IDS: In every programme we've got we're driving costs down. Labour OPPOSED every single one of £83 BILLION of welfare budget savings #DWPqs
I thought Labour were ridiculous when they announced the compounded increase in spending over three years for Health, back in the late 90s. I remember it causing a bit of a fuss at the time, with the Opposition complaining that they should not mislead people by adding together three years in such a way.
How many years has IDS added together to reach his absurd figure of £83 billion?
As we can see, though, there will always be people who believe such claims - despite IDS's previous form on this front. Given that, he'll carry on.
Sunny Hundal @sunny_hundal 7m So while visitors from India (our 2nd biggest investors) have to pay £3k bond to visit, Chinese get unlimited visas? Indians will be furious
The people that China let out of China are highly likely to go back home. The same is not true for Indians. It's a fair solution. Especially since the Indian government decided to up the Visa charge for UK nationals from ~£40 to ~£90 for a visitor visa.
I can see Narendra Modi making moves to cool the tension between the UK and India when it comes to border control, but he has to win first. If the UPA win again then it's only going to get worse as India will continue to export their poor and unemployed to neighbouring countries and nations with lax border controls.
India's poor are stuck in India, living on its streets and in its slums. They certainly don't have close to enough money to buy plane tickets to fly all the way to the UK.
I think you would be surprised at the lengths the poor people of India will go to in order to get to Britain. Just take a walk through Leicester or Wembley to get a decent idea of what kind illegal Indian immigrants come over, very few are from the middle classes and yet they still manage to make it over here. If anything the bond should be increased to £10k and be payable by the UK based sponsor.
Christopher Snowdon @cjsnowdon Two academics and an MSP who all support minimum pricing on a panel chaired by a temperance activist. What a debate! alcoholconcern.org.uk/consultancy-an…
Gordon Rayner @gordonrayner Reid says there's no point costing it before they know they'll get the money. Hodge: Dear dear dear, I'm getting more worried...
Gordon Rayner @gordonrayner Hodge dismayed that Alan Reid doesn't have costings for all of the repairs that need doing.
Ladbrokes have clearly been taking money on a LAB gain from SNP in Fife. They have just shortened their Lab Win price for the Dunfermline by-election to 2/7 (from 1/3).
Sunny Hundal @sunny_hundal 7m So while visitors from India (our 2nd biggest investors) have to pay £3k bond to visit, Chinese get unlimited visas? Indians will be furious
The people that China let out of China are highly likely to go back home. The same is not true for Indians. It's a fair solution. Especially since the Indian government decided to up the Visa charge for UK nationals from ~£40 to ~£90 for a visitor visa.
I can see Narendra Modi making moves to cool the tension between the UK and India when it comes to border control, but he has to win first. If the UPA win again then it's only going to get worse as India will continue to export their poor and unemployed to neighbouring countries and nations with lax border controls.
India's poor are stuck in India, living on its streets and in its slums. They certainly don't have close to enough money to buy plane tickets to fly all the way to the UK.
I think you would be surprised at the lengths the poor people of India will go to in order to get to Britain. Just take a walk through Leicester or Wembley to get a decent idea of what kind illegal Indian immigrants come over, very few are from the middle classes and yet they still manage to make it over here. If anything the bond should be increased to £10k and be payable by the UK based sponsor.
They may not be from the middle classes, but I'd be very surprised if they were among India's poor. The huge numbers of people I saw living in boxes under railway bridges, by railway tracks or just sleeping rough on the streets are not going to end up in the UK. That is not to deny your main point. It's just that in India being poor takes on a whole new meaning that those who have not been there would struggle to comprehend.
Is there not an online, special reduced commission arrangement in place for those who don't want to be long term investors in a strike ridden, overmanned cess pit with considerable structural disadvantages and ever more competitors?
I am still trying to make up my mind. The short term dividends promised are a lot better than deposit accounts.
Question is whether you want to hold £1000 in a single stock. More most people this will either be too much or too little.
We got 2 lots, one for me and one for my better half. She had the wisdom to put £5K in for each of us rather than £10K for one. A bit like the CB trap but in reverse...
I've not noticed this market before, in a seat with a wafer-thin majority. PP clearly believe that the Lib Dems are going to struggle in Con/LD battleground seats.
Paddy Power - Camborne and Redruth (incumbent: George Eustice, Con; MAJ = 66)
Sunny Hundal @sunny_hundal 7m So while visitors from India (our 2nd biggest investors) have to pay £3k bond to visit, Chinese get unlimited visas? Indians will be furious
The people that China let out of China are highly likely to go back home. The same is not true for Indians. It's a fair solution. Especially since the Indian government decided to up the Visa charge for UK nationals from ~£40 to ~£90 for a visitor visa.
I can see Narendra Modi making moves to cool the tension between the UK and India when it comes to border control, but he has to win first. If the UPA win again then it's only going to get worse as India will continue to export their poor and unemployed to neighbouring countries and nations with lax border controls.
India's poor are stuck in India, living on its streets and in its slums. They certainly don't have close to enough money to buy plane tickets to fly all the way to the UK.
I think you would be surprised at the lengths the poor people of India will go to in order to get to Britain. Just take a walk through Leicester or Wembley to get a decent idea of what kind illegal Indian immigrants come over, very few are from the middle classes and yet they still manage to make it over here. If anything the bond should be increased to £10k and be payable by the UK based sponsor.
They may not be from the middle classes, but I'd be very surprised if they were among India's poor. The huge numbers of people I saw living in boxes under railway bridges, by railway tracks or just sleeping rough on the streets are not going to end up in the UK. That is not to deny your main point. It's just that in India being poor takes on a whole new meaning that those who have not been there would struggle to comprehend.
There are people living under bridges in Hounslow, west London - albeit an old story:
CCHQ Press Office @RicHolden Number of people who are "long term sick" under 2 million at lowest for almost 20 years. Down over 200,000 (10%) since General Election.
CCHQ Press Office @RicHolden Number of people who are "long term sick" under 2 million at lowest for almost 20 years. Down over 200,000 (10%) since General Election.
It will be the launch of the NHS 111 Helpline and the success of Lansley's reforms wot did it.
Is there not an online, special reduced commission arrangement in place for those who don't want to be long term investors in a strike ridden, overmanned cess pit with considerable structural disadvantages and ever more competitors?
I am still trying to make up my mind. The short term dividends promised are a lot better than deposit accounts.
Question is whether you want to hold £1000 in a single stock. More most people this will either be too much or too little.
We got 2 lots, one for me and one for my better half. She had the wisdom to put £5K in for each of us rather than £10K for one. A bit like the CB trap but in reverse...
Did you get any further communication - I asked for £10K but haven't heard anything and not sure where I stand since £10K was the cut off point
I've not noticed this market before, in a seat with a wafer-thin majority. PP clearly believe that the Lib Dems are going to struggle in Con/LD battleground seats.
Paddy Power - Camborne and Redruth (incumbent: George Eustice, Con; MAJ = 66)
Con 2/5 LD 5/2 Lab 8/1 UKIP 40/1
Iirc Eustice moved out of the constituency while expecting the boundary changes to go through and is now trying (or possibly has) to move back in after they didn't go through.
Conservatives fell off in Cornwall a lot at the last locals (leaving the Lib Dems who declined a bit less as the largest party on the Council). Don't know the constituency breakdown off the top of my head.
The main problem which you have not addressed here is the fact that Online pollsters find more UKIP supporters in the first place than telephone pollsters , This is particularly true of Comres who carry out both types of polling . This fundamental difference is then masked somewhat by some of the Online pollsters such as Populus and to a lesser extent Yougov by severe Party ID weighting . Now you may argue that their weighting in this way is unjustified or too harsh but you have not answered the basic discrepancy between online and telephone polling results .
Mark Senior. It's interesting that you chose to say "the main problem...is the fact that online pollsters find MORE UKIP supporters...than telephone pollsters"
I'm more of the view that the problem is that random telephone calls to strangers that do not mention UKIP in the VI prompt finds LESS support than online - and less support that is the reality.
This is not a new phenomenon in polling, you'll be familiar with the "shy tory" effect that made Election night 1992 such a bad night for the industry.
Mr. Survation, could to see you engaging with pb.com.
On shy tory syndrome: isn't this likelier to (still) afflict the Conservatives, rather than UKIP? I can't see people being embarrassed, ashamed or reticent to say they're a UKIPper, and would expect that feeling/behaviour to be likelier for the three main parties.
The main problem which you have not addressed here is the fact that Online pollsters find more UKIP supporters in the first place than telephone pollsters , This is particularly true of Comres who carry out both types of polling . This fundamental difference is then masked somewhat by some of the Online pollsters such as Populus and to a lesser extent Yougov by severe Party ID weighting . Now you may argue that their weighting in this way is unjustified or too harsh but you have not answered the basic discrepancy between online and telephone polling results .
Mark Senior. It's interesting that you chose to say "the main problem...is the fact that online pollsters find MORE UKIP supporters...than telephone pollsters"
I'm more of the view that the problem is that random telephone calls to strangers that do not mention UKIP in the VI prompt finds LESS support than online - and less support that is the reality.
This is not a new phenomenon in polling, you'll be familiar with the "shy tory" effect that made Election night 1992 such a bad night for the industry.
Damian , thanks again for the response . Yes I am familiar with the " shy tory " effect but is there not also what seems to be a " bold UKIP " effect which has driven UKIP supporters to pile onto Online poll panels as well as blogs such as Conservativehome , Telegraph , DM etc . AFAIK the Comres methodology is identical between it's Online and Telephone polls and yet the results are consistently different .
"But calling for action on "benefit tourism" is a solution in search of a problem; as Theresa May admitted last week, it's about perception not reality."
Could be talking absolute nonsense here, but its an idea that's popped into my head...
Would there be any advantage in a phone pollster making phone calls until 100 people had indicated they would vote for each party, and using the number of calls made to achieve it for each as the data?
'You have no right to be in the UK and you should leave': Extraordinary moment immigration minister tells five-time failed asylum seeker to go home on live TV
Damian Lyons Lowe @DamianSurvation 3m 1) It's great to see people are reading our data tables in full. Finding out public are supportive of "Green Taxes" was really interesting!
Damian Lyons Lowe @DamianSurvation 3m 2) And a validation of Lib Dem & Labour Policies (and many Tories too)
You should do a guest post on this issue, the PB Tories are horribly deluded and no matter how many million times they are told it just doesn't sink in. I think this is because they deliberately ignore polling evidence that doesn't back up their anecdotes, some think it's because they aren't very bright. Whatever the explanation they cannot assimilate the polling
Maybe Mike could arrange it?
The problem with single issue polling as a whole is that most people respond to the question in the abstract.
All other things being equal, they may be prepared to pay Green Taxes. But to govern is to choose: would they prefer these vs. more spending on schools'n'hospitals funded by a higher income tax rate, perhaps?
Polling just on the nice stuff doesn't necessarily get you the full answer
re Green taxes - Airline fuel duty, higher petrol & diesel duties, parking charges, graduated Vehicle Excise Duty rates; 'residential' parking zones charges often linked to CO2 emissions of cars. It isn't just about additional taxes on gas and electricity usage.
The main problem which you have not addressed here is the fact that Online pollsters find more UKIP supporters in the first place than telephone pollsters , This is particularly true of Comres who carry out both types of polling . This fundamental difference is then masked somewhat by some of the Online pollsters such as Populus and to a lesser extent Yougov by severe Party ID weighting . Now you may argue that their weighting in this way is unjustified or too harsh but you have not answered the basic discrepancy between online and telephone polling results .
Mark Senior. It's interesting that you chose to say "the main problem...is the fact that online pollsters find MORE UKIP supporters...than telephone pollsters"
I'm more of the view that the problem is that random telephone calls to strangers that do not mention UKIP in the VI prompt finds LESS support than online - and less support that is the reality.
This is not a new phenomenon in polling, you'll be familiar with the "shy tory" effect that made Election night 1992 such a bad night for the industry.
Damian , thanks again for the response . Yes I am familiar with the " shy tory " effect but is there not also what seems to be a " bold UKIP " effect which has driven UKIP supporters to pile onto Online poll panels as well as blogs such as Conservativehome , Telegraph , DM etc . AFAIK the Comres methodology is identical between it's Online and Telephone polls and yet the results are consistently different .
Sure Mark, it is a worry for us all and it is the reason why you might *consider* Party ID weighting to iron out new entrants. A few points to note:
Has the panel sample we used been overwhelmed by UKIP supporters? I just looked at the raw data for you. Just 21 of the 751 people who said they voted in 2010 voted for UKIP.
Now you could argue that enthusiastic new converts are the problem. But tell me this.
UKIP got more than a quarter of the vote where they stood in the 2013 locals. Could a party that was on 5-7% nationally as those unprompted phone polls indicated 30 days before polling day really have done that?
Damian Lyons Lowe @DamianSurvation 3m 1) It's great to see people are reading our data tables in full. Finding out public are supportive of "Green Taxes" was really interesting!
Damian Lyons Lowe @DamianSurvation 3m 2) And a validation of Lib Dem & Labour Policies (and many Tories too)
You should do a guest post on this issue, the PB Tories are horribly deluded and no matter how many million times they are told it just doesn't sink in. I think this is because they deliberately ignore polling evidence that doesn't back up their anecdotes, some think it's because they aren't very bright. Whatever the explanation they cannot assimilate the polling
Maybe Mike could arrange it?
The problem with single issue polling as a whole is that most people respond to the question in the abstract.
All other things being equal, they may be prepared to pay Green Taxes. But to govern is to choose: would they prefer these vs. more spending on schools'n'hospitals funded by a higher income tax rate, perhaps?
Polling just on the nice stuff doesn't necessarily get you the full answer
Translation. "I don't like the polling so I'm going to spout a load of bollocks"
Nope, I've no idea what the polling says because I haven't looked at the question.
The fundamental point is if you ask someone "should taxes go up" you are likely to get a different answet to the question "should your taxes go up".
Similar if you say to someone "should we spend more on healthcare" then you will get a different answer to "should your taxes go up to spend more on healthcare"
UKIP got more than a quarter of the vote where they stood in the 2013 locals. Could a party that was on 5-7% nationally as those unprompted phone polls indicated 30 days before polling day really have done that?
UKIP do tend to surge just before the Euros every time (before falling back again afterwards).
I dont have an answer to your question though. If I had a convincing one I imagine I'd be setting up a rival pollster
Mark Senior. It's interesting that you chose to say "the main problem...is the fact that online pollsters find MORE UKIP supporters...than telephone pollsters"
I'm more of the view that the problem is that random telephone calls to strangers that do not mention UKIP in the VI prompt finds LESS support than online - and less support that is the reality.
This is not a new phenomenon in polling, you'll be familiar with the "shy tory" effect that made Election night 1992 such a bad night for the industry.
Damian , thanks again for the response . Yes I am familiar with the " shy tory " effect but is there not also what seems to be a " bold UKIP " effect which has driven UKIP supporters to pile onto Online poll panels as well as blogs such as Conservativehome , Telegraph , DM etc . AFAIK the Comres methodology is identical between it's Online and Telephone polls and yet the results are consistently different .
Sure Mark, it is a worry for us all and it is the reason why you might *consider* Party ID weighting to iron out new entrants. A few points to note:
Has the panel sample we used been overwhelmed by UKIP supporters? I just looked at the raw data for you. Just 21 of the 751 people who said they voted in 2010 voted for UKIP.
Now you could argue that enthusiastic new converts are the problem. But tell me this.
UKIP got more than a quarter of the vote where they stood in the 2013 locals. Could a party that was on 5-7% nationally as those unprompted phone polls indicated 30 days before polling day really have done that?
Damian , the answer to your last question is clearly Yes . A national VI poll for a GE some 2 years in the future with a turnout of 60 % is going to have a very different result in local elections tomorrow with a turnout of 30 % especially when one party is very much keener to turn out and register a strong protest vote .
UKIP got more than a quarter of the vote where they stood in the 2013 locals. Could a party that was on 5-7% nationally as those unprompted phone polls indicated 30 days before polling day really have done that?
UKIP do tend to surge just before the Euros every time (before falling back again afterwards).
I dont have an answer to your question though. If I had a convincing one I imagine I'd be setting up a rival pollster
Sure, but Euro surge aside. The telephone polls before May entirely failed to capture what was about to happen (by a factor of 3-4X!). A locals performance that Prof John Curtice called "the most significant incursion by a 4th party since... well a long time as he doesn't count SDP as a "4th party".
But it's interesting right? that people say the online polls have UKIP too HIGH and not the other way around!
Damian , the answer to your last question is clearly Yes . A national VI poll for a GE some 2 years in the future with a turnout of 60 % is going to have a very different result in local elections tomorrow with a turnout of 30 % especially when one party is very much keener to turn out and register a strong protest vote .
The standard polling question however asks how you would vote if there was a GE TOMORROW though right? not "2 years in the future"
Proving yet again that the PB tories are as out of touch as Tea Party activists are in the USA.
If everybody is so happy with the status quo on energy prices tim, then why freezing them just about the only recognisable policy we've had out of ed miliband since he took over as leader?
If the PB tories are out of touch on energy prices, then so is ed. Why doesn't he just say everything is fine if there's such support for the status quo, like the lib dems are doing?
"The Prime Minister was in Cambridge today to meet the entrepreneurs helping to drive the country’s economic recovery. David Cameron, who arrived in a Land Rover with an entourage of bodyguards and advisers, chose Cambridge for the two-hour visit because of its reputation in spawning successful new businesses - as he publicised plans to boost jobs by cutting companies’ tax bill"
But it's interesting right? that people say the online polls have UKIP too HIGH and not the other way around!
It's definitely interesting. We'd have much less to talk about on pbc if there werent issues like this to debate. As a lefty I'd be delighted for the right to splinter this badly but when putting money on it I'll be basing my views on the more traditional approach.
If you still have time to debate these things - how to you reconcile the relatively small gap between UKIP support for Euro and GE elections? Surely UKIP will far outperform at Euro level?
'At the end of day - the McCanns went socialising with their friends whilst their toddler was alone."
You really are a dismal piece of work Plato.
Why Roger? Whilst I have a huge amount of sympathy for the McCanns and think they have suffered far beyond anything the state could or should impose, what Plato says is undeniably true.
What the McCanns did was, under English law, a criminal offence. Maybe the law is different in Portugal but the basic principle is the same wherever you are. It is a criminal offence to leave children alone if doing so puts them at risk. Given the circumstances it seems that that is exactly what was done in this case.
Damian , the answer to your last question is clearly Yes . A national VI poll for a GE some 2 years in the future with a turnout of 60 % is going to have a very different result in local elections tomorrow with a turnout of 30 % especially when one party is very much keener to turn out and register a strong protest vote .
The standard polling question however asks how you would vote if there was a GE TOMORROW though right? not "2 years in the future"
That is true but everyone answering knows that there is not going to be a GE tomorrow and perhaps the majority know the next GE is 2 years away . Actually looking at the wordings of ICM and Populus they do not actually mention the word TOMORROW in their question
It's definitely interesting. We'd have much less to talk about on pbc if there werent issues like this to debate. As a lefty I'd be delighted for the right to splinter this badly but when putting money on it I'll be basing my views on the more traditional approach.
If you still have time to debate these things - how to you reconcile the relatively small gap between UKIP support for Euro and GE elections? Surely UKIP will far outperform at Euro level?
==> I don't think people are thinking much about their European election choices just yet. I would expect UKIP to do a lot better than our Sunday poll showed by May. Looking at the evidence - e.g. the cross-party responses to IN/OUT referendum etc - it's clear that UKIP's message on the EU has lots of support among CON voters (and LD/LAB voters). Farage asking people to "lend" their vote will be persuasive, and differential turnout should help them. At the moment I would say a tight race between UKIP and LAB for 1st with CON a more distant 3rd.
==> I don't think people are thinking much about their European election choices just yet.
I think that's fair enough. UKIP have surely taken from the Tories on this question but Labour remain far too high. When some of that Labour vote finds its way to UKIP (when the election has more prominence and UKIP's coverage is higher) then UKIP's measure on this should soar. Interesting times!
We all know UKIP VI are concerned about immigration. But not all immigrants are equal. From the Survation poll on asked whether immigrants should be allowed into the UK:
Not at all OA (UKIP) Source: Old EU (Fr/De/Sp): 5 (8) New EU (Po/Lat/Rom): 15 (29) Old Commonwealth (Oz, NZ, SA): 5 (4) New Commonwealth: (Ind/Pak/Bdesh): 15 (30) USA: 6 (6) Far E developed(Japan/Ko/Taiwan): 11 (19) Middle East (Saudi/Egypt/UAE): 19 (40) Latin America (Mex/Arg/Bra): 14 (26) Other Developing (Rus/Chin/Indo): 13 (25)
None of which is really relevant to the "circus" as Hodges describes it. Certainly it's totally irrelevant to why this missing child is the centre of a 30 Detective hunt whereas the others on the missing child list aren't. I think we all know the reasons for that.
To my mind the 'circus' started long ago right back when the child went missing. The fact that it appears that the original investigation was so badly botched would seem to me to be a very good reason for it to be looked at again. Most people see this simply as a case of trying to find a missing child. Only a few sad sacks like you try and make a political point out of it.
The standard polling question however asks how you would vote if there was a GE TOMORROW though right? not "2 years in the future"
That is true but everyone answering knows that there is not going to be a GE tomorrow and perhaps the majority know the next GE is 2 years away . Actually looking at the wordings of ICM and Populus they do not actually mention the word TOMORROW in their question
This is how Mr. Wells has listed:
MORI: How would you vote if there were a General Election held tomorrow? Would you vote… Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat [rotate order] or for some other party ICM: If there were to be a general election tomorrow which party do you think you would vote for? Conservative/Labour/Liberal Democrat/Other? YouGov: If there were a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, Scottish Nationalist/Plaid cymru, some other party, would not vote, don’t know Populus: If the general election was tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Would it be [rotate order] Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, or another party – or would you not vote at all? Communicate Research: If there were a general election tomorrow, would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat or some other party?
O/T I've just remembered that I was caught out for a golden duck this year by the now outgoing Lib Dem MP for Frome.... damn good keeper's catch, standing up to a quick.I barely moved to the quicks delivery before he'd taken the catch and was appealing - swine.
I suppose after claiming the scrapman for 0, a swift kick out of Govt and now retirement - it was inevitable. Where can you go once your career has peaked....
Is there not an online, special reduced commission arrangement in place for those who don't want to be long term investors in a strike ridden, overmanned cess pit with considerable structural disadvantages and ever more competitors?
I am still trying to make up my mind. The short term dividends promised are a lot better than deposit accounts.
Question is whether you want to hold £1000 in a single stock. More most people this will either be too much or too little.
We got 2 lots, one for me and one for my better half. She had the wisdom to put £5K in for each of us rather than £10K for one. A bit like the CB trap but in reverse...
Did you get any further communication - I asked for £10K but haven't heard anything and not sure where I stand since £10K was the cut off point
Not so far. I was expecting to hear tomorrow. I am just assuming we each got some on the basis that we fall within the category. I will let you know if anything arrives.
'At the end of day - the McCanns went socialising with their friends whilst their toddler was alone."
You really are a dismal piece of work Plato.
Why Roger? Whilst I have a huge amount of sympathy for the McCanns and think they have suffered far beyond anything the state could or should impose, what Plato says is undeniably true.
What the McCanns did was, under English law, a criminal offence. Maybe the law is different in Portugal but the basic principle is the same wherever you are. It is a criminal offence to leave children alone if doing so puts them at risk. Given the circumstances it seems that that is exactly what was done in this case.
It's just unbelievably horrific. Given that the McCanns must relive that night relentlessly, and must hate themselves for what happened, surely in the end what they did was to make a horrible, life-changing mistake at a holiday village where they had no reason to suspect that their children (there was more then one of them there, wasn't there?) would be in any kind of danger. It's still not something that many parents would have done, but they did it and they have to live with it.
Proving yet again that the PB tories are as out of touch as Tea Party activists are in the USA.
If everybody is so happy with the status quo on energy prices tim, then why freezing them just about the only recognisable policy we've had out of ed miliband since he took over as leader?
If the PB tories are out of touch on energy prices, then so is ed. Why doesn't he just say everything is fine if there's such support for the status quo, like the lib dems are doing?
Because people are not happy with energy prices?
You are confusing a number of different issues there aren't you. Look at the polling
"Q20.The major energy companies are preparing to hike their bills by more than 8 per cent They argue that part of the reason is 'green taxes', imposed to help investment in renewable energy.Do you believe the energy companies when they say that taxes are the reason for steeper bills?
Yes 15% No 75%
Tory voters 23/%/72%
Hardly surprising since Tory govt ministers were all over the media saying that green taxes weren't the cause/were only a minor cause.
But the Tea Party PB Tories are so far removed from the mainstream of even their own party.
Surely the question's wrong. It contradicts itself: it correctly says that the energy companies argue that green taxes are part of the reason for the increase, then asks if you agree that the taxes are 'the' reason. Secondly, much of the green taxes go not to renewable energy, but things like home insulation and new boiler schemes.
Besides, your oh-so-predictable rant against PB Tories misses the fact that I for one was not arguing over the price of energy (which, outside f new developments, can only go up long-term), but about the issues of investment and energy security. I've been fairly consistent on these concerns, even before Ed's stupidity.
Only a few sad sacks like you try and make a political point out of it.
Didnt Cameron make a political point out of it when he intervened in police operations on an issue a, er, favourite tabloid editor was campaigning on?
Given that it involved the jurisdiction of a foreign country and the possible insult to a foreign police force it is hardly surprising it has drawn in the government. Are you seriously telling me that if this had been a Labour government asking for a review that Tim would have been making his snide little comments? As with every other single posting he makes he cares nothing for the issue at hand and only for the ability to make a political attack.
The standard polling question however asks how you would vote if there was a GE TOMORROW though right? not "2 years in the future"
That is true but everyone answering knows that there is not going to be a GE tomorrow and perhaps the majority know the next GE is 2 years away . Actually looking at the wordings of ICM and Populus they do not actually mention the word TOMORROW in their question
This is how Mr. Wells has listed:
MORI: How would you vote if there were a General Election held tomorrow? Would you vote… Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat [rotate order] or for some other party ICM: If there were to be a general election tomorrow which party do you think you would vote for? Conservative/Labour/Liberal Democrat/Other? YouGov: If there were a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, Scottish Nationalist/Plaid cymru, some other party, would not vote, don’t know Populus: If the general election was tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Would it be [rotate order] Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, or another party – or would you not vote at all? Communicate Research: If there were a general election tomorrow, would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat or some other party?
Yes OK , interesting that some of ICM questions do mention the word TOMORROW and others just say A NEW GE , doubt ut makes any difference to the responses .
BTW - If you can afford it, make sure you and your husband/wife/partner if any use as much of your ISA allowance as you can every year. The opportunity may not last for ever:
The most likely change IMO is to disallow further contributions once a max lifetime contribution limit has been reached, rather than to attempt to snaffle back what's already been subscribed (although who knows, under PM Miliband?).
I'm not saying this is imminent - in fact I'm fairly sure it's not - but it's bound to be considered in the future. Personally, I aim to lock in as much tax-free savings as I can afford. If you can afford the full £11K a year, or £22K for a couple, in a few years you can have a tidy sum producing a respectable income, as a very useful supplement to pensions for those of us who have to pay for our own.
[This is not financial advice, do your own research etc etc]
'At the end of day - the McCanns went socialising with their friends whilst their toddler was alone."
You really are a dismal piece of work Plato.
Why Roger? Whilst I have a huge amount of sympathy for the McCanns and think they have suffered far beyond anything the state could or should impose, what Plato says is undeniably true.
What the McCanns did was, under English law, a criminal offence. Maybe the law is different in Portugal but the basic principle is the same wherever you are. It is a criminal offence to leave children alone if doing so puts them at risk. Given the circumstances it seems that that is exactly what was done in this case.
It's just unbelievably horrific. Given that the McCanns must relive that night relentlessly, and must hate themselves for what happened, surely in the end what they did was to make a horrible, life-changing mistake at a holiday village where they had no reason to suspect that their children (there was more then one of them there, wasn't there?) would be in any kind of danger. It's still not something that many parents would have done, but they did it and they have to live with it.
I agree which is why I said the state should not take any further action against them. But the one real victim here was the child. The parents have a large degree of culpability and it seems to me that fact has been lost in the intervening years.
There are still a frightening number of people who believe that they did nothing wrong at all and see them purely as victims.
BTW - If you can afford it, make sure you and your husband/wife/partner if any use as much of your ISA allowance as you can every year. The opportunity may not last for ever:
The most likely change IMO is to disallow further contributions once a max lifetime contribution limit has been reached, rather than to attempt to snaffle back what's already been subscribed (although who knows, under PM Miliband?).
I'm not saying this is imminent - in fact I'm fairly sure it's not - but it's bound to be considered in the future. Personally, I aim to lock in as much tax-free savings as I can afford. If you can afford the full £11K a year, or £22K for a couple, in a few years you can have a tidy sum producing a respectable income, as a very useful supplement to pensions for those of us who have to pay for our own.
[This is not financial advice, do your own research etc etc]
When I told my tax adviser I was getting married he was very excited. Just promise me one thing, he said: please tell me she's not American...
Yes OK , interesting that some of ICM questions do mention the word TOMORROW and others just say A NEW GE , doubt ut makes any difference to the responses .
=> I'm not really making any point about wording of the VI prompt but the difference in our approach is this.
I don't believe that the job of a pollster is to somehow "second guess" what the voters REALLY mean for 2015. I see it as our job to accurately reflect current public opinion.
UKIP's support may evaporate after the Euros as most people hope it will but I'd prefer to wait for that to happen on an evidence basis rather than pre-judge.
Are you seriously telling me that if this had been a Labour government asking for a review that Tim would have been making his snide little comments?
Just because tim is completely and utterly partisan (more anti-Tory than pro-anything in particular) doesnt mean he is always wrong!
Cameron intervened into operational police matters to please elements of the media. I dont think that's a great way to run the country.
I think that the one over-riding duty of government after defence of the realm is to try and protect its citizens when they are abroad. I see this as very much an issue where a government of any stripe should be involved.
UKIP got more than a quarter of the vote where they stood in the 2013 locals. Could a party that was on 5-7% nationally as those unprompted phone polls indicated 30 days before polling day really have done that?
UKIP do tend to surge just before the Euros every time (before falling back again afterwards).
I dont have an answer to your question though. If I had a convincing one I imagine I'd be setting up a rival pollster
Sure, but Euro surge aside. The telephone polls before May entirely failed to capture what was about to happen (by a factor of 3-4X!). A locals performance that Prof John Curtice called "the most significant incursion by a 4th party since... well a long time as he doesn't count SDP as a "4th party".
But it's interesting right? that people say the online polls have UKIP too HIGH and not the other way around!
I think that the online polls show UKIP's potential support, or the sort of support that the party would get in an election held under a PR system. I think that now carries into local elections, as people know they aren't choosing a government, and these are low-turnout elections that attract the most committed voters.
But, in a general election, people are generally forced to choose between one of two parties, which will squeeze UKIP down to the level of support shown by telephone pollsters.
And why do you think Cameron intervened in this case and no others involving missing children?
Dunno, tim. Maybe there's a clue in the fact that Gordon Brown didn't have 'several telephone conversations' with the parents of all those other missing children?
Huzzah. ....Mark Harper my MP making an impact on the telly. Wonder if his foot is better yet?
My personal unsubstantiated theory is that the crusty retired colonel wing of UKIP is likely to revert I large numbers to the Tories for fear of Ed. However the working class ex labour anti-politics northern wing is mu h more likely to stick to its UKIP guns being immune to southern metro Ed's charms.
I think that the one over-riding duty of government after defence of the realm is to try and protect its citizens when they are abroad. I see this as very much an issue where a government of any stripe should be involved.
And I think this was about pandering / caving in to elements of the media rather than protecting citizens.
'At the end of day - the McCanns went socialising with their friends whilst their toddler was alone."
You really are a dismal piece of work Plato.
Why Roger? Whilst I have a huge amount of sympathy for the McCanns and think they have suffered far beyond anything the state could or should impose, what Plato says is undeniably true.
What the McCanns did was, under English law, a criminal offence. Maybe the law is different in Portugal but the basic principle is the same wherever you are. It is a criminal offence to leave children alone if doing so puts them at risk. Given the circumstances it seems that that is exactly what was done in this case.
It's just unbelievably horrific. Given that the McCanns must relive that night relentlessly, and must hate themselves for what happened, surely in the end what they did was to make a horrible, life-changing mistake at a holiday village where they had no reason to suspect that their children (there was more then one of them there, wasn't there?) would be in any kind of danger. It's still not something that many parents would have done, but they did it and they have to live with it.
I agree which is why I said the state should not take any further action against them. But the one real victim here was the child. The parents have a large degree of culpability and it seems to me that fact has been lost in the intervening years.
There are still a frightening number of people who believe that they did nothing wrong at all and see them purely as victims.
And why do you think Cameron intervened in this case and no others involving missing children?
I don't know Cameron's mind and am no fan. But each and every case is different and more importantly the numbers of children that go missing abroad and are not found after this length of time is absolutely tiny. But personally I think the government should take a far more robust line with missing children overseas and should not simply rely on foreign agencies to find them. I would like to see more of this sort of intervention by UK governments rather than less.
When I told my tax adviser I was getting married he was very excited. Just promise me one thing, he said: please tell me she's not American...
Surely he'd be excited that she is American?
Worldwide tax b*ggers things up - nothing I can do but pay specialist lawyers a blooming fortune to file a tax return each year. ISAs don't work for Americans & my wife can't be on the house either in London (no PPR) or California (otherwise she would be liable for state income tax)
I think that the one over-riding duty of government after defence of the realm is to try and protect its citizens when they are abroad. I see this as very much an issue where a government of any stripe should be involved.
And I think this was about pandering / caving in to elements of the media rather than protecting citizens.
Of course you do,. But that says far more about your motivations and thinking than it does about cameron's.
"Despite their party's role in coalition, Liberal Democrat voters side with Labour on both counts. They back Miliband's energy price cap by 60%-29%, and reject the sale of Royal Mail – in which Lib Dem cabinet ministers Vince Cable and Ed Davey have played important roles – by an emphatic 62% to 32% margin."
Unfortunately, that's one to file in the bin. Look at the question:
"capping the energy prices because that helps struggling households".
Unlike ICM to ask such a leading question. They're usually more professional.
I think that the one over-riding duty of government after defence of the realm is to try and protect its citizens when they are abroad. I see this as very much an issue where a government of any stripe should be involved.
And I think this was about pandering / caving in to elements of the media rather than protecting citizens.
Of course you do,. But that says far more about your motivations and thinking than it does about cameron's.
And of course you would think that. Of course I would say it says more about your naivety than it does Cameron's motivations. There's enough material out there on this for most fair minded people to make their minds up for themselves.
I don't know Cameron's mind and am no fan. But each and every case is different and more importantly the numbers of children that go missing abroad and are not found after this length of time is absolutely tiny. But personally I think the government should take a far more robust line with missing children overseas and should not simply rely on foreign agencies to find them. I would like to see more of this sort of intervention by UK governments rather than less.
There's a tremedous book you might enjoy. Depressing, but important
That looks like it could be potentially a very realistic outcome, although I would suspect that a few more LibDems would return at the expense of Labour.
Iirc Eustice moved out of the constituency while expecting the boundary changes to go through and is now trying (or possibly has) to move back in after they didn't go through.
Has Eustice sent the bill to the perfidious LibDems who broke their Coalition Agreement commitment and scuppered the boundary changes? They owe him money.
Funnily enough, the 42% combined Tory/UKIP poll share in the latest ICM is what the Tories alone got in the ICM at this time in the last Parliament (19th October 2008). The combined 50% that Labour and the LDs have got today is 1% less than for the October 2008 poll. Not sure what that tells us though!
I think that the one over-riding duty of government after defence of the realm is to try and protect its citizens when they are abroad. I see this as very much an issue where a government of any stripe should be involved.
And I think this was about pandering / caving in to elements of the media rather than protecting citizens.
Of course you do,. But that says far more about your motivations and thinking than it does about cameron's.
And of course you would think that. Of course I would say it says more about your naivety than it does Cameron's motivations. There's enough material out there on this for most fair minded people to make their minds up for themselves.
So if you believe that Cameron is making a special exception in this case but not others you must therefore be able to tell me how many other cases there are where a British toddler has disappeared without trace overseas (not including known parental snatches which are of course a different matter) and where there is such a huge controversy over the original investigation by the local police. Just rough numbers and maybe a few specific examples?
Once you can provide those details you might then be able to start to build a case that Cameron is making an exceptional intervention rather than just throwing around spurious accusations.
I think that the one over-riding duty of government after defence of the realm is to try and protect its citizens when they are abroad. I see this as very much an issue where a government of any stripe should be involved.
And I think this was about pandering / caving in to elements of the media rather than protecting citizens.
Of course you do,. But that says far more about your motivations and thinking than it does about cameron's.
And of course you would think that. Of course I would say it says more about your naivety than it does Cameron's motivations. There's enough material out there on this for most fair minded people to make their minds up for themselves.
So if you believe that Cameron is making a special exception in this case but not others you must therefore be able to tell me how many other cases there are where a British toddler has disappeared without trace overseas (not including known parental snatches which are of course a different matter) and where there is such a huge controversy over the original investigation by the local police. Just rough numbers and maybe a few specific examples?
Once you can provide those details you might then be able to start to build a case that Cameron is making an exceptional intervention rather than just throwing around spurious accusations.
I can tell you the number of cases that Cameron authorised millions to be spent reviewing the day after it was demanded on the front page of a national tabloid newspaper who had bought the rights to serialise a book on the subject: one.
Would it reflect more favourably on Cameron if he told the McCanns he didn't give a toss about their missing child?
As someone who has read Gonçalo Amaral's book 'A Verdade da Mentira' and am more inclined to believe that version of events than the McCann defence, I'd be a bit stronger than that.
I can tell you the number of cases that Cameron authorised millions to be spent reviewing the day after it was demanded on the front page of a national tabloid newspaper who had bought the rights to serialise a book on the subject: one.
Yep I was just waiting for you to bring up the Needham case. The differences are stark. Firstly Needham would now be 24 years old so, if he were still alive, so we are now no longer dealing with a child. More importantly the UK police have continued to be actively involved in the case and as recently as last year were back in Greece following up new evidence. To that extent there was and is no need for Cameron to intervene. Nor (in spite of the fact that the family were initially considered suspects) was there the accusation that the chief investigator had so comprehensively screwed up the investigation.
So again tell me why this is Cameron making a special exceptional intervention?
. So again tell me why this is Cameron making a special exceptional intervention?
Because he intervened in an operational police matter at the behest of a national tabloid. That may be how you would like the country to be run but I think it is bad form.
. So again tell me why this is Cameron making a special exceptional intervention?
Because he intervened in an operational police matter at the behest of a national tabloid. That may be how you would like the country to be run but I think it is bad form.
Again that is your interpretation and says far more about your partial view of things than it does about Cameron.
Edit: And I note you then immediately drop the Needham case when your argument is disproved.
. So again tell me why this is Cameron making a special exceptional intervention?
Because he intervened in an operational police matter at the behest of a national tabloid. That may be how you would like the country to be run but I think it is bad form.
Again that is your interpretation and says far more about your partial view of things than it does about Cameron.
Edit: And I note you then immediately drop the Needham case when your argument is disproved.
And I say your view of things says more about your naivety than it does about anything else.
You didnt "prove" anything about the Needham case. That family asked Cameron for help privately - they didnt get the response that the McCann's did when they asked via the front page of a national tabloid. That could be down to the reasons you gave. Or it could be down to not having such intense backing from a major media group that Cameron felt compelled to intervene in operational police matters. People will make up their own minds about that.
. So again tell me why this is Cameron making a special exceptional intervention?
Because he intervened in an operational police matter at the behest of a national tabloid. That may be how you would like the country to be run but I think it is bad form.
Again that is your interpretation and says far more about your partial view of things than it does about Cameron.
Edit: And I note you then immediately drop the Needham case when your argument is disproved.
And I say your view of things says more about your naivety than it does about anything else.
You didnt "prove" anything about the Needham case. That family asked Cameron for help privately - they didnt get the response that the McCann's did when they asked via the front page of a national tabloid. That could be down to the reasons you gave. Or it could be down to not having such intense backing from a major media group that Cameron felt compelled to intervene in operational police matters. People will make up their own minds about that.
Well you have clearly made up yours irrespective of the actual facts of the case.
Well you have clearly made up yours irrespective of the actual facts of the case.
Whereas your approach is the apotheosis of reasoning!
I'm bemused how you can consider your take on this to be superior considering neither of us can know for certain what Cameron was really thinking.
But you are the one making the claim that his behaviour was exceptional and politically motivated whilst failing to provide any evidence that it was in any was exceptional. he emphasis has to be upon you to prove that this was an unusual intervention and that there are other similar cases where he has failed to intervene. If you cannot do that you have nothing but your own bias to support your position.
I on the other hand have already said that I do not know what his reasoning was and without any other evidence and given the obvious responsibility of the government in the case I am willing to accept his intervention at face value rather than claiming it was for any ulterior motive.
Comments
Two academics and an MSP who all support minimum pricing on a panel chaired by a temperance activist. What a debate! alcoholconcern.org.uk/consultancy-an…
Gordon Rayner @gordonrayner
Reid says there's no point costing it before they know they'll get the money. Hodge: Dear dear dear, I'm getting more worried...
Gordon Rayner @gordonrayner
Hodge dismayed that Alan Reid doesn't have costings for all of the repairs that need doing.
New SNP price: 5/2 (from 2/1).
New LD price: 50/1 (from 33/1).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24522653
I'm sure IDS will have some numbers, somewhere....
Reid: Ballpark figure for total repairs is £50m. Hodge: Why didn't you tell us that 20 minutes ago?
I do love PAC.
Paddy Power - Camborne and Redruth (incumbent: George Eustice, Con; MAJ = 66)
Con 2/5
LD 5/2
Lab 8/1
UKIP 40/1
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19645461
Mendacious spin if the latter.
http://toys.usvsth3m.com/realistic-facebook-privacy-simulator/
CCHQ Press Office @RicHolden
Number of people who are "long term sick" under 2 million at lowest for almost 20 years. Down over 200,000 (10%) since General Election.
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/10/14/conferences-what-conferences/
Conservatives fell off in Cornwall a lot at the last locals (leaving the Lib Dems who declined a bit less as the largest party on the Council). Don't know the constituency breakdown off the top of my head.
Mark Senior. It's interesting that you chose to say "the main problem...is the fact that online pollsters find MORE UKIP supporters...than telephone pollsters"
I'm more of the view that the problem is that random telephone calls to strangers that do not mention UKIP in the VI prompt finds LESS support than online - and less support that is the reality.
This is not a new phenomenon in polling, you'll be familiar with the "shy tory" effect that made Election night 1992 such a bad night for the industry.
So survation are confident that Ukip will poll approx 18% of the vote in the GE ?
Interesting.
On shy tory syndrome: isn't this likelier to (still) afflict the Conservatives, rather than UKIP? I can't see people being embarrassed, ashamed or reticent to say they're a UKIPper, and would expect that feeling/behaviour to be likelier for the three main parties.
I'm more of the view that the problem is that random telephone calls to strangers that do not mention UKIP in the VI prompt finds LESS support than online - and less support that is the reality.
This is not a new phenomenon in polling, you'll be familiar with the "shy tory" effect that made Election night 1992 such a bad night for the industry.
Damian , thanks again for the response . Yes I am familiar with the " shy tory " effect but is there not also what seems to be a " bold UKIP " effect which has driven UKIP supporters to pile onto Online poll panels as well as blogs such as Conservativehome , Telegraph , DM etc . AFAIK the Comres methodology is identical between it's Online and Telephone polls and yet the results are consistently different .
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/14/benefit-tourism-facts-european-commission-report
"But calling for action on "benefit tourism" is a solution in search of a problem; as Theresa May admitted last week, it's about perception not reality."
Would there be any advantage in a phone pollster making phone calls until 100 people had indicated they would vote for each party, and using the number of calls made to achieve it for each as the data?
All other things being equal, they may be prepared to pay Green Taxes. But to govern is to choose: would they prefer these vs. more spending on schools'n'hospitals funded by a higher income tax rate, perhaps?
Polling just on the nice stuff doesn't necessarily get you the full answer
Sure Mark, it is a worry for us all and it is the reason why you might *consider* Party ID weighting to iron out new entrants. A few points to note:
Has the panel sample we used been overwhelmed by UKIP supporters? I just looked at the raw data for you. Just 21 of the 751 people who said they voted in 2010 voted for UKIP.
Now you could argue that enthusiastic new converts are the problem. But tell me this.
UKIP got more than a quarter of the vote where they stood in the 2013 locals. Could a party that was on 5-7% nationally as those unprompted phone polls indicated 30 days before polling day really have done that?
The fundamental point is if you ask someone "should taxes go up" you are likely to get a different answet to the question "should your taxes go up".
Similar if you say to someone "should we spend more on healthcare" then you will get a different answer to "should your taxes go up to spend more on healthcare"
I dont have an answer to your question though. If I had a convincing one I imagine I'd be setting up a rival pollster
http://comresupdates.eu.com/DCJ-1WGCY-F21LMD8E11/cr.aspx
Has the panel sample we used been overwhelmed by UKIP supporters? I just looked at the raw data for you. Just 21 of the 751 people who said they voted in 2010 voted for UKIP.
Now you could argue that enthusiastic new converts are the problem. But tell me this.
UKIP got more than a quarter of the vote where they stood in the 2013 locals. Could a party that was on 5-7% nationally as those unprompted phone polls indicated 30 days before polling day really have done that?
Damian , the answer to your last question is clearly Yes . A national VI poll for a GE some 2 years in the future with a turnout of 60 % is going to have a very different result in local elections tomorrow with a turnout of 30 % especially when one party is very much keener to turn out and register a strong protest vote .
But it's interesting right? that people say the online polls have UKIP too HIGH and not the other way around!
You really are a dismal piece of work Plato.
Damian , the answer to your last question is clearly Yes . A national VI poll for a GE some 2 years in the future with a turnout of 60 % is going to have a very different result in local elections tomorrow with a turnout of 30 % especially when one party is very much keener to turn out and register a strong protest vote .
The standard polling question however asks how you would vote if there was a GE TOMORROW though right? not "2 years in the future"
If everybody is so happy with the status quo on energy prices tim, then why freezing them just about the only recognisable policy we've had out of ed miliband since he took over as leader?
If the PB tories are out of touch on energy prices, then so is ed. Why doesn't he just say everything is fine if there's such support for the status quo, like the lib dems are doing?
Because people are not happy with energy prices?
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News/Prime-Minister-David-Cameron-visits-Cambridge-and-says-city-offers-a-great-example-to-others-20131014170225.htm
"The Prime Minister was in Cambridge today to meet the entrepreneurs helping to drive the country’s economic recovery.
David Cameron, who arrived in a Land Rover with an entourage of bodyguards and advisers, chose Cambridge for the two-hour visit because of its reputation in spawning successful new businesses - as he publicised plans to boost jobs by cutting companies’ tax bill"
If you still have time to debate these things - how to you reconcile the relatively small gap between UKIP support for Euro and GE elections? Surely UKIP will far outperform at Euro level?
What the McCanns did was, under English law, a criminal offence. Maybe the law is different in Portugal but the basic principle is the same wherever you are. It is a criminal offence to leave children alone if doing so puts them at risk. Given the circumstances it seems that that is exactly what was done in this case.
The standard polling question however asks how you would vote if there was a GE TOMORROW though right? not "2 years in the future"
That is true but everyone answering knows that there is not going to be a GE tomorrow and perhaps the majority know the next GE is 2 years away . Actually looking at the wordings of ICM and Populus they do not actually mention the word TOMORROW in their question
It's definitely interesting. We'd have much less to talk about on pbc if there werent issues like this to debate. As a lefty I'd be delighted for the right to splinter this badly but when putting money on it I'll be basing my views on the more traditional approach.
If you still have time to debate these things - how to you reconcile the relatively small gap between UKIP support for Euro and GE elections? Surely UKIP will far outperform at Euro level?
==> I don't think people are thinking much about their European election choices just yet. I would expect UKIP to do a lot better than our Sunday poll showed by May. Looking at the evidence - e.g. the cross-party responses to IN/OUT referendum etc - it's clear that UKIP's message on the EU has lots of support among CON voters (and LD/LAB voters). Farage asking people to "lend" their vote will be persuasive, and differential turnout should help them. At the moment I would say a tight race between UKIP and LAB for 1st with CON a more distant 3rd.
Not at all OA (UKIP)
Source:
Old EU (Fr/De/Sp): 5 (8)
New EU (Po/Lat/Rom): 15 (29)
Old Commonwealth (Oz, NZ, SA): 5 (4)
New Commonwealth: (Ind/Pak/Bdesh): 15 (30)
USA: 6 (6)
Far E developed(Japan/Ko/Taiwan): 11 (19)
Middle East (Saudi/Egypt/UAE): 19 (40)
Latin America (Mex/Arg/Bra): 14 (26)
Other Developing (Rus/Chin/Indo): 13 (25)
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Full-Sky-News-Immigration-Tables.pdf
Why am I not surprised?
The standard polling question however asks how you would vote if there was a GE TOMORROW though right? not "2 years in the future"
That is true but everyone answering knows that there is not going to be a GE tomorrow and perhaps the majority know the next GE is 2 years away . Actually looking at the wordings of ICM and Populus they do not actually mention the word TOMORROW in their question
This is how Mr. Wells has listed:
MORI: How would you vote if there were a General Election held tomorrow? Would you vote… Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat [rotate order] or for some other party
ICM: If there were to be a general election tomorrow which party do you think you would vote for? Conservative/Labour/Liberal Democrat/Other?
YouGov: If there were a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, Scottish Nationalist/Plaid cymru, some other party, would not vote, don’t know
Populus: If the general election was tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Would it be [rotate order] Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, or another party – or would you not vote at all?
Communicate Research: If there were a general election tomorrow, would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat or some other party?
I suppose after claiming the scrapman for 0, a swift kick out of Govt and now retirement - it was inevitable. Where can you go once your career has peaked....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6694999.stm
Besides, your oh-so-predictable rant against PB Tories misses the fact that I for one was not arguing over the price of energy (which, outside f new developments, can only go up long-term), but about the issues of investment and energy security. I've been fairly consistent on these concerns, even before Ed's stupidity.
This is how Mr. Wells has listed:
MORI: How would you vote if there were a General Election held tomorrow? Would you vote… Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat [rotate order] or for some other party
ICM: If there were to be a general election tomorrow which party do you think you would vote for? Conservative/Labour/Liberal Democrat/Other?
YouGov: If there were a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, Scottish Nationalist/Plaid cymru, some other party, would not vote, don’t know
Populus: If the general election was tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Would it be [rotate order] Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, or another party – or would you not vote at all?
Communicate Research: If there were a general election tomorrow, would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat or some other party?
Yes OK , interesting that some of ICM questions do mention the word TOMORROW and others just say A NEW GE , doubt ut makes any difference to the responses .
http://www.conservativehome.com/leftwatch/2013/10/priti-patel-letter-to-ed-miliband-reject-unite-donations-until-mccluskey-pays-the-unions-missing-vat-millions.html
Cameron intervened into operational police matters to please elements of the media. I dont think that's a great way to run the country.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/10373750/Are-politicians-about-to-start-tinkering-with-Isas.html
The most likely change IMO is to disallow further contributions once a max lifetime contribution limit has been reached, rather than to attempt to snaffle back what's already been subscribed (although who knows, under PM Miliband?).
I'm not saying this is imminent - in fact I'm fairly sure it's not - but it's bound to be considered in the future. Personally, I aim to lock in as much tax-free savings as I can afford. If you can afford the full £11K a year, or £22K for a couple, in a few years you can have a tidy sum producing a respectable income, as a very useful supplement to pensions for those of us who have to pay for our own.
[This is not financial advice, do your own research etc etc]
There are still a frightening number of people who believe that they did nothing wrong at all and see them purely as victims.
Yes OK , interesting that some of ICM questions do mention the word TOMORROW and others just say A NEW GE , doubt ut makes any difference to the responses .
=> I'm not really making any point about wording of the VI prompt but the difference in our approach is this.
I don't believe that the job of a pollster is to somehow "second guess" what the voters REALLY mean for 2015. I see it as our job to accurately reflect current public opinion.
UKIP's support may evaporate after the Euros as most people hope it will but I'd prefer to wait for that to happen on an evidence basis rather than pre-judge.
Immigrants have made it easier for me to find tradesmen and other workers who can provide a cost effective service (net agree)
Con: -15
Lab: -4
Lib Dem: +18
UKIP: -55
But, in a general election, people are generally forced to choose between one of two parties, which will squeeze UKIP down to the level of support shown by telephone pollsters.
Guardian/ICM poll records two-point increases for Labour and Tories but fall of two percentage points for Lib Dems
Monday 14 October 2013 18.00 BST
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/14/conference-season-bounce-labour-tories-poll
My personal unsubstantiated theory is that the crusty retired colonel wing of UKIP is likely to revert I large numbers to the Tories for fear of Ed. However the working class ex labour anti-politics northern wing is mu h more likely to stick to its UKIP guns being immune to southern metro Ed's charms.
Fatty Bolger
"capping the energy prices because that helps struggling households".
Unlike ICM to ask such a leading question. They're usually more professional.
http://www.amazon.com/They-Are-My-Children-Too/dp/1891620150
Green Tax Party 34 +2
Huhnites 12 -2
Kipper Ties 8 -1
Once you can provide those details you might then be able to start to build a case that Cameron is making an exceptional intervention rather than just throwing around spurious accusations.
I dont believe this family had the backing of said tabloid (or had sold book rights to them): http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/191278/Missing-Ben-Needham-call-to-David-Cameron
So again tell me why this is Cameron making a special exceptional intervention?
Edit: And I note you then immediately drop the Needham case when your argument is disproved.
You didnt "prove" anything about the Needham case. That family asked Cameron for help privately - they didnt get the response that the McCann's did when they asked via the front page of a national tabloid. That could be down to the reasons you gave. Or it could be down to not having such intense backing from a major media group that Cameron felt compelled to intervene in operational police matters. People will make up their own minds about that.
I'm bemused how you can consider your take on this to be superior considering neither of us can know for certain what Cameron was really thinking.
I on the other hand have already said that I do not know what his reasoning was and without any other evidence and given the obvious responsibility of the government in the case I am willing to accept his intervention at face value rather than claiming it was for any ulterior motive.
Prove it otherwise or accept you are wrong.