politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Looking at the trend in YouGov polls since mid-Sept it does

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Looking at the trend in YouGov polls since mid-Sept it does seem that LAB has had 2-3 pc boost

Update : Labour lead at 9 – Latest YouGov/ The Sun results 28th October – Con 31%, Lab 40%, LD 9%, UKIP 12%; APP -28 http://t.co/xof1uRF0TJ

Read the full story here

dr_spyn

Premature thread or is it just waiting for another comment to keep it company?

dr_spyn

is this what Ed Balls meant by flat-lining.

NickPalmer

I think the core Labour vote at the moment is about 37-38 - when things are going well as now, it nudges up, but it's ages since it was below 37, except in polls with methodology favouring UKIP which have the Tories in the 20s. That's why I remain pretty confident about the election - there is no swingback to the Tories because there hasn't been a swing from the Tories, snd the swing that has happened, from the :anti-Tory LibDems, is the most solid element of British politics today.

SMukesh

Lead rising as the economy recovers-Not what the Tories expected.

The government had counted on sheer numbers but well done to Ed Miliband for pointing out that though GDP is rising,wages are falling and living costs are rising.

I see the government are again thrashing around on HS2.Eventually when the project is killed off as it`s becoming clear it will be,they will look even more ridiculous for spining this yarn.

Morris_Dancer

Betting Post

Backed Verdasco to beat Gasquet at 3.2 in the BNP Paribas Masters. They're 6:5 head-to-head, in Verdasco's favour, and he has a 3:1 advantage on hard surface (which they'll be playing on). More of a 50/50 than a 2/1 shot in my view.

I've also backed Cornet to beat Kirilenko in the Tournament of Champions, at 2.3. She has a 3:0 record, including 2 wins on hard (the surface they'll be playing on).

Flockers_pb

This looks right to me. Coupled with a slight hardening in Conservative support the net effect has been a slight but sustained increase in the Labour lead since the start of the conference season, by 1-1.5 pts. Against the background of a recovering economy it is disappointing for the Conservatives and indicative of the challenge they have closing that gap.

One of the risks for the Conservatives is that they are taking for granted that the public will give them the credit for the recovering economy. As some polling this weekend indicated (and as Peter Kellner noted in a recent blog), most people either do not believe the official figures or are not noticing the growth having a positive impact on them. If, as is perfectly possible (and not wildly significant) growth in Q4 falls from 0.8 to 0.4, it is as likely as not that the Government will be met with headlines along the lines "growth halves as questions emerge about the strength of the recovery". Meanwhile the opposition line on the difference between wage increases and inflation will continue to resonate. We still have 18 months to go before the election, and on the whole I expect the economy to be performing much better by then and to deliver a boost to both governing parties (assuming they don't blow it when they stage manage their divorce). But I don't think the recovering economy alone will be sufficiently decisive or important to carry the election for the Conservatives and therefore I think they need to develop a broader electoral strategy. Just what is their vision for a second term?

FluffyThoughts

Wee-Timmy,

Have you ever worked for the Wehrmacht? The tone of your reporting in very Radio Stalingrad, circa Xmas '42. Can you play another record: The Allies own Marlene dontchya know....

SMukesh

tim said:

SMukesh said:

Lead rising as the economy recovers-Not what the Tories expected.

The government had counted on sheer numbers but well done to Ed Miliband for pointing out that though GDP is rising,wages are falling and living costs are rising.

I see the government are again thrashing around on HS2.Eventually when the project is killed off as it`s becoming clear it will be,they will look even more ridiculous for spining this yarn.

Hence the PB Tory BBC threads on here, a sure giveway sign that they know things aren't going well.

They know Ed is making the fat boy dance.

The killer stat is that for 39 out of 40 months that Cameron has been Prime Minister,wages have fallen in comparison to inflation.

And George Osborne calls this the `Road to Prosperity`.

The only ones who have prospered are the millionaires with their 5% income tax cut.

Financier

Cameron saying in another way what Ratcliffe of Ineos was saying about British industry and economy. The dinosaurs of industry and education are holding back the opportunities for our young people.

"Eastern Europeans find it so easy to get jobs in Britain because many of our young people are not ‘fully capable’ of holding down work, David Cameron has said.

The Prime Minister said the UK needs to ‘say no’ to the current situation, which sees half of workers in many factories coming from abroad.

Poor training and school standards mean young Britons do not have the skills and qualifications to compete, he said.

He told apprentices at a Mini factory in Oxfordshire he did not blame ‘hard-working’ Eastern Europeans for travelling here, nor employers for hiring them.

But because our education system has failed many school-leavers and the welfare system has not incentivised work, Britons are often a cut below other workers, he said. ‘Immigration, welfare and education are totally linked,’ said Mr Cameron.

‘You go round factories in our country and half the people have come from Poland or Lithuania or Latvia. You can’t blame them. They work hard.

‘They see the jobs, they come over and they do them. But as a country what we ought to be saying is “no”.’

He said: ‘Let’s get our education system right so we are producing young people out of our schools and colleges who are fully capable of doing the jobs. Second, let’s reform the welfare system so that it doesn’t pay to be out of work. And third, let’s have sensible controls on immigration.

‘Crack those three problems together and we’ll create an economy that really generates wealth for all our people.’

The comments come weeks after London Mayor Boris Johnson backed chef Jamie Oliver, who suggested many young Britons were ‘lazy’ and ‘wet behind the ears’."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478336/David-Camerons-anger-factories-staffed-foreigners.html#ixzz2j65RDZhQ

RichardNabavi

That Scotland poll by Lord Ashcroft is extraordinary in its range, scope and detail, and the size of the sample. He really is a hero, providing such data for us at his own expense.

One to download and study in detail.

dr_spyn

Although Labour might point to inflation outstripping wages as a significant Coalition weakness, how do they propose to redress the issue? Wages won't rise in real terms just because Ed M wills it.

CD13

I quite like the BBC, and it still retains a good reputation here and abroad.

But it has a mindset which is inevitably set by its employees. A sort of liberal, metropolitan, we know best do-goodery. They may well put up "colourful" rather than convincing or expert witnesses for debate. And if they add a "crazy" right winger for balance, it may be that they regard their views as being crazy anyway and hence the guest is representative of the party's views.

In statistics, random doesn't really mean random, it has to be worked at assiduously. Hence the machinations of pollsters. For the BBC to be totally impartial in all instances would require enormous effort. From their particular viewpoint, they are being impartial.

CarlottaVance

Throughout October 2012 LAB was never out of the 40s – in fact its lowest share was 41%. So there has been a decline which has mostly been down to seepage to UKIP.

Miliband doing well/badly (net well)
October 2012: -14
October 2013: -29

Hail the mighty Ed!

SMukesh

dr_spyn said:

Although Labour might point to inflation outstripping wages as a significant Coalition weakness, how do they propose to redress the issue? Wages won't rise in real terms just because Ed M wills it.

I think he will point to recent Labour record in office when wages increased till 2004 and flatlined till 2010.Much better than this government`s appalling record on wages.

Plato

dr_spyn said:

Although Labour might point to inflation outstripping wages as a significant Coalition weakness, how do they propose to redress the issue? Wages won't rise in real terms just because Ed M wills it.

Quite. I suspect there'll be an arms race on cutting totemic things like bank charges etc to show their political virility. It's all retail politicking but predictable.

RichardNabavi

On topic:

Well, if people vote on the basis of this, they'll have no-one to blame but themselves:

Labour's blitz on Conservative-held marginals will begin with direct emails to 100,000 voters explaining its plan for an energy freeze.

It will also use Facebook and other routes to target voters with "personalised information" on how much they could save, borrowing tactics from American politics. A party election broadcast by Miliband this week will also focus on the "cost of living crisis".

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/28/labour-targets-tory-suburbs-vote-drive

Are people really stupid enough to think their cost of living can be reduced by Ed Miliband passing a law to confiscate money from investors in international companies which make run-of-the-mill profits, and which are free to invest anywhere in the world? Maybe they are, but God help us if so.

On the wider question of the economy, I'm not sure that the oft-repeated statement that people won't react to the improving economy until they see the effects in their own family finances is right. The bigger effect is the tone of media reporting (not the actual GDP or unemployment figures), and talking to other people. If confidence is up, business activity increasing, and the talk is of the UK doing better than other countries, people will gradually notice. We're currently in the early stages of them noticing.

Financier

An amusing read:

"Hypocrisy of not so clever Clegg: Harry Mount went to school with Deputy PM and says he's a plodder who owes everything to the joyously maverick teachers he now wants to ban"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478669/Hypocrisy-clever-Clegg-Harry-Mount-went-school-Deputy-PM-says-hes-plodder-owes-joyously-maverick-teachers-wants-ban.html#ixzz2j68FZ3Ca

Flockers_pb

SMukesh said:

The killer stat is that for 39 out of 40 months that Cameron has been Prime Minister, wages have fallen in comparison to inflation.

And George Osborne calls this the `Road to Prosperity`.

The only ones who have prospered are the millionaires with their 5% income tax cut.

The "millionaires" to whom you refer, many of whom, as you know, are not millionaires, are expected to contribute 29.8% of all income tax collected in the UK this year and are subject to the 18th highest top rate in the World. They may well have prospered but they also fund a sizeable proportion of Britain's public services, as well as being significant purchasers (and indeed vendors) of goods and services that drive the wider economy. Meanwhile this Government has lifted many low earners out of the income tax net altogether. You embarrass yourself by talking about the top rate tax cut without understanding the broader context.

You make a better point about the differential between wage increases and inflation, but that doesn't make for a credible alternative thesis. Do you honestly believe there is such a thing as a centrally funded, pain free (for all but the top 1%) recovery? Gently inflating away debts while gradually tightening personal finances over the medium term and avoiding internal shocks has been remarkably successful, so far avoiding the adverse consequences you or your forerunners told us were certain (4 million unemployed, double/triple dip recession etc).

MikeK

So, now even OGH admits that UKIP are picking up votes from Labour as well as Tory. A fact long proclaimed by UKIP, but derided on PB.

HopiSen

I'd add a couple of points to Mike's excellent post.

First, the week immediately before conference season was a low point for labour. If you look at
the YG polls from start of September to 15th they are almost uniformly 38/39 (I think there's one 37 and one 40).

So you can either see Labour's current polling as a 2/3 increase
or as a return to the status quo ante in early September. Either way, I think labour people will be please to have halted what was looking like a trend downwards

On today's poll, I noticed that again YG seems to up weight it's 18-24 group a lot. Today's poll had the weight almost doubled. I remember someone here rightly making this point when there was a YG showing a near tie, and the 18-24 was very highly weighted and v Tory. This time the Tory share seems to be unusually low. Could explain the difference between a 9 and the usual 6/7? On the other hand, the Comres poll also had the Tories below 20 among under 35s, so while I suspect both are a bit of a sample issue, it might be real. One to keep an eye on?

Plato

CD13 said:

I quite like the BBC, and it still retains a good reputation here and abroad.

But it has a mindset which is inevitably set by its employees. A sort of liberal, metropolitan, we know best do-goodery. They may well put up "colourful" rather than convincing or expert witnesses for debate. And if they add a "crazy" right winger for balance, it may be that they regard their views as being crazy anyway and hence the guest is representative of the party's views.

In statistics, random doesn't really mean random, it has to be worked at assiduously. Hence the machinations of pollsters. For the BBC to be totally impartial in all instances would require enormous effort. From their particular viewpoint, they are being impartial.

From my experience of the BBC over 3yrs dealing with them 14hrs a day - they don't see their own bias. It's reinforced amongst themselves to an enormous degree. I'd NEVER turn up to a meeting with a copy of the DT or Times if I wanted to create a favourable impression. God knows what the reaction to the Sun or Mail would be.

If I wanted to create the antithesis, I'd get Seamus Milne on more often than Owen Jones [and lets face it - Owen Jones is the BBC's pet Lefty] - that they think Owen is a legitimate Voice of the Left is beyond me. He's on the edge of falling off entirely along with Dr Eoin and Len McCluskey.

They're the Militant Tendancy types Kinnock ridded his Party of - and now they're back with avengeance.

HopiSen

Oh, and I'd also add that the 15-18th sept was LD conf week, which might explain Labour's share being a touch lower than normal (or might not- Tory conference didn't seem to shift it!) At any rate, I prefer to use end Aug/ first two weeks of sept as baseline, just in case.

edmundintokyo

MikeK said:

So, now even OGH admits that UKIP are picking up votes from Labour as well as Tory. A fact long proclaimed by UKIP, but derided on PB.

Who's been deriding that? Of course they pick up votes from both - the issue is simply that they take substantially more from Con than Lab, so all things being equal it's helpful for Lab, and harmful to Con, for UKIP to do well.

The corollary is that when you see a poll with a high UKIP score, that should be less worrying for Con than a poll with the same Labour lead and a low UKIP score, because UKIP will probably get squeezed in the general election and some of the voters will switch back to the main parties, and Con will get more of them than Lab.

Financier

Never mind cutting essential services as long as you look after the 'boyos' in the Welsh Labour heartlands - where incompetency reigns.

"Wales' second biggest council gave five senior officers redundancy packages averaging £126,200 each during the last financial year, it has been revealed.

Five unnamed top officers at Labour-controlled Rhondda Cynon Taf (RCT) council picked up £631,000 between them as the local authority sought to cut costs.

At the same time 140 lower paid staff were given pay offs totalling £646,000 – an average of just £4,614 each.

Despite the redundancies, the council’s workforce rose from 12,444 to 12,458. (for a population of~235,000)

Last week RCT council agreed to consult on five radical cost cutting proposals in the wake of significant cuts coming ultimately from the UK Government. One proposal would see three-year-olds starting school during the term following their third birthday on a part-time, rather than a full-time basis.

Another would see the meals-on-wheels service reduced so that instead of having hot meals seven days a week, there would be hot meals from Monday to Friday, with two additional chilled meals being delivered on a Friday to be eaten over the weekend.

A third proposal suggests closing 14 out of the council’s 26 libraries, the fourth involves centralising youth clubs and services in the borough’s 17 secondary schools, and the fifth proposal would see nine of the current 19 day centres in the area close."

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/five-senior-officers-one-welsh-6249942

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Sen, good to see you on.

Didn't the debt ceiling/deficit shutdown in the US coincide with the Conservative conference? It didn't eclipse the conference in coverage terms but did detract from it.

GIN1138

I expected Labour's boost from the energy price freeze to be a lot more than this...

JonnyJimmy

tim said:

They know Ed is making the fat boy dance.

Why are you so obsessed with Cameron's physique?

NickPalmer

Flockers_pb said:

One of the risks for the Conservatives is that they are taking for granted that the public will give them the credit for the recovering economy.

There is even a risk that they DO get credit for the recovering economy, but people note that they're not better off themselves (and in the next year or two few people will be) and feel that the Conservatives have engineered a recovery that only benefits someone else, fitting with the really widely-held view (cf numerous YouGovs) that the Tories only care about part of society.

SMukesh

Flockers_pb said:

SMukesh said:

The killer stat is that for 39 out of 40 months that Cameron has been Prime Minister, wages have fallen in comparison to inflation.

And George Osborne calls this the `Road to Prosperity`.

The only ones who have prospered are the millionaires with their 5% income tax cut.

The "millionaires" to whom you refer, many of whom, as you know, are not millionaires, are expected to contribute 29.8% of all income tax collected in the UK this year and are subject to the 18th highest top rate in the World. They may well have prospered but they also fund a sizeable proportion of Britain's public services, as well as being significant purchasers (and indeed vendors) of goods and services that drive the wider economy. Meanwhile this Government has lifted many low earners out of the income tax net altogether. You embarrass yourself by talking about the top rate tax cut without understanding the broader context.

You make a better point about the differential between wage increases and inflation, but that doesn't make for a credible alternative thesis. Do you honestly believe there is such a thing as a centrally funded, pain free (for all but the top 1%) recovery? Gently inflating away debts while gradually tightening personal finances over the medium term and avoiding internal shocks has been remarkably successful, so far avoiding the adverse consequences you or your forerunners told us were certain (4 million unemployed, double/triple dip recession etc).

I am sure you make some good points and can even agree with some of them.But I just pointed out that it`s too early to call us on the road to prosperity when wages are still falling for most people.

As regards the double-dip,there were three successive quarters of negative growth and the middle one has been revised by the tiniest of margins.It doesn`t take away the fact that output was negative over three quarters.I would not be surprised if Osborne pulled some strings in the ONS to wipe away the double-dip.

MikeSmithson

HopiSen said:

I'd add a couple of points to Mike's excellent post.

First, the week immediately before conference season was a low point for labour. If you look at
the YG polls from start of September to 15th they are almost uniformly 38/39 (I think there's one 37 and one 40).

So you can either see Labour's current polling as a 2/3 increase
or as a return to the status quo ante in early September. Either way, I think labour people will be please to have halted what was looking like a trend downwards

On today's poll, I noticed that again YG seems to up weight it's 18-24 group a lot. Today's poll had the weight almost doubled. I remember someone here rightly making this point when there was a YG showing a near tie, and the 18-24 was very highly weighted and v Tory. This time the Tory share seems to be unusually low. Could explain the difference between a 9 and the usual 6/7? On the other hand, the Comres poll also had the Tories below 20 among under 35s, so while I suspect both are a bit of a sample issue, it might be real. One to keep an eye on?

Hopi

If you look back over YouGov polls that are published on Tuesdays you'll find the same effect. For some reason the firm finds it challenging getting enough 18-24yo participants in its first survey each week. This mean that those that do take part have their views scaled up by more than usual

another_richard

edmundintokyo said:

MikeK said:

So, now even OGH admits that UKIP are picking up votes from Labour as well as Tory. A fact long proclaimed by UKIP, but derided on PB.

Who's been deriding that? Of course they pick up votes from both - the issue is simply that they take substantially more from Con than Lab, so all things being equal it's helpful for Lab, and harmful to Con, for UKIP to do well.

I'd say its more flexible than that.

The first part of UKIP gains is from former Conservative voters of lower middle and skilled working class background.

But if UKIP does really well then most of its subsequent increase would be from wwc Labour voters. An example fo this was in the May local elections, the Eastleigh byelection (adjusting for the different electoral dynamics there) and at several local byelections since.

So what the Conservatives need is either a UKIP collapse or a big UKIP breakthrough.

Labour are presumably aware as to their vulnerability to UKIP among their wwc voters and this will lie behind their emphasis on energy prices and cost of living generally.

Scrapheap_as_was

Might be right but still quite comfortable at this stage... if it moves to double digits in early 2014 then there might be a bit more panic but rather doubt it.

JonnyJimmy

This is insane...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/worldnews/10410846/Surfers-ride-monster-waves-off-Nazare-Portugal-after-St-Judes-storm.html

HopiSen

MikeSmithson said:

Hopi

If you look back over YouGov polls that are published on Tuesdays you'll find the same effect. For some reason the firm finds it challenging getting enough 18-24yo participants in its first survey each week. This mean that those that do take part have their views scaled up by more than usual

Thanks Mike, that's really interesting: I'll know to watch out for that when trying to read YG polls in future. I suppose 18-24s have better things to do on a Sunday than fill out online polls!

DecrepitJohnL

Financier said:

An amusing read:

"Hypocrisy of not so clever Clegg: Harry Mount went to school with Deputy PM and says he's a plodder who owes everything to the joyously maverick teachers he now wants to ban"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478669/Hypocrisy-clever-Clegg-Harry-Mount-went-school-Deputy-PM-says-hes-plodder-owes-joyously-maverick-teachers-wants-ban.html#ixzz2j68FZ3Ca

It is not surprising that Mail writers who believe Clegg is left-wing also think the BBC is biased.

Financier

Welsh Labour throws money at a commemoration whilst cutting back on needy surgical operations over the winter.

"An extensive programme of events designed to commemorate the centenary of the First World War has been launched by First Minister Carwyn Jones.

The four-year programme, known as Wales Remembers 1914 - 1918, was officially launched at Cardiff Castle’s Museum of the Welsh Soldier today.....

He announced that the Welsh Government had allocated a total of £850,000 to develop the education programme for commemoration. As part of the funding, each secondary school in Wales will receive £1,000 to spend on resources to aid teaching of the conflict."

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/carwyn-jones-launches-four-year-commemoration-6248934

Are the teaching staff so incompetent in Wales and so badly trained and qualified that they are unable to commemorate and teach about these events out of current budgets? Perhaps they need to buy some history books to make good their knowledge deficiency.

edmundintokyo

NickPalmer said:

Flockers_pb said:

One of the risks for the Conservatives is that they are taking for granted that the public will give them the credit for the recovering economy.

There is even a risk that they DO get credit for the recovering economy, but people note that they're not better off themselves (and in the next year or two few people will be) and feel that the Conservatives have engineered a recovery that only benefits someone else, fitting with the really widely-held view (cf numerous YouGovs) that the Tories only care about part of society.

Alternatively that the voters do feel better off, do give the government credit, and then say, "I'm glad we got the Conservatives in to sort out the economy, they're very good at that kind of thing, now that's fixed let's have Labour back to sort out the schools and hospitals".

Gerry_Mander

NickPalmer said:

Flockers_pb said:

One of the risks for the Conservatives is that they are taking for granted that the public will give them the credit for the recovering economy.

There is even a risk that they DO get credit for the recovering economy, but people note that they're not better off themselves (and in the next year or two few people will be) and feel that the Conservatives have engineered a recovery that only benefits someone else, fitting with the really widely-held view (cf numerous YouGovs) that the Tories only care about part of society.

Some of us thought that the last Labour engineered a situation where other people benefitted. The thing I found most difficult about that time was telling the children to work hard, get a good job, and try to help those less fortunate than yourself. We gave up trying eventually, and just tried to site it our. I'm not sure what to do with our youngest, she's still at school.

TGOHF

Half term innit - holiday poll.

Surprised the latest Lord Ashcroft poll hasn't got a thread.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/lots-of-scots-back-pm-s-policies-lord-ashcroft-1-3162139

"Lord Ashcroft admits that most of those polled who he claims back Tory policies still say they would not vote Conservative tomorrow if a UK general election was held."

edmundintokyo

another_richard said:

I'd say its more flexible than that.

The first part of UKIP gains is from former Conservative voters of lower middle and skilled working class background.

But if UKIP does really well then most of its subsequent increase would be from wwc Labour voters. An example fo this was in the May local elections, the Eastleigh byelection (adjusting for the different electoral dynamics there) and at several local byelections since.

So what the Conservatives need is either a UKIP collapse or a big UKIP breakthrough.

Labour are presumably aware as to their vulnerability to UKIP among their wwc voters and this will lie behind their emphasis on energy prices and cost of living generally.

I see what you're saying but I think the disparity has tended to be so big that I couldn't really imagine any vote plausible share where they'd hurting Lab more then Con, at least while Lab are in opposition.

Morris_Dancer

F1: don't forget that the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix is this coming weekend. Early discussion is up here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/abu-dhabi-early-discussion.html

TGOHF

NickPalmer said:

I think the core Labour vote at the moment is about 37-38 - when things are going well as now, it nudges up, but it's ages since it was below 37, except in polls with methodology favouring UKIP which have the Tories in the 20s. That's why I remain pretty confident about the election - there is no swingback to the Tories because there hasn't been a swing from the Tories, snd the swing that has happened, from the :anti-Tory LibDems, is the most solid element of British politics today.

Core Labour vote at the GE was 29%.

Or 27 odd % in England.

dr_spyn

Pointing to Labour's record pre 2010 on wages, look there are no bank collapses, there is no growth, there is no debt, there is no deficit. It is all perfect in the Potemkin villages.

How will real wages rise, by diktat of Ed M, by cuts in taxes, national insurance contributions or by wish fulfilment.

Plato

For our Yorkshire PBers - I love the antimacassars on the seats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPjJFv1NDBg

tyson

This poll drift presents no worries at all since our very own Nate Silver at Oxford has the Tories with a 58% probability for a majority and an 80 odd percent for largest party. Great news for PB Tory loons, bankers, anyone with money really and of course racists.

Terrible news for badgers, the BBC, the environment and anyone else who hasn't got loads of dosh.

another_richard

RichardNabavi said:

Are people really stupid enough to think their cost of living can be reduced by Ed Miliband passing a law to confiscate money from investors in international companies which make run-of-the-mill profits, and which are free to invest anywhere in the world? Maybe they are, but God help us if so.

They don't believe it will work but that wont stop them voting for it.

There's two forces at work here:

1) Something for free - its an equivalent to all the special offers you see in shops You know you're going to lose out somewhere else to make up for it but you still want to have it.

2) Energy bills are now regularly over £100 per month - being three figures that's a deduction which stands out on bank statements. Perhaps not coincidentally council tax became increasingly resented when that started to hit the three figure amount.

If people had to pay income taxes from their own bank account they would be far more resented than being deducted at source as they are now.

Bobajob

SMukesh said:

Flockers_pb said:

SMukesh said:

The killer stat is that for 39 out of 40 months that Cameron has been Prime Minister, wages have fallen in comparison to inflation.

And George Osborne calls this the `Road to Prosperity`.

The only ones who have prospered are the millionaires with their 5% income tax cut.

The "millionaires" to whom you refer, many of whom, as you know, are not millionaires, are expected to contribute 29.8% of all income tax collected in the UK this year and are subject to the 18th highest top rate in the World. They may well have prospered but they also fund a sizeable proportion of Britain's public services, as well as being significant purchasers (and indeed vendors) of goods and services that drive the wider economy. Meanwhile this Government has lifted many low earners out of the income tax net altogether. You embarrass yourself by talking about the top rate tax cut without understanding the broader context.

You make a better point about the differential between wage increases and inflation, but that doesn't make for a credible alternative thesis. Do you honestly believe there is such a thing as a centrally funded, pain free (for all but the top 1%) recovery? Gently inflating away debts while gradually tightening personal finances over the medium term and avoiding internal shocks has been remarkably successful, so far avoiding the adverse consequences you or your forerunners told us were certain (4 million unemployed, double/triple dip recession etc).

I am sure you make some good points and can even agree with some of them.But I just pointed out that it`s too early to call us on the road to prosperity when wages are still falling for most people.

As regards the double-dip,there were three successive quarters of negative growth and the middle one has been revised by the tiniest of margins.It doesn`t take away the fact that output was negative over three quarters.I would not be surprised if Osborne pulled some strings in the ONS to wipe away the double-dip.

Correct - there was indeed a double dip, effectively. The rest is mere semantics.

MikeSmithson

TGOHF said:

NickPalmer said:

I think the core Labour vote at the moment is about 37-38 - when things are going well as now, it nudges up, but it's ages since it was below 37, except in polls with methodology favouring UKIP which have the Tories in the 20s. That's why I remain pretty confident about the election - there is no swingback to the Tories because there hasn't been a swing from the Tories, snd the swing that has happened, from the :anti-Tory LibDems, is the most solid element of British politics today.

Core Labour vote at the GE was 29%.

Or 27 odd % in England.

I think it important to use GB totals only - the figure you quote includes NI.

Reason is quite simple. All polling is carried our on a GB based only so the numbers for GE2010 comparisons should be what happened there. CON 37, LAB 29.7, LD 23.6

Financier

Plato said:

For our Yorkshire PBers - I love the antimacassars on the seats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPjJFv1NDBg

@Plato

Antimacassars were not limited to Yorkshire. They were used also in the age of Brylcreem, but I do not recall anyone using macassar oil on their hair. Of course you now get a bit of hard non-woven on aircraft seats.

Pulpstar

I'd have thought David William Donald Cameron would be an asset to Scots Tory vote.

another_richard

edmundintokyo said:

another_richard said:

I'd say its more flexible than that.

The first part of UKIP gains is from former Conservative voters of lower middle and skilled working class background.

But if UKIP does really well then most of its subsequent increase would be from wwc Labour voters. An example fo this was in the May local elections, the Eastleigh byelection (adjusting for the different electoral dynamics there) and at several local byelections since.

So what the Conservatives need is either a UKIP collapse or a big UKIP breakthrough.

Labour are presumably aware as to their vulnerability to UKIP among their wwc voters and this will lie behind their emphasis on energy prices and cost of living generally.

I see what you're saying but I think the disparity has tended to be so big that I couldn't really imagine any vote plausible share where they'd hurting Lab more then Con, at least while Lab are in opposition.

I agree.

UKIP would need to be getting at least 20%.

That's not going to happen until Labour are in government but would not be too different to what is happening in France at present.

CarlottaVance

Bobajob said:

SMukesh said:

Flockers_pb said:

SMukesh said:

The killer stat is that for 39 out of 40 months that Cameron has been Prime Minister, wages have fallen in comparison to inflation.

And George Osborne calls this the `Road to Prosperity`.

The only ones who have prospered are the millionaires with their 5% income tax cut.

The "millionaires" to whom you refer, many of whom, as you know, are not millionaires, are expected to contribute 29.8% of all income tax collected in the UK this year and are subject to the 18th highest top rate in the World. They may well have prospered but they also fund a sizeable proportion of Britain's public services, as well as being significant purchasers (and indeed vendors) of goods and services that drive the wider economy. Meanwhile this Government has lifted many low earners out of the income tax net altogether. You embarrass yourself by talking about the top rate tax cut without understanding the broader context.

You make a better point about the differential between wage increases and inflation, but that doesn't make for a credible alternative thesis. Do you honestly believe there is such a thing as a centrally funded, pain free (for all but the top 1%) recovery? Gently inflating away debts while gradually tightening personal finances over the medium term and avoiding internal shocks has been remarkably successful, so far avoiding the adverse consequences you or your forerunners told us were certain (4 million unemployed, double/triple dip recession etc).

I am sure you make some good points and can even agree with some of them.But I just pointed out that it`s too early to call us on the road to prosperity when wages are still falling for most people.

As regards the double-dip,there were three successive quarters of negative growth and the middle one has been revised by the tiniest of margins.It doesn`t take away the fact that output was negative over three quarters.I would not be surprised if Osborne pulled some strings in the ONS to wipe away the double-dip.

Correct - there was indeed a double dip, effectively. The rest is mere semantics

You are Ed Balls & I claim my £5 50p!

Blofelds_Cat

SMukesh said:

dr_spyn said:

Although Labour might point to inflation outstripping wages as a significant Coalition weakness, how do they propose to redress the issue? Wages won't rise in real terms just because Ed M wills it.

I think he will point to recent Labour record in office when wages increased till 2004 and flatlined till 2010.Much better than this government`s appalling record on wages.

I guess that's where the deficit came from then - higher wages, paid from the Magic Money Tree

MikeSmithson

TGOHF said:

Half term innit - holiday poll.

Surprised the latest Lord Ashcroft poll hasn't got a thread.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/lots-of-scots-back-pm-s-policies-lord-ashcroft-1-3162139

"Lord Ashcroft admits that most of those polled who he claims back Tory policies still say they would not vote Conservative tomorrow if a UK general election was held."

I did consider that but Ashcroft's piece is mostly his comments with no standout numbers.

Bobajob

Interesting debate on the previous thread re: the bedroom tax.
So effective has Labour's project to boil down the policy into a pithy name everyone can grasp, nobody now knows the policy's official name (nor me, what is it?)
The Tories are remarkably bad at this - witness their idiotic naming of the Child Benefit removal as the Child Benefit Tax Charge. Can be easily contracted to Child Tax.
As for Plato's claim that the press should have used the Orwellian sounding Community Charge instead of Poll Tax: what planet does she live on?

Pulpstar

MikeSmithson said:

TGOHF said:

NickPalmer said:

I think the core Labour vote at the moment is about 37-38 - when things are going well as now, it nudges up, but it's ages since it was below 37, except in polls with methodology favouring UKIP which have the Tories in the 20s. That's why I remain pretty confident about the election - there is no swingback to the Tories because there hasn't been a swing from the Tories, snd the swing that has happened, from the :anti-Tory LibDems, is the most solid element of British politics today.

Core Labour vote at the GE was 29%.

Or 27 odd % in England.

I think it important to use GB totals only - the figure you quote includes NI.

Reason is quite simple. All polling is carried our on a GB based only so the numbers for GE2010 comparisons should be what happened there. CON 37, LAB 29.7, LD 23.6

When the numbers are put up like that I just simply can't see Con Majority...

BenM

Plato said:

From my experience of the BBC over 3yrs dealing with them 14hrs a day - they don't see their own bias.

I suspect they spotted *your* bias a mile off.

Tories do this all the time. Project their own bias onto the BBC and expect the public to swallow their whingeing.

Pulpstar

Bobajob said:

Interesting debate on the previous thread re: the bedroom tax.
So effective has Labour's project to boil down the policy into a pithy name everyone can grasp, nobody now knows the policy's official name (nor me, what is it?)
The Tories are remarkably bad at this - witness their idiotic naming of the Child Benefit removal as the Child Benefit Tax Charge. Can be easily contracted to Child Tax.
As for Plato's claim that the press should have used the Orwellian sounding Community Charge instead of Poll Tax: what planet does she live on?

Its a benefit reduction/removal/non-payment. Like when my (unemployed at the time) girlfriend was entitled to the princely sum of £0.00 Job Seekers she wasn't being taxed £50-70.

dr_spyn

Eric Joyce on Unite, with added comments on SNP.

http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2013/10/stephen-deans-resignation/

SimonStClare

One for the PB Terry Pratchett fans – and something for Dr Sunil to look forward to perhaps?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/authorinterviews/10396286/Terry-Pratchett-interview.html

dr_spyn

Spot the missing Labour word.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24715666

Ed Ballsed it up.

Plato

Financier said:

Plato said:

For our Yorkshire PBers - I love the antimacassars on the seats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPjJFv1NDBg

@Plato

Antimacassars were not limited to Yorkshire. They were used also in the age of Brylcreem, but I do not recall anyone using macassar oil on their hair. Of course you now get a bit of hard non-woven on aircraft seats.

I was amazed that the Wordpress template actually recognised *antimacassar* as a word - it normally finds a much more common one a spelling error!

Pulpstar

Everyone has bias/preference, but some people don't realise it. Those that do, and acknowledge it tend to be the best people to listen to regarding wagering on politics.

TheWatcher

Bobajob said:

Interesting debate on the previous thread re: the bedroom tax.
So effective has Labour's project to boil down the policy into a pithy name everyone can grasp, nobody now knows the policy's official name (nor me, what is it?)
The Tories are remarkably bad at this - witness their idiotic naming of the Child Benefit removal as the Child Benefit Tax Charge. Can be easily contracted to Child Tax.
As for Plato's claim that the press should have used the Orwellian sounding Community Charge instead of Poll Tax: what planet does she live on?

OGH needs to impose a 'Whinge Tax'. Might stop you clogging the threads with endless 'Me Me Me' posts.

SimonStClare

dr_spyn said:

Spot the missing Labour word.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24715666

Ed Ballsed it up.

Never mind, today’s Telegraph provides the context of the payoff that the BBC couldn’t find room for..!

“Ed Balls, the then Education Secretary, said Mrs Shoesmith was not “fit for office” and she was summarily dismissed after a damning Ofsted report. She was fired without a payoff or pension, leading her to fight for compensation for loss of earnings and a settlement.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/10410698/Sharon-Shoesmith-agrees-payout-over-Baby-P-sacking.html

dr_spyn

Fantasy railway game - part 3 revenue projection and cost control. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24721214

Given the timescale of the HS2 project all figures today, will bear little resemblance to the outcome.

TGOHF

Tony as helpful as always.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair/10410792/Blair-says-problem-with-career-politicians-like-Ed-Miliband.html

"Blair says 'problem' with career politicians like Ed Miliband

Tony Blair said MPs should work normal jobs before entering politics to give them a better overview of how the world works"

"Mr Blair said: “Look, it's - this is not a specific point at all, because I support Ed’s leadership and I support what he’s doing......"

TheWatcher

dr_spyn said:

Eric Joyce on Unite, with added comments on SNP.

http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2013/10/stephen-deans-resignation/

Unless my hearing was playing up, the Unite spokesman on Today earlier this morning was attempting to blame it all on Joyce for standing down in the first place!

dr_spyn

@simonStClare As Bill Deedes might have corrected it: "Ed Balls, the then Education Secretary, was not “fit for office”."

Millsy

Interesting that if we look at the first and last polls in the above graph the actual number of (weighted) voters for non-Labour parties is roughly the same (within 10 or 20) but the number of Labour voters has gone up from 466 to 546. As with ComRes yesterday, this alters the published Conservative share just as much as the Labour share, meaning in these polls Labour are up 3, Tories are down 3, and the lead goes from 3 to 9, even if the actual number of people saying they would vote Conservative is roughly the same.

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/lh565p7nyg/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-160913.pdf

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/m26vwfrtzp/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-281013.pdf

Cyclefree

tim said:

Bit of praise for the Govt, Dave is getting this one right

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24722440

As opposed to putting British nuclear power in hock to the Chinese Communist Party and paying huge premiums, developing London as a centre for Islamic finance makes a lot of sense.

Possibly - but he who pays the piper calls the tune.

Pulpstar

SimonStClare said:

dr_spyn said:

Spot the missing Labour word.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24715666

Ed Ballsed it up.

Never mind, today’s Telegraph provides the context of the payoff that the BBC couldn’t find room for..!

“Ed Balls, the then Education Secretary, said Mrs Shoesmith was not “fit for office” and she was summarily dismissed after a damning Ofsted report. She was fired without a payoff or pension, leading her to fight for compensation for loss of earnings and a settlement.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/10410698/Sharon-Shoesmith-agrees-payout-over-Baby-P-sacking.html

Just hearing her name brings me out in a rash. I suppose when something in the future like this occurs again we will have to trust that people are being 'fairly' chucked over the cliff edge of their careers and trust this is the precise reason why politicians are reluctant to speak out.

Theuniondivvie

TheWatcher said:

dr_spyn said:

Eric Joyce on Unite, with added comments on SNP.

http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2013/10/stephen-deans-resignation/

Unless my hearing was playing up, the Unite spokesman on Today earlier this morning was attempting to blame it all on Joyce for standing down in the first place!

Spokesman missed a trick there. As any fule kno, it was the Tories fault for being ****s and therefore causing 'Hulk' Joyce to go postal.

TGOHF

TheWatcher said:

dr_spyn said:

Eric Joyce on Unite, with added comments on SNP.

http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2013/10/stephen-deans-resignation/

Unless my hearing was playing up, the Unite spokesman on Today earlier this morning was attempting to blame it all on Joyce for standing down in the first place!

BBC Radio 4 Today ‏@BBCr4today 1h
Andrew Murray, Chief of Staff at Unite, says Stevie Deans's departure was not part of the deal with Ineos to keep the Grangemouth plant open

@JennieUnite 36m
@BBCr4today He also questioned why serious news programmes give disgraced MP @EricJoyce any credibility; Falkirk should have by-election now

Eric Joyce MP ‏@ericjoyce 34m
@JennieUnite @BBCr4today key point that Unite is corrupted and has only one, bullying mode. Like ur tweet.

perdix

edmundintokyo said:

NickPalmer said:

Flockers_pb said:

One of the risks for the Conservatives is that they are taking for granted that the public will give them the credit for the recovering economy.

There is even a risk that they DO get credit for the recovering economy, but people note that they're not better off themselves (and in the next year or two few people will be) and feel that the Conservatives have engineered a recovery that only benefits someone else, fitting with the really widely-held view (cf numerous YouGovs) that the Tories only care about part of society.

Alternatively that the voters do feel better off, do give the government credit, and then say, "I'm glad we got the Conservatives in to sort out the economy, they're very good at that kind of thing, now that's fixed let's have Labour back to sort out the schools and hospitals".

Of course if the voters were properly informed they would know that Labour's record on health and education is one of supporting their union friends not the patients and students.

DecrepitJohnL

Grangemouth -- is there any polling evidence that votes are being shifted to Labour rather than Conservative now the narrative has moved away from "intransigent unions" and on to "management bullies"? Any polls showing an uptick for Labour rather than the Conservatives, despite jubilant predictions on pb?

Carola

One for TSE's Nighthawks round-up:
'According to the latest Lonely Planet guide, Yorkshire is the third-best region in the world http://thetim.es/1gXgGDl' Times (£)

Gerry_Mander

perdix said:

Of course if the voters were properly informed they would know that Labour's record on health and education is one of supporting their union friends not the patients and students.

If you're employed in health or education, this is of course a reason for supporting Labour.

It is in the name 'Labour'. They support the producers.

CarlottaVance

DecrepitJohnL said:

Grangemouth.....now the narrative has moved away from "intransigent unions" and on to "management bullies"?

Really?

Today the narrative is all about the Union convener who resigned & is still Chair of the Falkirk Labour Party:

"Falkirk MP Eric Joyce has said Labour is protecting the position of the Unite union organiser at the centre of a selection row because it "fears" the organisation's leadership."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24724670

Gerry_Mander

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Grangemouth.....now the narrative has moved away from "intransigent unions" and on to "management bullies"?

Really?

"Falkirk MP Eric Joyce has said Labour is protecting the position of the Unite union organiser at the centre of a selection row because it "fears" the organisation's leadership."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24724670

DJL didn't specify which management were bullies. Presumably the union management?

CarlottaVance

Gerry_Mander said:

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Grangemouth.....now the narrative has moved away from "intransigent unions" and on to "management bullies"?

Really?

"Falkirk MP Eric Joyce has said Labour is protecting the position of the Unite union organiser at the centre of a selection row because it "fears" the organisation's leadership."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24724670

DJL didn't specify which management were bullies. Presumably the union management?

Good point - Joyce:

""The Labour Party, because it won't allow people to elect a new chair, is effectively keeping Deans in place, and I think it's to some degree because of a substantial amount of fear inside the Labour Party of the Unite leadership."

Theuniondivvie

Carola said:

One for TSE's Nighthawks round-up:
'According to the latest Lonely Planet guide, Yorkshire is the third-best region in the world http://thetim.es/1gXgGDl' Times (£)

Alistair Darling ‏@A_DarlingMP 2m
A new expert report by @lonelyplanet puts a separate Scotland alongside the shanties of Brazil & desolate Antarctica. We're better together.

Plato

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Grangemouth.....now the narrative has moved away from "intransigent unions" and on to "management bullies"?

Really?

Today the narrative is all about the Union convener who resigned & is still Chair of the Falkirk Labour Party:

"Falkirk MP Eric Joyce has said Labour is protecting the position of the Unite union organiser at the centre of a selection row because it "fears" the organisation's leadership."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24724670

Those Unite non-bullies who rewrote and submitted for approval to Mr Unite of Grangemouth the witness statements of those signed up as Labour members without their consent?

Ah, I see.

Morris_Dancer

F1: Mercedes decide they prefer a hydra approach to leadership, and Brawn will leave the team:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/24725406

Madness, in my view. No idea where he'll end up or if he'll even stay in F1.

Pulpstar

Carola said:

One for TSE's Nighthawks round-up:
'According to the latest Lonely Planet guide, Yorkshire is the third-best region in the world http://thetim.es/1gXgGDl' Times (£)

For those of us without Times Paywall access:

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/lonely-planet-yorkshire-in-top-three-of-world-travel-list-1-6191668

DavidL

Pulpstar said:

SimonStClare said:

dr_spyn said:

Spot the missing Labour word.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24715666

Ed Ballsed it up.

Never mind, today’s Telegraph provides the context of the payoff that the BBC couldn’t find room for..!

“Ed Balls, the then Education Secretary, said Mrs Shoesmith was not “fit for office” and she was summarily dismissed after a damning Ofsted report. She was fired without a payoff or pension, leading her to fight for compensation for loss of earnings and a settlement.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/10410698/Sharon-Shoesmith-agrees-payout-over-Baby-P-sacking.html

Just hearing her name brings me out in a rash. I suppose when something in the future like this occurs again we will have to trust that people are being 'fairly' chucked over the cliff edge of their careers and trust this is the precise reason why politicians are reluctant to speak out.

It seems that Ed Balls' pre-emptory response to the horror of Baby P is costing us a lot of money but for once I find it very hard to criticise a Labour politician's fiscal incontinence. What his response did was show that "lessons have been learned" is simply not the panacea of the modern age and that responsbility in senior positions in public life means something. It was an important lesson to learn but it has not been applied consistently. David Nicholson comes to mind and those Chief Constables who were too scared to take on the Police Federation.

The Court of Appeal Judge suggested that Mrs Shoesmith should be entitled to 3 months notice for her wrongful dismissal. A sum of £33K. How she is getting £600K is one of the mysteries of the age. I would like to think that the vast bulk of that is actually payment of her legal expenses but I fear not.

TheScreamingEagles

Theuniondivvie said:

Carola said:

One for TSE's Nighthawks round-up:
'According to the latest Lonely Planet guide, Yorkshire is the third-best region in the world http://thetim.es/1gXgGDl' Times (£)

Alistair Darling ‏@A_DarlingMP 2m
A new expert report by @lonelyplanet puts a separate Scotland alongside the shanties of Brazil & desolate Antarctica. We're better together.

Scotland is the New Yorkshire


Scotland is third place, behind Brazil and Antarctica, in the guide’s top ten countries for 2014 in recognition of an year that will feature the independence vote, the Commonwealth Games, the Ryder Cup and the Year of Homecoming cultural festival.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, why's Antarctica so high up?

TheScreamingEagles

Alas there will be no nighthawks tonight.

I have a date with Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddlestone three times tonight.

CarlottaVance

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

SimonStClare said:

dr_spyn said:

Spot the missing Labour word.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24715666

Ed Ballsed it up.

Never mind, today’s Telegraph provides the context of the payoff that the BBC couldn’t find room for..!

“Ed Balls, the then Education Secretary, said Mrs Shoesmith was not “fit for office” and she was summarily dismissed after a damning Ofsted report. She was fired without a payoff or pension, leading her to fight for compensation for loss of earnings and a settlement.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/10410698/Sharon-Shoesmith-agrees-payout-over-Baby-P-sacking.html

Just hearing her name brings me out in a rash. I suppose when something in the future like this occurs again we will have to trust that people are being 'fairly' chucked over the cliff edge of their careers and trust this is the precise reason why politicians are reluctant to speak out.

It seems that Ed Balls' pre-emptory response to the horror of Baby P is costing us a lot of money but for once I find it very hard to criticise a Labour politician's fiscal incontinence. What his response did was show that "lessons have been learned"

That's not a excuse for not following due process - but I agree, Haringey's Labour council should be paying her the minimum legally required.....

Pulpstar

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

SimonStClare said:

dr_spyn said:

Spot the missing Labour word.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24715666

Ed Ballsed it up.

Never mind, today’s Telegraph provides the context of the payoff that the BBC couldn’t find room for..!

“Ed Balls, the then Education Secretary, said Mrs Shoesmith was not “fit for office” and she was summarily dismissed after a damning Ofsted report. She was fired without a payoff or pension, leading her to fight for compensation for loss of earnings and a settlement.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/10410698/Sharon-Shoesmith-agrees-payout-over-Baby-P-sacking.html

Just hearing her name brings me out in a rash. I suppose when something in the future like this occurs again we will have to trust that people are being 'fairly' chucked over the cliff edge of their careers and trust this is the precise reason why politicians are reluctant to speak out.

It seems that Ed Balls' pre-emptory response to the horror of Baby P is costing us a lot of money but for once I find it very hard to criticise a Labour politician's fiscal incontinence. What his response did was show that "lessons have been learned" is simply not the panacea of the modern age and that responsbility in senior positions in public life means something. It was an important lesson to learn but it has not been applied consistently. David Nicholson comes to mind and those Chief Constables who were too scared to take on the Police Federation.

The Court of Appeal Judge suggested that Mrs Shoesmith should be entitled to 3 months notice for her wrongful dismissal. A sum of £33K. How she is getting £600K is one of the mysteries of the age. I would like to think that the vast bulk of that is actually payment of her legal expenses but I fear not.

The gap as you point out is enourmous. What would the legal bill be like though - 100-200k perhaps ? Still a huge gap

JosiasJessop

Morris_Dancer said:

F1: Mercedes decide they prefer a hydra approach to leadership, and Brawn will leave the team:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/24725406

Madness, in my view. No idea where he'll end up or if he'll even stay in F1.

Such a shame. Somehow Brawn managed to remain likeable throughout the years of Ferrari domination in the early 2000s.

I hope he remains in F1.

However, Mercedes may have a point. You need one technical autocrat who really understands the entire concept of the car, ala Newey. I'm not sure one man can do that and all the business guff that now occurs in F1. Red Bull's split (Horner as team principal, Newey CTO) seems the best way of doing business.

Brawn's problem is that he was a technical director who became team principal, and has an interest in both worlds.

Roger

@Tyson

"This poll drift presents no worries at all since our very own Nate Silver at Oxford has the Tories with a 58% probability for a majority and an 80 odd percent for largest party. Great news for PB Tory loons, bankers, anyone with money really and of course racists.

Terrible news for badgers, the BBC, the environment and anyone else who hasn't got loads of dosh."

Keep the red flag flying Tyson! it's a nice change to read something on here not copied from The Daily Mail

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, why's Antarctica so high up?

Something to do with oil, and this

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/environment/scientists-drill-for-answers-in-antarctica-20131028-2wc1r.html

TheScreamingEagles

On topic, earlier on this year, one of PBers most perceptive, brilliantly astute and intelligent poster did identify that Labour were seeping votes to UKIP, at a rate 3 times greater than the Tories were

http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/05/29/polling-averages-and-changes-with-the-phone-pollsters-since-january/

DecrepitJohnL

CarlottaVance said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Grangemouth.....now the narrative has moved away from "intransigent unions" and on to "management bullies"?

Really?

Today the narrative is all about the Union convener who resigned & is still Chair of the Falkirk Labour Party:

"Falkirk MP Eric Joyce has said Labour is protecting the position of the Unite union organiser at the centre of a selection row because it "fears" the organisation's leadership."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24724670

Really. Or did you not notice there is still no CON MAJ NAILED ON despite all the spin about unions costing jobs? On the contrary, I think there might even have been a pb thread about increased Labour leads.

Of course, it may be this change in narrative to Ineos bullying workers from Ratcliffe's Swiss yacht has been noticed by Conservative spin chiefs who want to move the story back to the Falkirk selection.

Even here, we should note that (a) most voters' eyes glaze over; (b) Eric Joyce is not a disinterested spectator; (c) Ed Miliband is on the side of the angels having called in Knacker of the Yard.

SimonStClare

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

SimonStClare said:

dr_spyn said:

Spot the missing Labour word.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24715666

Ed Ballsed it up.

Never mind, today’s Telegraph provides the context of the payoff that the BBC couldn’t find room for..!

“Ed Balls, the then Education Secretary, said Mrs Shoesmith was not “fit for office” and she was summarily dismissed after a damning Ofsted report. She was fired without a payoff or pension, leading her to fight for compensation for loss of earnings and a settlement.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/10410698/Sharon-Shoesmith-agrees-payout-over-Baby-P-sacking.html

Just hearing her name brings me out in a rash. I suppose when something in the future like this occurs again we will have to trust that people are being 'fairly' chucked over the cliff edge of their careers and trust this is the precise reason why politicians are reluctant to speak out.

It seems that Ed Balls' pre-emptory response to the horror of Baby P is costing us a lot of money but for once I find it very hard to criticise a Labour politician's fiscal incontinence.

[snip]

BBC – “Former Children's Secretary Ed Balls should pay compensation to ex-Haringey Children's boss Sharon Shoesmith following the death of Baby P, according to the Appeal Court judges.”

“She could be entitled to payments covering her back-dated salary, loss of future earnings and her pension. - But in their judgement the Appeal Court judges suggest the former Children's Secretary Ed Balls should also be asked to contribute.”

“"Although compensation is a matter between Ms Shoesmith and Haringey, it would be entirely appropriate for Haringey to seek a voluntary contribution from the Secretary of State whose unlawful directions gave rise to the problems", it says.”

Admittedly article from 2011 – but the look on Balls face as he 'voluntarily' handed over the cheque would be priceless.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-13589138

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Jessop, but Mercedes are going for Cerberus, not Orthus. I'm not sure a three-headed beast will work well.

Mr. Eagles, cheers for the answer, though if it seems a rather rubbish reason.

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jessop, but Mercedes are going for Cerberus, not Orthus. I'm not sure a three-headed beast will work well.

Mr. Eagles, cheers for the answer, though if it seems a rather rubbish reason.

And holidays as well

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-2468691/Five-best-Antarctic-holidays-sea.html

Roger

The narrative today wasn't Unite but Sharon Shoesmith. The Bbc commentators were queuing up to put the boot in. Knowing something about the story this really pissed me off. If this is what reflecting public opinion is all about why not start campaigning to bring back corporal and capital punishment and give Nabavi his fellow reactionaries something to applaud