So the two policies you like are the unfunded tax giveaway to a quarter of married couples and the under 25's benefit cuts.
The two policies I like are those which help lower-paid families with just a single income, who haven't benefitted fully from the big increases in personal allowances (a policy which will be fully 'funded' in the Autumn statement), and the fact that the Conservatives are serious about helping youngsters avoid the benefit trap which has blighted so many lives.
Oh, and I course I very much like Osborne's long-term plans for easing back the unacceptable levels of public debt. This should hardly need saying, of course, but it does.
I thought Cameron's speech was good on the broad mission stuff - that he didn't produce rabbits from the hat didn't bother me at all - that's not the job of the PM, the Autumn Statement is only a month away.
I rather liked a speech about ideology than one packed full of electioneering gimmicks for a change. We'll have plenty of them in the coming months.
The rise in the Labour vote share will please the high command.
I do hope so - because it will illustrate how poorly they understand polls!
Is there a reason you have omitted October polling from your 'analysis' below?
The same reason the PB Tories are determined to ignore the Ashcroft marginals polling
The same reason PB Lefties see a run of a few good polls and react like kiddies on Coca Cola in the same way they invariably describe the "PB Tories" as doing......
Example?
Today's reaction to the 'rise' in essentially flat polls, for starters......
But do post your analysis supporting the 'rise' theory - and lets see how many polls you rely upon.....
The week before the Labour conference saw a YouGov average of 37 for Labour, the week after , over 40. Not sure what that translates to in PB Toryworld, a win for Maria Hutchings probably
Imagine tim's reaction if a 'PB Tory' based their analysis on MOE changes across individual week's polls!
Mind you, you do have a weakness for very small base sizes when it comes to Eastleigh......
Why include early August polls but exclude 40% of post conference polling and hope that everyone on the site is too stupid to notice?
You mean 'two polls' - and the reason I 'excluded' them is they are not yet on the YouGov Voting Intention spread sheet - but go on, why don't you run the maths with these two polls (out of the 22 already included) and wonder at the change in Labour's vote.....
You're the one who thinks everyone on this site is too stupid to notice your 'Eastleigh Con woman's vote' meme is based on a miniscule base size.....And also won't spot when 'Dave's women problem' morphs into 'Labour's women lead' everytime the polling position changes.....
The polls have been up on the YouGov site since 0600 this morning.
Edmund - heard on the radio this morning that Dread Pirate Roberts has been arrested & Silk Road closed down. Bitcoins also being mentioned as currency of choice for these sorts of people.
Are there any implications we should be aware of?
1) The difficulties bitcoin allegedly poses to law enforcement are exaggerated, because OPSEC is really hard to do without screwing up. You should probably go back to hiring your hitmen the traditional way. 2) If you had any money on deposit in Silk Road you don't have it any more. 3) The federal government, and the FBI specifically, is now one of the world's largest holders of bitcoins. This will do interesting things to their incentives. 4) The traditional model where one company runs a marketplace while holding onto their users' money is horribly broken, as we also saw when Intrade went bust and took everybody's money with it. 5) Bitcoin has features that allow escrow without a third-party. These have largely been ignored by users up until now, but this will now change. 6) This will change the world. 7) We will no longer need bookmakers.
Thanks.
I must admit, I was slightly amused by the fact that a alleged villain was a fan of Princess Bride!
Markit complete their run of three sectoral PMIs for September today. After Manufacturing and Construction showed strong growth, with an index level a shade under that registered in August, the all important Services Sector follows suit.
The UK Services Sector PMI for September was 60.3 compared with August's 60.5. This makes the quarterly performance of the sector, from July to September, the highest recorded since Q2 1997.
So George's conference gift to the nation has been to return us all to levels of service sector growth not seen since the days of John Major.
And if Bobajob is able, in the mornings, to read more than three paragraphs and a title, he should be delighted to learn that Markit's respondents were reporting increased employment and incoming new orders. More neutral responses were that increases in operating costs were not being passed on in prices due to increased competition and that firms were experiencing the buildup of order backlogs.
Markit's Chief Economist, Chris Williamson, excitedly commented:
The buoyant data follow similar upbeat surveys of the manufacturing and construction sectors, and collectively the surveys suggest the economy will have expanded by as much as 1.2% in the third quarter.
Meanwhile tim, Bobajob and Dr Palmer gloomily study the slide in YouGov's Labour lead from 11% pre-Tory conference to 6% today. Cheer up boys. Why not focus on the good news of GDP growth?
The rise in the Labour vote share will please the high command. But it needs to be sustained beyond the conference season to actually mean anything. But a fortnight ago a few on here were talking about a possible Tory lead in a poll or two in the wake of the conference season, so Labour are bound to be pleased with how the last three weeks have gone.
...On a betting point, this makes "no polling crossover in 2013" likely. Hard to see any great Tory-boosting events between now and New Year...
3 more months of rising employment, 1 more quarter of growth and an Autumn Statement packed with goodies should do something for the Tory numbers.
I am expecting a decent tax cut - middle income families in London have been completed hammered by the incompetent tool that is George "Ozzy" Osborne. Austerity and the deficit are no longer the battlegrounds - it's all about giveaways to reduce the cost if living now. As Richard was saying below, the Tories have completed conceded the "fiscal responsibility" ground. As I said would happen, and as Antifrank wrongly denied.
You could call it sharing the proceeds of growth - between the deficit/debt and giveaways.
So the two policies you like are the unfunded tax giveaway to a quarter of married couples and the under 25's benefit cuts.
The two policies I like are those which help lower-paid families with just a single income, who haven't benefitted fully from the big increases in personal allowances (a policy which will be fully 'funded' in the Autumn statement), and the fact that the Conservatives are serious about helping youngsters avoid the benefit trap which has blighted so many lives.
I missed the speech, but other than reducing the income of youngsters who can't get jobs because there aren't any, what solid proposals were there for helping them? Without wasting lots of energy on the ideology of welfare dependency I assume we can all agree that the "earning or learning" aspiration is a desirable one: do we know where the jobs or the financially-viable educational places are going to come from?
"And what has been said about him by this newspaper can surely not be compared to the tasteless and cruel suggestion by a Labour councillor, embraced by Mr Miliband, that he and his pals would like to dance on Lady Thatcher’s grave. The Labour leader is being — shall we be kind? — inconsistent. The same observation can be made of the hordes of Leftists who are dabbing their eyes in memory of Ralph Miliband, having publicly celebrated the death of Margaret Thatcher only a few months ago.
In Glasgow and Brixton, campaigners shouted from loudspeakers: ‘Maggie, Maggie, Maggie’, as the mob ecstatically replied: ‘Dead, dead, dead.’ Some were carrying banners, with one proclaiming ‘Rejoice. Thatcher is dead’.
I missed the speech, but other than reducing the income of youngsters who can't get jobs because there aren't any, what solid proposals were there for helping them? Without wasting lots of energy on the ideology of welfare dependency I assume we can all agree that the "earning or learning" aspiration is a desirable one: do we know where the jobs or the financially-viable educational places are going to come from?
I imagine this will be fleshed out in the manifesto.
So the two policies you like are the unfunded tax giveaway to a quarter of married couples and the under 25's benefit cuts.
The two policies I like are those which help lower-paid families with just a single income, who haven't benefitted fully from the big increases in personal allowances (a policy which will be fully 'funded' in the Autumn statement), and the fact that the Conservatives are serious about helping youngsters avoid the benefit trap which has blighted so many lives.
I missed the speech, but other than reducing the income of youngsters who can't get jobs because there aren't any, what solid proposals were there for helping them? Without wasting lots of energy on the ideology of welfare dependency I assume we can all agree that the "earning or learning" aspiration is a desirable one: do we know where the jobs or the financially-viable educational places are going to come from?
"Later Tory officials confirmed that under-25s would lose their automatic right to Housing Benefit and Jobseeker’s Allowance if they refused to take up offers of work, training or education. ...
The “earn or learn” scheme would aim to ensure that all under-25s were either in education, training, work or an apprenticeship. By merging education and welfare policies, Mr Cameron wants the state to intervene at the earliest possible stage to prevent young people being trapped in a cycle of unemployment and benefit dependency.....
The issue is being studied by the Tory MP Jo Johnson, who heads the Downing Street Policy Unit, and Sir Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary. At present, the young jobless lose their benefits if they train for more than 16 hours a week. As a result, the system pays them if they are not in training - but stops supporting them when they are. The Heywood review is looking at ways of supporting young people after they start training."
Ignore it if you want, as the PB Tories are so desperate to ignore the massive Ashcroft marginals poll.
As for ignoring the polls from today and yesterday because they "aren't on the spreadsheet" thats a bit "I was vacuuming naked and fell on top of the sherry scooner" isn't it.
Yes tim, I can read spreadsheets.
What you ignore is that the '18% lead' is actually the difference between '62 women' vs '113 women'......
And since both you and Mr Smithson are such charmers - I reran the numbers and it produced no change in the average across September - as anyone who understood basic maths "how big a difference to an average will increasing the base size from 23 to 24 make" would understand.....
As you're such a charmer rerunning the average with the latest poll included results in....no change across September - but then I would have thought most would have realised that including one extra poll (not the two I thought were not included) in with twenty three other polls wouldn't shift much....in any case, my point was about the monthly averages, not cherrypicking polls which make Labour look good.....
So the two policies you like are the unfunded tax giveaway to a quarter of married couples and the under 25's benefit cuts.
I missed the speech, but other than reducing the income of youngsters who can't get jobs because there aren't any, what solid proposals were there for helping them? Without wasting lots of energy on the ideology of welfare dependency I assume we can all agree that the "earning or learning" aspiration is a desirable one: do we know where the jobs or the financially-viable educational places are going to come from?
"Later Tory officials confirmed that under-25s would lose their automatic right to Housing Benefit and Jobseeker’s Allowance if they refused to take up offers of work, training or education. ...
The “earn or learn” scheme would aim to ensure that all under-25s were either in education, training, work or an apprenticeship. By merging education and welfare policies, Mr Cameron wants the state to intervene at the earliest possible stage to prevent young people being trapped in a cycle of unemployment and benefit dependency.....
The issue is being studied by the Tory MP Jo Johnson, who heads the Downing Street Policy Unit, and Sir Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary. At present, the young jobless lose their benefits if they train for more than 16 hours a week. As a result, the system pays them if they are not in training - but stops supporting them when they are. The Heywood review is looking at ways of supporting young people after they start training."
Saying that you "aim" to have all "youngsters" in education, training, work or an apprenticeship without any details on where the additional jobs and apprenticeship will come from does sound rather like you "aim" to lower energy prices without control of wholesale prices- it's a really nice aspiration an' all but if we're into wishing for stuff then let's just aim to give everyone a pet unicorn, a pot of gold, a 4-bed detached house and an unfunded marriage tax break and be done with it.
The rise in the Labour vote share will please the high command. But it needs to be sustained beyond the conference season to actually mean anything. But a fortnight ago a few on here were talking about a possible Tory lead in a poll or two in the wake of the conference season, so Labour are bound to be pleased with how the last three weeks have gone.
...On a betting point, this makes "no polling crossover in 2013" likely. Hard to see any great Tory-boosting events between now and New Year...
3 more months of rising employment, 1 more quarter of growth and an Autumn Statement packed with goodies should do something for the Tory numbers.
I am expecting a decent tax cut - middle income families in London have been completed hammered by the incompetent tool that is George "Ozzy" Osborne. Austerity and the deficit are no longer the battlegrounds - it's all about giveaways to reduce the cost if living now. As Richard was saying below, the Tories have completed conceded the "fiscal responsibility" ground. As I said would happen, and as Antifrank wrongly denied.
A few quotes from David Cameron's speech yesterday to show that you are wrong:
"I see that Labour have stopped talking about the debt crisis and now they talk about the cost of living crisis. As if one wasn’t directly related to the other.
If you want to know what happens if you don’t deal with a debt crisis ... and how it affects the cost of living ... just go and ask the Greeks. So finishing the job means sticking to our course until we’ve paid off all of Labour’s deficit, not just some of it.
And yes – let’s run a surplus so that this time we fix the roof when the sun is shining ... as George said in that brilliant speech on Monday. To abandon deficit reduction now would throw away all the progress we’ve made. It would put us back to square one.
Unbelievably, that’s exactly what Labour now want to do.
How did they get us into this mess? Too much spending, too much borrowing, too much debt. And what did they propose last week? More spending, more borrowing, more debt. They have learned nothing – literally nothing – from the crisis they created."
YouGov give some information about their methodology here and here.
Thanks for that reply - appreciated.
I used to be polled by YouGov around 40-50 times a year, I suppose, over the last decade or so.
The political polling is almost invariably tacked on to a number of polling questions on other matters, news/political stories of the week, in particular, as well as a wide range of other topics.
Though the number of polls I have been invited to answer has shot up markedly in recent months (as I posted before), the number of political polls has barely changed - at least from memory!
I must be on well over a dozen polling panels in total (3 relating to what I watched on TV last night!) and at least 3-4 regularly have political questions in their mix, which is why I said that internet polling actually polls many of the same people through different panels (sad anoraks and nerds, like me!).
On what criteria they select a particular sample, who knows - it's clearly intended to give an approximation to the UK as a whole, based on age, gender, employment, education, residence, ethnicity (etc).
There is, however, one fatal flaw in that - the respondents have to complete their details on a registration form 'About me'), which can subsequently be updated - indeed, many Panels specifically insist that you check and amend that data at least once a year.
However, there's no check made on how accurate that information is, and since polling always screens out a significant number of starters after the first few questions (OK) or after you've nearly finished it (NOT OK!), you soon learn to insert personal data which makes you more likely to be allowed to complete the survey, and so be paid.
In short, YouGov might think they have sampled a demographically representative sample of UK adults, but actually have sampled almost 100% of geeky male middle-aged (and older) nerds managing Liverpool off-licences.
The difference between propaganda and official statistics
Gordon Rayner @gordonrayner ONS says 1.1 per cent of adults said they are gay, 0.4pc bisexual. 2.6% of 16-24s gay or bisexual, but only 0.4% of over-65s.
OK, I'm tired of the Milliband/Mail spat. Ed's gained sympathy, and gained a harder edge by retaliating, but, when Bad Al gets involved, you know it's gone bats#!t crazy. Time for Milliband to cowboy the feck up, and just ignore it. Demanding apologies, and not getting them makes you look whiney and weak, it just paves the way for bleating by politicians every time a paper prints something nasty about them.
On topic, Labour, and Ed Milliband in particular, are the clear winners from the conference season. Labour had some populist policies, the Mail enhancing Milliband during the Tory conf, and no dramas.
The Tories were a bit low key, and I think the under 25 thing makes them look a bit nasty.
The Lib Dems are gonna give under fives free shopping bags at lunchtime, or something.
It should be "weren't". It's subjunctive, not indicative.
Bizarrely/depressingly, I didn't learn about either of those things in English, but when I had a crack at teaching myself basic Latin (didn't work, alas. Me miserum). It's weird that I elarnt more about English grammar from being taught German and from my own studies after school than in five years of secondary school.
Mark Sparrow @MarkGSparrow I do feel a bit sorry for @campbellclaret as all this Mail kerfuffle has kicked off right in the middle of a tour to promote his new book.
Rod Liddle: Ever since I criticised a leftist icon, the Beeb hasn't stopped calling me | Rod Liddle via @spectator specc.ie/1aNBCpv
"The odd thing is, it never, ever happens when I have a go at the right, no matter how recklessly, personally or unpleasantly. Sometimes when I’ve been spiteful about the crop of smug and inept public-school boys who currently run this country, I sort of hope that the phone will start its incessant ringing, because it would make a nice change. But it never does. I could write an article insisting that David Cameron was created from the frozen semen of Adolf Hitler by Soviet scientists and that he enjoyed nightly intercourse with feral goats — and the Beeb and Channel 4 wouldn’t give a monkey’s. ‘He’s probably right,’ they’d all be saying to themselves, ‘for once.’ There would be no calls for sackings, or prosecutions. The Guardian Comment is Free website would be utterly uninterested." http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9040771/here-we-go-again-say-one-word-against-an-icon-of-the-left-and-the-phone-wont-stop-ringing/
F1: Korean Grand Prix could be slightly unpredictable.
"Reports suggest this year's race could be affected by a powerful tropical storm. Typhoon Fitow is on course to hit the area on Sunday, bringing with it torrential rain and winds of up to 100mph."
Edited extra bit: that was lucky. I was considering backing Lopez and Vinci in the tennis (undecided, planned to log back on and have a proper look but forgot) and both ended up losing.
The difference between propaganda and official statistics
Gordon Rayner @gordonrayner ONS says 1.1 per cent of adults said they are gay, 0.4pc bisexual. 2.6% of 16-24s gay or bisexual, but only 0.4% of over-65s.
The key words in that tweet are "said they are", as illustrated by the otherwise inexplicable difference between the over-65s and the 16-24s.
1.1% being gay is probably not out by an order of magnitude, but 0.4% being bisexual is probably out by a factor of something like 20. There are far more bisexuals than gay men, and a lot of very good reasons why bisexuals might not be forthcoming about their sexuality.
OK, I'm tired of the Milliband/Mail spat. Ed's gained sympathy, and gained a harder edge by retaliating, but, when Bad Al gets involved, you know it's gone bats#!t crazy. Time for Milliband to cowboy the feck up, and just ignore it. Demanding apologies, and not getting them makes you look whiney and weak, it just paves the way for bleating by politicians every time a paper prints something nasty about them.
On topic, Labour, and Ed Milliband in particular, are the clear winners from the conference season. Labour had some populist policies, the Mail enhancing Milliband during the Tory conf, and no dramas.
The Tories were a bit low key, and I think the under 25 thing makes them look a bit nasty.
The Lib Dems are gonna give under fives free shopping bags at lunchtime, or something.
Because make no mistake: that sketch will be in the style of David Cameron’s speech. Listing things. Listing some more things. Hawking truisms. Gesturing emptily. Looking knackered. Phoning it in. Talking in the sort of tone you might use when patiently giving directions to a tourist who looks a bit dim and speaks hardly a word of English. And yes – lots of sentences beginning “And yes”. Let’s be absolutely clear. This sketch will contain straw men. Straw men who say: “You shouldn’t do things that are good.” Straw men who say: “You should do things that are bad.” But to those straw men I say: “No.” I say: “We shouldn’t do things that are bad.” I say: “We should do things that are good.” Because we are the party that believes good things are good – and that bad things are bad.
The fact is this. We ran out of big shiny policies to announce earlier in the week. So instead, here’s something woolly about dreams. Something woolly about opportunity. Something woolly about our children and our grandchildren. And most important of all: a reminder that I married a woman. [Gaze damply at woman, to applause.]
"You're Better Than That", Tim. That describes every politician's speech, ever!
As you're such a charmer rerunning the average with the latest poll included results in....no change across September - but then I would have thought most would have realised that including one extra poll (not the two I thought were not included) in with twenty three other polls wouldn't shift much....in any case, my point was about the monthly averages, not cherrypicking polls which make Labour look good.....
As I understand it the contention is that a speech given by Miliband on the 24th of September has changed public opinion. Obviously you do not measure that by comparing polls for all of September with all of August.
We're just going to have to wait to compare the polls from all of October with all of August.
It should be "weren't". It's subjunctive, not indicative.
Bizarrely/depressingly, I didn't learn about either of those things in English, but when I had a crack at teaching myself basic Latin (didn't work, alas. Me miserum). It's weird that I elarnt more about English grammar from being taught German and from my own studies after school than in five years of secondary school.
When speaking, it's fine to ignore grammar if formally correct grammar sounds clunky.
The difference between propaganda and official statistics
Gordon Rayner @gordonrayner ONS says 1.1 per cent of adults said they are gay, 0.4pc bisexual. 2.6% of 16-24s gay or bisexual, but only 0.4% of over-65s.
The key words in that tweet are "said they are", as illustrated by the otherwise inexplicable difference between the over-65s and the 16-24s.
1.1% being gay is probably not out by an order of magnitude, but 0.4% being bisexual is probably out by a factor of something like 20. There are far more bisexuals than gay men, and a lot of very good reasons why bisexuals might not be forthcoming about their sexuality.
How many women or men do you know who actually had sex with both? I know one. I know lots more gay men and lesbians.
OK, I'm tired of the Milliband/Mail spat. Ed's gained sympathy, and gained a harder edge by retaliating, but, when Bad Al gets involved, you know it's gone bats#!t crazy. .
Campbell is the gift that goes on giving.
Helps to remind everyone of the really bad old days, when bullying and media manipulation was rife, under the previous Labour administration.
"And I repeat the charge. If George Osborne’s dad was as far to the right as Ralph Miliband was to the left, and this fact was reported (having read interviews with Osborne’s father, this might not be far from the truth), nobody would howl in anger that this was a smear, would they? The BBC and Channel 4 News would, instead, leap in and kick the living daylights out of Osborne Sr and think themselves entirely justified in so doing. Ralph Miliband may have been a lovely dad, but he was a damaging and unjustly revered influence. It should not be a crime to say as much."
For what it's worth, the poll analysis panel at the Conservative conference (with ComRes and a group of Conservative politicians) stated as fact that the Conservatives have a problem with women voters, and contrasted it with the past when they used to have an advantage with this group. It was compared with the problem with ethnic voters as a strategic difficulty. I'm not sure it's a comparably huge problem myself, but there's something there.
The most striking comment from the meeting was the Tory MP who said that "the bedroom tax" (her phrase) was causing large parts of Lewisham to move to a new estate in her constituency!
Because make no mistake: that sketch will be in the style of David Cameron’s speech. Listing things. Listing some more things. Hawking truisms. Gesturing emptily. Looking knackered. Phoning it in. Talking in the sort of tone you might use when patiently giving directions to a tourist who looks a bit dim and speaks hardly a word of English. And yes – lots of sentences beginning “And yes”. Let’s be absolutely clear. This sketch will contain straw men. Straw men who say: “You shouldn’t do things that are good.” Straw men who say: “You should do things that are bad.” But to those straw men I say: “No.” I say: “We shouldn’t do things that are bad.” I say: “We should do things that are good.” Because we are the party that believes good things are good – and that bad things are bad.
The fact is this. We ran out of big shiny policies to announce earlier in the week. So instead, here’s something woolly about dreams. Something woolly about opportunity. Something woolly about our children and our grandchildren. And most important of all: a reminder that I married a woman. [Gaze damply at woman, to applause.]
Speeches are not that important, disregard teenage scribblers. It's what action is being taken to sort out the country that's important. Of that there has been plenty.
As you're such a charmer rerunning the average with the latest poll included results in....no change across September - but then I would have thought most would have realised that including one extra poll (not the two I thought were not included) in with twenty three other polls wouldn't shift much....in any case, my point was about the monthly averages, not cherrypicking polls which make Labour look good.....
As I understand it the contention is that a speech given by Miliband on the 24th of September has changed public opinion. Obviously you do not measure that by comparing polls for all of September with all of August.
We're just going to have to wait to compare the polls from all of October with all of August.
Quite - but its entertaining to see the lefties hyperventillating over a few polls in the same way they accuse the "PB Tories" of.....
I would be surprised if any of the Conferences had a measurable impact on the polls - the 'bounces' people relish are rarely outside MOE.....
It should be "weren't". It's subjunctive, not indicative.
Bizarrely/depressingly, I didn't learn about either of those things in English, but when I had a crack at teaching myself basic Latin (didn't work, alas. Me miserum). It's weird that I elarnt more about English grammar from being taught German and from my own studies after school than in five years of secondary school.
When speaking, it's fine to ignore grammar if formally correct grammar sounds clunky.
It's not "an unfunded tax break" because that implies that the money belongs to the government.
It doesn't.
Legally, money that the law requires to be paid as tax belongs to the government. Morally, the answer depends upon the particular deontology you're paid up to, but many major religions would recognise a moral duty to comply with the laws of the state unless they conflict with other prior moral duties.Philosophically... well, what does that even mean is this context? My degree's in philosophy and the best I could do is describe the interpretation of certain scenarios within various philosophies... what is the universal philosophy to which you're referring?
Colloquially, particularly in Cameron and Osborne's language, the envelope of the government's budget is exactly like a household budget (paying down credit cards and all) and it would be normal to describe a cut in income as "unfunded" if you aren't either gaining alternative income of an equal amount or reducing outgoings by an equal amount. I thought that was pretty uncontroversial language and is commonly used by posters from right across the political spectrum on here.
Taking under 25s out of the benefits system is an easy change - you just don't put them on in the first place.
tim thinks any change ever is just to complicated for anyone's pretty little head and therefore all welfare should remain unreformed.
Paucity of ambition is another reason not to vote Labour - if more are needed.
Right, so you're saying that this change, even if enacted immediately after the 2015 election, wouldn't take full effect until 2022 (at which time those who were 18 before the election finally turned 25)? That would be sensible, rather like an incremental introduction of housing benefit reductions for those who refused to move to a smaller property when it became available in their area; it wouldn't be very consistent with the Tories' current approach to big-bang policy changes.
Increase to the pension age have been incremental - as have changes to tax free childcare vouchers.
Removing bribes from people who have never had them is easier than from those who have got a taste for the teet of the taxpayer.
Conversely child benefit was done the other way round - hence the gnashing of teeth. Should have withdrawn it for 3+ children from say 2014 - plenty of time for family planning.
Of course the usual lefty whiners wouldn't stop complaining about not yet conceived children missing out on vouchers and dead guys not paying any IHT anymore.
called socialism is proposed by Ed Miliband. How do you see it playing out?
I've no idea how the policy will be implemented - my main point was that the pain free way to implement benefit cuts is to close them to new claimants.
The other way is to freeze them until inflation makes them meaningless or less important.
As you're such a charmer rerunning the average with the latest poll included results in....no change across September - but then I would have thought most would have realised that including one extra poll (not the two I thought were not included) in with twenty three other polls wouldn't shift much....in any case, my point was about the monthly averages, not cherrypicking polls which make Labour look good.....
As I understand it the contention is that a speech given by Miliband on the 24th of September has changed public opinion. Obviously you do not measure that by comparing polls for all of September with all of August.
We're just going to have to wait to compare the polls from all of October with all of August.
Quite - but its entertaining to see the lefties hyperventillating over a few polls in the same way they accuse the "PB Tories" of.....
I would be surprised if any of the Conferences had a measurable impact on the polls - the 'bounces' people relish are rarely outside MOE.....
What we have all seen is you get caught out rather badly with some extremely clumsy poll spinning.
Says the guy who alternates between "Conservative's women's problem" and "Labour's Women's lead" and has an Eastleigh meme on differences barely outside MOE.......
OK, I'm tired of the Milliband/Mail spat. Ed's gained sympathy, and gained a harder edge by retaliating, but, when Bad Al gets involved, you know it's gone bats#!t crazy. Time for Milliband to cowboy the feck up, and just ignore it.
Demanding apologies, and not getting them makes you look whiney and weak, it just paves the way for bleating by politicians every time a paper prints something nasty about them.
[snip]
Although Cameron and Clegg were quick to express their support for Ed, I don’t think this whole saga will encourage other MPs to go whining to the press, they seen it all before and know the consequences. As Ed ably demonstrated, it invariably leads to escalating the problem and disseminating the story further.
On the upside for end it has shown him to be a little more human perhaps and prepared to stand up to the big boys - on the downside, the number of people who now know Ralph was a communist and influences Ed’s thinking was increased by a thousand fold.
It will also be interesting to see how Ed responds to future press attacks on other party leaders as no doubt, he opinion will be asked from now on.
The ECHR allowed the Hungarian plan, so we may see more of this. Would a British government have the nerve to do something along the same lines? If Ed Balls is looking for a way to make the figures look better, he might be tempted.
As ever, gradations between Con-Lab-LibD and UKIP are outliers.
Also interesting polling on 'National Identity' - different from some research earlier from the census - with a much higher 'British' (44) vs 'English' (41) (Scotland 40 Brit, 51 Scot).
An extra £20m is being made available to the government’s new Traineeships programme to support even more young people into Apprenticeships and other jobs.
The additional funding was announced as Skills Minister Matthew Hancock travelled to Nottingham to meet young people already taking part in the scheme.
Traineeships, which began in August, provide 16 to 23-year-olds with the skills, experience and confidence to compete in the labour market – helping them secure Apprenticeships or other jobs.
More than 500 providers have pledged to take on trainees this year and so far 150 companies, both large and small, have all expressed an interest in offering placements to young people. They include household names such as BAE Systems, Siemens and Virgin Media. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-funding-for-traineeship-scheme-announced
" if they refused to take up offers of work, training or education. ..."
That makes more sense. How many people do that?
There was that self-righteous, entitled woman in (?)Birmingham
OK, thats one, (assuming she was under 25 and I have no idea who you are talking about and Birmingham in Charlesworld could well be Alabama or Nottingham so i can't google it) surely we can build an anecdotal PB Tory database on this.
You posted about her enough at the time! It was that recently-qualified (22) but unemployed graduate who objected to working in Poundland on the grounds it was "forced labour" (or some other emotionally-loaded term with no bearing on reality)
She was being asked to work 5 hours a day for 3 weeks
OK, I'm tired of the Milliband/Mail spat. Ed's gained sympathy, and gained a harder edge by retaliating, but, when Bad Al gets involved, you know it's gone bats#!t crazy. Time for Milliband to cowboy the feck up, and just ignore it.
Demanding apologies, and not getting them makes you look whiney and weak, it just paves the way for bleating by politicians every time a paper prints something nasty about them.
[snip]
Although Cameron and Clegg were quick to express their support for Ed, I don’t think this whole saga will encourage other MPs to go whining to the press, they seen it all before and know the consequences. As Ed ably demonstrated, it invariably leads to escalating the problem and disseminating the story further.
On the upside for end it has shown him to be a little more human perhaps and prepared to stand up to the big boys - on the downside, the number of people who now know Ralph was a communist and influences Ed’s thinking was increased by a thousand fold.
It will also be interesting to see how Ed responds to future press attacks on other party leaders as no doubt, he opinion will be asked from now on.
I'd have a little more sympathy with Ed if he'd spoken out more in time to stop McBride's poison from hurting more people. But evidently his voice - strong when it's his own family being attacked - was silent when it was other people's lives being ruined.
It's not "an unfunded tax break" because that implies that the money belongs to the government.
It doesn't.
Great. Then abolish all taxes in a fully funded manifesto promise.
That's only achievable if you think the government shouldn't do anything.
I don't - there is a legitimate role for the state and they need resources to execute on that. But the money belongs to the citizens of this country, and it is taken from them by the government for a specific purpose
Neil Wallis @neilwallis1 Is it a new record?! Now 21 stories on @mediaguardian today about the Daily Mail, 4 up on yesterday! How many are positive? Go on, guess...
The ECHR allowed the Hungarian plan, so we may see more of this. Would a British government have the nerve to do something along the same lines? If Ed Balls is looking for a way to make the figures look better, he might be tempted.
The Irish government imposed a tax on pension assets too. I cant see a British government having the nerve but if the circumstances ever became that bad - it would be slightly less unpopular than taking a proportion of everyone's current account balance.
This really is the book to buy myself for Christmas
Robert Hutton @RobDotHutton senior backbenchers • backbenchers who returned our calls. If this simply sounds implausible, try ‘rising star' #Journalese @MrHarryCole
I cant see a British government having the nerve but if the circumstances ever became that bad - it would be slightly less unpopular than taking a proportion of everyone's current account balance.
Given Miliband's behaviour over the last few weeks, why not? He's shown himself to be both irresponsible and ruthless, in a strangely dithering sort of way.
OK, I'm tired of the Milliband/Mail spat. Ed's gained sympathy, and gained a harder edge by retaliating, but, when Bad Al gets involved, you know it's gone bats#!t crazy. Time for Milliband to cowboy the feck up, and just ignore it.
Demanding apologies, and not getting them makes you look whiney and weak, it just paves the way for bleating by politicians every time a paper prints something nasty about them.
[snip]
Although Cameron and Clegg were quick to express their support for Ed, I don’t think this whole saga will encourage other MPs to go whining to the press, they seen it all before and know the consequences. As Ed ably demonstrated, it invariably leads to escalating the problem and disseminating the story further.
On the upside for end it has shown him to be a little more human perhaps and prepared to stand up to the big boys - on the downside, the number of people who now know Ralph was a communist and influences Ed’s thinking was increased by a thousand fold.
It will also be interesting to see how Ed responds to future press attacks on other party leaders as no doubt, he opinion will be asked from now on.
I'd have a little more sympathy with Ed if he'd spoken out more in time to stop McBride's poison from hurting more people. But evidently his voice - strong when it's his own family being attacked - was silent when it was other people's lives being ruined.
Well quite. – But it’s not just Ed’s double standards that irk - there are a lot of Labour MPs and journalists of all shades that should hang their head in shame over their conspiratorial cover up, imho.
"Imagine if the Daily Mail hired a journalist. Imagine the Mail was then told this journalist was a fascist spy, taking money from fascists, so they were forced to sack him. Imagine the Daily Mail then thought "To hell with it", and hired the same guy again – to write some more sinister articles? How would the Guardian react to that?
Perhaps they would find it all rather refreshing."
@Josias - I think you were asking me something about my company and the government in relation to Labour's land policy. My response is that there is no comparison between a largely web-based international publishing operation and one whose line of business is building UK infrastructure. I can see why developers would not like what Labour proposes, but in my view the land is a resource to be managed for the benefit of all of us, not for the benefit of developers. This country desperately needs more homes. If developers buy land designated for building homes, but after a defined and well-known period of time do not build on it then I have no problem in that land being subject to compulsory purchase. If developers do not like such a regime they can get out of development and sell their land to those with business models that can cope with it. Just as we can get out of our business, or adapt, if the regulatory regime changes (it has, in fact, with regard to data).
"I think one of the important functions of an open society is that the press, the media, remind us sometimes of the need to examine our practices and see whether we do comply as much as we should with the need, for instance, for open justice," he told reporters.
"I think some of the campaigns, while they are not always well-conceived and entirely right in some respects, but the campaigns for improving openness in the courts are to be applauded." The Times and the Daily Mail have both been particularly active in campaigning for greater openness in the courts.
The Daily Mail reported last year on the secret jailing by the Court of Protection of a woman, 50-year-old Wanda Maddocks, who had tried to take her father out of a care home. The judge said, in response to a question about the case (the Mail reports): "The short answer is, if you are saying that this case has resulted - which it has done - in increased openness then one welcomes it without reservation."
Actually Sean's article is uncharacteristically soft-hitting. The list of apologists on the British left for Stalin, and for Mao, long after the true scale of the horrors they perpetrated became widely known, is long and ignominious.
"I'd have a little more sympathy with Ed if he'd spoken out more in time to stop McBride's poison from hurting more people. But evidently his voice - strong when it's his own family being attacked - was silent when it was other people's lives being ruined."
It's a good point and well worth raising, Josias.
I wish I knew more about the details of what went on then, and who exactly was implicated, but reliable evidence is scarce, for the obvious reasons. Perhaps you could divulge your views and the evidence you have seen, at least to the extent that it doesn't open Mike up to a libel case.
My understanding, gleaned largely from from reading the accounts by Blair, Rawnesley and Mullins, is that Brown operated a sort of mafia, but he wasn't very hands on. He left that to his henchman. The manifest closeness between Brown and Balls suggests the latter was heavily implicated. McBride may claim that he received no direct instructions from them or anybody else, but it is hard to believe that B&B could not have done anything to stop him so at the very least they were 'permissive' even if they were not actively complicit.
Beyond that there would be a whole host of camp followers. David Miliband would definitely not have been included. Ed Miliband was, but his closeness to Brown, and Balls, is questionable, as too is his involvement in or approval of any McBride type activities. I am not being mealy mouthed here. I have no dog in this fight. The picture, as far as I am concerned, becomes unclear at this point. If you can clarify it, I would be very grateful, because I am definitely into guesswork now.
Fwiw, my guess is that EM and numerous other senior Brownites were aware to a greater or lesser degree , but were either powerless or afraid to do anything. There is certainly evidence (notably in the Rawnesley book) that those who took a stand were ruthlessly dealt with. Anybody who has ever been the victim of mafia-like operations can sympathise with those chose not to become martyrs. Futile gestures serve no purpose, and self-interested silence may in the long run also be the most effective policy.
How do you judge Ed's conduct in all this? I just don't know, and I have already speculated more than I normally care to.
Ed Milliband writing to Lord Rothermere about Sunday Mail reporter gatecrashing a memorial service for his uncle, and questioning relatives, according to Sky News. The Mail are heading for a bloody nose.
"And I repeat the charge. If George Osborne’s dad was as far to the right as Ralph Miliband was to the left, and this fact was reported (having read interviews with Osborne’s father, this might not be far from the truth), nobody would howl in anger that this was a smear, would they? The BBC and Channel 4 News would, instead, leap in and kick the living daylights out of Osborne Sr and think themselves entirely justified in so doing. Ralph Miliband may have been a lovely dad, but he was a damaging and unjustly revered influence. It should not be a crime to say as much."
So apparently Osborne's dad was (is?) very right wing? Interesting that the 'nasty' left-wing media hasn't tried to make capital out of this and visit the sins of the father on the son. Or maybe (The Mirror aside) the left wing media is too nice and sensible to produce such hatchet jobs. Let's not forget that one of those ridiculing the Mail's Miliband hated Britain story was Thatcher favourite Lord Moore. Thought it was a nice touch of the Torygraph to reproduce their obituary of Ralph Miliband yesterday.
Ed Milliband writing to Lord Rothermere about Sunday Mail reporter gatecrashing a memorial service for his uncle, and questioning relatives, according to Sky News. The Mail are heading for a bloody nose.
@Josias - I think you were asking me something about my company and the government in relation to Labour's land policy. My response is that there is no comparison between a largely web-based international publishing operation and one whose line of business is building UK infrastructure. I can see why developers would not like what Labour proposes, but in my view the land is a resource to be managed for the benefit of all of us, not for the benefit of developers. This country desperately needs more homes. If developers buy land designated for building homes, but after a defined and well-known period of time do not build on it then I have no problem in that land being subject to compulsory purchase. If developers do not like such a regime they can get out of development and sell their land to those with business models that can cope with it. Just as we can get out of our business, or adapt, if the regulatory regime changes (it has, in fact, with regard to data).
If the government wants more land it should buy it, or go through it's over laden property portfolio and release it for housing.
"The Editor of the Mail on Sunday has since confirmed to my office that a journalist from his newspaper did indeed attend the memorial uninvited with the intention of seeking information for publication this weekend.
Sending a reporter to my late uncle’s memorial crosses a line of common decency. I believe it a symptom of the culture and practices of both the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday."
" I believe no purpose would be served by me complaining to the Press Complaints Commission because it is widely discredited.
Instead, I am writing to you as the owners of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday because I believe it is long overdue that you reflect on the culture of your newspapers. You should conduct your own swift investigation into who was responsible at a senior level for this latest episode and also who is responsible for the culture and practices of these newspapers which jar so badly with the values of your readers.
There are bigger issues for the people of Britain in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis for a century than intrusion into the life of my family. But the reaction of many people to the Daily Mail’s attacks on my father this week demonstrates that the way your newspapers have behaved does not reflect the real character of our country.
We now have three government giveaways in progress - mortgage subsidies, petrol duty and marriage tax allowances.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of these it ruins the image of the government for those who believe in fiscal responsibility.
There is ALWAYS money available for Cameron to give to foreigners, to waste on his pet projects and to throw at political problems.
For all their talk Cameron and Osborne do not believe in living within their means.
There must be a cold nor-easterly blowing off the North Sea up in Cleethorpes, ar.
The Help to Buy Guarantee scheme does not affect government borrowing. Cash flows are from the banks to the government as guarantees are purchased. There will only be a counterflow if banks have to repossess property and its value has fallen by between 5.25-20.0%. So the current fiscal impact of the HTB Guarantee scheme is tighter fiscal performance.
The freezing of fuel duty also does not need "paying for" as it is not an additional expense but a foregone revenue. It is almost certain the fuel duty revenue account is running above budget given the higher than forecast economic activity this year and the fact that wholesale Brent Crude prices have averaged above $108 per barrel in 2013 compared to budget assumptions of c. $100/barrel. So Osborne has the option to relieve tax without affecting this budget line.
Additionally as the OBR calculated the cancellation of the planned September 2013 fuel duty rise reduced headline inflation by 0.1% over the year there will probably be savings to come from lower inflation linked benefit payments (e.g. pensions).
On marriage tax allowances and nursery school meals I do not have the figures to hand, but I would expect any additional costs to be more than covered by increased revenues due to higher growth this year.
So unless you can provide evidence to the contrary, there are no grounds for claiming that any of the above changes have diminished the government's commitment to fiscal responsibility.
Ed Milliband writing to Lord Rothermere about Sunday Mail reporter gatecrashing a memorial service for his uncle, and questioning relatives, according to Sky News. The Mail are heading for a bloody nose.
Was his uncle also a Marxist ?
Doesn't matter if the uncle was Karl's bessie, The Mail have dropped the shovel, and are renting a fleet of JCBs to complete the digging. They're getting deeper down the hole.
@Josias - I think you were asking me something about my company and the government in relation to Labour's land policy. My response is that there is no comparison between a largely web-based international publishing operation and one whose line of business is building UK infrastructure. I can see why developers would not like what Labour proposes, but in my view the land is a resource to be managed for the benefit of all of us, not for the benefit of developers. This country desperately needs more homes. If developers buy land designated for building homes, but after a defined and well-known period of time do not build on it then I have no problem in that land being subject to compulsory purchase. If developers do not like such a regime they can get out of development and sell their land to those with business models that can cope with it. Just as we can get out of our business, or adapt, if the regulatory regime changes (it has, in fact, with regard to data).
Why should your business should be treated any differently to that of a property developer?
I'd argue that publishing is one of the services and facilities necessary for an economy to function.
SeanT has the Grauniad bang to rights in his Telegraph piece. There's no point pretending otherwise. On reflection, though, he might concede that freelancing for a paper is not the same as being employed by it. However, that's a very minor point.
What is he thinking of? Really? This is overplaying one's hand in a serious way. He's coming across as a thin-skinned whiner.
You have to stop thinking of how you view these things and instead think of it from the point of view of someone who isnt completely biased against him.
" I believe no purpose would be served by me complaining to the Press Complaints Commission because it is widely discredited.
Instead, I am writing to you as the owners of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday because I believe it is long overdue that you reflect on the culture of your newspapers. You should conduct your own swift investigation into who was responsible at a senior level for this latest episode and also who is responsible for the culture and practices of these newspapers which jar so badly with the values of your readers.
There are bigger issues for the people of Britain in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis for a century than intrusion into the life of my family. But the reaction of many people to the Daily Mail’s attacks on my father this week demonstrates that the way your newspapers have behaved does not reflect the real character of our country.
It is now your responsibility to respond."
Disagree - the MoS have crossed a line attending a private memorial - it would be very borderline doorstepping attendees at a public one - but this is clearly an intrusion into the family's privacy - I hope Rotheremere recognises that quickly.....
What is he thinking of? Really? This is overplaying one's hand in a serious way. He's coming across as a thin-skinned whiner.
You have to stop thinking of how you view these things and instead think of it from the point of view of someone who isnt completely biased against him.
Incredibly Neil - you being a Greenie isn't exactly a yardstick for public opinion either.
" I believe no purpose would be served by me complaining to the Press Complaints Commission because it is widely discredited.
Instead, I am writing to you as the owners of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday because I believe it is long overdue that you reflect on the culture of your newspapers. You should conduct your own swift investigation into who was responsible at a senior level for this latest episode and also who is responsible for the culture and practices of these newspapers which jar so badly with the values of your readers.
There are bigger issues for the people of Britain in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis for a century than intrusion into the life of my family. But the reaction of many people to the Daily Mail’s attacks on my father this week demonstrates that the way your newspapers have behaved does not reflect the real character of our country.
It is now your responsibility to respond."
I think you're misreading this, Plato. Milliband is in the clear on this, the Sunday Mail have aimed a 50 cal at both feet, and pulled the trigger.
"The Editor of the Mail on Sunday has since confirmed to my office that a journalist from his newspaper did indeed attend the memorial uninvited with the intention of seeking information for publication this weekend.
Sending a reporter to my late uncle’s memorial crosses a line of common decency. I believe it a symptom of the culture and practices of both the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday."
What is he thinking of? Really? This is overplaying one's hand in a serious way. He's coming across as a thin-skinned whiner.
You have to stop thinking of how you view these things and instead think of it from the point of view of someone who isnt completely biased against him.
Incredibly Neil - you being a Greenie isn't exactly a yardstick for public opinion either.
I never claimed to be a barometer of public opinion on any subject.
"The Editor of the Mail on Sunday has since confirmed to my office that a journalist from his newspaper did indeed attend the memorial uninvited with the intention of seeking information for publication this weekend.
Sending a reporter to my late uncle’s memorial crosses a line of common decency. I believe it a symptom of the culture and practices of both the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday."
On this one, I'd say he has them 'bang to rights...'
Can't see even the declining band of Dacre fans trying to defend this one.
Oh I don't know tim , this could be one of those buy popcorn events. Ed thought he'd have a straight in out dingdong with the Mail and move on. If the Mail has just got the bit between its teeth and is now on a prove a point crusade, Ed's just tumbled into a two year guerilla war ahead for himself and his party. he's now having to fight on 2 fronts.
" I believe no purpose would be served by me complaining to the Press Complaints Commission because it is widely discredited.
Instead, I am writing to you as the owners of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday because I believe it is long overdue that you reflect on the culture of your newspapers. You should conduct your own swift investigation into who was responsible at a senior level for this latest episode and also who is responsible for the culture and practices of these newspapers which jar so badly with the values of your readers.
There are bigger issues for the people of Britain in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis for a century than intrusion into the life of my family. But the reaction of many people to the Daily Mail’s attacks on my father this week demonstrates that the way your newspapers have behaved does not reflect the real character of our country.
It is now your responsibility to respond."
Disagree - the MoS have crossed a line attending a private memorial - it would be very borderline doorstepping attendees at a public one - but this is clearly an intrusion into the family's privacy - I hope Rotheremere recognises that quickly.....
Writing a public letter is playing politics with it - its escalating the spat yet again - that's my point.
" I believe no purpose would be served by me complaining to the Press Complaints Commission because it is widely discredited.
Instead, I am writing to you as the owners of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday because I believe it is long overdue that you reflect on the culture of your newspapers. You should conduct your own swift investigation into who was responsible at a senior level for this latest episode and also who is responsible for the culture and practices of these newspapers which jar so badly with the values of your readers.
There are bigger issues for the people of Britain in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis for a century than intrusion into the life of my family. But the reaction of many people to the Daily Mail’s attacks on my father this week demonstrates that the way your newspapers have behaved does not reflect the real character of our country.
It is now your responsibility to respond."
Disagree - the MoS have crossed a line attending a private memorial - it would be very borderline doorstepping attendees at a public one - but this is clearly an intrusion into the family's privacy - I hope Rotheremere recognises that quickly.....
Does that mean *all* newspapers should stop sending reporters to such events?
@Josias - I think you were asking me something about my company and the government in relation to Labour's land policy. My response is that there is no comparison between a largely web-based international publishing operation and one whose line of business is building UK infrastructure. I can see why developers would not like what Labour proposes, but in my view the land is a resource to be managed for the benefit of all of us, not for the benefit of developers. This country desperately needs more homes. If developers buy land designated for building homes, but after a defined and well-known period of time do not build on it then I have no problem in that land being subject to compulsory purchase. If developers do not like such a regime they can get out of development and sell their land to those with business models that can cope with it. Just as we can get out of our business, or adapt, if the regulatory regime changes (it has, in fact, with regard to data).
So there's no comparison between your industries? How utterly convenient. How utterly, totally and horribly predictable.
In your mind it's a case of: "it doesn't effect me, therefore it's okay."
But people will be affected, and seriously so if the proposed law is as bad as it sounds. Given the lengths of time that it often takes to get planning permission, conditions on planning, and the problems of long-term finance, you are asking the impossible of many developers.
There's also a massive conflict of interest between councils being the ones who grant planning permission and impose conditions, and them being the ones who can grab the land.
And developers are not just faceless large companies. They're also people like a colleague, building a new house for his family, or my sister, extending her cottage. Or my dad in the past. You are putting severe restrictions on these people being able to pursue their dreams of a new home, or a new business opportunity.
If the country desperately needs new homes, Labour should have built them. Besides, you and I both know that we don't need many new homes. What we need are less second-home and holiday-home owners. But no party will touch that issue with a bargepole.
Luckily we can look forward to the Miliband era where journalists will have to be licensed by Hacked Off, the Murdoch papers and the Mail will be closed down, and the only paper running intrusive personal attacks will be the Guardian.
The Help to Buy Guarantee scheme does not affect government borrowing. Cash flows are from the banks to the government as guarantees are purchased. There will only be a counterflow if banks have to repossess property and its value has fallen by between 5.25-20.0%. So the current fiscal impact of the HTB Guarantee scheme is tighter fiscal performance.
Avery, you seem to know about public sector accounting - whilst the government obviously doesn't account for implicit guarantees, is there no requirement to recognise a fair-value liability for exposure under explicit contractual guarantees of this nature? Given that the HTB scheme is based on the provision of guarantees at off-market rates, if a company granted these guarantees there would be an upfront hit to the income statement as part of the recognition of the exposure on the balance sheet. In government terms, that would increase borrowing. Is this another case of public sector cash accounting to the rescue in order to keep FV liabilities off-balance-sheet?
" I believe no purpose would be served by me complaining to the Press Complaints Commission because it is widely discredited.
Instead, I am writing to you as the owners of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday because I believe it is long overdue that you reflect on the culture of your newspapers. You should conduct your own swift investigation into who was responsible at a senior level for this latest episode and also who is responsible for the culture and practices of these newspapers which jar so badly with the values of your readers.
There are bigger issues for the people of Britain in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis for a century than intrusion into the life of my family. But the reaction of many people to the Daily Mail’s attacks on my father this week demonstrates that the way your newspapers have behaved does not reflect the real character of our country.
It is now your responsibility to respond."
Disagree - the MoS have crossed a line attending a private memorial - it would be very borderline doorstepping attendees at a public one - but this is clearly an intrusion into the family's privacy - I hope Rotheremere recognises that quickly.....
Writing a public letter is playing politics with it - its escalating the spat yet again - that's my point.
The only (minor) criticism I'd have of the Miliband letter was including the 'worst cost of living crisis' point....which it didn't need - but on the major point, Miliband is right & the Mail wrong.....and given their track, if I were Miliband I would not leave it to the Mail to publish what I had written.....for example, their reporting of Cameron's comments on the matter were highly selective, to put it mildly......
Clegg piling in as well, Dacre in hiding, Ed should kick them as hard as possible.
I'm sure Clegg's immense personal popularity and his universal reputation for complete integrity will be decisive in this. The Mail will be terrified by his intervention.
Comments
Oh, and I course I very much like Osborne's long-term plans for easing back the unacceptable levels of public debt. This should hardly need saying, of course, but it does.
I thought Cameron's speech was good on the broad mission stuff - that he didn't produce rabbits from the hat didn't bother me at all - that's not the job of the PM, the Autumn Statement is only a month away.
I rather liked a speech about ideology than one packed full of electioneering gimmicks for a change. We'll have plenty of them in the coming months.
A limp excuse.
I must admit, I was slightly amused by the fact that a alleged villain was a fan of Princess Bride!
Markit complete their run of three sectoral PMIs for September today. After Manufacturing and Construction showed strong growth, with an index level a shade under that registered in August, the all important Services Sector follows suit.
The UK Services Sector PMI for September was 60.3 compared with August's 60.5. This makes the quarterly performance of the sector, from July to September, the highest recorded since Q2 1997.
So George's conference gift to the nation has been to return us all to levels of service sector growth not seen since the days of John Major.
And if Bobajob is able, in the mornings, to read more than three paragraphs and a title, he should be delighted to learn that Markit's respondents were reporting increased employment and incoming new orders. More neutral responses were that increases in operating costs were not being passed on in prices due to increased competition and that firms were experiencing the buildup of order backlogs.
Markit's Chief Economist, Chris Williamson, excitedly commented:
The buoyant data follow similar upbeat surveys of the manufacturing and construction sectors, and collectively the surveys suggest the economy will have expanded by as much as 1.2% in the third quarter.
Meanwhile tim, Bobajob and Dr Palmer gloomily study the slide in YouGov's Labour lead from 11% pre-Tory conference to 6% today. Cheer up boys. Why not focus on the good news of GDP growth?
"And what has been said about him by this newspaper can surely not be compared to the tasteless and cruel suggestion by a Labour councillor, embraced by Mr Miliband, that he and his pals would like to dance on Lady Thatcher’s grave. The Labour leader is being — shall we be kind? — inconsistent. The same observation can be made of the hordes of Leftists who are dabbing their eyes in memory of Ralph Miliband, having publicly celebrated the death of Margaret Thatcher only a few months ago.
In Glasgow and Brixton, campaigners shouted from loudspeakers: ‘Maggie, Maggie, Maggie’, as the mob ecstatically replied: ‘Dead, dead, dead.’ Some were carrying banners, with one proclaiming ‘Rejoice. Thatcher is dead’.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-2442132/Ed-Milibands-Marxist-father-debate-How-hypocritical-Left-upset.html#ixzz2geJudOIa
"Later Tory officials confirmed that under-25s would lose their automatic right to Housing Benefit and Jobseeker’s Allowance if they refused to take up offers of work, training or education. ...
The “earn or learn” scheme would aim to ensure that all under-25s were either in education, training, work or an apprenticeship. By merging education and welfare policies, Mr Cameron wants the state to intervene at the earliest possible stage to prevent young people being trapped in a cycle of unemployment and benefit dependency.....
The issue is being studied by the Tory MP Jo Johnson, who heads the Downing Street Policy Unit, and Sir Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary. At present, the young jobless lose their benefits if they train for more than 16 hours a week. As a result, the system pays them if they are not in training - but stops supporting them when they are. The Heywood review is looking at ways of supporting young people after they start training."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-young-people-under-25-would-not-be-able-to-claim-employment-or-housing-benefits-under-tory-government-8853560.html
What you ignore is that the '18% lead' is actually the difference between '62 women' vs '113 women'......
And since both you and Mr Smithson are such charmers - I reran the numbers and it produced no change in the average across September - as anyone who understood basic maths "how big a difference to an average will increasing the base size from 23 to 24 make" would understand.....
As you're such a charmer rerunning the average with the latest poll included results in....no change across September - but then I would have thought most would have realised that including one extra poll (not the two I thought were not included) in with twenty three other polls wouldn't shift much....in any case, my point was about the monthly averages, not cherrypicking polls which make Labour look good.....
"I see that Labour have stopped talking about the debt crisis and now they talk about the cost of living crisis. As if one wasn’t directly related to the other.
If you want to know what happens if you don’t deal with a debt crisis ... and how it affects the cost of living ... just go and ask the Greeks. So finishing the job means sticking to our course until we’ve paid off all of Labour’s deficit, not just some of it.
And yes – let’s run a surplus so that this time we fix the roof when the sun is shining ... as George said in that brilliant speech on Monday. To abandon deficit reduction now would throw away all the progress we’ve made. It would put us back to square one.
Unbelievably, that’s exactly what Labour now want to do.
How did they get us into this mess? Too much spending, too much borrowing, too much debt. And what did they propose last week? More spending, more borrowing, more debt. They have learned nothing – literally nothing – from the crisis they created."
I used to be polled by YouGov around 40-50 times a year, I suppose, over the last decade or so.
The political polling is almost invariably tacked on to a number of polling questions on other matters, news/political stories of the week, in particular, as well as a wide range of other topics.
Though the number of polls I have been invited to answer has shot up markedly in recent months (as I posted before), the number of political polls has barely changed - at least from memory!
I must be on well over a dozen polling panels in total (3 relating to what I watched on TV last night!) and at least 3-4 regularly have political questions in their mix, which is why I said that internet polling actually polls many of the same people through different panels (sad anoraks and nerds, like me!).
On what criteria they select a particular sample, who knows - it's clearly intended to give an approximation to the UK as a whole, based on age, gender, employment, education, residence, ethnicity (etc).
There is, however, one fatal flaw in that - the respondents have to complete their details on a registration form 'About me'), which can subsequently be updated - indeed, many Panels specifically insist that you check and amend that data at least once a year.
However, there's no check made on how accurate that information is, and since polling always screens out a significant number of starters after the first few questions (OK) or after you've nearly finished it (NOT OK!), you soon learn to insert personal data which makes you more likely to be allowed to complete the survey, and so be paid.
In short, YouGov might think they have sampled a demographically representative sample of UK adults, but actually have sampled almost 100% of geeky male middle-aged (and older) nerds managing Liverpool off-licences.
Gordon Rayner @gordonrayner
ONS says 1.1 per cent of adults said they are gay, 0.4pc bisexual. 2.6% of 16-24s gay or bisexual, but only 0.4% of over-65s.
On topic, Labour, and Ed Milliband in particular, are the clear winners from the conference season. Labour had some populist policies, the Mail enhancing Milliband during the Tory conf, and no dramas.
The Tories were a bit low key, and I think the under 25 thing makes them look a bit nasty.
The Lib Dems are gonna give under fives free shopping bags at lunchtime, or something.
It should be "weren't". It's subjunctive, not indicative.
Bizarrely/depressingly, I didn't learn about either of those things in English, but when I had a crack at teaching myself basic Latin (didn't work, alas. Me miserum). It's weird that I elarnt more about English grammar from being taught German and from my own studies after school than in five years of secondary school.
It's not "an unfunded tax break" because that implies that the money belongs to the government.
It doesn't.
I do feel a bit sorry for @campbellclaret as all this Mail kerfuffle has kicked off right in the middle of a tour to promote his new book.
Rod Liddle: Ever since I criticised a leftist icon, the Beeb hasn't stopped calling me | Rod Liddle via @spectator specc.ie/1aNBCpv
"The odd thing is, it never, ever happens when I have a go at the right, no matter how recklessly, personally or unpleasantly. Sometimes when I’ve been spiteful about the crop of smug and inept public-school boys who currently run this country, I sort of hope that the phone will start its incessant ringing, because it would make a nice change. But it never does. I could write an article insisting that David Cameron was created from the frozen semen of Adolf Hitler by Soviet scientists and that he enjoyed nightly intercourse with feral goats — and the Beeb and Channel 4 wouldn’t give a monkey’s. ‘He’s probably right,’ they’d all be saying to themselves, ‘for once.’ There would be no calls for sackings, or prosecutions. The Guardian Comment is Free website would be utterly uninterested." http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9040771/here-we-go-again-say-one-word-against-an-icon-of-the-left-and-the-phone-wont-stop-ringing/
"Reports suggest this year's race could be affected by a powerful tropical storm. Typhoon Fitow is on course to hit the area on Sunday, bringing with it torrential rain and winds of up to 100mph."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/24352958
Edited extra bit: that was lucky. I was considering backing Lopez and Vinci in the tennis (undecided, planned to log back on and have a proper look but forgot) and both ended up losing.
1.1% being gay is probably not out by an order of magnitude, but 0.4% being bisexual is probably out by a factor of something like 20. There are far more bisexuals than gay men, and a lot of very good reasons why bisexuals might not be forthcoming about their sexuality.
That describes every politician's speech, ever!
We're just going to have to wait to compare the polls from all of October with all of August.
Helps to remind everyone of the really bad old days, when bullying and media manipulation was rife, under the previous Labour administration.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9040771/here-we-go-again-say-one-word-against-an-icon-of-the-left-and-the-phone-wont-stop-ringing/
The most striking comment from the meeting was the Tory MP who said that "the bedroom tax" (her phrase) was causing large parts of Lewisham to move to a new estate in her constituency!
I would be surprised if any of the Conferences had a measurable impact on the polls - the 'bounces' people relish are rarely outside MOE.....
So to be perfectly accurate, he fought for Belgium, not Britain...
Colloquially, particularly in Cameron and Osborne's language, the envelope of the government's budget is exactly like a household budget (paying down credit cards and all) and it would be normal to describe a cut in income as "unfunded" if you aren't either gaining alternative income of an equal amount or reducing outgoings by an equal amount. I thought that was pretty uncontroversial language and is commonly used by posters from right across the political spectrum on here.
The other way is to freeze them until inflation makes them meaningless or less important.
On the upside for end it has shown him to be a little more human perhaps and prepared to stand up to the big boys - on the downside, the number of people who now know Ralph was a communist and influences Ed’s thinking was increased by a thousand fold.
It will also be interesting to see how Ed responds to future press attacks on other party leaders as no doubt, he opinion will be asked from now on.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0432a08e-1e06-11e3-85e0-00144feab7de.html#axzz2gdryURnD
The ECHR allowed the Hungarian plan, so we may see more of this. Would a British government have the nerve to do something along the same lines? If Ed Balls is looking for a way to make the figures look better, he might be tempted.
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/kf5d231qce/YG-Archive-ESRC-Demos-Birkbeck-results-300713.pdf
As ever, gradations between Con-Lab-LibD and UKIP are outliers.
Also interesting polling on 'National Identity' - different from some research earlier from the census - with a much higher 'British' (44) vs 'English' (41) (Scotland 40 Brit, 51 Scot).
An extra £20m is being made available to the government’s new Traineeships programme to support even more young people into Apprenticeships and other jobs.
The additional funding was announced as Skills Minister Matthew Hancock travelled to Nottingham to meet young people already taking part in the scheme.
Traineeships, which began in August, provide 16 to 23-year-olds with the skills, experience and confidence to compete in the labour market – helping them secure Apprenticeships or other jobs.
More than 500 providers have pledged to take on trainees this year and so far 150 companies, both large and small, have all expressed an interest in offering placements to young people. They include household names such as BAE Systems, Siemens and Virgin Media. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-funding-for-traineeship-scheme-announced
She was being asked to work 5 hours a day for 3 weeks
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/12/graduate-cait-reilly-made-stack-shelves-poundland-without-pay_n_1201520.html
I don't - there is a legitimate role for the state and they need resources to execute on that. But the money belongs to the citizens of this country, and it is taken from them by the government for a specific purpose
Neil Wallis @neilwallis1
Is it a new record?! Now 21 stories on @mediaguardian today about the Daily Mail, 4 up on yesterday! How many are positive? Go on, guess...
Robert Hutton @RobDotHutton
senior backbenchers • backbenchers who returned our calls. If this simply sounds implausible, try ‘rising star' #Journalese @MrHarryCole
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100239508/the-guardian-and-the-murderers-of-the-left-a-love-story/
RT @Independent: Predatory paedophile mice deterred by tears of pre-pubescent victims, study claims ind.pn/15Nu9mS
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100239508/the-guardian-and-the-murderers-of-the-left-a-love-story/
"Imagine if the Daily Mail hired a journalist. Imagine the Mail was then told this journalist was a fascist spy, taking money from fascists, so they were forced to sack him. Imagine the Daily Mail then thought "To hell with it", and hired the same guy again – to write some more sinister articles? How would the Guardian react to that?
Perhaps they would find it all rather refreshing."
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/mar/21/tenquestionsonslobodanmilo
He seems to write for the Guardian regularly:
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/neilclark
Do the others typically take ads in the Mail every day?
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/neilclark
RT @HotMetalHack: Top UK judge says Mail exposure of woman's secret jailing has improved openness of UK courts |... fb.me/3m530C2XC
Oh, but that doesn't suit, does it? When did the Mirror ever do anything of note? Bar alleging UK troops peed on Iraqi POW?
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/top-uk-judge-says-mail-exposure-womans-secret-jailing-has-improved-openness-uk-courts
"I think one of the important functions of an open society is that the press, the media, remind us sometimes of the need to examine our practices and see whether we do comply as much as we should with the need, for instance, for open justice," he told reporters.
"I think some of the campaigns, while they are not always well-conceived and entirely right in some respects, but the campaigns for improving openness in the courts are to be applauded." The Times and the Daily Mail have both been particularly active in campaigning for greater openness in the courts.
The Daily Mail reported last year on the secret jailing by the Court of Protection of a woman, 50-year-old Wanda Maddocks, who had tried to take her father out of a care home. The judge said, in response to a question about the case (the Mail reports): "The short answer is, if you are saying that this case has resulted - which it has done - in increased openness then one welcomes it without reservation."
"I'd have a little more sympathy with Ed if he'd spoken out more in time to stop McBride's poison from hurting more people. But evidently his voice - strong when it's his own family being attacked - was silent when it was other people's lives being ruined."
It's a good point and well worth raising, Josias.
I wish I knew more about the details of what went on then, and who exactly was implicated, but reliable evidence is scarce, for the obvious reasons. Perhaps you could divulge your views and the evidence you have seen, at least to the extent that it doesn't open Mike up to a libel case.
My understanding, gleaned largely from from reading the accounts by Blair, Rawnesley and Mullins, is that Brown operated a sort of mafia, but he wasn't very hands on. He left that to his henchman. The manifest closeness between Brown and Balls suggests the latter was heavily implicated. McBride may claim that he received no direct instructions from them or anybody else, but it is hard to believe that B&B could not have done anything to stop him so at the very least they were 'permissive' even if they were not actively complicit.
Beyond that there would be a whole host of camp followers. David Miliband would definitely not have been included. Ed Miliband was, but his closeness to Brown, and Balls, is questionable, as too is his involvement in or approval of any McBride type activities. I am not being mealy mouthed here. I have no dog in this fight. The picture, as far as I am concerned, becomes unclear at this point. If you can clarify it, I would be very grateful, because I am definitely into guesswork now.
Fwiw, my guess is that EM and numerous other senior Brownites were aware to a greater or lesser degree , but were either powerless or afraid to do anything. There is certainly evidence (notably in the Rawnesley book) that those who took a stand were ruthlessly dealt with. Anybody who has ever been the victim of mafia-like operations can sympathise with those chose not to become martyrs. Futile gestures serve no purpose, and self-interested silence may in the long run also be the most effective policy.
How do you judge Ed's conduct in all this? I just don't know, and I have already speculated more than I normally care to.
Your own views would be very welcome.
When the pilot tunrs the engine off and you can still hear the whining.
Meanwhile, balanced piece in the Jewish Chronicle on whether anti-semitism was behind the Miliband article:
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/111993/daily-mail-accused-antisemitic-attack-over-miliband-story
"The Editor of the Mail on Sunday has since confirmed to my office that a journalist from his newspaper did indeed attend the memorial uninvited with the intention of seeking information for publication this weekend.
Sending a reporter to my late uncle’s memorial crosses a line of common decency. I believe it a symptom of the culture and practices of both the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/03/nick-cleggs-lbc-phone-in-and-reaction-to-david-camerons-conference-speech-politics-live-blog#block-524d4b49e4b0c602c15d5a8f
On this one, I'd say he has them 'bang to rights...'
What is he thinking of? Really? This is overplaying one's hand in a serious way. He's coming across as a thin-skinned whiner.
http://labourpress.tumblr.com/post/62985465439/ed-miliband-letter-to-lord-rothermere
" I believe no purpose would be served by me complaining to the Press Complaints Commission because it is widely discredited.
Instead, I am writing to you as the owners of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday because I believe it is long overdue that you reflect on the culture of your newspapers. You should conduct your own swift investigation into who was responsible at a senior level for this latest episode and also who is responsible for the culture and practices of these newspapers which jar so badly with the values of your readers.
There are bigger issues for the people of Britain in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis for a century than intrusion into the life of my family. But the reaction of many people to the Daily Mail’s attacks on my father this week demonstrates that the way your newspapers have behaved does not reflect the real character of our country.
It is now your responsibility to respond."
The Help to Buy Guarantee scheme does not affect government borrowing. Cash flows are from the banks to the government as guarantees are purchased. There will only be a counterflow if banks have to repossess property and its value has fallen by between 5.25-20.0%. So the current fiscal impact of the HTB Guarantee scheme is tighter fiscal performance.
The freezing of fuel duty also does not need "paying for" as it is not an additional expense but a foregone revenue. It is almost certain the fuel duty revenue account is running above budget given the higher than forecast economic activity this year and the fact that wholesale Brent Crude prices have averaged above $108 per barrel in 2013 compared to budget assumptions of c. $100/barrel. So Osborne has the option to relieve tax without affecting this budget line.
Additionally as the OBR calculated the cancellation of the planned September 2013 fuel duty rise reduced headline inflation by 0.1% over the year there will probably be savings to come from lower inflation linked benefit payments (e.g. pensions).
On marriage tax allowances and nursery school meals I do not have the figures to hand, but I would expect any additional costs to be more than covered by increased revenues due to higher growth this year.
So unless you can provide evidence to the contrary, there are no grounds for claiming that any of the above changes have diminished the government's commitment to fiscal responsibility.
I'd argue that publishing is one of the services and facilities necessary for an economy to function.
I think you're misreading this, Plato. Milliband is in the clear on this, the Sunday Mail have aimed a 50 cal at both feet, and pulled the trigger.
You don`t offend the next Prime Minister of Britain callously.
Dacre will likely have to go soon.
In your mind it's a case of: "it doesn't effect me, therefore it's okay."
But people will be affected, and seriously so if the proposed law is as bad as it sounds. Given the lengths of time that it often takes to get planning permission, conditions on planning, and the problems of long-term finance, you are asking the impossible of many developers.
There's also a massive conflict of interest between councils being the ones who grant planning permission and impose conditions, and them being the ones who can grab the land.
And developers are not just faceless large companies. They're also people like a colleague, building a new house for his family, or my sister, extending her cottage. Or my dad in the past. You are putting severe restrictions on these people being able to pursue their dreams of a new home, or a new business opportunity.
If the country desperately needs new homes, Labour should have built them. Besides, you and I both know that we don't need many new homes. What we need are less second-home and holiday-home owners. But no party will touch that issue with a bargepole.