Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
India (which has more Muslims than any other country) is rated +25
The immigrant mix from India is far more likely to be Hindu and Sikh though. I know it's anecdote and all but I personally have never known a single Indian muslim.
My understanding there is also a significant difference in background of Indian immigrants. Especially the initial wave were all from "professional" middle class backgrounds, doctors, lawyers, accountants.
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
Yes, attitudes to immigration are often ill-thought through, knee-jerk and irrational. Who knew?
Since immigration was a big issue for Leavers, but Polish immigration is quite popular you have to wonder why so many voted Leave. I’m not convinced that idea of Romanian immigrants explains the overwhelming concern about immigration among Leavers.
Carswell is defined by Brexit. If you think he's driven mad look at the remain supporters who thought it would never happen and are slowly waking up to smell the coffee, these people have gone completely bonkers!
I think in any Brexit Bonkers list A C Grayling would come pretty near the top....
Bloody hell. How an someone so supposedly intelligent be so dumb. He must realise that voting Green or Lib Dem only takes votes away from Labour and they are still the only realistic hope Remaniacs have of reversing Brexit.
Surely that depends where you live? It's a local election - wouldn't it be nice if people actually voted on the basis of what sort of local council they Want? Tomorrow's vote isn't going to stop Brexit - it may affect your social care or schools or roads or libraries.
Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
Agreed, but our immigration system treats people very differently depending on their nationality.
Mainly it is preferential to EU/EEA migrants which will end once free movement ends to create a more level playing field
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
Yes, attitudes to immigration are often ill-thought through, knee-jerk and irrational. Who knew?
Since immigration was a big issue for Leavers, but Polish immigration is quite popular you have to wonder why so many voted Leave. I’m not convinced that idea of Romanian immigrants explains the overwhelming concern about immigration among Leavers.
It is quite simple. Stoke man wants the government to have the ability to choose which people we admit and how many per year, rather than the current EU free for all.
The fact people think the Poles on the whole are making a positive impact isn't at odds with that.
If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.
It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
He means LAB +131.
Does he? Labour won the 2014 Locals when these were last up remember but are now only neck and neck in the polls at best
I'd think so. IIRC, nearly half of the seats up in this round are in London, so although Labour is doing worse in the polls vs Con nationally than it was in 2014, the London factor, plus the gains it should pick up from UKIP elsewhere, should more than offset losses elsewhere to Con. (That said, +131 seems quite ambitious).
The basic problem is that Leavers thought that the post-referendum phase was going to be a tickertape parade, when in reality they needed to work towards a reconstruction. Their failure to prioritise and plan has left them strategically poorly-placed now.
Sturgeon's constituents not happy with her, apparently Glasgow Southside is a bit of a dump right now.
Right now? I am not a fan (I may have hidden my views on this) but to suggest that has occurred under her watch is a tad harsh.
On the radio this morning, filthy nappies in stairwells, bins uncollected, rats. I know it's never going to be a quaint town on the isle of Skye but it seems to have worsened under Sturgeon's watch.
Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.
Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.
Executive summary: no-one has a clue!
Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
May I ask which ward?
Middleton Park. I hope I'm not breaking any confidences when I say that I don't expect to be elected.
I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
Although I suspect people are answering the question about the Roma rather than Romanians.
No I don't think that's true. I'm probably one of the few PBers who has been to Romania and Bulgaria, it was obvious that Romania was (and still is) in no way suitable for entry into the EU. I'm sure whatever studies were done by the EU at the time were conducted on the same basis as Greece entering the Eurozone rather than a frank assessment of whether Romania was a suitable EU candidate.
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
India (which has more Muslims than any other country) is rated +25
The immigrant mix from India is far more likely to be Hindu and Sikh though. I know it's anecdote and all but I personally have never known a single Indian muslim.
I lived next door to one (literally!) for 8 years. He described himself as a bad muslim because he liked his beer but he still drew the line at bacon and pork.
Carswell is defined by Brexit. If you think he's driven mad look at the remain supporters who thought it would never happen and are slowly waking up to smell the coffee, these people have gone completely bonkers!
I think in any Brexit Bonkers list A C Grayling would come pretty near the top....
Bloody hell. How an someone so supposedly intelligent be so dumb. He must realise that voting Green or Lib Dem only takes votes away from Labour and they are still the only realistic hope Remaniacs have of reversing Brexit.
Surely that depends where you live? It's a local election - wouldn't it be nice if people actually voted on the basis of what sort of local council they Want? Tomorrow's vote isn't going to stop Brexit - it may affect your social care or schools or roads or libraries.
This is the Lib Dem pitch in provincial England.
But in London it is 24/7 anti-Brexit.
As usual, the LibDems are the masters of facing both ways (or indeed multiple ways) at the same time.
If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.
It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
He means LAB +131.
Does he? Labour won the 2014 Locals when these were last up remember but are now only neck and neck in the polls at best
I'd think so. IIRC, nearly half of the seats up in this round are in London, so although Labour is doing worse in the polls vs Con nationally than it was in 2014, the London factor, plus the gains it should pick up from UKIP elsewhere, should more than offset losses elsewhere to Con. (That said, +131 seems quite ambitious).
Corbyn will certainly hope so but if the Tories minimise the losses in London and gain far more former UKIP voters than Labour outside London Labour could make a net loss certainly
Seems like Corbyn’s PMQs strategy is deliberately designed for social media - not about producing an overall performance for the commentariar to applaud, but producing clips for Facebook and Twitter for Momentum et al to share. Think that this kind of strategy might be too early as most people still get their news from broadcast media. https://twitter.com/shehabkhan/status/991638059816022016
Yes, I think the euro-sceptics in the government got carried away - flustered by the rantings of Farage and the hysteria to trigger Article 50 immediately. They should have conceded that Brexit was a long-term project that would take a decade or more to finalize. They now look like headless chickens and it's all their own fault.
Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.
Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.
Executive summary: no-one has a clue!
Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
May I ask which ward?
Middleton Park. I hope I'm not breaking any confidences when I say that I don't expect to be elected.
Jezza shtick is like those 60/70s bands who still tour now just playing their greatest hits night in night out....not surprisingly they are very well drilled, but they can't make any decent new material.
Seems like Corbyn’s PMQs strategy is deliberately designed for social media - not about producing an overall performance for the commentariar to applaud, but producing clips for Facebook and Twitter for Momentum et al to share. Think that this kind of strategy might be too early as most people still get their news from broadcast media. https://twitter.com/shehabkhan/status/991638059816022016
Always helpful to have the Russian bots on your side....
If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.
It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
He means LAB +131.
Does he? Labour won the 2014 Locals when these were last up remember but are now only neck and neck in the polls at best
I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
Although I suspect people are answering the question about the Roma rather than Romanians.
No I don't think that's true. I'm probably one of the few PBers who has been to Romania and Bulgaria, it was obvious that Romania was (and still is) in no way suitable for entry into the EU. I'm sure whatever studies were done by the EU at the time were conducted on the same basis as Greece entering the Eurozone rather than a frank assessment of whether Romania was a suitable EU candidate.
Which parts of Bulgaria did you visit ?
I've been to Varna (Via Sofia) twice, which was pleasent enough - any summer package deal invariably seems to be to "Sunny Beach" though which looked like an absolute tourist factory when we passed it in the taxi...
If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.
It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
He means LAB +131.
Does he? Labour won the 2014 Locals when these were last up remember but are now only neck and neck in the polls at best
Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.
Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.
Executive summary: no-one has a clue!
Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
May I ask which ward?
Middleton Park. I hope I'm not breaking any confidences when I say that I don't expect to be elected.
Thanks. We can both be gallant losers then.
Are any of our PBers likely to win? Which ward are you standing in @HYUFD?
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
Yes, attitudes to immigration are often ill-thought through, knee-jerk and irrational. Who knew?
Since immigration was a big issue for Leavers, but Polish immigration is quite popular you have to wonder why so many voted Leave. I’m not convinced that idea of Romanian immigrants explains the overwhelming concern about immigration among Leavers.
I'll tell you why people like Poles, they are like us. Just with a Polish accent. A very good friend of mine is Polish, he married an English woman and the only Polish thing about his kid is that they spell Alex slightly differently. He's fully integrated into the UK, he's taken up citizenship. I don't think that this is abnormal either. A Polish EA at my old work was exactly the same, she took up British citizenship and has married a British man.
In addition, specific to Poland, there is a lot of history between British people and Polish people going back to the war.
Much like Indians, Poles are seen as "good immigrants" and we have some level of history with Poland.
If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.
It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
He means LAB +131.
Does he? Labour won the 2014 Locals when these were last up remember but are now only neck and neck in the polls at best
I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
Although I suspect people are answering the question about the Roma rather than Romanians.
No I don't think that's true. I'm probably one of the few PBers who has been to Romania and Bulgaria, it was obvious that Romania was (and still is) in no way suitable for entry into the EU. I'm sure whatever studies were done by the EU at the time were conducted on the same basis as Greece entering the Eurozone rather than a frank assessment of whether Romania was a suitable EU candidate.
Which parts of Bulgaria did you visit ?
I've been to Varna (Via Sofia) twice, which was pleasent enough - any summer package deal invariably seems to be to "Sunny Beach" though which looked like an absolute tourist factory when we passed it in the taxi...
Sofia, we didn't go to Sunny Beach. It's a great place, and a night and day difference to Bucharest.
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.
It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
He means LAB +131.
Does he? Labour won the 2014 Locals when these were last up remember but are now only neck and neck in the polls at best
Right OK. Though interesting that a net Labour loss is still very much a possibility within that range
Yeah, the headline seems to be how wide the ranges (supposedly 95%) are, especially for the Conservatives.
His forecast checking it again does indeed seem to be a net Labour loss of 130 compared to Rawlings and Thrasher forecasting net Labour gains of over 300.
Last year he was more accurate for the county council elections than Rawlings and Thrasher as the figures in the article make clear
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
Yes, attitudes to immigration are often ill-thought through, knee-jerk and irrational. Who knew?
Since immigration was a big issue for Leavers, but Polish immigration is quite popular you have to wonder why so many voted Leave. I’m not convinced that idea of Romanian immigrants explains the overwhelming concern about immigration among Leavers.
It is quite simple. Stoke man wants the government to have the ability to choose which people we admit and how many per year, rather than the current EU free for all.
The fact people think the Poles on the whole are making a positive impact isn't at odds with that.
It was interesting to read in All Out War that the Remain side had little understanding of the immigration issue. They assumed that concerns around immigration were about cultural concerns and that the economy would trump immigration when it came to it. Unfortunately for them, they didn't realize until it was too late that concerns around immigration are very much economic rather than cultural (though that probably is an aspect in some instances).
Amber Rudd, who resigned as home secretary on Sunday night, starts by congratulating Sajid Javid on his appointment. She says the UK threat level remains at severe. Last year five terrorist attacks got through. Will May share with her her admiration for the work of the security services?
May says she is pleased to be able to pay tribute to Rudd for the work she did as home secretary. She says Rudd’s work with internet companies was ground breaking. And she says she agrees with what Rudd said about the work of the intelligence agencies and emergency services.
(That exchange is a fairly clear sign that Rudd will not be joining the pro-European Tory rebels.)
Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.
Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.
Executive summary: no-one has a clue!
Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
May I ask which ward?
Middleton Park. I hope I'm not breaking any confidences when I say that I don't expect to be elected.
Thanks. We can both be gallant losers then.
Are any of our PBers likely to win? Which ward are you standing in @HYUFD?
Epping Hemnall, currently LD but the LDs are trying to capture Epping Lindsay from the Tories so although a long shot they may have left a bit of a gap in their backyard
There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..
I see little value there.
Davidson isn't in parliament and is unlikely to be so after 2022 - either SCon has had another very good election in 2021, meaning she's a key power-broker in Holyrood, or she's had a poor election, which destroys one of her main selling points. And that's assuming that May lasts until then, which is unlikely. Even if she does, and Ruth moves to Westminster, she'd still have to gain a lot of support among MPs who she'd have known for a couple of years at most (if Con win, but then it'd be a huge step up to become PM, though she'd be a shoo-in for Scottish Secretary), or a few months if Con lose. I'd want at least 100/1.
Miliband is completely out of the action and shows no desire to return. His brand of politics is very out of favour with the Labour members; on top of which he showed himself to be arrogant and complacent in the 2010 leadership election. And again, there'd need to be no change of Con MP before Miliband has returned to the UK, won the Labour leadership and then ousted Con. At least 250/1.
Khan is more sensible. it's basically a combination of the above, except that the timing does work better for him - he could resign as mayor in anticipation of the 2022 election, stand for election in a post-GE leadership contest and then replace May later. It's a lot of contingencies but there's a smidgen of value. I'd make him 150/1.
Farage. Lol. No party, no organisation, might have an issue if Brexit is stopped but even then (1) it's not an election-winning one, and (2) how the hell does he get to replace May before anyone else, when failing to deliver on any sort of brexit would undoubtedly topple her? I'd want four-figure odds before backing him.
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
Yes, attitudes to immigration are often ill-thought through, knee-jerk and irrational. Who knew?
Since immigration was a big issue for Leavers, but Polish immigration is quite popular you have to wonder why so many voted Leave. I’m not convinced that idea of Romanian immigrants explains the overwhelming concern about immigration among Leavers.
It is quite simple. Stoke man wants the government to have the ability to choose which people we admit and how many per year, rather than the current EU free for all.
The fact people think the Poles on the whole are making a positive impact isn't at odds with that.
It was interesting to read in All Out War that the Remain side had little understanding of the immigration issue. They assumed that concerns around immigration were about cultural concerns and that the economy would trump immigration when it came to it. Unfortunately for them, they didn't realize until it was too late that concerns around immigration are very much economic rather than cultural (though that probably is an aspect in some instances).
I think you have it the wrong way round. It is not socially acceptable to oppose immigration for cultural reasons, so people give economic objections. That’s why Labour In’s proposal of a ‘migration impact fund’ would not have helped Remain in any meaningful way.
Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
Agreed, but our immigration system treats people very differently depending on their nationality.
It should be set up to encourage those with skills we need and who can be contributors to British society, irrespective of where they come from. There should be minimal barriers to residence based on nationality, maybe things like recognition of qualifications for certain professions.
Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.
Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.
Executive summary: no-one has a clue!
Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
May I ask which ward?
Middleton Park. I hope I'm not breaking any confidences when I say that I don't expect to be elected.
Thanks. We can both be gallant losers then.
Are any of our PBers likely to win? Which ward are you standing in @HYUFD?
Epping Hemnall, currently LD but the LDs are trying to capture Epping Lindsay from the Tories so although a long shot they may have left a bit of a gap in their backyard
I think you have a good chance given the size of the UKIP vote that is up for grabs.
Amber Rudd, who resigned as home secretary on Sunday night, starts by congratulating Sajid Javid on his appointment. She says the UK threat level remains at severe. Last year five terrorist attacks got through. Will May share with her her admiration for the work of the security services?
May says she is pleased to be able to pay tribute to Rudd for the work she did as home secretary. She says Rudd’s work with internet companies was ground breaking. And she says she agrees with what Rudd said about the work of the intelligence agencies and emergency services.
(That exchange is a fairly clear sign that Rudd will not be joining the pro-European Tory rebels.)
There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..
I see little value there. ... .
My point was that the value was in laying them, not backing them!
I don’t find the immigration figures contradictory. It makes sense to privilege immigration from countries that share our cultural values, and I think most Brits are happy with individual immigrants.
What they have an issue with is “uncontrolled” immigration, by which I presume is meant:
- immigration over 150k per year, without any grown up plans around infrastructure - the ability of immigrants to qualify for various support (tax credits, housing) without needing to “put in” - the lack of any coherent policy on illegal migration - specific issues relating to - sad to say - immigration from Islamic countries, ie crime, FGM, cousin marriage, child rape etc. - the preponderance of Eastern Europeans (Roma?) selling Big Issue - the rapid change in the make-up of certain areas, which bewilders especially the elderly.
We have at least moved on from the days of not mentioning immigration at all, for fear of racism. However I still don’t see any politician able to confidently address the issues above while maintaining the overriding *positive* case for immigration - skills, creativity, and relieving the demographic burden.
I myself would try to maintain immigration at sub-150k, by aggressive use of the income threshold. I would exclude students from the target. I would set up an independent body to monitor and set various thresholds. I would exclude migrants from benefits for five years. I would privilege, in order, fellow crown realms, the EU, the USA and India, and former Commonwealth countries. I would set up a migration infrastructure fund that is directly correlated to migration numbers. I would invest in hostile measures against illegal migration and against cultural practices which should not be tolerated in the U.K.
The above is broad stroke and the devil is in the detail. But if we want immigration - and we do - we must pay more to manage it and to make it “fair”. It’s fairness above all that pisses people off.
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
Yes, attitudes to immigration are often ill-thought through, knee-jerk and irrational. Who knew?
Since immigration was a big issue for Leavers, but Polish immigration is quite popular you have to wonder why so many voted Leave. I’m not convinced that idea of Romanian immigrants explains the overwhelming concern about immigration among Leavers.
It is quite simple. Stoke man wants the government to have the ability to choose which people we admit and how many per year, rather than the current EU free for all.
The fact people think the Poles on the whole are making a positive impact isn't at odds with that.
It was interesting to read in All Out War that the Remain side had little understanding of the immigration issue. They assumed that concerns around immigration were about cultural concerns and that the economy would trump immigration when it came to it. Unfortunately for them, they didn't realize until it was too late that concerns around immigration are very much economic rather than cultural (though that probably is an aspect in some instances).
I think you have it the wrong way round. It is not socially acceptable to oppose immigration for cultural reasons, so people give economic objections. That’s why Labour In’s proposal of a ‘migration impact fund’ would not have helped Remain in any meaningful way.
Yes, this was perfectly captured in a vox pop where someone said "they don't work and take our jobs".
Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.
Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.
Executive summary: no-one has a clue!
Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
May I ask which ward?
Middleton Park. I hope I'm not breaking any confidences when I say that I don't expect to be elected.
Thanks. We can both be gallant losers then.
Are any of our PBers likely to win? Which ward are you standing in @HYUFD?
Epping Hemnall, currently LD but the LDs are trying to capture Epping Lindsay from the Tories so although a long shot they may have left a bit of a gap in their backyard
I don’t find the immigration figures contradictory. It makes sense to privilege immigration from countries that share our cultural values, and I think most Brits are happy with individual immigrants.
What they have an issue with is “uncontrolled” immigration, by which I presume is meant:
- immigration over 150k per year, without any grown up plans around infrastructure - the ability of immigrants to qualify for various support (tax credits, housing) without needing to “put in” - the lack of any coherent policy on illegal migration - specific issues relating to - sad to say - immigration from Islamic countries, ie crime, FGM, cousin marriage, child rape etc. - the preponderance of Eastern Europeans (Roma?) selling Big Issue - the rapid change in the make-up of certain areas, which bewilders especially the elderly.
We have at least moved on from the days of not mentioning immigration at all, for fear of racism. However I still don’t see any politician able to confidently address the issues above while maintaining the overriding *positive* case for immigration - skills, creativity, and relieving the demographic burden.
I myself would try to maintain immigration at sub-150k, by aggressive use of the income threshold. I would exclude students from the target. I would set up an independent body to monitor and set various thresholds. I would exclude migrants from benefits for five years. I would privilege, in order, fellow crown realms, the EU, the USA and India, and former Commonwealth countries. I would set up a migration infrastructure fund that is directly correlated to migration numbers. I would invest in hostile measures against illegal migration and against cultural practices which should not be tolerated in the U.K.
The above is broad stroke and the devil is in the detail. But if we want immigration - and we do - we must pay more to manage it and to make it “fair”. It’s fairness above all that pisses people off.
Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.
Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.
Executive summary: no-one has a clue!
Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
May I ask which ward?
Middleton Park. I hope I'm not breaking any confidences when I say that I don't expect to be elected.
Thanks. We can both be gallant losers then.
Are any of our PBers likely to win? Which ward are you standing in @HYUFD?
Epping Hemnall, currently LD but the LDs are trying to capture Epping Lindsay from the Tories so although a long shot they may have left a bit of a gap in their backyard
I think you have a good chance given the size of the UKIP vote that is up for grabs.
EDIT: And top of the ballot paper.
An outside one yes but voters also have concerns about the Local Plan and greenbelt development to deal with and had to put out a leaflet at the weekend assuring residents there will continue to be a Sports Centre longer term in Epping.
I think I have done more canvassing in the ward than the LDs this year though and may even have put out more leaflets which was not the case last year at the by election, though as usual they have more posters. I am not expecting to win but tomorrow if I really get all the Cs and Ps out and the undecideds and ex Kippers break for me it is not completely impossible I suppose
There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..
I see little value there. ... .
My point was that the value was in laying them, not backing them!
Genuine question: Apart from maybe Davidson, isn't it likely to be better to put your money in a savings account, or bonds?
I don’t find the immigration figures contradictory. It makes sense to privilege immigration from countries that share our cultural values, and I think most Brits are happy with individual immigrants.
What they have an issue with is “uncontrolled” immigration, by which I presume is meant:
- immigration over 150k per year, without any grown up plans around infrastructure - the ability of immigrants to qualify for various support (tax credits, housing) without needing to “put in” - the lack of any coherent policy on illegal migration - specific issues relating to - sad to say - immigration from Islamic countries, ie crime, FGM, cousin marriage, child rape etc. - the preponderance of Eastern Europeans (Roma?) selling Big Issue - the rapid change in the make-up of certain areas, which bewilders especially the elderly.
We have at least moved on from the days of not mentioning immigration at all, for fear of racism. However I still don’t see any politician able to confidently address the issues above while maintaining the overriding *positive* case for immigration - skills, creativity, and relieving the demographic burden.
I myself would try to maintain immigration at sub-150k, by aggressive use of the income threshold. I would exclude students from the target. I would set up an independent body to monitor and set various thresholds. I would exclude migrants from benefits for five years. I would privilege, in order, fellow crown realms, the EU, the USA and India, and former Commonwealth countries. I would set up a migration infrastructure fund that is directly correlated to migration numbers. I would invest in hostile measures against illegal migration and against cultural practices which should not be tolerated in the U.K.
The above is broad stroke and the devil is in the detail. But if we want immigration - and we do - we must pay more to manage it and to make it “fair”. It’s fairness above all that pisses people off.
Income based assessment is the best way and we should apply it globally and apply a cultural test for everyone who meets the requirements. That would keep net migration down to about the level you mention and we would only import wealth creating immigration. It's essentially what Switzerland does. Immigration needs to add economic value or it shouldn't happen.
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
India (which has more Muslims than any other country) is rated +25
The immigrant mix from India is far more likely to be Hindu and Sikh though. I know it's anecdote and all but I personally have never known a single Indian muslim.
I lived next door to one (literally!) for 8 years. He described himself as a bad muslim because he liked his beer but he still drew the line at bacon and pork.
Sounds like a guy I used to work with. He’s a Muslim vegetarian, but could sometimes be persuaded of the merits of a bacon sandwich to help with the hangover!
There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..
I see little value there. ... .
My point was that the value was in laying them, not backing them!
Genuine question: Apart from maybe Davidson, isn't it likely to be better to put your money in a savings account, or bonds?
It depends on what other positions you have. If you have already laid (say) Rees-Mogg, and therefore have a liability of a few hundred quid, it doesn't increase your liability to add in the long-shot no-hopers for a few quid each. It's free money (well, until it goes wrong, of course, and David Miliband swans into No 10!)
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
Yes, attitudes to immigration are often ill-thought through, knee-jerk and irrational. Who knew?
Since immigration was a big issue for Leavers, but Polish immigration is quite popular you have to wonder why so many voted Leave. I’m not convinced that idea of Romanian immigrants explains the overwhelming concern about immigration among Leavers.
It is quite simple. Stoke man wants the government to have the ability to choose which people we admit and how many per year, rather than the current EU free for all.
The fact people think the Poles on the whole are making a positive impact isn't at odds with that.
It was interesting to read in All Out War that the Remain side had little understanding of the immigration issue. They assumed that concerns around immigration were about cultural concerns and that the economy would trump immigration when it came to it. Unfortunately for them, they didn't realize until it was too late that concerns around immigration are very much economic rather than cultural (though that probably is an aspect in some instances).
I think you have it the wrong way round. It is not socially acceptable to oppose immigration for cultural reasons, so people give economic objections. That’s why Labour In’s proposal of a ‘migration impact fund’ would not have helped Remain in any meaningful way.
I think the biggest problem with a "migration impact fund" is that the government would have ended up spending more money on the areas with more immigrants. The opposition would say "well, if you limited the numbers, you wouldn't have to spend as much money."
Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.
Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.
Executive summary: no-one has a clue!
Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
May I ask which ward?
Middleton Park. I hope I'm not breaking any confidences when I say that I don't expect to be elected.
Thanks. We can both be gallant losers then.
Are any of our PBers likely to win? Which ward are you standing in @HYUFD?
Epping Hemnall, currently LD but the LDs are trying to capture Epping Lindsay from the Tories so although a long shot they may have left a bit of a gap in their backyard
My extended family is still based in Boston and as I've said before, the Poles aren't personally disliked by the Leavers who include virtually all of the adults in my family. (The odd younger member is excused their Remainer instincts as they'll probably grow out of it soon enough).
They drink hard and the drink-drive convictions have shot up, but no one denies they do work hard too
The problem is more the seeming lack of control over the numbers. There's been a massive increase in the population without a corresponding increase in the local facilities like schools and healthcare. The RC church now has four Sunday masses instead of the previous one.
I asked my young nephew (a Remainer in the referendum) who was unemployed for a while after graduating, why he didn't go on the land for a bit. "I can't speak Polish or Lithuanian" was his reply.
They feel the over-crowding and they don't trust any UK government to give a shit. Instead there's a feeling that it will fall over itself to suck up to the EU and be a perfect member. I can understand that feeling.
Mr Meeks knows it's racism pure and simple as he is much wiser (being a Londoner) and thus knows better than these rural thickos about what's happening on the fens.
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
My extended family is still based in Boston and as I've said before, the Poles aren't personally disliked by the Leavers who include virtually all of the adults in my family. (The odd younger member is excused their Remainer instincts as they'll probably grow out of it soon enough).
They drink hard and the drink-drive cpnvictions have shot up, but no one denies they do work hard too
The problem is more the seeming lack of control over the numbers. There's been a massive increase in the population without a corresponding increase in the local facilities like schools and healthcare. The RC church now has four Sunday masses instead of the previous one.
I asked my young nephew (a Remainer in the referendum) who was unemployed for a while after graduating, why he didn't go on the land for a bit. "I can't speak Polish or Lithuanian" was his reply.
They feel the over-crowding and they don't trust any UK government to give a shit. Instead there's a feeling that it will fall over itself to suck up to the EU and be a perfect member. I can understand that feeling.
Mr Meeks knows it's racism pure and simple as he is much wiser (being a Londoner) and thus knows better than these rural thickos about what's happening on the fens.
This post is so full of common sense and in some ways make obvious points.
Yet it makes them well and needs saying because some of the London elite still don't get it.
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.
It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
He means LAB +131.
Does he? Labour won the 2014 Locals when these were last up remember but are now only neck and neck in the polls at best
Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.
The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
India (which has more Muslims than any other country) is rated +25
The immigrant mix from India is far more likely to be Hindu and Sikh though. I know it's anecdote and all but I personally have never known a single Indian muslim.
I lived next door to one (literally!) for 8 years. He described himself as a bad muslim because he liked his beer but he still drew the line at bacon and pork.
Sounds like a guy I used to work with. He’s a Muslim vegetarian, but could sometimes be persuaded of the merits of a bacon sandwich to help with the hangover!
Bacon sandwiches are good at any time. Now... what to do for lunch??? Hmm.....
My extended family is still based in Boston and as I've said before, the Poles aren't personally disliked by the Leavers who include virtually all of the adults in my family. (The odd younger member is excused their Remainer instincts as they'll probably grow out of it soon enough).
They drink hard and the drink-drive convictions have shot up, but no one denies they do work hard too
The problem is more the seeming lack of control over the numbers. There's been a massive increase in the population without a corresponding increase in the local facilities like schools and healthcare. The RC church now has four Sunday masses instead of the previous one.
I asked my young nephew (a Remainer in the referendum) who was unemployed for a while after graduating, why he didn't go on the land for a bit. "I can't speak Polish or Lithuanian" was his reply.
They feel the over-crowding and they don't trust any UK government to give a shit. Instead there's a feeling that it will fall over itself to suck up to the EU and be a perfect member. I can understand that feeling.
Mr Meeks knows it's racism pure and simple as he is much wiser (being a Londoner) and thus knows better than these rural thickos about what's happening on the fens.
The problem here is the lack of spending on facilities and infrastructure, not the immigrants.
Amber Rudd, who resigned as home secretary on Sunday night, starts by congratulating Sajid Javid on his appointment. She says the UK threat level remains at severe. Last year five terrorist attacks got through. Will May share with her her admiration for the work of the security services?
May says she is pleased to be able to pay tribute to Rudd for the work she did as home secretary. She says Rudd’s work with internet companies was ground breaking. And she says she agrees with what Rudd said about the work of the intelligence agencies and emergency services.
(That exchange is a fairly clear sign that Rudd will not be joining the pro-European Tory rebels.)
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
I don’t find the immigration figures contradictory. It makes sense to privilege immigration from countries that share our cultural values, and I think most Brits are happy with individual immigrants.
What they have an issue with is “uncontrolled” immigration, by which I presume is meant:
- immigration over 150k per year, without any grown up plans around infrastructure - the ability of immigrants to qualify for various support (tax credits, housing) without needing to “put in” - the lack of any coherent policy on illegal migration - specific issues relating to - sad to say - immigration from Islamic countries, ie crime, FGM, cousin marriage, child rape etc. - the preponderance of Eastern Europeans (Roma?) selling Big Issue - the rapid change in the make-up of certain areas, which bewilders especially the elderly.
We have at least moved on from the days of not mentioning immigration at all, for fear of racism. However I still don’t see any politician able to confidently address the issues above while maintaining the overriding *positive* case for immigration - skills, creativity, and relieving the demographic burden.
I myself would try to maintain immigration at sub-150k, by aggressive use of the income threshold. I would exclude students from the target. I would set up an independent body to monitor and set various thresholds. I would exclude migrants from benefits for five years. I would privilege, in order, fellow crown realms, the EU, the USA and India, and former Commonwealth countries. I would set up a migration infrastructure fund that is directly correlated to migration numbers. I would invest in hostile measures against illegal migration and against cultural practices which should not be tolerated in the U.K.
The above is broad stroke and the devil is in the detail. But if we want immigration - and we do - we must pay more to manage it and to make it “fair”. It’s fairness above all that pisses people off.
I agree with much of this. But it brings us back to how do we do all of that if we are still in the Single Market for instance? I feel sure a large majority would love to have an income threshold that let in (say) Indian surgeons but kept out (say) Romanian Big Issue sellers, but the EU won't allow such a notion.
I'm coming round to ID cards too if that's what it takes (though I Ioathe the idea in principle), and we would need a total overhaul of the benefits system (fair enough in my book).
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
Labour in for a tonking in Sheffield Methinks due to the tree felling PFI
I hope so, but the protest vote is bound to be split between the Greens and the Lib Dems also there are wards Labour is so far ahead in they won't lose till hell freezes over. So I think Labour will probably be OK. And the Tories only remote chance is Stocksbridge ward I think.
I agree with much of this. But it brings us back to how do we do all of that if we are still in the Single Market for instance? I feel sure a large majority would love to have an income threshold that let in (say) Indian surgeons but kept out (say) Romanian Big Issue sellers, but the EU won't allow such a notion.
Nobody dreams of growing up to sell the Big Issue so the best approach is to ensure people have better options and also clamp down on any exploitation. Trying to control numbers or set thresholds is treating the symptom, not the cause.
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
It is amazing the consistency of views one hears from inside the echo chamber Carlotta!
PMQs - Snap verdict: That wasn’t really a PMQs at all; we just had two PPBs (party political broadcasts) blaring away in tandem, doing little to enlighten anyone. Corbyn’s PPB was better on passion, and it covered wider ground - in fact, there was little area of public policy where he failed to castigate the government - but May probably did better on specific, memorable detail (her Hazelbourne Road anecdote).
My extended family is still based in Boston and as I've said before, the Poles aren't personally disliked by the Leavers who include virtually all of the adults in my family. (The odd younger member is excused their Remainer instincts as they'll probably grow out of it soon enough).
They drink hard and the drink-drive convictions have shot up, but no one denies they do work hard too
The problem is more the seeming lack of control over the numbers. There's been a massive increase in the population without a corresponding increase in the local facilities like schools and healthcare. The RC church now has four Sunday masses instead of the previous one.
I asked my young nephew (a Remainer in the referendum) who was unemployed for a while after graduating, why he didn't go on the land for a bit. "I can't speak Polish or Lithuanian" was his reply.
They feel the over-crowding and they don't trust any UK government to give a shit. Instead there's a feeling that it will fall over itself to suck up to the EU and be a perfect member. I can understand that feeling.
Mr Meeks knows it's racism pure and simple as he is much wiser (being a Londoner) and thus knows better than these rural thickos about what's happening on the fens.
The problem here is the lack of spending on facilities and infrastructure, not the immigrants.
It's both. Not I stress the immigrants "fault" per se, but if you have a non contributory benefits system (to an extent), a huge disparity in wages from one country to the next, and a legal open door, a large influx will follow (why wouldn't they come? I probably would given the same maths), requiring the infrastructure. The numpties in charge in 2004 either didn't understand or didn't want to understand this.
Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
Agreed, but our immigration system treats people very differently depending on their nationality.
Mainly it is preferential to EU/EEA migrants which will end once free movement ends to create a more level playing field
Nonsense - do you really think the immigration systems treats applicants from Somalia and the USA equally?
Comments
https://twitter.com/frasernelson/status/991619358626598912
The fact people think the Poles on the whole are making a positive impact isn't at odds with that.
As usual, the LibDems are the masters of facing both ways (or indeed multiple ways) at the same time.
https://twitter.com/shehabkhan/status/991638059816022016
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/991638113414975488
(* delete as appropriate)
Did they? I cannot say that I noticed.... Corbynistic hell surely?
I've been to Varna (Via Sofia) twice, which was pleasent enough - any summer package deal invariably seems to be to "Sunny Beach" though which looked like an absolute tourist factory when we passed it in the taxi...
In addition, specific to Poland, there is a lot of history between British people and Polish people going back to the war.
Much like Indians, Poles are seen as "good immigrants" and we have some level of history with Poland.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/may/02/pmqs-may-corbyn-brexit-rees-mogg-claims-tory-brexiter-customs-partnership-warning-will-help-may-politics-live
I would expect she had a difficult PMQ's
Last year he was more accurate for the county council elections than Rawlings and Thrasher as the figures in the article make clear
May says she is pleased to be able to pay tribute to Rudd for the work she did as home secretary. She says Rudd’s work with internet companies was ground breaking. And she says she agrees with what Rudd said about the work of the intelligence agencies and emergency services.
(That exchange is a fairly clear sign that Rudd will not be joining the pro-European Tory rebels.)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/may/02/pmqs-may-corbyn-brexit-rees-mogg-claims-tory-brexiter-customs-partnership-warning-will-help-may-politics-live
Davidson isn't in parliament and is unlikely to be so after 2022 - either SCon has had another very good election in 2021, meaning she's a key power-broker in Holyrood, or she's had a poor election, which destroys one of her main selling points. And that's assuming that May lasts until then, which is unlikely. Even if she does, and Ruth moves to Westminster, she'd still have to gain a lot of support among MPs who she'd have known for a couple of years at most (if Con win, but then it'd be a huge step up to become PM, though she'd be a shoo-in for Scottish Secretary), or a few months if Con lose. I'd want at least 100/1.
Miliband is completely out of the action and shows no desire to return. His brand of politics is very out of favour with the Labour members; on top of which he showed himself to be arrogant and complacent in the 2010 leadership election. And again, there'd need to be no change of Con MP before Miliband has returned to the UK, won the Labour leadership and then ousted Con. At least 250/1.
Khan is more sensible. it's basically a combination of the above, except that the timing does work better for him - he could resign as mayor in anticipation of the 2022 election, stand for election in a post-GE leadership contest and then replace May later. It's a lot of contingencies but there's a smidgen of value. I'd make him 150/1.
Farage. Lol. No party, no organisation, might have an issue if Brexit is stopped but even then (1) it's not an election-winning one, and (2) how the hell does he get to replace May before anyone else, when failing to deliver on any sort of brexit would undoubtedly topple her? I'd want four-figure odds before backing him.
EDIT: And top of the ballot paper.
It makes sense to privilege immigration from countries that share our cultural values, and I think most Brits are happy with individual immigrants.
What they have an issue with is “uncontrolled” immigration, by which I presume is meant:
- immigration over 150k per year, without any grown up plans around infrastructure
- the ability of immigrants to qualify for various support (tax credits, housing) without needing to “put in”
- the lack of any coherent policy on illegal migration
- specific issues relating to - sad to say - immigration from Islamic countries, ie crime, FGM, cousin marriage, child rape etc.
- the preponderance of Eastern Europeans (Roma?) selling Big Issue
- the rapid change in the make-up of certain areas, which bewilders especially the elderly.
We have at least moved on from the days of not mentioning immigration at all, for fear of racism. However I still don’t see any politician able to confidently address the issues above while maintaining the overriding *positive* case for immigration - skills, creativity, and relieving the demographic burden.
I myself would try to maintain immigration at sub-150k, by aggressive use of the income threshold. I would exclude students from the target. I would set up an independent body to monitor and set various thresholds. I would exclude migrants from benefits for five years. I would privilege, in order, fellow crown realms, the EU, the USA and India, and former Commonwealth countries. I would set up a migration infrastructure fund that is directly correlated to migration numbers. I would invest in hostile measures against illegal migration and against cultural practices which should not be tolerated in the U.K.
The above is broad stroke and the devil is in the detail. But if we want immigration - and we do - we must pay more to manage it and to make it “fair”. It’s fairness above all that pisses people off.
https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/991643117483798528
https://mobile.twitter.com/carriesymonds/status/991373566645100548
I think I have done more canvassing in the ward than the LDs this year though and may even have put out more leaflets which was not the case last year at the by election, though as usual they have more posters. I am not expecting to win but tomorrow if I really get all the Cs and Ps out and the undecideds and ex Kippers break for me it is not completely impossible I suppose
5 live calling it a draw but I did not hear PMQ's
* dressed up as a tax on uni accommodation providers but we all know that will be passed on.
They drink hard and the drink-drive convictions have shot up, but no one denies they do work hard too
The problem is more the seeming lack of control over the numbers. There's been a massive increase in the population without a corresponding increase in the local facilities like schools and healthcare. The RC church now has four Sunday masses instead of the previous one.
I asked my young nephew (a Remainer in the referendum) who was unemployed for a while after graduating, why he didn't go on the land for a bit. "I can't speak Polish or Lithuanian" was his reply.
They feel the over-crowding and they don't trust any UK government to give a shit. Instead there's a feeling that it will fall over itself to suck up to the EU and be a perfect member. I can understand that feeling.
Mr Meeks knows it's racism pure and simple as he is much wiser (being a Londoner) and thus knows better than these rural thickos about what's happening on the fens.
https://twitter.com/Conservatives/status/991362321627930625
Yet it makes them well and needs saying because some of the London elite still don't get it.
I wonder how this latest test of faith will be received by the true believers.
https://electionsetc.com/2018/05/02/forecasting-local-election-seat-gains-losses-2018/
Quite frankly, the Tories can do one when it comes to Council Tax.
I'm coming round to ID cards too if that's what it takes (though I Ioathe the idea in principle), and we would need a total overhaul of the benefits system (fair enough in my book).
Labour in for a tonking in Sheffield Methinks due to the tree felling PFI
I had a Labour leaflet through the door boasting they had "given all council employees a minimum wage of £10/hr - vote for us"
Mindboggling how crass it came across.
Council tax in Tory Craven is HIGHER than in Labour Leeds.
Who'd have thunk it!
And the Tories only remote chance is Stocksbridge ward I think.
edit: IF that is Hazelbourne Road!