politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The issues: Which parties are seen to be best
The chart above shows the latest YouGov best party on specific issues tracker. Today’s figures are not remarkable but I thought it useful to post as a reference point.
I'm not sure that the economy ever becomes an unimportant issue.
That said, I would expect the message will be "we've made great progress, let us finish the job" or some kind of variant. (combined with get rid of the LibDem monkey on our back*)
* Not afraid of being accused of being racist by using the term "monkey" as the LibDems don't have any non-white MPs...
I'm curious that most topics polarise voters between the Conservatives and Labour, with the exception of "Europe" and to a lesser extent Immigration and Education.
What's interesting for me is that Labour is in the lead on only 3 topics but on two: jobs and education the lead is quite small and, potentially, vulnerable (more so on jobs I'd have thought).
Also the Tory's lead on Europe is - considering how much they go on about it - relatively small.
I'm not sure that the economy ever becomes an unimportant issue.
That said, I would expect the message will be "we've made great progress, let us finish the job" or some kind of variant. (combined with get rid of the LibDem monkey on our back*)
* Not afraid of being accused of being racist by using the term "monkey" as the LibDems don't have any non-white MPs...
I'm not sure that the economy ever becomes an unimportant issue.
That said, I would expect the message will be "we've made great progress, let us finish the job" or some kind of variant. (combined with get rid of the LibDem monkey on our back*)
* Not afraid of being accused of being racist by using the term "monkey" as the LibDems don't have any non-white MPs...
The polling suggests that the LDs are seen as restraining the Tories from their baser instincts.
One possible conclusion from the chart is that the LibDems really haven't got a USP; there's no issue which stands out as one they might own, out of those listed. Perhaps they would do better to concentrate their messaging much more heavily on one or at most two specific areas - Europe or Education, perhaps.
What's interesting for me is that Labour is in the lead on only 3 topics but on two: jobs and education the lead is quite small and, potentially, vulnerable (more so on jobs I'd have thought).
Also the Tory's lead on Europe is - considering how much they go on about it - relatively small.
Miles ahead on Jobs health and education in the marginals polling though. And nobody cares about Europe
Miles ahead on jobs ? and by the graph you could debate on education.
What's interesting for me is that Labour is in the lead on only 3 topics but on two: jobs and education the lead is quite small and, potentially, vulnerable (more so on jobs I'd have thought).
Also the Tory's lead on Europe is - considering how much they go on about it - relatively small.
Miles ahead on Jobs health and education in the marginals polling though. And nobody cares about Europe
Is there a link for the marginals polling you quote? Thanks.
UKIP should be included in these questions, as with Best PM.
The most encouraging numbers for the Conservatives are the big lead on the economy, and the fact they're almost level-pegging with Labour on Jobs, an area of historic Labour strength,
One possible conclusion from the chart is that the LibDems really haven't got a USP; there's no issue which stands out as one they might own, out of those listed. Perhaps they would do better to concentrate their messaging much more heavily on one or at most two specific areas - Europe or Education, perhaps.
What's interesting for me is that Labour is in the lead on only 3 topics but on two: jobs and education the lead is quite small and, potentially, vulnerable (more so on jobs I'd have thought).
Also the Tory's lead on Europe is - considering how much they go on about it - relatively small.
Miles ahead on Jobs health and education in the marginals polling though. And nobody cares about Europe
Is there a link for the marginals polling you quote? Thanks.
UKIP should be included in these questions, as with Best PM.
The most encouraging numbers for the Conservatives are the big lead on the economy, and the fact they're almost level-pegging with Labour on Jobs, an area of historic Labour strength,
An interesting sub section of jobs would be creating and preserving jobs.
There's a good chance the Tories would be seen as better at creating jobs. Labour would be seen as better at preserving existing jobs.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 18s BREAKING: Sir John Major calls for George Osborne to impose a new profits tax on energy companies to help struggling consumers
What's interesting for me is that Labour is in the lead on only 3 topics but on two: jobs and education the lead is quite small and, potentially, vulnerable (more so on jobs I'd have thought).
Also the Tory's lead on Europe is - considering how much they go on about it - relatively small.
Miles ahead on Jobs health and education in the marginals polling though. And nobody cares about Europe
Is there a link for the marginals polling you quote? Thanks.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 35s BREAKING: Sir John Major calls for George Osborne to impose a new profits tax on energy companies to help struggling consumers.
LOL.
Masterstroke.
"God they've got us on this power thing what on earth are we going to do? We've committed ourselves to opposing it but they [gestures outside to the public] seem to like it. We're sc****ed. Any ideas Lynton?"
"Well....isn't John Major a Tory, a non-posho, quite a popular PM if you see what I mean. Let's get him to float some response. Say a tax or something.
"People will love that..Tories..men of the people...sensible ideas...and we can claim it will generate the right sort of debate."
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 35s BREAKING: Sir John Major calls for George Osborne to impose a new profits tax on energy companies to help struggling consumers.
LOL.
On this,major living in the real world with the idea of switching looking sillier.
UKIP should be included in these questions, as with Best PM.
The most encouraging numbers for the Conservatives are the big lead on the economy, and the fact they're almost level-pegging with Labour on Jobs, an area of historic Labour strength,
An interesting sub section of jobs would be creating and preserving jobs.
There's a good chance the Tories would be seen as better at creating jobs. Labour would be seen as better at preserving existing jobs.
"George Osborne’s economic plan won the backing of one of the biggest figures in global finance yesterday.
Alan Greenspan, who was chairman of the US Federal Reserve for nearly 20 years, said Britain’s austerity programme is working.
Record high levels of employment and the recent pick-up in economic output showed he was wrong to doubt the Coalition’s efforts to eradicate the deficit, he admitted.
His comments, in an interview with the BBC, came at the start of another crucial week for the economy amid signs that the recovery is gaining momentum.
Official figures are expected to show today that the Government borrowed less last month than in September last year.
A separate report on Friday is likely to show economic growth in the third quarter of the year was even stronger than the 0.7 per cent clocked up in the second quarter.
Mr Greenspan, 87, who ran the Fed from 1987 to 2006, said he was surprised the economy was managing to grow at all given the scale of cuts planned by the Chancellor.
‘What Britain has done with its austerity programme has worked much better than I thought it would,’ he said.
‘I have had discussions with George Osborne and others and as far as I can judge, it is coming out pretty much the way they had expected.’"
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 18s BREAKING: Sir John Major calls for George Osborne to impose a new profits tax on energy companies to help struggling consumers
I should imagine the energy companies will foil him by refusing to make much profit.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 4m John Major has just made George Osborne cancel all his afternoon meetings. Kicked over a hornets' nest re emergency energy profits tax
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 35s BREAKING: Sir John Major calls for George Osborne to impose a new profits tax on energy companies to help struggling consumers.
LOL.
On this,major living in the real world with the idea of switching looking sillier.
The problem is that energy use has been seen for many years as a "bad" thing. Whether it's the petrol tax "escalator" or green taxes.
The second problem is that all major parties have been wedded to this, so it's hard to undo. Miliband was previously happy with more and more taxes on energy.
An extra tax or a price freeze will only hit consumers later down the the line, but if that's what the people want...
Caught ITV's The Agenda last night, Ed Miliband's energy price fix didn't fair well at all. Anthony Horowitz was as usual an interesting and well informed guest on the panel, Nick Clegg not so much last night.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 18s BREAKING: Sir John Major calls for George Osborne to impose a new profits tax on energy companies to help struggling consumers
I should imagine the energy companies will foil him by refusing to make much profit.
Tomorrows PMQs, Miliband uses Major to whack the out of touch PM round the head repeatedly.
What does Ed think is a fair level of profit for an energy company ?
"Oliver Cooper @OliverCooper 7m John Major calls for a tax on energy companies' "windfall profits". What windfall profits? Their average profit margin is under 5%."
Mike - this polling kind of sucks for me. Not the outcomes but the methodology:
WTF does 'Best on the NHS' mean? Best at preserving the status quo? Best at serving patients' needs? Best at driving efficiency? Best at protecting the BMA? The NHS is not without huge flaws and is in need of reform - patient interest driven reform. Is the challenge not to preserve but reform the NHS? Very woolly wording.
On jobs: Well Labour can borrow and spend and create public sector jobs with the 'best' of them. The Tories maybe represent bad news for public sector employment but much better news for employment generally. What is the question asking? Is spending money on non-jobs a good thing or a bad thing? I'd say bad. Others would say good.
Good afternoon all and well done Sir John Major for saying it as he sees it. A remarkable man, DC and the High Command should be wheeling him out as a weapon against the empty rhetoric of the Labour front bench.
The energy companies need a shake up and if takes an emergency tax on them to bring them to their senses, so be it. Someone should point out to all Westminster village occupants that there are large parts of the country where houses are not heated by gas or electricity. Both oil and solid fuel are prohibitively expensive.
That brings me to Grangemouth. I wonder what Eck will do if the American owner announces tomorrow that he will only re-open the plant if the workforce becomes non-unionised and demands UNITE is sent packing.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Mike - this polling kind of sucks for me. Not the outcomes but the methodology:
WTF does 'Best on the NHS' mean? Best at preserving the status quo? Best at serving patients' needs? Best at driving efficiency? Best at protecting the BMA? The NHS is not without huge flaws and is in need of reform - patient interest driven reform. Is the challenge not to preserve but reform the NHS? Very woolly wording.
On jobs: Well Labour can borrow and spend and create public sector jobs with the 'best' of them. The Tories maybe represent bad news for public sector employment but much better news for employment generally. What is the question asking? Is spending money on non-jobs a good thing or a bad thing? I'd say bad. Others would say good.
The questions should be alot sharper.
It lets the voters decide what it is about the NHS that is most important to them that they think their chosen party is best at, rather than the opinion pollster deciding what the issue is beforehand. That has to make it more relevant.
Where it would be interesting would be in comparing the views of specific groups of voters - which is what tim has picked up on by pointing out the views of 2010 Lib Dems who have switched to Labour.
The Labour party then run the danger of being seen as reacting to the Government's agenda, and therefore being bounced into such a pledge at the last minute. Not good politics, if they were going to back it, they should have come out and done so by now to reap any benefits. It also makes you wonder why they have not yet chosen to with the Euro's looming next year.
"George Osborne’s economic plan won the backing of one of the biggest figures in global finance yesterday.
Alan Greenspan, who was chairman of the US Federal Reserve for nearly 20 years, said Britain’s austerity programme is working.
Record high levels of employment and the recent pick-up in economic output showed he was wrong to doubt the Coalition’s efforts to eradicate the deficit, he admitted.
His comments, in an interview with the BBC, came at the start of another crucial week for the economy amid signs that the recovery is gaining momentum.
Official figures are expected to show today that the Government borrowed less last month than in September last year.
A separate report on Friday is likely to show economic growth in the third quarter of the year was even stronger than the 0.7 per cent clocked up in the second quarter.
Mr Greenspan, 87, who ran the Fed from 1987 to 2006, said he was surprised the economy was managing to grow at all given the scale of cuts planned by the Chancellor.
‘What Britain has done with its austerity programme has worked much better than I thought it would,’ he said.
‘I have had discussions with George Osborne and others and as far as I can judge, it is coming out pretty much the way they had expected.’"
Given how wrong Greenspan got it in the lead-up to the credit crisis, that's not necessarily quite the endorsement one might wish for.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.
George Eaton @georgeeaton 3m Osborne was surely considering windfall tax on energy companies as a riposte to Labour. Major has destroyed element of surprise.
"George Osborne’s economic plan won the backing of one of the biggest figures in global finance yesterday.
Alan Greenspan, who was chairman of the US Federal Reserve for nearly 20 years, said Britain’s austerity programme is working.
Record high levels of employment and the recent pick-up in economic output showed he was wrong to doubt the Coalition’s efforts to eradicate the deficit, he admitted.
His comments, in an interview with the BBC, came at the start of another crucial week for the economy amid signs that the recovery is gaining momentum.
Official figures are expected to show today that the Government borrowed less last month than in September last year.
A separate report on Friday is likely to show economic growth in the third quarter of the year was even stronger than the 0.7 per cent clocked up in the second quarter.
Mr Greenspan, 87, who ran the Fed from 1987 to 2006, said he was surprised the economy was managing to grow at all given the scale of cuts planned by the Chancellor.
‘What Britain has done with its austerity programme has worked much better than I thought it would,’ he said.
‘I have had discussions with George Osborne and others and as far as I can judge, it is coming out pretty much the way they had expected.’"
Given how wrong Greenspan got it in the lead-up to the credit crisis, that's not necessarily quite the endorsement one might wish for.
"George Osborne’s economic plan won the backing of one of the biggest figures in global finance yesterday.
Alan Greenspan, who was chairman of the US Federal Reserve for nearly 20 years, said Britain’s austerity programme is working.
Record high levels of employment and the recent pick-up in economic output showed he was wrong to doubt the Coalition’s efforts to eradicate the deficit, he admitted.
His comments, in an interview with the BBC, came at the start of another crucial week for the economy amid signs that the recovery is gaining momentum.
Official figures are expected to show today that the Government borrowed less last month than in September last year.
A separate report on Friday is likely to show economic growth in the third quarter of the year was even stronger than the 0.7 per cent clocked up in the second quarter.
Mr Greenspan, 87, who ran the Fed from 1987 to 2006, said he was surprised the economy was managing to grow at all given the scale of cuts planned by the Chancellor.
‘What Britain has done with its austerity programme has worked much better than I thought it would,’ he said.
‘I have had discussions with George Osborne and others and as far as I can judge, it is coming out pretty much the way they had expected.’"
Fitalass, why are you quoting this ? Do you think being endorsed by Greenspan is a positive development ? The man who didn't see the biggest credit crunch coming up !
Good afternoon all and well done Sir John Major for saying it as he sees it. A remarkable man, DC and the High Command should be wheeling him out as a weapon against the empty rhetoric of the Labour front bench.
The energy companies need a shake up and if takes an emergency tax on them to bring them to their senses, so be it. Someone should point out to all Westminster village occupants that there are large parts of the country where houses are not heated by gas or electricity. Both oil and solid fuel are prohibitively expensive.
That brings me to Grangemouth. I wonder what Eck will do if the American owner announces tomorrow that he will only re-open the plant if the workforce becomes non-unionised and demands UNITE is sent packing.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Unite have well and truly stuffed negotiations at Grangemouth , 50% already accepted and more will join as the total closure looms. Ineos are going to win big time, just a pity the workforce were stupid enough to follow unite and Labour. They will pay a heavy price.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.
Pay rises all round !
You may have missed this on the previous thread
"Given you've obviously researched this what % of the costs at Grangemouth are A.Labour costs. B.Final salary pension cost not funded by pension funds"
The Labour party then run the danger of being seen as reacting to the Government's agenda, and therefore being bounced into such a pledge at the last minute. Not good politics, if they were going to back it, they should have come out and done so by now to reap any benefits. It also makes you wonder why they have not yet chosen to with the Euro's looming next year.
"George Osborne’s economic plan won the backing of one of the biggest figures in global finance yesterday.
Alan Greenspan, who was chairman of the US Federal Reserve for nearly 20 years, said Britain’s austerity programme is working.
Record high levels of employment and the recent pick-up in economic output showed he was wrong to doubt the Coalition’s efforts to eradicate the deficit, he admitted.
His comments, in an interview with the BBC, came at the start of another crucial week for the economy amid signs that the recovery is gaining momentum.
Official figures are expected to show today that the Government borrowed less last month than in September last year.
A separate report on Friday is likely to show economic growth in the third quarter of the year was even stronger than the 0.7 per cent clocked up in the second quarter.
Mr Greenspan, 87, who ran the Fed from 1987 to 2006, said he was surprised the economy was managing to grow at all given the scale of cuts planned by the Chancellor.
‘What Britain has done with its austerity programme has worked much better than I thought it would,’ he said.
‘I have had discussions with George Osborne and others and as far as I can judge, it is coming out pretty much the way they had expected.’"
Given how wrong Greenspan got it in the lead-up to the credit crisis, that's not necessarily quite the endorsement one might wish for.
Failed American praises useless Tory , huzzah all is well in the UK
Greenspan was on R4 yesterday being interviewed by Evan Davies. I think I feel a book coming on.
Seemed quite spritely for his very considerable age but not particularly convincing on dealing with bubbles. He was quick to correct Evan and point out that the wheels came off 3 years after he stood down not 2 but that was really the case for the defence.
At least he is still willing to look at the facts rather than simply espouse his own prejudices.
Sir John Major sounds as though he has been having a lot of fun today. It must be great being a former Prime Minister sometimes.
Tim Shipman (Mail) @ShippersUnbound 4m John Major in summary: Tories should have a heart. Eurosceptics are still wrong and still bastards. Energy companies deserve a windfall
Tomorrows PMQs, Miliband uses Major to whack the out of touch PM round the head repeatedly.
Unless, of course, Major is trailing what may appear in Osborne's Autumn Statement.....
Well if Osborne was considering it it'll look even more reactive now.
Indeed. I think the Tories undestimate how infuriated people are by the energy companies. My husband, who has no time at all for Labour (or the Tories, for that matter), would happily see the Chief Executives of all the energy companies hung, drawn and quartered.......
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.
Pay rises all round !
You may have missed this on the previous thread
"Given you've obviously researched this what % of the costs at Grangemouth are A.Labour costs. B.Final salary pension cost not funded by pension funds"
These are both major problems, hence the condition of closing the final salary pension scheme and the changes in conditions, but they are not the problem.
The problem is that the feed stock from the North sea is running out and the site needs to substantially improve it's harbour access to obtain more base material to work the site at anything like full capacity. There has to be an economic case for that capital investment and at the moment there simply isn't.
Without the new investment the site will die. It does not look good. A government that had Scotland's interests at heart would be moving heaven and earth to involve Westminster on this and try to find a way to subsidise the capital needs without falling foul of EU law. But I can't see that happening either.
"Revenge, they say, is a dish best eaten cold. Sir John Major has waited a very long time – 20 years to be precise. And he has chosen to eat it in the press gallery dining room.
Back in 1993 Iain Duncan Smith led the opposition to John Major over Maastricht. Over the gallery lunch today Mr Major led the opposition to Iain Duncan Smith over welfare reform: "Unless Iain Duncan Smith is very lucky, which he may not be, or a genius, which is unproven, he may get some of it wrong."
I thought it quite significant that John Swinney was keen to emphasis that the Scottish Government was now working in partnership with the Westminster Government to find a solution to the dispute on Scotland Tonight last night. But the sheer extent to which relations have now broken down between INEOS and Unite has to be the biggest stumbling block to finding a workable solution at Grangemouth? Neither appear prepared to back down, no matter how high the stakes.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.
Pay rises all round !
You may have missed this on the previous thread
"Given you've obviously researched this what % of the costs at Grangemouth are A.Labour costs. B.Final salary pension cost not funded by pension funds"
These are both major problems, hence the condition of closing the final salary pension scheme and the changes in conditions, but they are not the problem.
The problem is that the feed stock from the North sea is running out and the site needs to substantially improve it's harbour access to obtain more base material to work the site at anything like full capacity. There has to be an economic case for that capital investment and at the moment there simply isn't.
Without the new investment the site will die. It does not look good. A government that had Scotland's interests at heart would be moving heaven and earth to involve Westminster on this and try to find a way to subsidise the capital needs without falling foul of EU law. But I can't see that happening either.
Labour must surely be disappointed to not be doing better on jobs. If the recovery does get/continue going to the election then (essentially) "the wrong sort of recovery" is going to be the natural Labour line - benefitting the rich, too few jobs, that sort of thing.
The problem with arguing that Labour has a lead on issues such as jobs and living standards when the Tories have a lead on the economy is that jobs and living standards are dependent on the economy.
Sustainable improvements in living standards and reductions in unemployment cannot happen independently of fixing the economy (defining the 'economy' simplistically as growth).
Of course this economic truth may not translate into popular perception. Voters may believe that unemployment can be reduced and living standards improved without the economy being managed competently.
But to accept such perceptions at face value implies the assumption that voters are ignorant of the facts. This would be unwise.
The inconsistency of a Tory lead on the economy with a Labour lead on unemployment more likely results from different perceptions about the nature of the tasks associated with each issue. Fixing the economy may be seen as a 'hard task', involving cuts and tax rises and reductions in services, whereas fixing 'jobs' may be seen more as a 'soft task' caring for the jobless, the vulnerable and disadvantaged.
It may well be that Labour scores highly on tasks requiring a soft, caring approach whereas the Tories do better when a tough approach is needed. So the fact that the Tories are rated higher on the economy and Labour on jobs may simply reflect public perceptions about the best approach to solving each type of problem.
If this is the case then there will be not only a prioritised list of issues in the public's mind but a hierarchy of approaches. In economic downtimes, a 'hard' approach may be perceived as being more effective and necessary than a 'soft' approach. A voter might feel that Labour would be better than the Tories in dealing with the unemployed but that the economy needs fixing first making a Conservative or Coalition government overall the better of the two options.
It would be interesting to see some pollsters getting respondents to rank not only issues on salience but their attitudes to the differing types of approach to problem solving and to see whether certain issues are dependent on others..
I thought it quite significant that John Swinney was keen to emphasis that the Scottish Government was now working in partnership with the Westminster Government to find a solution to the dispute on Scotland Tonight last night.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.
Pay rises all round !
You may have missed this on the previous thread
"Given you've obviously researched this what % of the costs at Grangemouth are A.Labour costs. B.Final salary pension cost not funded by pension funds"
These are both major problems, hence the condition of closing the final salary pension scheme and the changes in conditions, but they are not the problem.
The problem is that the feed stock from the North sea is running out and the site needs to substantially improve it's harbour access to obtain more base material to work the site at anything like full capacity. There has to be an economic case for that capital investment and at the moment there simply isn't.
Without the new investment the site will die. It does not look good. A government that had Scotland's interests at heart would be moving heaven and earth to involve Westminster on this and try to find a way to subsidise the capital needs without falling foul of EU law. But I can't see that happening either.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.
Pay rises all round !
You may have missed this on the previous thread
"Given you've obviously researched this what % of the costs at Grangemouth are A.Labour costs. B.Final salary pension cost not funded by pension funds"
These are both major problems, hence the condition of closing the final salary pension scheme and the changes in conditions, but they are not the problem.
The problem is that the feed stock from the North sea is running out and the site needs to substantially improve it's harbour access to obtain more base material to work the site at anything like full capacity. There has to be an economic case for that capital investment and at the moment there simply isn't.
Without the new investment the site will die. It does not look good. A government that had Scotland's interests at heart would be moving heaven and earth to involve Westminster on this and try to find a way to subsidise the capital needs without falling foul of EU law. But I can't see that happening either.
Correct - £10M a month in salary savings is not feasible from 1,500 workers - as smarter trolls would have noticed
So they need to increase revenue too.
Good news for Salmond is that it prob wont close before next Sept.
However for an "oil rich" nation to have to import 80% of it's petrol is embarrassing at best.
Absolutely. Bernard Ponsonby was reporting that Alex Salmond's Office has been turned into a branch of ACAS over the last week, but apparently with little success.....
I thought it quite significant that John Swinney was keen to emphasis that the Scottish Government was now working in partnership with the Westminster Government to find a solution to the dispute on Scotland Tonight last night.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.
Pay rises all round !
You may have missed this on the previous thread
"Given you've obviously researched this what % of the costs at Grangemouth are A.Labour costs. B.Final salary pension cost not funded by pension funds"
These are both major problems, hence the condition of closing the final salary pension scheme and the changes in conditions, but they are not the problem.
The problem is that the feed stock from the North sea is running out and the site needs to substantially improve it's harbour access to obtain more base material to work the site at anything like full capacity. There has to be an economic case for that capital investment and at the moment there simply isn't.
Without the new investment the site will die. It does not look good. A government that had Scotland's interests at heart would be moving heaven and earth to involve Westminster on this and try to find a way to subsidise the capital needs without falling foul of EU law. But I can't see that happening either.
"Operator Ineos will tell workers at 10 a.m. (0900 GMT) on Wednesday if the Grangemouth oil refinery in Scotland will close down permanently, it said in a statement."
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 35s BREAKING: Sir John Major calls for George Osborne to impose a new profits tax on energy companies to help struggling consumers.
Jeremy Hunt @Jeremy_Hunt Need to know will Lab vote to raise 500m 4 NHS from overseas visitors; is it 'diversionary', 'xenophobic' or fairness for British taxpayers?
Interesting snippet from the Culture Committee evidence as we've often chewed it over without knowing for sure:
Hall revealed the make-up of the audience for Question Time. It was 30% Conservative supporters, 30% Labour supporters, 10% Lib Dems, 10% Ukip or another minor party, 5% others and 15% don't knows, he said.
IF Grangemouth closes, it will be interesting to see if either the SNP or Labour attempt to make political capital out of it in the Dunfermline bye-election
When MG Rover closed in the run up to the 2005 GE, Con & Labour treated it as a 'natural disaster' and neither side sought to apportion blame...
Always had a soft spot for Major - a much underestimated politician IMO who defied political gravity to win in 1992 and then got five years of futile badger baiting from the frothing Tory right for his troubles. A cricket fan and a decent human being - sounds like good stuff from the old campaigner today.
Major's speech has highlighted something about the modern Tory Party that has puzzled me for a while. Just when, and why, did they become so ideological, Rightwing, and - frankly - downright unpleasant?
A successful modern Tory Party should surely be, excuse the phrase, One Nation? Broadly liberal and inclusive, supportive of small business and community enterprise, of individual endevour but finding ways to give the hard-pressed a leg up, champions of efficient free markets but not afraid to intervene, suspicious of but not outright hostile to the power of the State as force for good, etc.
Instead we have the current crop sticking up for a rotten little clutch of massive energy companies, consistently demonising or at best dismissing those in poverty or unemployment, attacking charities and trade unions, doing fiscal favours for millionaires and big business, farming out chunks of our NHS to big business. Go home vans....go home vans!
It's baffling, because the centre is where the votes are. Instead, their wait for a majority looks like extending to 28 years at least. Cameron's detox PR was briefly promising, but never had any substance. Instead they seem wedded to a warped, corporatist ultra-Thatcherite ideology.
Sir John gave a glimpse of a Tory Party I could almost vote for. Hard-nosed and pragmatic, but not the Nasty Party it has once again become.
"Revenge, they say, is a dish best eaten cold. Sir John Major has waited a very long time – 20 years to be precise. And he has chosen to eat it in the press gallery dining room.
Back in 1993 Iain Duncan Smith led the opposition to John Major over Maastricht. Over the gallery lunch today Mr Major led the opposition to Iain Duncan Smith over welfare reform: "Unless Iain Duncan Smith is very lucky, which he may not be, or a genius, which is unproven, he may get some of it wrong."
Grangemouth could become the new Polmaise where the only thing the trade unions achieved was the closure of the plant and total job losses for all concerned.
The new owners of the Coop Bank could call in Ed and Ed and ask how they intend to repay their indebtedness, failing which call in Labour's overdraft and borrowings.
Ed and Ed could have an interesting time on Friday explaining how the UK economy is stagnating.
I saw him speak at a dinner once - much more impressive in person than on the TV - he was also very clear eyed about the Euro - 'Helmut' saw it as a way of anchoring Eastern Europe into the West, while 'Mitterand' wanted a seat on the board of the Bundesbank.....it was transparent what he thought of their respective motives.....
I assume we are in for lots of outlier polls in the next couple of weeks. Should be fun watching everyone argue over whether something is margin of error or more significant while the wider population get their priorities right with Halloween, Guy Fawkes, Strictly and X Factor.
Grangemouth could become the new Polmaise where the only thing the trade unions achieved was the closure of the plant and total job losses for all concerned.
The new owners of the Coop Bank could call in Ed and Ed and ask how they intend to repay their indebtedness, failing which call in Labour's overdraft and borrowings.
Ed and Ed could have an interesting time on Friday explaining how the UK economy is stagnating.
Ed could be in for an interesting time, explaining how his Unite 'bosses' have managed to force the closure of a major piece of energy infrastucture.
Grangemouth could become the new Polmaise where the only thing the trade unions achieved was the closure of the plant and total job losses for all concerned.
The new owners of the Coop Bank could call in Ed and Ed and ask how they intend to repay their indebtedness, failing which call in Labour's overdraft and borrowings.
Ed and Ed could have an interesting time on Friday explaining how the UK economy is stagnating.
Ed could be in for an interesting time, explaining how his Unite 'bosses' have managed to force the closure of a major piece of energy infrastucture.
Comments
That said, I would expect the message will be "we've made great progress, let us finish the job" or some kind of variant. (combined with get rid of the LibDem monkey on our back*)
* Not afraid of being accused of being racist by using the term "monkey" as the LibDems don't have any non-white MPs...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24626422
Also the Tory's lead on Europe is - considering how much they go on about it - relatively small.
"This tank is full of political promises..."
Arf!
Irony just sucks ...
The most encouraging numbers for the Conservatives are the big lead on the economy, and the fact they're almost level-pegging with Labour on Jobs, an area of historic Labour strength,
There's a good chance the Tories would be seen as better at creating jobs.
Labour would be seen as better at preserving existing jobs.
BREAKING: Sir John Major calls for George Osborne to impose a new profits tax on energy companies to help struggling consumers
"God they've got us on this power thing what on earth are we going to do? We've committed ourselves to opposing it but they [gestures outside to the public] seem to like it. We're sc****ed. Any ideas Lynton?"
"Well....isn't John Major a Tory, a non-posho, quite a popular PM if you see what I mean. Let's get him to float some response. Say a tax or something.
"People will love that..Tories..men of the people...sensible ideas...and we can claim it will generate the right sort of debate."
Job done.
"George Osborne’s economic plan won the backing of one of the biggest figures in global finance yesterday.
Alan Greenspan, who was chairman of the US Federal Reserve for nearly 20 years, said Britain’s austerity programme is working.
Record high levels of employment and the recent pick-up in economic output showed he was wrong to doubt the Coalition’s efforts to eradicate the deficit, he admitted.
His comments, in an interview with the BBC, came at the start of another crucial week for the economy amid signs that the recovery is gaining momentum.
Official figures are expected to show today that the Government borrowed less last month than in September last year.
A separate report on Friday is likely to show economic growth in the third quarter of the year was even stronger than the 0.7 per cent clocked up in the second quarter.
Mr Greenspan, 87, who ran the Fed from 1987 to 2006, said he was surprised the economy was managing to grow at all given the scale of cuts planned by the Chancellor.
‘What Britain has done with its austerity programme has worked much better than I thought it would,’ he said.
‘I have had discussions with George Osborne and others and as far as I can judge, it is coming out pretty much the way they had expected.’"
John Major has just made George Osborne cancel all his afternoon meetings. Kicked over a hornets' nest re emergency energy profits tax
The second problem is that all major parties have been wedded to this, so it's hard to undo. Miliband was previously happy with more and more taxes on energy.
An extra tax or a price freeze will only hit consumers later down the the line, but if that's what the people want...
"Oliver Cooper @OliverCooper 7m
John Major calls for a tax on energy companies' "windfall profits". What windfall profits? Their average profit margin is under 5%."
WTF does 'Best on the NHS' mean? Best at preserving the status quo? Best at serving patients' needs? Best at driving efficiency? Best at protecting the BMA? The NHS is not without huge flaws and is in need of reform - patient interest driven reform. Is the challenge not to preserve but reform the NHS? Very woolly wording.
On jobs: Well Labour can borrow and spend and create public sector jobs with the 'best' of them. The Tories maybe represent bad news for public sector employment but much better news for employment generally. What is the question asking? Is spending money on non-jobs a good thing or a bad thing? I'd say bad. Others would say good.
The questions should be alot sharper.
The energy companies need a shake up and if takes an emergency tax on them to bring them to their senses, so be it. Someone should point out to all Westminster village occupants that there are large parts of the country where houses are not heated by gas or electricity. Both oil and solid fuel are prohibitively expensive.
That brings me to Grangemouth. I wonder what Eck will do if the American owner announces tomorrow that he will only re-open the plant if the workforce becomes non-unionised and demands UNITE is sent packing.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Where it would be interesting would be in comparing the views of specific groups of voters - which is what tim has picked up on by pointing out the views of 2010 Lib Dems who have switched to Labour.
"I can say what I think now," says Sir John Major - and he certainly has #pressgallery #storyfest
Pay rises all round !
Osborne was surely considering windfall tax on energy companies as a riposte to Labour. Major has destroyed element of surprise.
Is he an ethical banker (misprint).
Conservative party "would be better off without Scotland" but UK wouldn't, Sir John Major tells #pressgallery
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24627442
B. £200M and rising.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/grangemouth-alex-salmond-in-hunt-for-buyer-1-3149580
#bbcqt panel this Thursday: @trussliz @CarolineFlintMP @timfarron @OwenJones84 and Peter Hitchens (@ClarkeMicah)
Seemed quite spritely for his very considerable age but not particularly convincing on dealing with bubbles. He was quick to correct Evan and point out that the wheels came off 3 years after he stood down not 2 but that was really the case for the defence.
At least he is still willing to look at the facts rather than simply espouse his own prejudices.
John Major in summary: Tories should have a heart. Eurosceptics are still wrong and still bastards. Energy companies deserve a windfall
He must have ;-)
EDIT: But it does explain Nick Clegg...!
RT @JihadWidow: I have been told twitter likes cat pics. Here is mine. Ally Ackbar!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BXLqI2yCYAE9eeF.jpg:large
The problem is that the feed stock from the North sea is running out and the site needs to substantially improve it's harbour access to obtain more base material to work the site at anything like full capacity. There has to be an economic case for that capital investment and at the moment there simply isn't.
Without the new investment the site will die. It does not look good. A government that had Scotland's interests at heart would be moving heaven and earth to involve Westminster on this and try to find a way to subsidise the capital needs without falling foul of EU law. But I can't see that happening either.
"Revenge, they say, is a dish best eaten cold. Sir John Major has waited a very long time – 20 years to be precise. And he has chosen to eat it in the press gallery dining room.
Back in 1993 Iain Duncan Smith led the opposition to John Major over Maastricht. Over the gallery lunch today Mr Major led the opposition to Iain Duncan Smith over welfare reform: "Unless Iain Duncan Smith is very lucky, which he may not be, or a genius, which is unproven, he may get some of it wrong."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100242545/sir-john-major-boosts-ed-miliband-and-undermines-his-old-enemy-iain-duncan-smith-this-is-what-revenge-looks-like/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-24622478
The LDs appear to be well down in third place on all major issues - except when beaten into fourth place by the ‘others’..!
Time to upgrade ‘dog-poo’ to major status, me thinks.
Sir John Major calls for windfall tax on energy profits
Sir John said the government should act if firms asked for unjustified price rises
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24621391#TWEET931203
What are the odds its leads @6?
Sustainable improvements in living standards and reductions in unemployment cannot happen independently of fixing the economy (defining the 'economy' simplistically as growth).
Of course this economic truth may not translate into popular perception. Voters may believe that unemployment can be reduced and living standards improved without the economy being managed competently.
But to accept such perceptions at face value implies the assumption that voters are ignorant of the facts. This would be unwise.
The inconsistency of a Tory lead on the economy with a Labour lead on unemployment more likely results from different perceptions about the nature of the tasks associated with each issue. Fixing the economy may be seen as a 'hard task', involving cuts and tax rises and reductions in services, whereas fixing 'jobs' may be seen more as a 'soft task' caring for the jobless, the vulnerable and disadvantaged.
It may well be that Labour scores highly on tasks requiring a soft, caring approach whereas the Tories do better when a tough approach is needed. So the fact that the Tories are rated higher on the economy and Labour on jobs may simply reflect public perceptions about the best approach to solving each type of problem.
If this is the case then there will be not only a prioritised list of issues in the public's mind but a hierarchy of approaches. In economic downtimes, a 'hard' approach may be perceived as being more effective and necessary than a 'soft' approach. A voter might feel that Labour would be better than the Tories in dealing with the unemployed but that the economy needs fixing first making a Conservative or Coalition government overall the better of the two options.
It would be interesting to see some pollsters getting respondents to rank not only issues on salience but their attitudes to the differing types of approach to problem solving and to see whether certain issues are dependent on others..
Nothing like getting plenty of impairment in on a good year - especially with the falling corp tax.
Still at least its a British company, seems 4 out of the 6 are actually spanish , french and 2 german
So they need to increase revenue too.
Good news for Salmond is that it prob wont close before next Sept.
However for an "oil rich" nation to have to import 80% of it's petrol is embarrassing at best.
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2013/10/intellectuals-in-politics.html
What interesting bedfellows you make....
http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/10/22/scotland-refinery-announcement-idINL5N0IC20S20131022
Given INEOS track, I'd guess 'closure'......
Jeremy Hunt @Jeremy_Hunt
Need to know will Lab vote to raise 500m 4 NHS from overseas visitors; is it 'diversionary', 'xenophobic' or fairness for British taxpayers?
Hall revealed the make-up of the audience for Question Time. It was 30% Conservative supporters, 30% Labour supporters, 10% Lib Dems, 10% Ukip or another minor party, 5% others and 15% don't knows, he said.
When MG Rover closed in the run up to the 2005 GE, Con & Labour treated it as a 'natural disaster' and neither side sought to apportion blame...
A successful modern Tory Party should surely be, excuse the phrase, One Nation? Broadly liberal and inclusive, supportive of small business and community enterprise, of individual endevour but finding ways to give the hard-pressed a leg up, champions of efficient free markets but not afraid to intervene, suspicious of but not outright hostile to the power of the State as force for good, etc.
Instead we have the current crop sticking up for a rotten little clutch of massive energy companies, consistently demonising or at best dismissing those in poverty or unemployment, attacking charities and trade unions, doing fiscal favours for millionaires and big business, farming out chunks of our NHS to big business. Go home vans....go home vans!
It's baffling, because the centre is where the votes are. Instead, their wait for a majority looks like extending to 28 years at least. Cameron's detox PR was briefly promising, but never had any substance. Instead they seem wedded to a warped, corporatist ultra-Thatcherite ideology.
Sir John gave a glimpse of a Tory Party I could almost vote for. Hard-nosed and pragmatic, but not the Nasty Party it has once again become.
Grangemouth could become the new Polmaise where the only thing the trade unions achieved was the closure of the plant and total job losses for all concerned.
The new owners of the Coop Bank could call in Ed and Ed and ask how they intend to repay their indebtedness, failing which call in Labour's overdraft and borrowings.
Ed and Ed could have an interesting time on Friday explaining how the UK economy is stagnating.
http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2013/10/21/brexit-process-would-be-messy/
Not that they'll listen.