Jacinda Ardern got a lower percentage of the vote than Corbyn, she just cobbled together deals with minor parties to become PM
She lifted their vote by 11%.
She lifted it mainly by squeezing the Green vote and NZ First vote, in the UK the Green, LD and UKIP votes have already been squeezed to the bone.
That is why NZ comparisons are pointless, Ardern had far bigger minor party votes to squeeze than Corbyn or any other Labour leader will have next time
Well, that's true. Corbyn needs Tory to Labour switchers, and he's not making that easy for himself. Although equally, May needs people who voted Corbyn in 2017. Polarised age, perhaps.
No, May needs people to fall out of love with the Corbyn illusion. Them not voting next time will see her home fine and dandy.
It depends how Tory voters view her total capitulation on Brexit later this year. That will be a much bigger story than Corbyn and Russia which will have faded by then.
I agree the key is differential turnout not vote switching. I think it is more likely that Tory voters stay at home (or search for UKIP!) because of Brexit than Labour voters stay at home because of Corbyn/Russia.
There are also a lot right-leaning voters who despair at Brexit. If it's a pillow-soft landing it will firm up their vote. Currently they're being retained by the presence of Corbyn.
I can also see - though happy to be corrected - folk like TSE & Gardenwalker being happy to vote for a centrist Blairite Labour government over a frothing Tory (e.g. JRM). I'd certainly be happy to switch my allegiance in that case.
[All in all there are too many factions at work in both main parties for any of this to be more than a naval-gazing exercise.]
There are twice as many Leavers than Remainers among Tory supporters so it is difficult to say what the impact of a "pillow-soft" Brexit would be. [I do like that adjective though I suspect there would still be a few lumps].
I agree there are multiple scenarios and it is hard to predict. Perhaps in a toss-up situation like this the best strategy is to lay the favourite?
You may well be right in that strategy.
Even among the leavers we see a broad spectrum from the retired colonel to the free-trade libertarian. The flavour of Brexit will play radically differently from sub-group to sub-group.
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.3%, higher than for a year earlier (74.6%) and the joint highest since comparable records began in 1971.
There were 1.45 million unemployed people (people not in work but seeking and available to work), 24,000 more than for August to October 2017 but 127,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
The unemployment rate (the proportion of those in work plus those unemployed, that were unemployed) was 4.3%, down from 4.7% for a year earlier and the joint lowest since 1975.
The inactivity rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were economically inactive) was 21.2%, lower than for a year earlier (21.6%) and the joint lowest since comparable records began in 1971.
Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) fell by 0.2% excluding bonuses, but were unchanged including bonuses, compared with a year earlier.
I have never voted Labour in my life. But times change and yes, I would vote for a credible, “radically centrist” Labour.
I guess Blair would have fallen into that category pre Iraq war. I wasn’t living in the country at the time but probably would have voted Major anyway - I was much more of a Tory in my youth!
Does anyone now seriously think that Theresa won't lead the Tories at the next GE? The 2017 fiasco is rapidly fading from memory, the consensus is that Jezza has blown it over Russia and the Brexit settlement couldn't be more wonderful. Theresa is mistress of all she surveys. I don't know how long it will be before Theresa stops being the British prime minister - ten, fifteen, twenty years? - but when that moment happens it will be entirely of her choosing.
Let's see what the consensus is after the May local elections.
The May elections won't be a problem for May. There'll be losses in London but the rest of the country (which will count earlier due to the time it takes to count First, Second and Third Past The Post votes in London), should be reasonably good. They'll certainly be nothing like the hammerings that some governments have taken and survived.
But yes, I expect that May will stand down or be removed. My expectation for a while was that summer next year was the most likely time, once the main Brexit deal was done. But if she comes through that without too much of a row - more possible than looked likely a few months ago - then summer 2021 becomes more probable.
I have never voted Labour in my life. But times change and yes, I would vote for a credible, “radically centrist” Labour.
I guess Blair would have fallen into that category pre Iraq war. I wasn’t living in the country at the time but probably would have voted Major anyway - I was much more of a Tory in my youth!
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
You'd think the TUC might be a bit embarrassed by those numbers. How shit must they be at delivering for their members, when the best they can engineer is parity with Greece?
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.3%, higher than for a year earlier (74.6%) and the joint highest since comparable records began in 1971.
There were 1.45 million unemployed people (people not in work but seeking and available to work), 24,000 more than for August to October 2017 but 127,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
The unemployment rate (the proportion of those in work plus those unemployed, that were unemployed) was 4.3%, down from 4.7% for a year earlier and the joint lowest since 1975.
The inactivity rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were economically inactive) was 21.2%, lower than for a year earlier (21.6%) and the joint lowest since comparable records began in 1971.
Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) fell by 0.2% excluding bonuses, but were unchanged including bonuses, compared with a year earlier.
Interesting article, too many variables. PMs tend to do well in crises. It's easy to overstate the impact of Salisbury 4 years hence, when Brexit implementation will be making structural changes to the economy.
Corbyn will still be a lefty. May will still have the charisma and appeal of diarrhoea.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
Blimey, the sweaties are doing well against the windies. Could it possibly be...
Well they lost to Afghanistan the other day so they could lose to Scotland too.
Don't want any comments from you about how well Scotland are batting later on. 8 down the WIndies. No idea what the pitch is like but that does not look a good score. How the once mighty are fallen.
Outrageous behaviour by Farage - chucking a load of rotting fish into the Thames. Surely a law against pollution is being infringed here. Why do Leavers do nothing but complain? Theresa is doing her best and the transition settlement was a mini triumph, yet the Leavers are always on hand to snipe and sneer. What a miserable bunch!
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.3%, higher than for a year earlier (74.6%) and the joint highest since comparable records began in 1971.
There were 1.45 million unemployed people (people not in work but seeking and available to work), 24,000 more than for August to October 2017 but 127,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
The unemployment rate (the proportion of those in work plus those unemployed, that were unemployed) was 4.3%, down from 4.7% for a year earlier and the joint lowest since 1975.
The inactivity rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were economically inactive) was 21.2%, lower than for a year earlier (21.6%) and the joint lowest since comparable records began in 1971.
Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) fell by 0.2% excluding bonuses, but were unchanged including bonuses, compared with a year earlier.
Does anyone now seriously think that Theresa won't lead the Tories at the next GE? The 2017 fiasco is rapidly fading from memory, the consensus is that Jezza has blown it over Russia and the Brexit settlement couldn't be more wonderful. Theresa is mistress of all she surveys. I don't know how long it will be before Theresa stops being the British prime minister - ten, fifteen, twenty years? - but when that moment happens it will be entirely of her choosing.
Let's see what the consensus is after the May local elections.
The May elections won't be a problem for May. There'll be losses in London but the rest of the country (which will count earlier due to the time it takes to count First, Second and Third Past The Post votes in London), should be reasonably good. They'll certainly be nothing like the hammerings that some governments have taken and survived.
But yes, I expect that May will stand down or be removed. My expectation for a while was that summer next year was the most likely time, once the main Brexit deal was done. But if she comes through that without too much of a row - more possible than looked likely a few months ago - then summer 2021 becomes more probable.
She will be gone in November.
The only reason the Leavers are putting up with her crap negotiations is that they are saying that they will focus on the end game. But in reality, the endgame she will deliver will be unacceptable because she has not been able to stand up to the EU so they know she will cave on everything in the end.
At that point, the Leavers will make their move. They will say that they gave her (a Remainer) every chance and support but that she failed to deliver on her promised redlines. They will say we were loyal, supported her when they did not agree with her backdowns (eg Phase 1 and transition) but that she promised that the final deal would deliver a real Brexit and that she has failed to do so. Basically, they will wait for her to fail conclusively before taking over.
The failure of the negotiations will become clear in October; she will be gone shortly thereafter.
I have never voted Labour in my life. But times change and yes, I would vote for a credible, “radically centrist” Labour.
I guess Blair would have fallen into that category pre Iraq war. I wasn’t living in the country at the time but probably would have voted Major anyway - I was much more of a Tory in my youth!
BTW, why a NZ PM as your avatar?
Good spot.
I’m a NZer who has been living in the U.K. for nearly 20 years. Rob Muldoon was the overwhelming political figure of my earliest memory and my mother was an enthusiastic member of “Rob’s Mob”. I’m a still a fan of his - despite my liberal sensibilities - for the way he pulled himself up from terrible hardship.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
Usually low unemployment leads ti wage growth because firms run out of people to employ so they have to increase pay to nick them from other firms. When you always have more to hire from abroad, they don't need to do that.
Does anyone now seriously think that Theresa won't lead the Tories at the next GE? The 2017 fiasco is rapidly fading from memory, the consensus is that Jezza has blown it over Russia and the Brexit settlement couldn't be more wonderful. Theresa is mistress of all she surveys. I don't know how long it will be before Theresa stops being the British prime minister - ten, fifteen, twenty years? - but when that moment happens it will be entirely of her choosing.
Let's see what the consensus is after the May local elections.
The May elections won't be a problem for May. There'll be losses in London but the rest of the country (which will count earlier due to the time it takes to count First, Second and Third Past The Post votes in London), should be reasonably good. They'll certainly be nothing like the hammerings that some governments have taken and survived.
But yes, I expect that May will stand down or be removed. My expectation for a while was that summer next year was the most likely time, once the main Brexit deal was done. But if she comes through that without too much of a row - more possible than looked likely a few months ago - then summer 2021 becomes more probable.
She will be gone in November.
The only reason the Leavers are putting up with her crap negotiations is that they are saying that they will focus on the end game. But in reality, the endgame she will deliver will be unacceptable because she has not been able to stand up to the EU so they know she will cave on everything in the end.
At that point, the Leavers will make their move. They will say that they gave her (a Remainer) every chance and support but that she failed to deliver on her promised redlines. They will say we were loyal, supported her when they did not agree with her backdowns (eg Phase 1 and transition) but that she promised that the final deal would deliver a real Brexit and that she has failed to do so. Basically, they will wait for her to fail conclusively before taking over.
The failure of the negotiations will become clear in October; she will be gone shortly thereafter.
I have never voted Labour in my life. But times change and yes, I would vote for a credible, “radically centrist” Labour.
I guess Blair would have fallen into that category pre Iraq war. I wasn’t living in the country at the time but probably would have voted Major anyway - I was much more of a Tory in my youth!
BTW, why a NZ PM as your avatar?
Good spot.
I’m a NZer who has been living in the U.K. for nearly 20 years. Rob Muldoon was the overwhelming political figure of my earliest memory and my mother was an enthusiastic member of “Rob’s Mob”. I’m a still a fan of his - despite my liberal sensibilities - for the way he pulled himself up from terrible hardship.
Ah, I see. Thanks.
[You overestimate my political knowledge. Using chrome: right-click image; "search google for image"; Bob's your uncle!]
Does anyone now seriously think that Theresa won't lead the Tories at the next GE? The 2017 fiasco is rapidly fading from memory, the consensus is that Jezza has blown it over Russia and the Brexit settlement couldn't be more wonderful. Theresa is mistress of all she surveys. I don't know how long it will be before Theresa stops being the British prime minister - ten, fifteen, twenty years? - but when that moment happens it will be entirely of her choosing.
Let's see what the consensus is after the May local elections.
The May elections won't be a problem for May. There'll be losses in London but the rest of the country (which will count earlier due to the time it takes to count First, Second and Third Past The Post votes in London), should be reasonably good. They'll certainly be nothing like the hammerings that some governments have taken and survived.
But yes, I expect that May will stand down or be removed. My expectation for a while was that summer next year was the most likely time, once the main Brexit deal was done. But if she comes through that without too much of a row - more possible than looked likely a few months ago - then summer 2021 becomes more probable.
At that point, the Leavers will make their move. They will say that they gave her (a Remainer) every chance and support but that she failed to deliver on her promised redlines.
If only a Leaver had been carrying out the negotiations at DEXEU - then we would have been able to have our cake and eat it.
Looking at the Feb borrowing figures am I right in thinking that
i) These figures are tres disappointing
ii) The OBR prediction in the spring statement for the 2017/18 PSBR might be right given the general derision
Yes, and yes. I was one of those who expressed derision but I was wrong. I think, looking back, 31st January last year was a Sunday so a lot of the tax receipts spilled into the first day of February. This year it was mid week and Feb 18 is £5bn worse off as a result. The £45bn is looking a more reasonable estimate now. Disappointing.
The other place we don't really see the jobs miracle is in government spending. We have much lower unemployment but no lower benefits, presumably because of the comparative generosity of inwork benefits.
(I) yes. Big revision to previous months actually the bigger of the drivers here.
(ii) - maybe. It would still need a considerably worse March (or another big revision) to be that bad...
On the real terms fall in wages: Does the increase in part-timers drive it down, as an average? Or is it calculated on a "like-for-like" basis (i.e. full time 2007 nurse vs full time 2017 nurse, 2007 bank manager vs 2017 bank manager, etc)?
On the real terms fall in wages: Does the increase in part-timers drive it down, as an average? Or is it calculated on a "like-for-like" basis (i.e. full time 2007 nurse vs full time 2017 nurse, 2007 bank manager vs 2017 bank manager, etc)?
It should be like-for-like (part time fuill time*), though no doubt big shifts in the way the workforce works can make that difficult to measure.
*I think more bank managers and fewer nurses is not accounted for, but I'm not sure
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
Usually low unemployment leads ti wage growth because firms run out of people to employ so they have to increase pay to nick them from other firms. When you always have more to hire from abroad, they don't need to do that.
Yes, that's why real wage growth is had been negative for so long and productivity is so poor. Companies have found it easier to employ people than capital - despite the low interest rates available on borrowing. In an economy with full employment and a restricted labour supply, wages would be expected to rise, but we have actually seen a large rise in supply keeping the price of labour down.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
I appreciate Corbyn isn't helping himself on some issues, but Tories need to solve the conundrum. I've detected an element of scapegoating Nick Timothy. Whilst I enjoy a lynching as much as the next man, he was only part of the problem. If Tories ignore the vacuum at the heart of their offering, and don't move on from "he said this in 1983" (which casts Corbyn, wrongly, in the minds of many as a principled, consistent fighter against the Establishment rather than a deeply flawed potential PM) they are in real trouble.
They do not need what he said in 1983, his behaviour in 2018 will have created the impression, correctly, that he is pro Russia, anti UK and the West, and he is a marxist communist that will not act in the interest of security of the UK
Whilst I agree with the underlying point that Corbyn would be a poor PM due to issues like Russia, I think it's a serious error to campaign in quite the way the Tories have on Corbyn himself.
There is a sizable group of people who simply see the Establishment round on Corbyn and feel he must have a point (the enemy of my enemy is my friend).
The language of the attacks comes across as "back in the USSR". Didn't resonate as you hoped it would in 2017, and won't in 2022 (or whenever) You've got to get him on the economy, on competence, on divided party.
I'm purely making an election strategy point here, not defending Corbyn himself on Russia etc.
Absolutely agree with you. Corbyn will not get a free ride on the economy next time and the Governmrnt have a good message on this.
The NHS and Social care will be addressed over the next 12 months, the public sector wage freeze will be over, education and student fees are due to be addressed in a year's time following the review
And of course who will keep us safe will be a topic
Which is why I've been saying for yonks that Labour needs to attack the Conservatives on decimating the army since 2010.
I have never voted Labour in my life. But times change and yes, I would vote for a credible, “radically centrist” Labour.
I guess Blair would have fallen into that category pre Iraq war. I wasn’t living in the country at the time but probably would have voted Major anyway - I was much more of a Tory in my youth!
BTW, why a NZ PM as your avatar?
Good spot.
I’m a NZer who has been living in the U.K. for nearly 20 years. Rob Muldoon was the overwhelming political figure of my earliest memory and my mother was an enthusiastic member of “Rob’s Mob”. I’m a still a fan of his - despite my liberal sensibilities - for the way he pulled himself up from terrible hardship.
No, May needs people to fall out of love with the Corbyn illusion. Them not voting next time will see her home fine and dandy.
Going around the country stirring up apathy? Dangerous game - you'll need more than that, I think.
It also reminds me of Democrats in the USA in 2016 (and to some extent still). Every crass Trump comment was meant to be the straw that broke the camel's back, but it never did. Some people have a Teflon quality which last a surprisingly long time for those of us who might think of ourselves (rightly or wrongly) as less susceptible. You need more than to wait for them to step over the line.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
No, I suspect it is calculated using the local currency - there would be no need to convert to dollars to compare % changes. However, they are only measuring wage income, so no accounting for the UKs increase in personal allowance and probably not social security income either.
Finally which is better: 10% of staff laid off and an increase in pay for the remaining of 5% or everyone kept on but a freeze in pay - that chart would say the first but it is arguable.
I have never voted Labour in my life. But times change and yes, I would vote for a credible, “radically centrist” Labour.
I guess Blair would have fallen into that category pre Iraq war. I wasn’t living in the country at the time but probably would have voted Major anyway - I was much more of a Tory in my youth!
BTW, why a NZ PM as your avatar?
Good spot.
I’m a NZer who has been living in the U.K. for nearly 20 years. Rob Muldoon was the overwhelming political figure of my earliest memory and my mother was an enthusiastic member of “Rob’s Mob”. I’m a still a fan of his - despite my liberal sensibilities - for the way he pulled himself up from terrible hardship.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
ONS figures say £471ppw to £459ppw regular pay in 2015 prices which is down 2.5%, not 10%.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
"One thing’s for sure that if May is still heading blue team, which she wants to do, then she is going to perform a lot lot better than she did a few last year."
Not sure at all. I think May made a tacit (?) assurance that she'd step down before the next election, and many of her MPs and party workers would be very disappointed if she didn't. I know it can be "better the devil you know" but they have very little confidence in her ability to deliver. She's proven herself unable to compete against Corbyn (in the GE campaign, she's obviously much better against him in the HoC) and is likely to fare worse against whoever Corbyn's replacement might be.
Also, I don't think the Russia business will be a big issue in 2022. As usual, standard of living will be the decisive factor. Even if Brexit rolls along as well as can be expected, all the uncertainty and difficulties it creates will create rough waters economically, so the Tories will be very lucky to get to 2022 with a country full of happy campers.
I appreciate Corbyn isn't helping himself on some issues, but Tories need to solve the conundrum. I've detected an element of scapegoating Nick Timothy. Whilst I enjoy a lynching as much as the next man, he was only part of the problem. If Tories ignore the vacuum at the heart of their offering, and don't move on from "he said this in 1983" (which casts Corbyn, wrongly, in the minds of many as a principled, consistent fighter against the Establishment rather than a deeply flawed potential PM) they are in real trouble.
They do not need what he said in 1983, his behaviour in 2018 will have created the impression, correctly, that he is pro Russia, anti UK and the West, and he is a marxist communist that will not act in the interest of security of the UK
Whilst I agree with the underlying point that Corbyn would be a poor PM due to issues like Russia, I think it's a serious error to campaign in quite the way the Tories have on Corbyn himself.
There is a sizable group of people who simply see the Establishment round on Corbyn and feel he must have a point (the enemy of my enemy is my friend).
The language of the attacks comes across as "back in the USSR". Didn't resonate as you hoped it would in 2017, and won't in 2022 (or whenever) You've got to get him on the economy, on competence, on divided party.
I'm purely making an election strategy point here, not defending Corbyn himself on Russia etc.
Absolutely agree with you. Corbyn will not get a free ride on the economy next time and the Governmrnt have a good message on this.
The NHS and Social care will be addressed over the next 12 months, the public sector wage freeze will be over, education and student fees are due to be addressed in a year's time following the review
And of course who will keep us safe will be a topic
Which is why I've been saying for yonks that Labour needs to attack the Conservatives on decimating the army since 2010.
How credible - really - could Corbyn be on this last point?
I have never voted Labour in my life. But times change and yes, I would vote for a credible, “radically centrist” Labour.
I guess Blair would have fallen into that category pre Iraq war. I wasn’t living in the country at the time but probably would have voted Major anyway - I was much more of a Tory in my youth!
BTW, why a NZ PM as your avatar?
Good spot.
I’m a NZer who has been living in the U.K. for nearly 20 years. Rob Muldoon was the overwhelming political figure of my earliest memory and my mother was an enthusiastic member of “Rob’s Mob”. I’m a still a fan of his - despite my liberal sensibilities - for the way he pulled himself up from terrible hardship.
I thought it was a photo of Alexei Sayle!
Me too.
Have Rob Muldoon and Alexei been seen in the same room together?
I appreciate Corbyn isn't helping himself on some issues, but Tories need to solve the conundrum. I've detected an element of scapegoating Nick Timothy. Whilst I enjoy a lynching as much as the next man, he was only part of the problem. If Tories ignore the vacuum at the heart of their offering, and don't move on from "he said this in 1983" (which casts Corbyn, wrongly, in the minds of many as a principled, consistent fighter against the Establishment rather than a deeply flawed potential PM) they are in real trouble.
They do not need what he said in 1983, his behaviour in 2018 will have created the impression, correctly, that he is pro Russia, anti UK and the West, and he is a marxist communist that will not act in the interest of security of the UK
Whilst I agree with the underlying point that Corbyn would be a poor PM due to issues like Russia, I think it's a serious error to campaign in quite the way the Tories have on Corbyn himself.
There is a sizable group of people who simply see the Establishment round on Corbyn and feel he must have a point (the enemy of my enemy is my friend).
The language of the attacks comes across as "back in the USSR". Didn't resonate as you hoped it would in 2017, and won't in 2022 (or whenever) You've got to get him on the economy, on competence, on divided party.
I'm purely making an election strategy point here, not defending Corbyn himself on Russia etc.
Absolutely agree with you. Corbyn will not get a free ride on the economy next time and the Governmrnt have a good message on this.
The NHS and Social care will be addressed over the next 12 months, the public sector wage freeze will be over, education and student fees are due to be addressed in a year's time following the review
And of course who will keep us safe will be a topic
Which is why I've been saying for yonks that Labour needs to attack the Conservatives on decimating the army since 2010.
How credible - really - could Corbyn be on this last point?
Credible enough. The facts are clear and easily presented on posters and Facebook videos; the only elephant trap to be avoided will be CCHQ attempts to talk only about nuclear submarines which Corbyn grudgingly accepts anyway. There would be a lot of retired colonels writing to the Telegraph in support. As Karl Rove told George W Bush: you need to attack your opponent's strengths.
I appreciate Corbyn isn't helping himself on some issues, but Tories need to solve the conundrum. I've detected an element of scapegoating Nick Timothy. Whilst I enjoy a lynching as much as the next man, he was only part of the problem. If Tories ignore the vacuum at the heart of their offering, and don't move on from "he said this in 1983" (which casts Corbyn, wrongly, in the minds of many as a principled, consistent fighter against the Establishment rather than a deeply flawed potential PM) they are in real trouble.
They do not need what he said in 1983, his behaviour in 2018 will have created the impression, correctly, that he is pro Russia, anti UK and the West, and he is a marxist communist that will not act in the interest of security of the UK
Whilst I agree with the underlying point that Corbyn would be a poor PM due to issues like Russia, I think it's a serious error to campaign in quite the way the Tories have on Corbyn himself.
There is a sizable group of people who simply see the Establishment round on Corbyn and feel he must have a point (the enemy of my enemy is my friend).
The language of the attacks comes across as "back in the USSR". Didn't resonate as you hoped it would in 2017, and won't in 2022 (or whenever) You've got to get him on the economy, on competence, on divided party.
I'm purely making an election strategy point here, not defending Corbyn himself on Russia etc.
Absolutely agree with you. Corbyn will not get a free ride on the economy next time and the Governmrnt have a good message on this.
The NHS and Social care will be addressed over the next 12 months, the public sector wage freeze will be over, education and student fees are due to be addressed in a year's time following the review
And of course who will keep us safe will be a topic
Which is why I've been saying for yonks that Labour needs to attack the Conservatives on decimating the army since 2010.
How credible - really - could Corbyn be on this last point?
Probably quite credible, in the dictionary sense of the word, as there is a substantial body of people who will believe, without question, absolutely anything the silly old sod says.
It could sound authentic if he couched it in terms of veterans' welfare and adequately equipping the forces.
If the media (and Conservatives) actually try holding Corbyn to account rather than asking hard-hitting questions such as "Will you keep your allotment?" things will go better for the blues.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
ONS figures say £471ppw to £459ppw regular pay in 2015 prices which is down 2.5%, not 10%.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
Something appears to have gone wrong with the wage recovery in 2016....
Which is why I've been saying for yonks that Labour needs to attack the Conservatives on decimating the army since 2010.
Yes. If Labour ever do manage to agree on ditching Trident they should pair it with spending that money on whatever equipment is actually needed by the armed forces.
Corbyn could do a good line on healthcare/support for veterans, and also maybe take an interest in those soldiers on very low pay (if I recall they are often well below the minimum wage given the long hours etc...)
Does anyone now seriously think that Theresa won't lead the Tories at the next GE? The 2017 fiasco is rapidly fading from memory, the consensus is that Jezza has blown it over Russia and the Brexit settlement couldn't be more wonderful. Theresa is mistress of all she surveys. I don't know how long it will be before Theresa stops being the British prime minister - ten, fifteen, twenty years? - but when that moment happens it will be entirely of her choosing.
Let's see what the consensus is after the May local elections.
The May elections won't be a problem for May. There'll be losses in London but the rest of the country (which will count earlier due to the time it takes to count First, Second and Third Past The Post votes in London), should be reasonably good. They'll certainly be nothing like the hammerings that some governments have taken and survived.
But yes, I expect that May will stand down or be removed. My expectation for a while was that summer next year was the most likely time, once the main Brexit deal was done. But if she comes through that without too much of a row - more possible than looked likely a few months ago - then summer 2021 becomes more probable.
She will be gone in November.
The only reason the Leavers are putting up with her crap negotiations is that they are saying that they will focus on the end game. But in reality, the endgame she will deliver will be unacceptable because she has not been able to stand up to the EU so they know she will cave on everything in the end.
At that point, the Leavers will make their move. They will say that they gave her (a Remainer) every chance and support but that she failed to deliver on her promised redlines. They will say we were loyal, supported her when they did not agree with her backdowns (eg Phase 1 and transition) but that she promised that the final deal would deliver a real Brexit and that she has failed to do so. Basically, they will wait for her to fail conclusively before taking over.
The failure of the negotiations will become clear in October; she will be gone shortly thereafter.
Yes. If Labour ever do manage to agree on ditching Trident they should pair it with spending that money on whatever equipment is actually needed by the armed forces.
Labour could finesse their internal differences over Trident by promising a referendum on it. They usually work out ok.
I appreciate Corbyn isn't helping himself on some issues, but Tories need to solve the conundrum. I've detected an element of scapegoating Nick Timothy. Whilst I enjoy a lynching as much as the next man, he was only part of the problem. If Tories ignore the vacuum at the heart of their offering, and don't move on from "he said this in 1983" (which casts Corbyn, wrongly, in the minds of many as a principled, consistent fighter against the Establishment rather than a deeply flawed potential PM) they are in real trouble.
They do not need what he said in 1983, his behaviour in 2018 will have created the impression, correctly, that he is pro Russia, anti UK and the West, and he is a marxist communist that will not act in the interest of security of the UK
Whilst I agree with the underlying point that Corbyn would be a poor PM due to issues like Russia, I think it's a serious error to campaign in quite the way the Tories have on Corbyn himself.
There is a sizable group of people who simply see the Establishment round on Corbyn and feel he must have a point (the enemy of my enemy is my friend).
The language of the attacks comes across as "back in the USSR". Didn't resonate as you hoped it would in 2017, and won't in 2022 (or whenever) You've got to get him on the economy, on competence, on divided party.
I'm purely making an election strategy point here, not defending Corbyn himself on Russia etc.
Absolutely agree with you. Corbyn will not get a free ride on the economy next time and the Governmrnt have a good message on this.
The NHS and Social care will be addressed over the next 12 months, the public sector wage freeze will be over, education and student fees are due to be addressed in a year's time following the review
And of course who will keep us safe will be a topic
Which is why I've been saying for yonks that Labour needs to attack the Conservatives on decimating the army since 2010.
Corbyn doing that would be hypocrisy in spades - he wants to get rid of it and leave NATO
Absolutely agree with you. Corbyn will not get a free ride on the economy next time and the Governmrnt have a good message on this.
The NHS and Social care will be addressed over the next 12 months, the public sector wage freeze will be over, education and student fees are due to be addressed in a year's time following the review
And of course who will keep us safe will be a topic
Which is why I've been saying for yonks that Labour needs to attack the Conservatives on decimating the army since 2010.
How credible - really - could Corbyn be on this last point?
Credible enough. The facts are clear and easily presented on posters and Facebook videos; the only elephant trap to be avoided will be CCHQ attempts to talk only about nuclear submarines which Corbyn grudgingly accepts anyway. There would be a lot of retired colonels writing to the Telegraph in support. As Karl Rove told George W Bush: you need to attack your opponent's strengths.
But the obvious question to be put to him will be: Would you vote to increase the defence budget? Plus his record - has he ever asked for defence spending to be increased? Has he ever voted in favour of it? - will be used against him.
Corbyn is on record as saying that he can think of only one military intervention since WW2 which he would support - namely some troops sent to Sierra Leone. Given that why would he want to increase the army? What would he use it for? Why would anyone believe that he would spend money on defence as opposed to the NHS or abolishing tuition fees or housing?
Help for veterans, while a worthy cause, does not make anyone safe.
His argument - and it may be an effective one - is that military interventions overseas have increased the risk to the UK and therefore the fewer of the former the lower the risks. Given that, increasing spending on defence makes no sense and attacks on the Tories for cutting army numbers even less sense. They are doing what he wants and what he has argued for all his political life.
Some canvassing insights... Ive got it wrong and ive been spot on in the past. I missed the Corbyn surge.. but there we go. Canvassing in Brexit voting northern tory marginal is showing rock solid data. Its normal to come across voters switching from one to another in a canvass, but this is pretty much no change. The odd one or two moving to Tories from last year, but probably offset elsewhere. Absolutley rock solid from the local and general election last year (the corbyn surge didnt show up the canvass last time). In fact i dont remember it been as stable from one year to the next as it is now.
Question to ponder, will those who dont vote Tory be motivated enough to come out in the local elections, and result in the usual mid term drubbing a party of government would expect through differential turnout?
(i understand that London is a very different situation)
I live in outer London; our support is similarly solid locally.
Yes. If Labour ever do manage to agree on ditching Trident they should pair it with spending that money on whatever equipment is actually needed by the armed forces.
Labour could finesse their internal differences over Trident by promising a referendum on it. They usually work out ok.
"One thing’s for sure that if May is still heading blue team, which she wants to do, then she is going to perform a lot lot better than she did a few last year."
Not sure at all. I think May made a tacit (?) assurance that she'd step down before the next election, and many of her MPs and party workers would be very disappointed if she didn't. I know it can be "better the devil you know" but they have very little confidence in her ability to deliver. She's proven herself unable to compete against Corbyn (in the GE campaign, she's obviously much better against him in the HoC) and is likely to fare worse against whoever Corbyn's replacement might be.
Also, I don't think the Russia business will be a big issue in 2022. As usual, standard of living will be the decisive factor. Even if Brexit rolls along as well as can be expected, all the uncertainty and difficulties it creates will create rough waters economically, so the Tories will be very lucky to get to 2022 with a country full of happy campers.
Do I assume you expect Corbyn not to lead into the next GE
Firstly, in terms of generousity generally, it's hardly a relaxation of the public sector pay squeeze. Even a real terms freeze would just be a case of maintaining rather than tightening further an already vice-like grip.
Second, it is extremely likely that it will turn out to be further a real terms cut. That's because the deal is fixed, so everything hangs on whether the BoE will manage to keep inflation at within it's long term target of 2% per annum. If it doesn't, then it's a cut. And the BoE's record in keeping to its inflation target is pretty poor, underpredicting CPI inflation more often than it overpredicts it. As for the OBR, back in May 2017, it predicted that CPI inflation would reach 2.4% by the end of 2017, whereas it reached 3.0%.
So, it's a mild further tightening of already extreme austerity as it affects NHS pay. All you can say in its favour is that it's not the sharp further tightening that the Government had previously planned for.
The average pay increase was 2.9% in 2017, a real terms rise of just 0.1% so it is not as if NHS workers will be that different from the rest of the workforce in not getting huge above inflation pay rises
No it wasn't. How can figures published in July 2017 show the average pay increase for 2017 as a whole?
Leaving that aside, the point though is that NHS nursing pay has been badly squeezed in terms of both very substantial real terms cuts over many years now and also in terms of falling behind pay increases in the private sector, which have not been squeezed anything like as much. And Lo! There is a big recruitment crisis as people desert NHS careers and insufficient new recruits can be found to replace them, with pay being a key factor in that (along with the dissatisfaction of working in a public service under ever increasing pressure). An at best inflation-matching increase over three years is not going to ease that crisis in any way - at best it's just going to give us more of the same.
Given that inflation tends by and large to exceed official forecasts of its level, I have every expectation that today's announcement will result in practice in further real terms NHS pay cuts. And in addition, I would not in such circumstances expect private sector pay rises to fall back to 2% to match those of the NHS, so the financial pressure to pursue alternative careers to NHS nursing will intensify.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
ONS figures say £471ppw to £459ppw regular pay in 2015 prices which is down 2.5%, not 10%.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
That's why I thought that they must be doing something else.
It seems like the ONS are cooking the books so the OBR don't look like complete dicks. The revisions to the borrowing figures don't make much sense at all.
It seems like the ONS are cooking the books so the OBR don't look like complete dicks. The revisions to the borrowing figures don't make much sense at all.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
ONS figures say £471ppw to £459ppw regular pay in 2015 prices which is down 2.5%, not 10%.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
Something appears to have gone wrong with the wage recovery in 2016....
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.3%, higher than for a year earlier (74.6%) and the joint highest since comparable records began in 1971.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
Most other EU nations imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 to reduce the wages of their low paid being undercut by Eastern European migrants.
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
That sees Labour 3% down on their GE score, Tories the same. Plaid seem to be the beneficiaries. "there remains absolutely no signs of a Liberal Democrat recovery."
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.3%, higher than for a year earlier (74.6%) and the joint highest since comparable records began in 1971.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
Most other EU nations imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 to reduce the wages of their low paid being undercut by Eastern European migrants.
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
No, these are wages growth in Poland, not remittances. Poland has a strongly growing economy.
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.3%, higher than for a year earlier (74.6%) and the joint highest since comparable records began in 1971.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
Most other EU nations imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 to reduce the wages of their low paid being undercut by Eastern European migrants.
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
Sweden didn't impose transitional controls and saw one of the highest increases in wages.
Polish industrial production has grown by about 40% since 2008. Little to do with migrant workers sending money home.
It seems like the ONS are cooking the books so the OBR don't look like complete dicks. The revisions to the borrowing figures don't make much sense at all.
That’s quite a big allegation. Can you elaborate a bit?
Corbyn doing that would be hypocrisy in spades - he wants to get rid of it and leave NATO
When did contemporary politics ever punish hypocrisy? May was a Remainer, probably out of inertia rather than ideology I grant you, then tacked to hard brexit when it came to conning the tories into letting her stupid arse lead them then changed course again to BINO when it became apparent hard brexit was going to be the like the second half of On the Beach.
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.3%, higher than for a year earlier (74.6%) and the joint highest since comparable records began in 1971.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no mployment as the trade off.
Most other EU nations imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 to reduce the wages of their low paid being undercut by Eastern European migrants.
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
No, these are wages growth in Poland, not remittances. Poland has a strongly growing economy.
And how is it growing that economy and increasing wages in Poland? Largely through Poles returning from the UK and other western European nations much richer than they left and spending thst and remittances coming back from Poles in the West to family at home thus expanding Poland's wealth and economy and hence wages
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
ONS figures say £471ppw to £459ppw regular pay in 2015 prices which is down 2.5%, not 10%.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
Something appears to have gone wrong with the wage recovery in 2016....
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were 018
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials playedme a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
Most other EU nations imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 to reduce the wages of their low paid being undercut by Eastern European migrants.
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
Sweden didn't impose transitional controls and saw one of the highest increases in wages.
Polish industrial production has grown by about 40% since 2008. Little to do with migrant workers sending money home.
No it did not. As the graph shows Swedish wage growth was well below French and German wage growth over that period.
France and Germany imposed transition controls unlike Sweden and the UK and Ireland (Irish wage growth was just 1.6%)
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were 018
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials playedme a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
Most other EU nations imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 to reduce the wages of their low paid being undercut by Eastern European migrants.
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
Sweden didn't impose transitional controls and saw one of the highest increases in wages.
Polish industrial production has grown by about 40% since 2008. Little to do with migrant workers sending money home.
No it did not. As the graph shows Swedish wage growth was well below French and German wage growth over that period.
France and Germany imposed transition controls unlike Sweden and the UK and Ireland (Irish wage growth was just 1.6%)
That doesn't explain the 2018 figures though as transition controls are long ended for everyone. Once again the UK is in the relegation zone:
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
ONS figures say £471ppw to £459ppw regular pay in 2015 prices which is down 2.5%, not 10%.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
Something appears to have gone wrong with the wage recovery in 2016....
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were 018
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at s bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials playedme a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor 5686580555640837?s=19
Most other EU nations imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 to reduce the wages of their low paid being undercut by Eastern European migrants.
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
Sweden didn't impose transitional controls and saw one of the highest increases in wages.
Polish industrial production has grown by about 40% since 2008. Little to do with migrant workers sending money home.
No it did not. As the graph shows Swedish wage growth was well below French and German wage growth over that period.
France and Germany imposed transition controls unlike Sweden and the UK and Ireland (Irish wage growth was just 1.6%)
That doesn't explain the 2018 figures though as transition controls are long ended for everyone. Once again the UK is in the relegation zone:
The figures are from 2007 to 2015 and cover 2007 to 2011 when we lacked transition controls. As noted today wage growth is now almost 3% in the UK on the latest figures compared to an average decline in wages of 10% in the UK from 2007 to 2015 so that projection made in January you posted is already wrong
There were 32.25 million people in work, 168,000 more than for August to October 2017 and 402,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were 018
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials playedme a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
Most other EU nations imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 to reduce the wages of their low paid being undercut by Eastern European migrants.
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
Sweden didn't impose transitional controls and saw one of the highest increases in wages.
Polish industrial production has grown by about 40% since 2008. Little to do with migrant workers sending money home.
No it did not. As the graph shows Swedish wage growth was well below French and German wage growth over that period.
France and Germany imposed transition controls unlike Sweden and the UK and Ireland (Irish wage growth was just 1.6%)
That doesn't explain the 2018 figures though as transition controls are long ended for everyone. Once again the UK is in the relegation zone:
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
ONS figures say £471ppw to £459ppw regular pay in 2015 prices which is down 2.5%, not 10%.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
Something appears to have gone wrong with the wage recovery in 2016....
What that graph shows is th at while we are down from the peak of 2007 we are at the same rate as 2005/06 - and higher than every year before then.
The real oddity is that wages barely moved at all in 2008-09, when GDP per head fell by 8%. GDP per head has risen by 11% since 2010, but real wages are 3% lower. It seems that there's a lag between falls in GDP hitting wages, and that the growth since 2010 has shown up in very strong employment growth, more than in wage growth.
I don't know where the TUC gets a 10% drop in wages from.
How is it possible that thousands of people flock to hear Corbyn speak?
At PMQs he can barely string a sentence together.
He only really does "angry, shouty socialist at a rally", repeating the same 20 stock phrases like a greyer version of Rick from the Young Ones. To be fair, he does that very well. But he's no debater, and he can't think on his feet.
It's as close as you can get to a jobs miracle. Truly remarkable. We are going to miss it when it goes wrong, as it always does.
I'm not sure it feels like a jobs miracle for those at the bottom getting their council tax bills for next year along with a host of other rises in train fares, postage, clothing and gas bills
Golden Ages often dont feel golden at the time. Never before have the essentials played such a small part of a persons monthly income. So its taken us a decade to get back to 2007. The pinnacle of British wealth and prosperity. So it has become a struggle to get back to the best it has ever been.
We have had very low unemployment for a long time, coupled with very low interest rates. Is it a golden age?
The systemic problems of the U.K. economic remain - low productivity, a trade deficit, and a whole generation of under 45s who feel stiffed.
I’d happily trade some of those employment numbers for higher productivity and by extension higher wages.
This chart accounts for why there is no feelgood factor despite the employment figures. More people are employed, but they are paid less in real terms. Despite FOM other countries in the EU, apart from Greece, have done much better, and not always with higher unemployment as the trade off.
That graph does say a lot, but why the commentator thinks that an almost unlimited supply of cheap labour is good for productivity I have no idea. When did he last get his car washed by a machine?
I wonder how they are calculating these figures. I suspect that they have measured them in US Dollars so that the UK figures are significantly affected by the depreciation of sterling which has only partially been recovered.
ONS figures say £471ppw to £459ppw regular pay in 2015 prices which is down 2.5%, not 10%.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
Something appears to have gone wrong with the wage recovery in 2016....
The Tories could win the next election, but if they do it won't be down to foreign policy.
Elections are by-and-large won on bread and butter issues - the economy, public services, jobs, taxation, public spending etc. Hence why New Labour were never punished for the Iraq War, but rather for their record on economic management, hence why Labour won a landslide in 1945, hence the long Tory reigns of 1951-1964 and 1979-1997.
May was careful to say there were no 'government' contracts with SCL or Cambridge Analytica, but that doesn't say anything about the Conservative party.
The Tories could win the next election, but if they do it won't be down to foreign policy.
Elections are by-and-large won on bread and butter issues - the economy, public services, jobs, taxation, public spending etc. Hence why New Labour were never punished for the Iraq War, but rather for their record on economic management, hence why Labour won a landslide in 1945, hence the long Tory reigns of 1951-1964 and 1979-1997.
Yes, and what we know is that wages have been stagnant for a long time, and expected to continue that way until the next election.
They WERE recovering rapidly, but Brexit put a stop to that.
May was careful to say there were no 'government' contracts with SCL or Cambridge Analytica, but that doesn't say anything about the Conservative party.
Not watching it but the BBC says: "Theresa May specifies there are "no current contracts" between her party and CA or its parent company SCL. "
May was careful to say there were no 'government' contracts with SCL or Cambridge Analytica, but that doesn't say anything about the Conservative party.
Not watching it but the BBC says: "Theresa May specifies there are "no current contracts" between her party and CA or its parent company SCL. "
The Tories could win the next election, but if they do it won't be down to foreign policy.
Elections are by-and-large won on bread and butter issues - the economy, public services, jobs, taxation, public spending etc. Hence why New Labour were never punished for the Iraq War, but rather for their record on economic management, hence why Labour won a landslide in 1945, hence the long Tory reigns of 1951-1964 and 1979-1997.
Yes, and what we know is that wages have been stagnant for a long time, and expected to continue that way until the next election.
They WERE recovering rapidly, but Brexit put a stop to that.
Yesterday - inflation at 2.7%
Today - wage rises at 2.8%
And expected inflation at 2% later this year with wage increases well above inflation
The Tories could win the next election, but if they do it won't be down to foreign policy.
Elections are by-and-large won on bread and butter issues - the economy, public services, jobs, taxation, public spending etc. Hence why New Labour were never punished for the Iraq War, but rather for their record on economic management, hence why Labour won a landslide in 1945, hence the long Tory reigns of 1951-1964 and 1979-1997.
Yes, and what we know is that wages have been stagnant for a long time, and expected to continue that way until the next election.
They WERE recovering rapidly, but Brexit put a stop to that.
Yesterday - inflation at 2.7%
Today - wage rises at 2.8%
And expected inflation at 2% later this year with wage increases well above inflation
The Tories could win the next election, but if they do it won't be down to foreign policy.
Elections are by-and-large won on bread and butter issues - the economy, public services, jobs, taxation, public spending etc. Hence why New Labour were never punished for the Iraq War, but rather for their record on economic management, hence why Labour won a landslide in 1945, hence the long Tory reigns of 1951-1964 and 1979-1997.
Yes, and what we know is that wages have been stagnant for a long time, and expected to continue that way until the next election.
They WERE recovering rapidly, but Brexit put a stop to that.
Yesterday - inflation at 2.7%
Today - wage rises at 2.8%
And expected inflation at 2% later this year with wage increases well above inflation
May was careful to say there were no 'government' contracts with SCL or Cambridge Analytica, but that doesn't say anything about the Conservative party.
Not watching it but the BBC says: "Theresa May specifies there are "no current contracts" between her party and CA or its parent company SCL. "
I don't think she referred to the party. ttps://twitter.com/nedsimons/status/976434340052852736
Isn’t there an old rule that party management issues are out of order for PMQs?
The Tories could win the next election, but if they do it won't be down to foreign policy.
Elections are by-and-large won on bread and butter issues - the economy, public services, jobs, taxation, public spending etc. Hence why New Labour were never punished for the Iraq War, but rather for their record on economic management, hence why Labour won a landslide in 1945, hence the long Tory reigns of 1951-1964 and 1979-1997.
Yes, and what we know is that wages have been stagnant for a long time, and expected to continue that way until the next election.
They WERE recovering rapidly, but Brexit put a stop to that.
Yesterday - inflation at 2.7%
Today - wage rises at 2.8%
And expected inflation at 2% later this year with wage increases well above inflation
Oh, get real.
0.1%.
On £30,000 that’s equivalent to £30. Quick - to Lidl before the champagne stocks run out!
The Tories could win the next election, but if they do it won't be down to foreign policy.
Elections are by-and-large won on bread and butter issues - the economy, public services, jobs, taxation, public spending etc. Hence why New Labour were never punished for the Iraq War, but rather for their record on economic management, hence why Labour won a landslide in 1945, hence the long Tory reigns of 1951-1964 and 1979-1997.
Yes, and what we know is that wages have been stagnant for a long time, and expected to continue that way until the next election.
They WERE recovering rapidly, but Brexit put a stop to that.
Yesterday - inflation at 2.7%
Today - wage rises at 2.8%
And expected inflation at 2% later this year with wage increases well above inflation
Oh, get real.
0.1%.
On £30,000 that’s equivalent to £30. Quick - to Lidl before the champagne stocks last!
Crossover is an important moment and a start to the change in the narrative where earnings are less than inflation
Well May just kicked nine shades of **** out of Corbyn there,
Funny. Corbyn speared her with six specific zingers on local councils quoting Tory Council leaders back at her. All she could do was her strange grimaces and usual blather.
Corbyn got what he wanted. It will be up on social media later today. It is focused on the local elections. He even had a slogan that he repeated three times. "The Tories - Get less. Pay more".
Well Corbyn just kicked nine shades of **** out of May there.
May was careful to say there were no 'government' contracts with SCL or Cambridge Analytica, but that doesn't say anything about the Conservative party.
Not watching it but the BBC says: "Theresa May specifies there are "no current contracts" between her party and CA or its parent company SCL. "
I don't think she referred to the party. ttps://twitter.com/nedsimons/status/976434340052852736
Isn’t there an old rule that party management issues are out of order for PMQs?
I do not think that an MP could have quizzed TMay on her role as spokesperson for the Conservative Party, as opposed to her role as leader of the government.
I do not think however that she could not have answered...
Well May just kicked nine shades of **** out of Corbyn there,
Funny. Corbyn speared her with six specific zingers on local councils quoting Tory Council leaders back at her. All she could do was her strange grimaces and usual blather.
Corbyn got what he wanted. It will be up on social media later today. It is focused on the local elections. He even had a slogan that he repeated three times. "The Tories - Get less. Pay more".
Well Corbyn just kicked nine shades of **** out of May there.
The eGuardian disagrees:
PMQs - Snap verdict: Elections always add an edge to political debate, and with the local elections only weeks away, Corbyn devoted all his questions to the state of local government. He started very, very well, flooring May with a question about Tory-run Northamptonshire county council effectively going bust...But Corbyn’s PMQs second half was not as bold as his opening, and May mounted a spirited, and largely successful, fightback... So, overall, they both scored some runs, but no one prevailed overall.
Comments
Even among the leavers we see a broad spectrum from the retired colonel to the free-trade libertarian. The flavour of Brexit will play radically differently from sub-group to sub-group.
But times change and yes, I would vote for a credible, “radically centrist” Labour.
I guess Blair would have fallen into that category pre Iraq war. I wasn’t living in the country at the time but probably would have voted Major anyway - I was much more of a Tory in my youth!
But yes, I expect that May will stand down or be removed. My expectation for a while was that summer next year was the most likely time, once the main Brexit deal was done. But if she comes through that without too much of a row - more possible than looked likely a few months ago - then summer 2021 becomes more probable.
Interesting article, too many variables. PMs tend to do well in crises. It's easy to overstate the impact of Salisbury 4 years hence, when Brexit implementation will be making structural changes to the economy.
Corbyn will still be a lefty. May will still have the charisma and appeal of diarrhoea.
8 down the WIndies. No idea what the pitch is like but that does not look a good score. How the once mighty are fallen.
The only reason the Leavers are putting up with her crap negotiations is that they are saying that they will focus on the end game. But in reality, the endgame she will deliver will be unacceptable because she has not been able to stand up to the EU so they know she will cave on everything in the end.
At that point, the Leavers will make their move. They will say that they gave her (a Remainer) every chance and support but that she failed to deliver on her promised redlines. They will say we were loyal, supported her when they did not agree with her backdowns (eg Phase 1 and transition) but that she promised that the final deal would deliver a real Brexit and that she has failed to do so. Basically, they will wait for her to fail conclusively before taking over.
The failure of the negotiations will become clear in October; she will be gone shortly thereafter.
I’m a NZer who has been living in the U.K. for nearly 20 years. Rob Muldoon was the overwhelming political figure of my earliest memory and my mother was an enthusiastic member of “Rob’s Mob”. I’m a still a fan of his - despite my liberal sensibilities - for the way he pulled himself up from terrible hardship.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28051208/market?marketId=1.125589838
[You overestimate my political knowledge. Using chrome: right-click image; "search google for image"; Bob's your uncle!]
(ii) - maybe. It would still need a considerably worse March (or another big revision) to be that bad...
Does the increase in part-timers drive it down, as an average?
Or is it calculated on a "like-for-like" basis (i.e. full time 2007 nurse vs full time 2017 nurse, 2007 bank manager vs 2017 bank manager, etc)?
*I think more bank managers and fewer nurses is not accounted for, but I'm not sure
It also reminds me of Democrats in the USA in 2016 (and to some extent still). Every crass Trump comment was meant to be the straw that broke the camel's back, but it never did. Some people have a Teflon quality which last a surprisingly long time for those of us who might think of ourselves (rightly or wrongly) as less susceptible. You need more than to wait for them to step over the line.
Finally which is better: 10% of staff laid off and an increase in pay for the remaining of 5% or everyone kept on but a freeze in pay - that chart would say the first but it is arguable.
£507ppw to £488ppw inc bonuses which is down 3.8%.
Not sure at all. I think May made a tacit (?) assurance that she'd step down before the next election, and many of her MPs and party workers would be very disappointed if she didn't. I know it can be "better the devil you know" but they have very little confidence in her ability to deliver. She's proven herself unable to compete against Corbyn (in the GE campaign, she's obviously much better against him in the HoC) and is likely to fare worse against whoever Corbyn's replacement might be.
Also, I don't think the Russia business will be a big issue in 2022. As usual, standard of living will be the decisive factor. Even if Brexit rolls along as well as can be expected, all the uncertainty and difficulties it creates will create rough waters economically, so the Tories will be very lucky to get to 2022 with a country full of happy campers.
Probably quite credible, in the dictionary sense of the word, as there is a substantial body of people who will believe, without question, absolutely anything the silly old sod says.
It could sound authentic if he couched it in terms of veterans' welfare and adequately equipping the forces.
Just got some passport photos. Nice to confirm I have the exact face of a psychopath.
On-topic: glad to see Corbyn humping Putin's leg hasn't gone down well.
Miss Cyclefree, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iabxArzFN_8
If the media (and Conservatives) actually try holding Corbyn to account rather than asking hard-hitting questions such as "Will you keep your allotment?" things will go better for the blues.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/976155911310934016
Inevitably the cultists who comment on it spend most of their time blaming the media.
https://twitter.com/stephenlclarke/status/976414244806823936
Corbyn could do a good line on healthcare/support for veterans, and also maybe take an interest in those soldiers on very low pay (if I recall they are often well below the minimum wage given the long hours etc...)
Corbyn is on record as saying that he can think of only one military intervention since WW2 which he would support - namely some troops sent to Sierra Leone. Given that why would he want to increase the army? What would he use it for? Why would anyone believe that he would spend money on defence as opposed to the NHS or abolishing tuition fees or housing?
Help for veterans, while a worthy cause, does not make anyone safe.
His argument - and it may be an effective one - is that military interventions overseas have increased the risk to the UK and therefore the fewer of the former the lower the risks. Given that, increasing spending on defence makes no sense and attacks on the Tories for cutting army numbers even less sense. They are doing what he wants and what he has argued for all his political life.
https://www.rogerscully.com/blog/supportfortheparties
Leaving that aside, the point though is that NHS nursing pay has been badly squeezed in terms of both very substantial real terms cuts over many years now and also in terms of falling behind pay increases in the private sector, which have not been squeezed anything like as much. And Lo! There is a big recruitment crisis as people desert NHS careers and insufficient new recruits can be found to replace them, with pay being a key factor in that (along with the dissatisfaction of working in a public service under ever increasing pressure). An at best inflation-matching increase over three years is not going to ease that crisis in any way - at best it's just going to give us more of the same.
Given that inflation tends by and large to exceed official forecasts of its level, I have every expectation that today's announcement will result in practice in further real terms NHS pay cuts. And in addition, I would not in such circumstances expect private sector pay rises to fall back to 2% to match those of the NHS, so the financial pressure to pursue alternative careers to NHS nursing will intensify.
https://twitter.com/TorstenBell/status/976400970841296896
Notice the biggest increase in wages in that timeframe came for Poles, as many of those working abroad sent back funds to family businesses etc back home
Polish industrial production has grown by about 40% since 2008. Little to do with migrant workers sending money home.
France and Germany imposed transition controls unlike Sweden and the UK and Ireland (Irish wage growth was just 1.6%)
https://www.statista.com/chart/12407/wage-growth-around-the-world-in-2018/
At PMQs he can barely string a sentence together.
I don't know where the TUC gets a 10% drop in wages from.
Elections are by-and-large won on bread and butter issues - the economy, public services, jobs, taxation, public spending etc. Hence why New Labour were never punished for the Iraq War, but rather for their record on economic management, hence why Labour won a landslide in 1945, hence the long Tory reigns of 1951-1964 and 1979-1997.
They WERE recovering rapidly, but Brexit put a stop to that.
"Theresa May specifies there are "no current contracts" between her party and CA or its parent company SCL. "
https://twitter.com/nedsimons/status/976434340052852736
Today - wage rises at 2.8%
And expected inflation at 2% later this year with wage increases well above inflation
0.1%.
On £30,000 that’s equivalent to £30.
Quick - to Lidl before the champagne stocks run out!
With mixed reults.
NHS Unions to recommend pay rise of between 6.5% and 29% over three years increasing a nurses salary by about £2,000 pa
Corbyn got what he wanted. It will be up on social media later today. It is focused on the local elections. He even had a slogan that he repeated three times. "The Tories - Get less. Pay more".
Well Corbyn just kicked nine shades of **** out of May there.
I do not think however that she could not have answered...
PMQs - Snap verdict: Elections always add an edge to political debate, and with the local elections only weeks away, Corbyn devoted all his questions to the state of local government. He started very, very well, flooring May with a question about Tory-run Northamptonshire county council effectively going bust...But Corbyn’s PMQs second half was not as bold as his opening, and May mounted a spirited, and largely successful, fightback... So, overall, they both scored some runs, but no one prevailed overall.