politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » 3 days before he lost GE2010 voters in the marginals rated Gordon Brown as best person to lead Britain through economic crisis
I came across the above finding from the final Ipsos-MORI marginals poll of the GE2010 campaign while researching the broader question of how such surveys compare with normal national polls when its comes to predicting elections.
Marginals polls are tricky to do right, I'd be a little bit cautious with them, especially the supplementals.
That said I think the discussion here tends to overstate how bad an electoral liability Gordon Brown was, not least because not many people on the left who post here were impressed with him .
We've spent a lot of time (correctly, IMHO) talking about LibDem switchers, but the other way for Cameron to win is to get people who voted for Gordon Brown. If these people exist, they sound like the kind of voters who would swing at the last minute, when they finally get around to tuning in and deciding which of the candidates looks the most prime-ministerialest.
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
"Maybe the lesson for today is the fact that Brown went on to lose in Labour’s second worst ever defeat suggests that the impact of these findings can be overstated"
Whilst we can say that Labour had a low vote share, claims of second worst defeat ever doesn't reflect the reality of modern politics and the death of the two party system.
Are we really suggesting the Gordon's 258 seats and a hung parliament is a worse result that Kinnock's 229 seats in '87 and a 50 seat tory majority?
What is interesting looking at historical figures is how much better the LD vote works for them compared to the past. The LD vote share was almost identical in '87 and '10, but they got double the seats this time round.
Anti tory tactical voting has become an established norm I guess now
Of course, "it's the economy" may mean different things for a government seeking a fourth term widely seen to have been responsible for creating an economic mess (at best, been at the scene of the crime) and a first term government clearing up someone else's mess facing the party still in denial over its roll....
YouGov Lab +7 on 40, with some eroding of Con strengths on Asylum/Immigration 27 (-4) Laura Norder 31 (-4) and Tax 26 (-5)
Londoners think their kids get the best grades, and rate Head Teachers (net important) 92, themselves, 88 ahead of the governors, 82, LEA, 67 and DoE, 71 in ensuring high standards in schools.
Just heard someone who sounded like a Labour politician (a Ballsian at that) on R4 talking about the economy - turns out it was the "impartial" (in his own words) Jonathan Portes....
What is interesting looking at historical figures is how much better the LD vote works for them compared to the past. The LD vote share was almost identical in '87 and '10, but they got double the seats this time round.
Anti tory tactical voting has become an established norm I guess now
Essentially the number of LibDem hotspots has significantly increased. The tipping point being 1997. Formerly their seats were restricted to the celtic fringe and the odd by-election retained seats. Added to that now we have a significant number of university seats, wealthy suburbs and a patchwork of rural constituencies.
There is no equivalent to the Republican tea party in Britain. In America which I know well having lived there most of my adult life the tea party is characterised more than anything by a God-fearing application of Christian biblical morality. It may seem as if some of the 'Tory' right-wing comments mirror those from across the pond but their source is so totally different that I wouldn't want people misled. On religion in general, and religious belief in politics in particular, America and Britain are poles apart.
A Labour source said: "We are acting on the basis of evidence, we are acting to uphold the integrity of our organisation. I don't think the Tories recognise those motivations."
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
We've spent a lot of time (correctly, IMHO) talking about LibDem switchers, but the other way for Cameron to win is to get people who voted for Gordon Brown. If these people exist, they sound like the kind of voters who would swing at the last minute, when they finally get around to tuning in and deciding which of the candidates looks the most prime-ministerialest.
Also worth remembering that direct switchers between Labour and Conservatives are worth twice those switching from the Lb Dems to either party in the Con-Lab marginals, because it is one less vote to your opponent at the same time as one extra vote for you.
Suppose that one-in-five Lib Dem 2010 voters switch to Labour - about 5% of the electorate. If the Tories can convince 2.5% of the electorate to switch from Labour to them, it will balance out, and this would be about one-in-twelve Labour 2010 voters.
Looking at the latest ICM poll for the Guardian, the weighted base identifies 182 Labour 2010 voters. So the Conservatives need a net transfer of 15 voters. In this poll there are 4 voters switching to their benefit, but 12 going in the other direction. Labour, though, are also losing 8 voters to UKIP and have 27 don't knows.
Supposing the Tories could win back their voters lost to Labour and win the votes of Labour voters currently supporting UKIP, then they would only need to pick up 3 more voters from the Labour don't knows to balance the Lib Dem to Labour switchers. It's far from impossible.
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Where have you been, sweltering in the heat from your MPs estate?
@Tim_Burgess: Tory millionaire MP after £6000 heating expenses while pensioners freeze. You couldn't make it up. You don't need to thanks to @nadhimzahawi
Been on hols and looking after the MiL. However I have to compliment my MP on trying to heat up the housing market single handed, but then he is an acolyte of Boy George.
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Where have you been, sweltering in the heat from your MPs estate?
@Tim_Burgess: Tory millionaire MP after £6000 heating expenses while pensioners freeze. You couldn't make it up. You don't need to thanks to @nadhimzahawi
No Labour MP's claiming heating expenses whilst their elderly constituents turn to ice blocks ??
Doesn't surprise me that most people want these things nationalised. Maybe people don't remember what public supply was like before (i'm too young), or it might just be the fact that small groups can profit from the supply of essentials where choice is an illusion. But I don't think politicians put forward good arguments in favour of private supply, especially when costs and prices only seem to go one way!
You could apply a slightly different interpretation to Mike's to the data above. Maybe the Tories failed to gain a majority precisely because they weren't leading on the economy in the marginal - Which would mean, it still is the Economy Stupid.
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Where have you been, sweltering in the heat from your MPs estate?
@Tim_Burgess: Tory millionaire MP after £6000 heating expenses while pensioners freeze. You couldn't make it up. You don't need to thanks to @nadhimzahawi
No Labour MP's claiming heating expenses whilst their elderly constituents turn to ice blocks ??
typical tim Jack.
An Iraqi immigrant boosts the energy market and he's complaining :-)
Putting the reservations about marginal polling to one side I think there were at least 2 factors behind this polling. Firstly, there is the "holding on to nurse" vote. Incumbency is an advantage, particularly in a time when dramatic action is being taken.
The second factor was the very successful fear campaign run by Mandelson during the campaign. It was a very unusual tactic. The government in office would not say what they would do, where the cuts were to fall, what they would do about tax, would not have a spending review etc. Instead their relentless focus was what the tories would do with scare stories and exaggerations abounding frightening the 6m people who then worked for the state and several million more in the third sector.
It worked. No question about it. Cynical but effective. Mandy in a sentence.
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Where have you been, sweltering in the heat from your MPs estate?
@Tim_Burgess: Tory millionaire MP after £6000 heating expenses while pensioners freeze. You couldn't make it up. You don't need to thanks to @nadhimzahawi
No Labour MP's claiming heating expenses whilst their elderly constituents turn to ice blocks ??
typical tim Jack.
An Iraqi immigrant boosts the energy market and he's complaining :-)
Have a heart!
There are two big political stories.
He can't talk about one, and won't talk about the other......
Doesn't surprise me that most people want these things nationalised. Maybe people don't remember what public supply was like before (i'm too young), or it might just be the fact that small groups can profit from the supply of essentials where choice is an illusion. But I don't think politicians put forward good arguments in favour of private supply, especially when costs and prices only seem to go one way!
Public supply was - gasp! - exactly the same as private supply, it came out of your hob and lights and you cooked and read by it. But you didn't get salespeople coming around to your house encouraging you to switch while being entirely ignorant of the paperwork involved. Nor did you end up with two companies "supplying" and charging you for your energy simultaneously, due to their woeful admin.
And we missed out on slogans like "looking after your world".
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Where have you been, sweltering in the heat from your MPs estate?
@Tim_Burgess: Tory millionaire MP after £6000 heating expenses while pensioners freeze. You couldn't make it up. You don't need to thanks to @nadhimzahawi
No Labour MP's claiming heating expenses whilst their elderly constituents turn to ice blocks ??
Some 340 MPs, some of them multi-millionaires, have taken advantage of the perk at a time when many people are struggling to pay rising utility bills.
Even Labour leader Mr Miliband, who has attacked the Government over spiralling costs, claimed £403.59 for fuel at his constituency home in Doncaster.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg claimed £254.29 for electricity and gas in his Sheffield constituency home, but David Cameron and George Osborne did not take advantage of the privilege.
Supposing the Tories could win back their voters lost to Labour and win the votes of Labour voters currently supporting UKIP, then they would only need to pick up 3 more voters from the Labour don't knows to balance the Lib Dem to Labour switchers. It's far from impossible.
Whilst it's not impossible, it's wildly improbable. You have 3 seperate 'ands' in your hypotheses, each one could perhaps been done, but the 3 groups have contracting objectives making pulling off the accumulator very very very difficult.
Maybe it's because although the economy was important to voters in 2010 it was crowded out by all the other issues and negatives that had accumulated over 13 years of Labour government.
I think Labour supporters are underestimating the strength of what will be the Con-LD government's argument (with memories still fresh of Brown) that after only 5 short years they need to finish the job.
You could apply a slightly different interpretation to Mike's to the data above. Maybe the Tories failed to gain a majority precisely because they weren't leading on the economy in the marginal - Which would mean, it still is the Economy Stupid.
Well quite but mind you that doesn't quite fit in with the never ending pattern of thread headers on PB damning the Tories chances in 2015.
Dr Carlos Vargas Silva of the Migration Observatory at Oxford University said the research suggests the net contribution of recent migrants is positive – but some groups can ‘represent a burden’.
In aggregate, it appears that EU migration is broadly positive, non-EU not so much. So, we should have been a bit smarter about who we let in, these last few years, no?
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Alan, Nice to see you back , hope you had a wonderful holiday
Good morning troops. Caroline Flint on Sky nearly shit herself when Eamonn Holmes asked her why the socialist party doesn't propose renationalisation of water and utility companies. He told her she doesn't have to govern and in the lead up to the election Labour is just promising everything.
He summed it up perfectly. We live in rip-off Britain. Everyone is ripping us off.
Meanwhile Lady Hodge the Dodge and chums now having a pop at the Duchy of Cornwall estates. If Lady Hodge and chums had been responsible for supporting the creation of as many businesses as the Prince's Trust, she could gloat her way from London to Tokyo and back umpteen times over.
Yet if the BBC refuse to repeat IDS & Co's lies they are biased.
" Introducing facts into the immigration debate is like teaching a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
Sing PB Tories, sing.
If only the bottom line on the accounts ledger was the most important thing in the world. Instead we also have to consider voters and their reactions to cultural change and impact on public services.
The public sector can pick up a few franchises in the next parliament IIRC.
Yes - that looks like it will be the extent of Ed's 'nationalisation' strategy......
That's the way to do it - will still be a significant holding, and renationalising mid contract is too expensive. We have a precedent - East Coast has run better times and increased passenger numbers since brought into the public sector. It's been a success story - the DFT have run it very well.
Doesn't surprise me that most people want these things nationalised. Maybe people don't remember what public supply was like before (i'm too young), or it might just be the fact that small groups can profit from the supply of essentials where choice is an illusion. But I don't think politicians put forward good arguments in favour of private supply, especially when costs and prices only seem to go one way!
Public supply was - gasp! - exactly the same as private supply, it came out of your hob and lights and you cooked and read by it. But you didn't get salespeople coming around to your house encouraging you to switch while being entirely ignorant of the paperwork involved. Nor did you end up with two companies "supplying" and charging you for your energy simultaneously, due to their woeful admin.
And we missed out on slogans like "looking after your world".
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Alan, Nice to see you back , hope you had a wonderful holiday
Thanks Malc.
I was on the Scilly Isles last week and got a year's weather in 6 days ! From blow your head off wind and gales to perfect sunshine sit on the beach and just about everything else in between bar snow. Good fun though and an excellect pub on the island.
On the issue of Falkirk, the entire Newsnight Scotland programme was about Falkirk. Interviews with Eric Joyce and Alistair Darling calling for open dealings. Vice Chairman of the Constituency Labour Party said they had been called to a meeting where they were denied access to the Ed inquiry report. He asked what basically was the point of keeping it from the constituency officials and members?
Falkirk is going nowhere as a political issue. It will quickly disappear from the news in Englandshire but it will fester and fester in Scotland where Labour has lots of seats to lose to Alex Salmond.
Yet if the BBC refuse to repeat IDS & Co's lies they are biased.
" Introducing facts into the immigration debate is like teaching a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
Sing PB Tories, sing.
If only the bottom line on the accounts ledger was the most important thing in the world. Instead we also have to consider voters and their reactions to cultural change and impact on public services.
Indeed - the polling on that is very interesting and a lot more nuanced than you might expect. People believe immigration is a big issue for the country, but not one that affects them very much.
Is the SNP highlighting the Falkirk business? That's entirely legitimate, of course, given the leverage intimidation that has been alleged and Brave Sir Ed's bravely running away from his own report.
On the pie chart: Clegg was only on 14%, but the Lib Dems got a lot more than that. Perhaps differential turnout partly explains the variance between the pie chart and the final result (or it could've been an off-kilter sample).
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Where have you been, sweltering in the heat from your MPs estate?
@Tim_Burgess: Tory millionaire MP after £6000 heating expenses while pensioners freeze. You couldn't make it up. You don't need to thanks to @nadhimzahawi
No Labour MP's claiming heating expenses whilst their elderly constituents turn to ice blocks ??
Some 340 MPs, some of them multi-millionaires, have taken advantage of the perk at a time when many people are struggling to pay rising utility bills.
Even Labour leader Mr Miliband, who has attacked the Government over spiralling costs, claimed £403.59 for fuel at his constituency home in Doncaster.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg claimed £254.29 for electricity and gas in his Sheffield constituency home, but David Cameron and George Osborne did not take advantage of the privilege.
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Alan, Nice to see you back , hope you had a wonderful holiday
Thanks Malc.
I was on the Scilly Isles last week and got a year's weather in 6 days ! From blow your head off wind and gales to perfect sunshine sit on the beach and just about everything else in between bar snow. Good fun though and an excellect pub on the island.
I only think that line is legitimate (ie a normalisation of the rules regarding it) if the same occurs with the Crown Estates. If Parliament wants the Royal Family's lands/businesses to operate in a standard way then it's illegitimate to at the same time have the rather odd settlement whereby the Crown Estates, which bring in a small fortune every year, are paid to the Treasury, and then the Treasury pays a much smaller amount in the Civil List to fund royal duties.
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Alan, Nice to see you back , hope you had a wonderful holiday
Thanks Malc.
I was on the Scilly Isles last week and got a year's weather in 6 days ! From blow your head off wind and gales to perfect sunshine sit on the beach and just about everything else in between bar snow. Good fun though and an excellect pub on the island.
Good to hear, you cannot go wrong as long as there is a decent pub.
Is the SNP highlighting the Falkirk business? That's entirely legitimate, of course, given the leverage intimidation that has been alleged and Brave Sir Ed's bravely running away from his own report.
On the pie chart: Clegg was only on 14%, but the Lib Dems got a lot more than that. Perhaps differential turnout partly explains the variance between the pie chart and the final result (or it could've been an off-kilter sample).
Morris, They are not making a meal of it. Everybody knows how bad Labour in Scotland are , this is normal business for them but people are not as easily fooled nowadays given they get the truth on the internet , twitter , etc. Their pals in the mainstream media cannot hide it as well nowadays.
Yet if the BBC refuse to repeat IDS & Co's lies they are biased.
" Introducing facts into the immigration debate is like teaching a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
Sing PB Tories, sing.
Hmmm,
a report written by a french immigrant and an italian immigrant finds european immigration is good. Who'd have thought it ?
What is slightly misleading is the tendency of news reports to show harvest workers toiling away when this type of "good news" story is presented whereas in fact most of these are seasonal workers from Latvia, Bulgaria etc who are generally here for less than six months a year. In all year round, non-agricultural but low-skilled sectors I'm not sure the benefits of immigration are quite so clear cut.
Mr. Observer, I'm not sure people should be expected to pay the heating bill of their workplace.
I don't disagree. It's just slightly disingenuous to say that Dave and George have not claimed anything without also pointing out that they live in residences where the energy costs are covered by the taxpayer.
"Heating and lighting the average home has become a lot costlier over the past decade with gas up 52 per cent and electricity 32 per cent. Even George Osborne, the Chancellor, found it hard to keep the costs down during the long, cold winter. The latest Treasury accounts show that he enjoyed taxable benefits of £6,900, which relate to heating, lighting and other expenses in his personal flat at 11 Downing Street."
Mr. Jonathan, perhaps, I hadn't spotted a leading line before. Another aspect could be '...out of the current crisis'. That could mean they feel Brown was best to get us out of the immediate danger zone (insanity though that view was/is) but that afterwards someone else would be better.
So, there's a temporal aspect to the question as well.
Despite the positive figures in the decade since the millennium, the study found that between 1995 and 2011, immigrants from non-EEA countries claimed more in benefits than they paid in taxes, mainly because they tended to have more children than native Britons.
Not surprised Wee-Timmy treats the full research with disdain: The truth and his goodself are not good bed-fellows. The fact that the EU-funded Al-Beeb is [headline] reporting a distorted picture should not come as a surprise to a cognisant amoeba: Labour voters will believe their mistruths.
As for the actual research itself: Meaningless fodder based on arbitrary time constraints. If it is trying to salve concerns about immigration it has failed; and has itself become a political football for the bigots that occupy the finges on the left and right. Dumb!
On-topic: The Tories have won the economic argument. REd still exhibits childish dreams about magick-money-trees: What a twunt....
Some 340 MPs, some of them multi-millionaires, have taken advantage of [heating expenses] at a time when many people are struggling to pay rising utility bills.
Even Labour leader Mr Miliband, who has attacked the Government over spiralling costs, claimed £403.59 for fuel at his constituency home in Doncaster.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg claimed £254.29 for electricity and gas in his Sheffield constituency home, but David Cameron and George Osborne did not take advantage of the privilege.
To be fair, we don't know what all those MPs who claimed heating expenses actually did with the money (AFAIK). It's possible they claimed and then donated it all to Age UK or some similar good cause working with older people...
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Alan, Nice to see you back , hope you had a wonderful holiday
Thanks Malc.
I was on the Scilly Isles last week and got a year's weather in 6 days ! From blow your head off wind and gales to perfect sunshine sit on the beach and just about everything else in between bar snow. Good fun though and an excellect pub on the island.
Which island? It must have been a bit choppy.
Tresco, really relaxing, it's like living in an Enid Blyton novel.
Saw your post from yesterday, hope it all works out well, sometimes the surprises have a tendancy to be for the better in the long term.
Of course it's not surprising that fewer immigrants claim out-of-work benefits, and more can claim in-work benefits, as the majority will come here to work and make a better life for themselves. Hover these figures do not address the question of whether the benefit or immigration rules are too lax. It may still be the case that many of these people shouldn't be entitled to benefits, or been allowed to settle here in the first place.
Falkirk is going nowhere as a political issue. It will quickly disappear from the news in Englandshire but it will fester and fester in Scotland where Labour has lots of seats to lose to Alex Salmond.
Suggesting that it won't even need a 'Yes' vote for Labour to be in trouble, GE-wise; they might lose several Scotland seats even if they remain in the UK. Mind you, perhaps the Falkirk scandal (if that's not too strong a word) will swing the independence referendum towards 'Yes'?
Doesn't surprise me that most people want these things nationalised. Maybe people don't remember what public supply was like before (i'm too young), or it might just be the fact that small groups can profit from the supply of essentials where choice is an illusion. But I don't think politicians put forward good arguments in favour of private supply, especially when costs and prices only seem to go one way!
Public supply was - gasp! - exactly the same as private supply, it came out of your hob and lights and you cooked and read by it. But you didn't get salespeople coming around to your house encouraging you to switch while being entirely ignorant of the paperwork involved. Nor did you end up with two companies "supplying" and charging you for your energy simultaneously, due to their woeful admin.
And we missed out on slogans like "looking after your world".
Actually all that sort of crap did happen under nationalisation.
Much of every That's Life episode was taken up by the incompetance of the utility boards.
Is the SNP highlighting the Falkirk business? That's entirely legitimate, of course, given the leverage intimidation that has been alleged and Brave Sir Ed's bravely running away from his own report.
snip
As you say, the SNP leader would have every right to intervene in the Falkirk vote rigging scandal – However, with the likes of Alistair Darling, the former Labour Chancellor, Jack Straw, the former Labour Home Secretary and Johann Lamond, the leader of Scottish Labour, all calling for Miliband to reopen his inquiry, Alex Salmond’s intervention could just cloud the issue and be an unnecessary distraction in this shoddy affait.
As an aside, I did find this comment amusing from the ubiquitous ‘leading member of the shadow cabinet’ who said: "Ed Miliband stuck his neck out quite far in ordering the initial inquiry but something led him to pull it again double quick. Now he just wants everything to go away but it won't.”
Story still rumbling on I see, and no doubt will get more dirty as vested interests attempt to close it down further.
Brogan (newsletter) gets the import of Falkirk to Labour in Scotland:
"Yesterday's decision by Labour HQ in London to issue a ruling that appears to challenge the will of senior figures of the party in Scotland is potentially explosive. There are enough doubts about how the party is run nationally for this to make a difference. Mr Miliband cannot afford to look like any more like the London fixer that he already is. The party's traditional strength, particularly in manpower and resources, once rested heavily in Scotland. If it wants to restore its strength in Holyrood politics and see off the SNP on independence, Labour must avoid giving the impression that its London operation is rigging the reality in Falkirk for the benefit of Unite's (English) leadership."
And also to the UK as a whole:
"The Mail has been leading the charge in a somewhat retro reds-under-the-bed attack on Labour over the Falkirk business. Tales of union skullduggery and Labour's paymasters may feel a bit hackneyed, but over time they achieve potency; Caroline Flint's comment on Today that "We don't publish internal documents in the Labour Party" will hardly help either. The drumbeat of stories about excessive union influence has a cumulative effect. It settles in the public consciousness and over time convinces voters, in the back of their minds, that Mr Miliband is not his own man. The story is reaching that point of critical mass when it becomes impossible for a leader to resist demands for publication and full transparency. Revolt in Scotland and a constant rumble of union dirty tricks. At some point the detail ceases to matter, it's the handling that does the damage."
The public sector can pick up a few franchises in the next parliament IIRC.
Yes - that looks like it will be the extent of Ed's 'nationalisation' strategy......
That's the way to do it - will still be a significant holding, and renationalising mid contract is too expensive. We have a precedent - East Coast has run better times and increased passenger numbers since brought into the public sector. It's been a success story - the DFT have run it very well.
You have to be careful before reading too much into EC's figures. There are several factors in play:
1) NR apparently completed some large scale engineering works shortly before the end of the contract, improving punctuality. Punctuality goes down during engineering works, as does passenger satisfaction, for the obvious reasons. 2) Several TOCs are returning equivalent amounts to the taxpayer. 3) The biggie: there is competition on the EC route from two OpenAccess operators - First Hull Trains and Grand Central. This keeps the main operator sharp, and also reduces the track access charges payable to NR. 4) The 'return to taxpayer' figures are not as simple as they seem. See (1) for the latest figures.
Indeed, it could be argued that OA should be extended more across the network.
There needs to be more honesty in the rail debate on all sides. For instance, whilst I welcome Network Rail's investment in the network, the off-the-books taxpayer-guaranteed debt is very worrying. There will soon be a time when operators will be forced to pay more realistic track access charges ...
Unite are still convinced that it is a conspiracy by right wing newspapers...must be written by David Spart.
"Reacting to the clarification tonight by the Labour Party of the status of statements given by the Kane family in connection with the party's Falkirk inquiry, a spokesman for Unite the union said: "Unite welcomes the Labour Party statement, which confirms that despite all the bluster in the Daily Mail and the Sunday Times, absolutely nothing new has emerged to contradict or undermine the finding of both the Labour Party and Police Scotland that Unite had broken neither the law nor Labour rules in Falkirk.
"The real scandal is the conduct of elements of the national media, which have shown a wilful readiness to disregard any facts which do not fit their anti-union, anti-Labour agenda. We appeal to the media to now accept this clarification and leave the people of Falkirk in peace."
FWIW looking at subsamples (hmm), YGs have shown Labour's lead over the SNP relatively slim in recent days (37-30 today), perhaps reflecting interest in Falkirk up there. Conversely, Labour's English share is slightly higher than the overall figure suggests. But it's all pretty minor, despite the Mail's best efforts. I think the Mail's Ralph M debacle has damaged them as a witness on anything to do with Labour - people say oh, they're obsessed and shrug.
On topic, people think the economy very important, but are not convinced that it's really in anyone's control beyond a bit of marginal tinkering. Nor do they see a consistent line - one moment, everything must be cut because the deficit must be curbed immediately, next moment there's lots of cash available for this and that nice thing. They've concluded that things are gradually picking up but it's not particularly due to anything the government is doing, and the improvement has not helped the Conservative score one iota.
"Immigrants to the UK since 2000 have a made a "substantial" contribution to public finances, a report says.
The study by University College London said recent immigrants were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than people born in Britain.
The authors said rather than being a "drain", their contribution had been "remarkably strong"."
So if they have made such as substantial contribution it means the dire economic performance of the last Labour govt. was even more manically incompetent than we thought, even the immigrant "bonus" couldn't bail them out !
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Alan, Nice to see you back , hope you had a wonderful holiday
Thanks Malc.
I was on the Scilly Isles last week and got a year's weather in 6 days ! From blow your head off wind and gales to perfect sunshine sit on the beach and just about everything else in between bar snow. Good fun though and an excellect pub on the island.
Which island? It must have been a bit choppy.
Tresco, really relaxing, it's like living in an Enid Blyton novel.
Saw your post from yesterday, hope it all works out well, sometimes the surprises have a tendancy to be for the better in the long term.
They really are lovely, aren't they? Never been to Tresco, but have spent time on both St Mary's and Bryher. It's a whole little world over there.
I am sure it will all work out with the boy. I think he is just a bit all over the place at the moment and it's been a real leap up for him in terms of training, intensity and time demands. He's not really known what level of commitment is needed to be a serious player up to now and it seems like he has decided he wants to play for fun and no more. That's absolutely fair enough - there's a big world out there that you can't enjoy if all you are doing is training, playing, studying and recovering; I know I could not have done that at 19. It was just a bit of a surprise yesterday as he had spent so many years working towards it.
Unite are still convinced that it is a conspiracy by right wing newspapers......
That would include the Sunday Mirror?
English Labour and English Unite really don't get Falkirk - and Milband's high handed dismissal of senior Scottish requests to re-open Falkirk are not going down well - some are now saying Lamont's position is untenable......
@IanDunt: Sir Andrew Green admits it: EU immigration is "clearly positive". #Today
Assads mate from Migration Watch taken apart with facts
Really tim ?
The report says that EA immigration is positive but that only one third of total immigration is from EA. The two thirds that aren't are mildly negative, and that's including the huge boost Lynton has given it. As for jobs 2.3 million going to immigrants versus 1 million to "natives" seems a strange definition of success. A ratio the other way is what the country needs.
On topic, people think the economy very important, but are not convinced that it's really in anyone's control beyond a bit of marginal tinkering. Nor do they see a consistent line - one moment, everything must be cut because the deficit must be curbed immediately, next moment there's lots of cash available for this and that nice thing. They've concluded that things are gradually picking up but it's not particularly due to anything the government is doing, and the improvement has not helped the Conservative score one iota.
Extraordinary. Do you actually believe that people aren't convinced that the economy isn't really in anyone's control?
They have got to you Nick, you used to be reasonably independent of thought; that line is preposterous.
The economy needs managing and managing well for longer than the next soundbite. The Labour Party manifestly did not do this.
That said, if that really is your belief, that the economy is out of anyone's hands, and that is also the Labour Party line, then it's confirmation that Labour should be kept out of power for, well, forever.
@IanDunt: Sir Andrew Green admits it: EU immigration is "clearly positive". #Today
Assads mate from Migration Watch taken apart with facts
It's amazing that with the supposed great boon of unlimited immigration the British economy has performed so disasterously since 2000.
Clearly the only conclusion is that the Labour government was even more disasterous than previously thought.
But with incompetant liars like Darling and Brown, with their tax increases on the low paid and bailouts for bankers, in charge that's not surprising.
Goodness - can you imagine how even crapper the economy would have been under Labour if they hadn't arranged for £10Bn a quarter to be sucked out of housing equity and for all these cheap workers to come in and drive down wages for the native working class ?
A Ponzi scheme based on borrowing - Leverage Labour were truly awful.
Funny how old-fashioned views of the parties persist. The Conservatives are efficient but heartless, a little like the Wehrmacht 1939 -1942. Labour's heart is in the right place but they're a bit ... gormless. And the LDs like motherhood, apple pie, and foreigners.
No matter what evidence there is to the contrary, that is their brand
Problem with immigration is that when people are talking about it, they are often talking about different things.
Of course it's positive when you're talking about high skilled high earners coming to work in the country, yet most people which are anti-immigration don't see that, they see non-skilled workers, or people with no jobs.
@IanDunt: Sir Andrew Green admits it: EU immigration is "clearly positive". #Today
Assads mate from Migration Watch taken apart with facts
It's amazing that with the supposed great boon of unlimited immigration the British economy has performed so disasterously since 2000.
Clearly the only conclusion is that the Labour government was even more disasterous than previously thought.
But with incompetant liars like Darling and Brown, with their tax increases on the low paid and bailouts for bankers, in charge that's not surprising.
If you want a laugh read the report's details. Apparently all EA immigration is a good thing and outdoes the "natives". Non-EA immigration ( the major share ) is a bit iffy ( was this report sponsored by the EU ? ). But the net effect is a £25bn boost to govt finances over 10 years or about £2.5 bn per annum. So 4 million immigrants give you about £600 benefit each per annum. It doesn't even cover the house price inflation or the extra infrastructure that's needed.
The more you think about the UCL research the less weight should be accorded to it. It does not compare apples with apples but with orang-utangs.
Your average Jonnie Foreigner [IIRC] does not qualify for most benefits until they have worked for two-years [in the UK]. If one assumes UCL used stringent analysis then their sample is from 2000 to 2012. Ergo one-sixth of the sample is highly unlikely to be entitled to state-support and would need to work to sustain themselves. *
Ofcourse I need access to the research to make more informed comment. No doubt some people are happy with copy-n-paste Guardian editorials though....
* Hence the 1995 time-constraint paints a different picture. People who decide to settle tend to become consumers of the gross state-largesse....
And don't forget that while immigrants have made a positive contribution economically, we now have the healthiest demographic profile in Europe while much of the continent ages and Germany plays catch up.
Get down on your knees and say thank you.
Glad you aren't arguing that Leverage Labour weren't crap for the economy anymore.
"Ministers at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) are to decide this month whether to immediately scrap all of the £300m Universal Credit IT systems and start again from scratch."
Are there any PB Tories prepared to back this not clever enough, pathological liar, failed ex leader being given a flagship reform seemingly because he wandered around Easterhouse with a bible long enough for people to forget how third rate he is?
How incompetent. Much more should have been squandered, like the £~10 billion (and counting) Labour squandered on the NHS IT project.
These projects are by their very nature expensive, and need excellent senior management. I wonder if there is a problem with civil servants with such expertise leaving for more money in the private sector companies implementing the projects?
And don't forget that while immigrants have made a positive contribution economically, we now have the healthiest demographic profile in Europe while much of the continent ages and Germany plays catch up.
Get down on your knees and say thank you.
Err we're worse off, real wages haven't risen for a decade and a half, we have 4 million extra people and no housing for them, we have 2.5 million unemployed and you want thanks for this ?
Extraordinary. Do you actually believe that people aren't convinced that the economy isn't really in anyone's control?
They have got to you Nick, you used to be reasonably independent of thought; that line is preposterous.
The economy needs managing and managing well for longer than the next soundbite. The Labour Party manifestly did not do this.
That said, if that really is your belief, that the economy is out of anyone's hands, and that is also the Labour Party line, then it's confirmation that Labour should be kept out of power for, well, forever.
No, I don't usually give my views here - it's a waste of time as people either agree or disagree according to preference and we spend half a thread arguing about them.
I usually comment on what it seems to me that most people think. And yes, my experience (and with respect I guess I talk to a lot more voters than you?) is that most people think of the economy as largely driven by world events and hard-to-control individual and corporate decisions. As a result of these hard-to-control events, they think that the Government has a certain amount of money to spend, and they do see differences between the parties on what they do with that money.
If you want my personal view, it's that UK Government decisions are very important, though not decisive, in economic development, and that generally Labour does a good job. But that's deacon-thinks-Pope-is-Catholic stuff, and doesn't really add to the interest of pb.
Comments
That said I think the discussion here tends to overstate how bad an electoral liability Gordon Brown was, not least because not many people on the left who post here were impressed with him
.
We've spent a lot of time (correctly, IMHO) talking about LibDem switchers, but the other way for Cameron to win is to get people who voted for Gordon Brown. If these people exist, they sound like the kind of voters who would swing at the last minute, when they finally get around to tuning in and deciding which of the candidates looks the most prime-ministerialest.
Whilst we can say that Labour had a low vote share, claims of second worst defeat ever doesn't reflect the reality of modern politics and the death of the two party system.
Are we really suggesting the Gordon's 258 seats and a hung parliament is a worse result that Kinnock's 229 seats in '87 and a 50 seat tory majority?
Anti tory tactical voting has become an established norm I guess now
YouGov Lab +7 on 40, with some eroding of Con strengths on Asylum/Immigration 27 (-4) Laura Norder 31 (-4) and Tax 26 (-5)
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/0m7gxef7e6/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-041113.pdf
Also YouGov publish the London schools research Carola mentioned on Sunday:
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/biz1ol8ka2/YouGov-London-Councils-Survey-Free-School-Parents-Results-130920.pdf
Londoners think their kids get the best grades, and rate Head Teachers (net important) 92, themselves, 88 ahead of the governors, 82, LEA, 67 and DoE, 71 in ensuring high standards in schools.
2 hours 32 minutes 32 seconds
"UK growth to pick up in 2014 – NIESR
Thinktank upgrades forecasts for this year and next – but warns economy too dependent on squeezed consumers"
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/nov/05/uk-growth-2014-niesr
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10426247/Labour-accused-of-new-cover-up-over-Falkirk-vote-rigging.html
A breath taking final comment
A Labour source said: "We are acting on the basis of evidence, we are acting to uphold the integrity of our organisation. I don't think the Tories recognise those motivations."
Guffaw !
New Labour the worst government ever.
Suppose that one-in-five Lib Dem 2010 voters switch to Labour - about 5% of the electorate. If the Tories can convince 2.5% of the electorate to switch from Labour to them, it will balance out, and this would be about one-in-twelve Labour 2010 voters.
Looking at the latest ICM poll for the Guardian, the weighted base identifies 182 Labour 2010 voters. So the Conservatives need a net transfer of 15 voters. In this poll there are 4 voters switching to their benefit, but 12 going in the other direction. Labour, though, are also losing 8 voters to UKIP and have 27 don't knows.
Supposing the Tories could win back their voters lost to Labour and win the votes of Labour voters currently supporting UKIP, then they would only need to pick up 3 more voters from the Labour don't knows to balance the Lib Dem to Labour switchers. It's far from impossible.
2 hours 2 minutes 2 seconds
NATIONALISE ENERGY AND RAIL COMPANIES, SAY PUBLIC
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/04/nationalise-energy-and-rail-companies-say-public/
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/tu07589ap6/YG-Archive-131028-Class.pdf
Doesn't surprise me that most people want these things nationalised. Maybe people don't remember what public supply was like before (i'm too young), or it might just be the fact that small groups can profit from the supply of essentials where choice is an illusion. But I don't think politicians put forward good arguments in favour of private supply, especially when costs and prices only seem to go one way!
Maybe the Tories failed to gain a majority precisely because they weren't leading on the economy in the marginal - Which would mean, it still is the Economy Stupid.
An Iraqi immigrant boosts the energy market and he's complaining :-)
The second factor was the very successful fear campaign run by Mandelson during the campaign. It was a very unusual tactic. The government in office would not say what they would do, where the cuts were to fall, what they would do about tax, would not have a spending review etc. Instead their relentless focus was what the tories would do with scare stories and exaggerations abounding frightening the 6m people who then worked for the state and several million more in the third sector.
It worked. No question about it. Cynical but effective. Mandy in a sentence.
There are two big political stories.
He can't talk about one, and won't talk about the other......
And we missed out on slogans like "looking after your world".
"Red Ed, union vote riggers and a stench that makes him unfit for No. 10"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2487443/MAX-HASTINGS-Red-Ed-union-vote-riggers-stench-makes-unfit-No-10.html#ixzz2jkpPCHFb
Even Labour leader Mr Miliband, who has attacked the Government over spiralling costs, claimed £403.59 for fuel at his constituency home in Doncaster.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg claimed £254.29 for electricity and gas in his Sheffield constituency home, but David Cameron and George Osborne did not take advantage of the privilege.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2486858/MPs-including-Ed-Miliband-Nick-Clegg-energy-bills-paid-expenses.html
The public sector can pick up a few franchises in the next parliament IIRC.
I think Labour supporters are underestimating the strength of what will be the Con-LD government's argument (with memories still fresh of Brown) that after only 5 short years they need to finish the job.
a report written by a french immigrant and an italian immigrant finds european immigration is good. Who'd have thought it ?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487501/How-migrants-outside-Europe-leave-100billion-hole-public-purse-Amount-taken-benefits-services-14-higher-money-back.html
Dr Carlos Vargas Silva of the Migration Observatory at Oxford University said the research suggests the net contribution of recent migrants is positive – but some groups can ‘represent a burden’.
In aggregate, it appears that EU migration is broadly positive, non-EU not so much.
So, we should have been a bit smarter about who we let in, these last few years, no?
He summed it up perfectly. We live in rip-off Britain. Everyone is ripping us off.
Meanwhile Lady Hodge the Dodge and chums now having a pop at the Duchy of Cornwall estates. If Lady Hodge and chums had been responsible for supporting the creation of as many businesses as the Prince's Trust, she could gloat her way from London to Tokyo and back umpteen times over.
I was on the Scilly Isles last week and got a year's weather in 6 days ! From blow your head off wind and gales to perfect sunshine sit on the beach and just about everything else in between bar snow. Good fun though and an excellect pub on the island.
Falkirk is going nowhere as a political issue. It will quickly disappear from the news in Englandshire but it will fester and fester in Scotland where Labour has lots of seats to lose to Alex Salmond.
Is the SNP highlighting the Falkirk business? That's entirely legitimate, of course, given the leverage intimidation that has been alleged and Brave Sir Ed's bravely running away from his own report.
On the pie chart: Clegg was only on 14%, but the Lib Dems got a lot more than that. Perhaps differential turnout partly explains the variance between the pie chart and the final result (or it could've been an off-kilter sample).
I only think that line is legitimate (ie a normalisation of the rules regarding it) if the same occurs with the Crown Estates. If Parliament wants the Royal Family's lands/businesses to operate in a standard way then it's illegitimate to at the same time have the rather odd settlement whereby the Crown Estates, which bring in a small fortune every year, are paid to the Treasury, and then the Treasury pays a much smaller amount in the Civil List to fund royal duties.
"Heating and lighting the average home has become a lot costlier over the past decade with gas up 52 per cent and electricity 32 per cent. Even George Osborne, the Chancellor, found it hard to keep the costs down during the long, cold winter. The latest Treasury accounts show that he enjoyed taxable benefits of £6,900, which relate to heating, lighting and other expenses in his personal flat at 11 Downing Street."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10238349/George-Osborne-reduces-energy-costs-at-Downing-Street.html
The key question would have been: Who has the policies to solve the (& avoid another) economic crisis?
Leverage Labour can keep their funds flowing nicely.
So, there's a temporal aspect to the question as well.
As for the actual research itself: Meaningless fodder based on arbitrary time constraints. If it is trying to salve concerns about immigration it has failed; and has itself become a political football for the bigots that occupy the finges on the left and right. Dumb!
On-topic: The Tories have won the economic argument. REd still exhibits childish dreams about magick-money-trees: What a twunt....
Saw your post from yesterday, hope it all works out well, sometimes the surprises have a tendancy to be for the better in the long term.
Determine your true fitness age, you may get a surprise
http://www.ntnu.edu/cerg/vo2max
30 minutes
Much of every That's Life episode was taken up by the incompetance of the utility boards.
As an aside, I did find this comment amusing from the ubiquitous ‘leading member of the shadow cabinet’ who said: "Ed Miliband stuck his neck out quite far in ordering the initial inquiry but something led him to pull it again double quick. Now he just wants everything to go away but it won't.”
Story still rumbling on I see, and no doubt will get more dirty as vested interests attempt to close it down further.
"Yesterday's decision by Labour HQ in London to issue a ruling that appears to challenge the will of senior figures of the party in Scotland is potentially explosive. There are enough doubts about how the party is run nationally for this to make a difference. Mr Miliband cannot afford to look like any more like the London fixer that he already is. The party's traditional strength, particularly in manpower and resources, once rested heavily in Scotland. If it wants to restore its strength in Holyrood politics and see off the SNP on independence, Labour must avoid giving the impression that its London operation is rigging the reality in Falkirk for the benefit of Unite's (English) leadership."
And also to the UK as a whole:
"The Mail has been leading the charge in a somewhat retro reds-under-the-bed attack on Labour over the Falkirk business. Tales of union skullduggery and Labour's paymasters may feel a bit hackneyed, but over time they achieve potency; Caroline Flint's comment on Today that "We don't publish internal documents in the Labour Party" will hardly help either. The drumbeat of stories about excessive union influence has a cumulative effect. It settles in the public consciousness and over time convinces voters, in the back of their minds, that Mr Miliband is not his own man. The story is reaching that point of critical mass when it becomes impossible for a leader to resist demands for publication and full transparency. Revolt in Scotland and a constant rumble of union dirty tricks. At some point the detail ceases to matter, it's the handling that does the damage."
1) NR apparently completed some large scale engineering works shortly before the end of the contract, improving punctuality. Punctuality goes down during engineering works, as does passenger satisfaction, for the obvious reasons.
2) Several TOCs are returning equivalent amounts to the taxpayer.
3) The biggie: there is competition on the EC route from two OpenAccess operators - First Hull Trains and Grand Central. This keeps the main operator sharp, and also reduces the track access charges payable to NR.
4) The 'return to taxpayer' figures are not as simple as they seem. See (1) for the latest figures.
Indeed, it could be argued that OA should be extended more across the network.
There needs to be more honesty in the rail debate on all sides. For instance, whilst I welcome Network Rail's investment in the network, the off-the-books taxpayer-guaranteed debt is very worrying. There will soon be a time when operators will be forced to pay more realistic track access charges ...
(1): https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rail-subsidy-per-passenger-mile
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/record-view-ed-miliband-must-2677645
Unite are still convinced that it is a conspiracy by right wing newspapers...must be written by David Spart.
"Reacting to the clarification tonight by the Labour Party of the status of statements given by the Kane family in connection with the party's Falkirk inquiry, a spokesman for Unite the union said:
"Unite welcomes the Labour Party statement, which confirms that despite all the bluster in the Daily Mail and the Sunday Times, absolutely nothing new has emerged to contradict or undermine the finding of both the Labour Party and Police Scotland that Unite had broken neither the law nor Labour rules in Falkirk.
"The real scandal is the conduct of elements of the national media, which have shown a wilful readiness to disregard any facts which do not fit their anti-union, anti-Labour agenda. We appeal to the media to now accept this clarification and leave the people of Falkirk in peace."
http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/unite-reaction-to-labour-party-statement-on-falkirk/
On topic, people think the economy very important, but are not convinced that it's really in anyone's control beyond a bit of marginal tinkering. Nor do they see a consistent line - one moment, everything must be cut because the deficit must be curbed immediately, next moment there's lots of cash available for this and that nice thing. They've concluded that things are gradually picking up but it's not particularly due to anything the government is doing, and the improvement has not helped the Conservative score one iota.
I am sure it will all work out with the boy. I think he is just a bit all over the place at the moment and it's been a real leap up for him in terms of training, intensity and time demands. He's not really known what level of commitment is needed to be a serious player up to now and it seems like he has decided he wants to play for fun and no more. That's absolutely fair enough - there's a big world out there that you can't enjoy if all you are doing is training, playing, studying and recovering; I know I could not have done that at 19. It was just a bit of a surprise yesterday as he had spent so many years working towards it.
MP's have decided to increase questioning by 5250%
English Labour and English Unite really don't get Falkirk - and Milband's high handed dismissal of senior Scottish requests to re-open Falkirk are not going down well - some are now saying Lamont's position is untenable......
10 minutes 10 seconds
The report says that EA immigration is positive but that only one third of total immigration is from EA. The two thirds that aren't are mildly negative, and that's including the huge boost Lynton has given it. As for jobs 2.3 million going to immigrants versus 1 million to "natives" seems a strange definition of success. A ratio the other way is what the country needs.
Clearly the only conclusion is that the Labour government was even more disasterous than previously thought.
But with incompetant liars like Darling and Brown, with their tax increases on the low paid and bailouts for bankers, in charge that's not surprising.
They have got to you Nick, you used to be reasonably independent of thought; that line is preposterous.
The economy needs managing and managing well for longer than the next soundbite. The Labour Party manifestly did not do this.
That said, if that really is your belief, that the economy is out of anyone's hands, and that is also the Labour Party line, then it's confirmation that Labour should be kept out of power for, well, forever.
A Ponzi scheme based on borrowing - Leverage Labour were truly awful.
Con 298 .. Lab 280 .. LibDem 38 .. SNP 10 .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. Ukip 1 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Speaker 1 .. Ind 0
Conservatives 28 seats short of a majority.
Funny how old-fashioned views of the parties persist. The Conservatives are efficient but heartless, a little like the Wehrmacht 1939 -1942. Labour's heart is in the right place but they're a bit ... gormless. And the LDs like motherhood, apple pie, and foreigners.
No matter what evidence there is to the contrary, that is their brand
Of course it's positive when you're talking about high skilled high earners coming to work in the country, yet most people which are anti-immigration don't see that, they see non-skilled workers, or people with no jobs.
Your average Jonnie Foreigner [IIRC] does not qualify for most benefits until they have worked for two-years [in the UK]. If one assumes UCL used stringent analysis then their sample is from 2000 to 2012. Ergo one-sixth of the sample is highly unlikely to be entitled to state-support and would need to work to sustain themselves. *
Ofcourse I need access to the research to make more informed comment. No doubt some people are happy with copy-n-paste Guardian editorials though....
* Hence the 1995 time-constraint paints a different picture. People who decide to settle tend to become consumers of the gross state-largesse....
A small step...
Ok .... up shortly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24140967
http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/editors-blog/2013/09/10-years-tickling-the-toes-of.html
These projects are by their very nature expensive, and need excellent senior management. I wonder if there is a problem with civil servants with such expertise leaving for more money in the private sector companies implementing the projects?
Con 298 (-8*) .. Leverage Labour-Unite 280 (+22) .. LibDem 38 (-19) .. SNP 10 (+4) .. PC 2 (-1) .. NI 18 .. Ukip 1 (+1) .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Speaker 1* .. Ind 0 (-1)
Which in perspective is not much change - unless you are a LD..
I usually comment on what it seems to me that most people think. And yes, my experience (and with respect I guess I talk to a lot more voters than you?) is that most people think of the economy as largely driven by world events and hard-to-control individual and corporate decisions. As a result of these hard-to-control events, they think that the Government has a certain amount of money to spend, and they do see differences between the parties on what they do with that money.
If you want my personal view, it's that UK Government decisions are very important, though not decisive, in economic development, and that generally Labour does a good job. But that's deacon-thinks-Pope-is-Catholic stuff, and doesn't really add to the interest of pb.