I agree - the smart move is for Miliband to back a referendum. And to do so as soon as possible.
Yet it seems far from likely that he will.
The argument that Labour used when Cameron first committed to a referendum way down the road was "four years of uncertainty". But that becomes less convincing with every month that ticks by.
On topic - if Miliband comes out for a referendum he will definitely win the GE. Mainly as Ukippers have no reason to vote Con.
Europe came second on "most important issue" for Kippers in Populus (?) poll the other day, behind immigration as a whole.
Anything that lets Miliband/Labour in is almost certainly bad for them - referendum or not.
Conservative strategy with UKIP will be precisely that anything which splits the right wing vote increases the likelihood of a LibLabLeft bloc.
"Vote Farage, Get Miliband - more Europe, more immigrants etc etc."
The question is how much they'll take heed of the warning. It's easy to say you'll vote a particular way when you aren't actually being called upon to do it, but on judgement day how many will stick with the devil they know?
So, having sorted out the economy, the over management of the health service (this one is just to wind up Tim), education, the deficit, absurd levels of benefits, the mess made of the MOD procurement budget and the need for nuclear power Henry now wants the Coalition to put to bed the thorny question of a European referendum as well.
What does he think a Miliband government should do? Sit and contemplate it's magnificent inheritance in awe? In fairness that largely worked for Blair until Iraq but it does seem a bit greedy.
It is the job of governments to govern.
It is the job of oppositions to oppose.
I'm always amazed by governing parties that behave like oppositions and wonder why the opposition is not governing very well. You Tories act as though you do not really want to be in government.
Do the SNP govt blame every waking moment on Labour, or is that just a pathetic English Tory thing?
It is that just a pathetic English Tory thing.
The current Scottish government almost never blames things on the Dewar, McLeish or McConnell governments. In fact, post mortem, Dewar is far more respected and fondly remembered in pro-independence circles than he is within his own party. McLeish has been a revelation, and is the nearest Scotland has to an elder statesman. McConnell is almost entirely forgotten already, which is quite astonishing when you remember that he only left office six years ago.
There would be little point in blaming McConnell for anything for the simple reason that most voters would shrug their shoulders and say "Who?"
Note how the Labour/Lib Dem coalition governments had four finance ministers in 5 years, whereas the SNP government has had the same finance minister throughout its term in office. That makes it hard to "blame" previous administrations because nobody remembers the nobodies who were responsible.
Well, at least I'll say this for Henry's piece: at least he doesn't even try to pretend that he sees this as anything other than a cynical party-political game.
As Camerons fantasy negotiation is.
Of course you're smart enough to know that the signing back into the police and security measures involves a big transfer of power to Europe which triggers Daves referendum lock.
No-one ever claimed that undoing the God-awful messes which Blair and Brown left was going to be easy, and that is perhaps even more true of our relationship with the EU than almost anything else. So, yes, renegotiation is going to be incredibly hard. It might even be impossible. That is a statement of the obvious; we shouldn't be starting from here.
If it turns out that it is impossible, or (more likely) that we get only limited concessions, then the country will need to decide whether we leave or not. The balance of the argument is, IMO, moving slightly towards us having to leave, mainly because of the attacks on the City following the last government's completely unnecessary surrender of regulatory powers over our most important industry to people indifferent to or actively hostile to it. What an A1 disaster of Blair and Brown that was - was can they have been thinking??? It's going to be extremely hard to reverse, and, if we can't reverse it, we might have to leave.
But it would be bonkers to have a referendum whilst all these matters are still in flux, and the EU itself is likely to change. The Eurozone banking union issue hasn't gone away - there will have to be big changes in the Eurozone.
On topic - if Miliband comes out for a referendum he will definitely win the GE. Mainly as Ukippers have no reason to vote Con.
Europe came second on "most important issue" for Kippers in Populus (?) poll the other day, behind immigration as a whole.
Anything that lets Miliband/Labour in is almost certainly bad for them - referendum or not.
Conservative strategy with UKIP will be precisely that anything which splits the right wing vote increases the likelihood of a LibLabLeft bloc.
"Vote Farage, Get Miliband - more Europe, more immigrants etc etc."
The question is how much they'll take heed of the warning. It's easy to say you'll vote a particular way when you aren't actually being called upon to do it, but on judgement day how many will stick with the devil they know?
I'm not convinced 'Vote Farage, Get Miliband' will work that well. After all, 'Vote Clegg, Get Brown/Hung Parliament' didn't exactly send voters running to the Tories. I agree that people not going through with a UKIP vote might have some impact though.
Well, at least I'll say this for Henry's piece: at least he doesn't even try to pretend that he sees this as anything other than a cynical party-political game.
As Camerons fantasy negotiation is.
Of course you're smart enough to know that the signing back into the police and security measures involves a big transfer of power to Europe which triggers Daves referendum lock.
I love the way Richard implies that Cameron's referendum move was principled and honourable, and was not forced upon him by agitating right wing backbenchers and UKIP's rise in the polls. I wonder if he had a straight face as he typed.
I love the way Richard implies that Cameron's referendum move was principled and honourable, and was not forced upon him by agitating right wing backbenchers and UKIP's rise in the polls. I wonder if he had a straight face as he typed.
What utter garbage. Of course the timing was influenced by the need to placate parts of the party. So what? Cameron is still the only UK party leader with a coherent position on the EU: try to reform it, not only in Britain's interest, but the EU's as a whole, and then put the reformed package to the people to decide on once and for all.
The contrast between how well UKIP are doing in northern England and how badly they are doing over the border in Scotland is quite startling.
Not really, there's already an alternative to a twit-led Tory Party to oppose Labour in Scotland. In the North of England there isn't.
The interesting question is how many of these people a Cameron led Fopocracy can get back, or whether they have to get rid of him and his clique before rebuilding.
On your second point, it is very clear to anyone with half a brain (so, that excludes the vast majority of PB Tories) that the Fopocracy is failing to connect with the English C1C2s that were the key to Thatcher and Major winning majorities. The Fopocracy just cannot win a majority without clerical workers' and skilled working-class support. The problem is that Cameron types just can't stand or understand those kinds of people. ie. normal people.
You forget that the Cameroons are modernisers who are creating an exciting new electoral coalition and no longer need such old fashioned voters in old fashioned places.
For example they are expecting a big swing in their favour from gay voters - surely you remember Charles telling us that gay marriage legalisation had given them 'permission' to vote Conservative. Add in others who have been given 'permission' to vote Conservative through increasing overseas aid, subsidising windmills and approving HS2 and an unstoppable electoral force is being built.
If you set aside Cameron's cunning stunts there is really bugger all strategic thinking. Has any senior Tory sat down recently and tried to sketch out who this government is meant to be appealing to?
Meanwhile, north of the border, the Yes campaign knows exactly who it is meant to be appealing to. The contrast in the clarity of visions north and south of the border will become clear when people go to the polling stations.
Andy Burnham has been touring the TV studios this morning. His central claim is that the huge rise in A&E attendance has "nothing to do" with Labour's introduction of a new GP contract in 2004. But what does the data show us?
The public record is remarkably clear. The pressure on A&E started to explode from 2004.
Chaand Nagpaul, the Chairman of the committee – and the man who has led for it during the negotiations on the new contract – concedes in the Daily Telegraph that “the 2004 contract brought unprecedented bureaucracy and chasing of targets and box-ticking”.
It'd be quicker to type "Dave crapped himself when the Eurosceps rattled his cage"
And quite rightly too. The capacity of the Conservative Party to shoot itself in the foot over Europe is exceeded only by UKIP's unwavering determination to cut off its nose to spite its face. That is hardly Cameron's fault - it's been going on for years.
More great news for Ed after his winning fight with Len over Falkirk...
Labour’s quest to reduce its financial dependence on the unions has been dealt a blow by the departure of its leading fundraiser.
Party officials had hoped that John McCaffrey would increase the party’s income from companies and private donors when he was appointed as commercial director in August last year.
However, his surprise departure from the role will fuel concerns that Labour will be plunged into financial peril after it overhauls its links to the unions next year.
I love the way Richard implies that Cameron's referendum move was principled and honourable, and was not forced upon him by agitating right wing backbenchers and UKIP's rise in the polls. I wonder if he had a straight face as he typed.
What utter garbage. Of course the timing was influenced by the need to placate parts of the party. So what? Cameron is still the only UK party leader with a coherent position on the EU: try to reform it, not only in Britain's interest, but the EU's as a whole, and then put the reformed package to the people to decide on once and for all.
I love the way Richard implies that Cameron's referendum move was principled and honourable, and was not forced upon him by agitating right wing backbenchers and UKIP's rise in the polls. I wonder if he had a straight face as he typed.
What utter garbage. Of course the timing was influenced by the need to placate parts of the party. So what? Cameron is still the only UK party leader with a coherent position on the EU: try to reform it, not only in Britain's interest, but the EU's as a whole, and then put the reformed package to the people to decide on once and for all.
Yes, yes, of course. Now, I must go and feed my flying pigs.
It'd be quicker to type "Dave crapped himself when the Eurosceps rattled his cage"
And quite rightly too. The capacity of the Conservative Party to shoot itself in the foot over Europe is exceeded only by UKIP's unwavering determination to cut off its nose to spite its face. That is hardly Cameron's fault - it's been going on for years.
There is no sizable group inside Labour calling for a referendum - another reason Ed won't include one in the manifesto.
@JohnRentoul: "The SNP are like the dog that caught the car and then had no idea what to do but bark." Anon Scottish former civil servant, via @Commsdan
No, there certainly won't. Not a chance. For one thing, the Labour Party would be completely split on it, but mostly against holding one. For another, Ed Miliband is a Europhile and wouldn't want to risk a No result (which might happen, given that it could turn into a referendum on his government, which by then would be extremely unpopular). Most of all, it wouldn't happen because Labour won't want to close down an issue which torments the Conservative Party.
A Conservative government is the only chance of a referendum which we have, and it's probably the only chance we'll get in a generation. UKIP are working hard to throw it away.
It'd be quicker to type "Dave crapped himself when the Eurosceps rattled his cage"
And quite rightly too. The capacity of the Conservative Party to shoot itself in the foot over Europe is exceeded only by UKIP's unwavering determination to cut off its nose to spite its face. That is hardly Cameron's fault - it's been going on for years.
The last thing UKIP want is Cameron leading a yes campaign after a fake renegotiation, their priority should obviously be to remove Cameron and preferably get a sceptic leader with Miliband in. Number Ten It's illogical for any Kipper obsessed by Europe or immigration to vote Tory while Cameron is I charge surely?
No - as there will never be a referendum under Labour.
Some madder Ukippers may want to gamble that a unicorn will bring a referendum in 2021 under a Con govt (no certainty of that ).
There's a default part of me that thinks it's all over for the Tories in 2015 if Ed Miliband commits to an EU referendum.
But the EU is one of those massively unpredictable issues that both Labour and Tory leaders wish would stay in the long grass.
If Ed Miliband commits to a referendum it is would be such a dramatic move (and shift in Labour's long standing position) that it will have unpredictable effects on Labour MPs, the Unions and its supporters.
Ed is in a string position as it is. He'd probably be better served to say he supports Britain's membership of the EU (he won't lose any votes over that) and let the Tories and UKIP fight it out.
The EU is the Tories' achilles heel. There's no doubt about that. It is very difficult for Cameron, whatever his detractors think.
The last thing UKIP want is Cameron leading a yes campaign after a fake renegotiation, their priority should obviously be to remove Cameron and preferably get a sceptic leader with Miliband in. Number Ten It's illogical for any Kipper obsessed by Europe or immigration to vote Tory while Cameron is I charge surely?
I've never understood this argument. If there is not much result from the renegotiation, that INCREASES the chance of the referendum producing an Out result. Therefore the Kippers should logically be saying: 'Go on, try it, you won't get a bean', and then they can say 'Told you so, now even those who were hoping for reform will agree that we'll have to leave'.
Or are they so gobsmacked by Dave's awesome powers that they think they can't win if he's recommending staying in?
Scottish Politician of the Year: Alex Salmond, becoming the first three-time winner in the history of the awards: " is dominating not just Scottish but UK politics as the independence referendum approaches on September 18, 2014."
Lifetime achievement award: Sir George Reid, SNP (former Presiding Officer), who is recovering from surgery for bladder cancer and sent a video message expressing thanks.
Of the other individual awards, three were won by Labour politicians, two by the SNP and one by the Greens. There was also a cross-party award in the local government category, and the homelessness charity Shelter Scotland won Public Campaign or Campaigner of the Year award, for highlighting the iniquities of the bedroom tax..
Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill won the award for Political Impact of the Year
Best Scot at Westminster: Douglas Alexander, the Labour MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South and Shadow Foreign Secretary.
Donald Dewar Debater of the Year: Labour leader Johann Lamont.
One to Watch: Kezia Dugdale, Shadow Education Secretary and an impressive media performer.
Politics and Business Award: Environment Secretary Richard Lochhead, for his tireless work in promoting the country's food and drink industry around the globe.
Scottish Local Politician of the Year Award: awarded jointly to the leaders (Gary Robinson, Angus Campbell and Steven Heddle) of our three island councils - Orkney, Shetland and Comhairle nan Eilean Siar - for their Our Islands Our Future campaign
There was a new category this year, E-Politician of the Year, recognising the best use of the electronic and social media. The award went to Green MSP Patrick Harvie, who was an early adopter of these techniques and has built up more than 11,000 followers on Twitter.
Quite a few interesting rugby matches on this weekend. England Vs the All Blacks stand out, and whilst a repeat of last year's heroics (New Zealand's only loss in 33 matches) would be great I'd be surprised. Hopefully Tuilagi will be back for the Six Nations.
Elsewhere, Wales play Argentina (Welsh should win) and Ireland face Australia in what should be the closest match of those I've mentioned.
On Sunday, Scotland face South Africa. Whilst Scotland seems to have more attacking potential than it has for years it's hard to see them beating the Springboks. Anyway, I'll have a quick look on Ladbrokes and Betfair and see if anything jumps out at me.
It'd be quicker to type "Dave crapped himself when the Eurosceps rattled his cage"
And quite rightly too. The capacity of the Conservative Party to shoot itself in the foot over Europe is exceeded only by UKIP's unwavering determination to cut off its nose to spite its face. That is hardly Cameron's fault - it's been going on for years.
The last thing UKIP want is Cameron leading a yes campaign after a fake renegotiation, their priority should obviously be to remove Cameron and preferably get a sceptic leader with Miliband in. Number Ten It's illogical for any Kipper obsessed by Europe or immigration to vote Tory while Cameron is I charge surely?
No - as there will never be a referendum under Labour.
Some madder Ukippers may want to gamble that a unicorn will bring a referendum in 2021 under a Con govt (no certainty of that ).
A better bet for them than a guaranteed loss if Cameron were still around in 2017 campaigning as Tory leader to stay in That puts it to bed for twenty years
Less downside to that - to win Cam has to get something from the EU.
5 years of Ed and we might be signed up to Van Rompouy as head of state.
The last thing UKIP want is Cameron leading a yes campaign after a fake renegotiation, their priority should obviously be to remove Cameron and preferably get a sceptic leader with Miliband in. Number Ten It's illogical for any Kipper obsessed by Europe or immigration to vote Tory while Cameron is I charge surely?
I've never understood this argument. If there is not much result from the renegotiation, that INCREASES the chance of the referendum producing an Out result. Therefore the Kippers should logically be saying: 'Go on, try it, you won't get a bean', and then they can say 'Told you so, now even those who were hoping for reform will agree that we'll have to leave'.
Or are they so gobsmacked by Dave's awesome powers that they think they can't win if he's recommending staying in?
Sorry to let you down RN, but 99% of UKIPers look upon Cammo as a cretin, planting all his four feet and Britain repeatedly in the shit.
Parts of Didcot Power station being moved off to Germany.
One of the encouraging parts of last night's question time was how little applause there was for commentators extolling the virtues of tree bothering.
Whether that says more about UK public's attitude to crackpot science or just towards Ed Davey is to be determined.
Ed Davey looks like Rooney but without his intellect.
The man is an absolute disgrace with his age old arguments that have been discredited. Everything he said was scientific opinion (vested interests) and not evidence based proof.
Very pleased the audience didn't go wild with applause, even they can see he is talking bollocks. As for Creasey, very pretty but seriously dim.
And no-one mentioned shale gas as the reason the US has reduced carbon emissions.
What are they going to tell us next, that we will lose three million jobs if we leave the EU.....
The last thing UKIP want is Cameron leading a yes campaign after a fake renegotiation, their priority should obviously be to remove Cameron and preferably get a sceptic leader with Miliband in. Number Ten It's illogical for any Kipper obsessed by Europe or immigration to vote Tory while Cameron is I charge surely?
I've never understood this argument. If there is not much result from the renegotiation, that INCREASES the chance of the referendum producing an Out result. Therefore the Kippers should logically be saying: 'Go on, try it, you won't get a bean', and then they can say 'Told you so, now even those who were hoping for reform will agree that we'll have to leave'.
Or are they so gobsmacked by Dave's awesome powers that they think they can't win if he's recommending staying in?
Sorry to let you down RN, but 99% of UKIPers look upon Cammo as a cretin, planting all his four feet and Britain repeatedly in the shit.
You'd prefer no referendum , 5 years of Labour and the hope of a unicorn coming in 2020 ?
Sorry to let you down RN, but 99% of UKIPers look upon Cammo as a cretin, planting all his four feet and Britain repeatedly in the shit.
Yes, I know, they are fruitcakes determined to cut their noses to spite their faces, which is why they are working for a Miliband government in order to to kill off any chance of leaving the EU, as well as to increase government intereference, raise taxes, increase borrowing, increase spending, and move society even further away from what they claim to want.
A dose of Balls may cure them, but sadly the collateral damage on the country will be a heavy price to pay.
The last thing UKIP want is Cameron leading a yes campaign after a fake renegotiation, their priority should obviously be to remove Cameron and preferably get a sceptic leader with Miliband in. Number Ten It's illogical for any Kipper obsessed by Europe or immigration to vote Tory while Cameron is I charge surely?
I've never understood this argument. If there is not much result from the renegotiation, that INCREASES the chance of the referendum producing an Out result. Therefore the Kippers should logically be saying: 'Go on, try it, you won't get a bean', and then they can say 'Told you so, now even those who were hoping for reform will agree that we'll have to leave'.
Or are they so gobsmacked by Dave's awesome powers that they think they can't win if he's recommending staying in?
Cameron will campaign for a yes vote no matter what, and people on your wing of the Tories will support him. Kippers know that.
Given that Cam couldn't win a GE against Gordon Brown (the worst PM ever) - why are you so confident he can win a referendum ?
Cameron will campaign for a yes vote no matter what, and people on your wing of the Tories will support him. Kippers know that.
The first part of your first sentence is probably true, the second is less true (I for one would very seriously consider voting to leave if there's no progress on the City). But that isn't the point - if, as the Kippers claim, Cameron is a useless 'cretin', what does it matter what he campaigns for? It can't both be true that he's useless and that his support for staying in would be decisive.
This is the best 'Henry's lefty Friday' article for ages.
If winning the GE is Miliband's overarching objective then I agre he should offer a referendum. With the current polling, cost of living / recovery not helping me theme and a referendum on offer then I'd be very surprised if he didn't become PM in 2015.
And as PM in power with the BBC, CBI, LinDems and a whole bunch of other players in trucj he damn well ought to be able to engineer a 'stay in' vote on Europe if that is what he really thinks is good for us. Either way we should be asked and if the the answer is 'Out' then fine.
Cameron will campaign for a yes vote no matter what, and people on your wing of the Tories will support him. Kippers know that.
The first part of your first sentence is probably true, the second is less true (I for one would very seriously consider voting to leave if there's no progress on the City). But that isn't the point - if, as the Kippers claim, Cameron is a useless 'cretin', what does it matter what he campaigns for? It can't both be true that he's useless and that his support for staying in would be decisive.
Maybe they are just frit.
I think the problem is more the kippers have lost the plot. They're so hung up on Cameron they've prioritised knifing him over getting a Euroref. It's one of the things which stops me voting kipper, and I'm not a fan of Cameron.
The point they keep missing is that they need to subsequently work with a lot of the people they are attacking if they want to win an Out vote. They're painting themselves into the same isolated corner the AV folk did.
Cameron will campaign for a yes vote no matter what, and people on your wing of the Tories will support him. Kippers know that.
The first part of your first sentence is probably true, the second is less true (I for one would very seriously consider voting to leave if there's no progress on the City). But that isn't the point - if, as the Kippers claim, Cameron is a useless 'cretin', what does it matter what he campaigns for? It can't both be true that he's useless and that his support for staying in would be decisive.
Maybe they are just frit.
Of course he's going support "yes" whatever - barring any sudden large changes in EU policy before then, it's other people he needs to convince. But (and I would put this down in part to it being a generation since the last vote) there are people who would vote "no" whatever Cameron could achieve.
EU statement on Gibraltar due The European Commission will make "key announcements" about the Gibraltar border issue within the next hour, a spokesperson said.
'Under a deal introduced by Labour, the majority of family doctors dropped responsibility for out-of-hours care, yet saw their earnings rise instantly by almost one third.
BMA negotiators later admitted the terms, which brought average GP incomes to more than £100,000 were so generous that they thought the Government was “having a laugh”.
And we now the A&E car crash resulting from this stupidity.
My rugby betting is fairly infrequent and a bit patchy, so follow at your own risk. I've bet with small stakes, but made a relatively large number of bets.
Betfair: I've backed the All Blacks to beat us by 25.5+ points at just over 5. We were ropey against Australia, and after a great first half against Argentina we were distinctly unimpressive. I suspect there's a reasonable prospect we'll get murdered.
Ireland to beat Australia at 2.16. I think the Aussies aren't so hot, and the Irish have O'Connell back.
Ladbrokes: In the half/full-time market I've backed Australia to lead and Ireland to win at 8. Happened to us, the Irish could do the same.
I've also backed Ireland to win by 13 points or more at 6.5. Whilst I suspect it'll be a little tighter, I think the odds are too long [it occurs to me I'll be a bigger Ireland than England fan on Saturday].
South Africa to beat Scotland by 13 points plus at 1.73. I think this'll be quite likely to happen.
Lastly, a pair of Wales to win bets. To beat the Argies by 21-30 points at 5, and (with half the usual stake) to beat them by 31-40 at 13. Argentina have had a torrid time of things and Wales is a good side.
Cameron will campaign for a yes vote no matter what, and people on your wing of the Tories will support him. Kippers know that.
The first part of your first sentence is probably true, the second is less true (I for one would very seriously consider voting to leave if there's no progress on the City). But that isn't the point - if, as the Kippers claim, Cameron is a useless 'cretin', what does it matter what he campaigns for? It can't both be true that he's useless and that his support for staying in would be decisive.
Maybe they are just frit.
Tim's having one of his broken clock moments on this issue, even if your party loyalty prevents you from seeing it.
The blunt fact of the matter is that UKIPers and those tempted to support them have absolutely no faith whatsoever in Cameron's willingness to play fair on this and therefore do not want to see him in control of the referendum process. Even if a referendum does happen - not a given, I for one strongly suspect that in the event of a Conservative majority Cameron will find some way of saying the time isn't right if there's a serious prospect of Yes losing - Cameron sceptics strongly suspect that it will be against a background of Cameron going to Europe, claiming whatever token concessions he manages to secure represent a triumphant vindication for his position and he's protected Britain's interests for a generation and he's therefore going to recommend a Yes vote, along with the official opposition, the CBI, the TUC, etc. And that when a Yes vote has been secured by fair means or foul that the issue has been closed down for a generation.This is after all the patten of every single renegotiation ever undetaken by a British government.
UKIPers, etc. want a referendum. They do not want one where the referendum process is controlled at every stage by fanatical Europhiles willing to lie, cheat, bend or break the rules and generally do whatever it takes to get a Yes vote - and they're pretty damn sure that that's what they'd get in any referendum called by David Cameron.
UKIPers, etc. want a referendum. They do not want one where the referendum process is controlled at every stage by fanatical Europhiles willing to lie, cheat, bend or break the rules and generally do whatever it takes to get a Yes vote -
So their answer is Ed "Joining the Euro depends how long I am PM" Miliband?
Commission finds no evidence checks broke EU law The EU Commission has said it has found no evidence that checks by Spanish authorities at the Gibraltor border broke European Law.
Cameron will campaign for a yes vote no matter what, and people on your wing of the Tories will support him. Kippers know that.
The first part of your first sentence is probably true, the second is less true (I for one would very seriously consider voting to leave if there's no progress on the City). But that isn't the point - if, as the Kippers claim, Cameron is a useless 'cretin', what does it matter what he campaigns for? It can't both be true that he's useless and that his support for staying in would be decisive.
Maybe they are just frit.
Tim's having one of his broken clock moments on this issue, even if your party loyalty prevents you from seeing it.
The blunt fact of the matter is that UKIPers and those tempted to support them have absolutely no faith whatsoever in Cameron's willingness to play fair on this and therefore do not want to see him in control of the referendum process. Even if a referendum does happen - not a given, I for one strongly suspect that in the event of a Conservative majority Cameron will find some way of saying the time isn't right if there's a serious prospect of Yes losing - Cameron sceptics strongly suspect that it will be against a background of Cameron going to Europe, claiming whatever token concessions he manages to secure represent a triumphant vindication for his position and he's protected Britain's interests for a generation and he's therefore going to recommend a Yes vote, along with the official opposition, the CBI, the TUC, etc. And that when a Yes vote has been secured by fair means or foul that the issue has been closed down for a generation.This is after all the patten of every single renegotiation ever undetaken by a British government.
UKIPers, etc. want a referendum. They do not want one where the referendum process is controlled at every stage by fanatical Europhiles willing to lie, cheat, bend or break the rules and generally do whatever it takes to get a Yes vote - and they're pretty damn sure that that's what they'd get in any referendum called by David Cameron.
And you can see the parliamentary conservative party allowing Cameron to slither, slip, slide and evade the commitment?
@Random - In other words, they are frit and think they can't win a referendum. Perhaps their complaint against Cameron, therefore, is that he has called their bluff.
As it happens, I think they are correct if they think that. I don't believe that a referendum would produce a Get Out result, for the reasons you list. Fear, uncertainty and doubt would win as usual, and it would be incredibly easy for the Stay In side to play on the uncertainty, as indeed Alex Salmond is finding in another context. This is even more true because (again, rather as with the SNP) there isn't actually any coherent answer from UKIP as to what exactly they envisage if we do leave.
Where their analysis is 100% wrong is in thinking that there might not be a referendum if there's a Conservative majority. Anyone who has recently been to any gathering of more than about three Conservative Party members will have no doubt that there's absolutely zero chance of the promise being reneged on.
I think UKIP have taken the referendum tactic as far as it'll go. Referendums are a tool for people pushing a marginal case that doesn't have enough support to get through the normal parliamentary process. A lot of people will support a referendum on X even if they don't support X, so calling for one helps people representing a minority position to move the ball up the pitch.
But UKIP are no longer representing a marginal position. Significant parts of the Tory Party are now BOO. They have a decent chance of getting their way using traditional political tactics. They should just drop the referendum thing, embrace traditional British constitutional principles over funny foreign ways and try to get MPs elected, either in their own party or in Con, who will vote to leave the EU.
Commission finds no evidence checks broke EU law The EU Commission has said it has found no evidence that checks by Spanish authorities at the Gibraltor border broke European Law.
UKIP are not 'frit' of a referendum. Dyed-in-the-wool tories who keep repeating this line miss the key point. It is simple: we are much more likely to win an out referendum under a labour govt than under a tory one.
The shrewdies within UKIP realise that we are odds-against winning an OUT referendum against PM Cameron, who would be the self-selected leader of the IN campaign. We think it would be almost entirely based on scaremongering.
Nobody believes that Cameron is the man to lead us out of the EU---not even Richard Nabavi.
UKIP are not 'frit' of a referendum. Dyed-in-the-wool tories who keep repeating this line miss the key point. It is simple: we are much more likely to win an out referendum under a labour govt than under a tory one.
The shrewdies within UKIP realise that we are odds-against winning an OUT referendum against PM Cameron, who would be the self-selected leader of the IN campaign. We think it would be almost entirely based on scaremongering.
Nobody believes that Cameron is the man to lead us out of the EU---not even Richard Nabavi.
Privately, I think that Cameron must loathe the idea of a referendum, which, win or lose, sees half his party lined up alongside UKIP.
@david_kendrick1 - Well, at least you're honest enough to admit you're working for a Labour government.
Just don't blame me if you get what you wish for, or at least the first part. You certainly won't get a referendum under a Labour government, and, even if you did, why on earth would there be any less 'scaremongering' under PM Miliband than PM Cameron?
All those China-is-doomed demographers will have to think again. tim.
Too late
I think it will prove hard to turn around what has become custom and practice. And, even then, it would take a generation for a rising birthrate to have an impact on the labour market.
35% of British adults are satisfied with David Cameron’s performance as Prime Minister, while 56% are dissatisfied. This gives him a net rating (% satisfied minus % dissatisfied) of -21. Mr Cameron’s net rating among Conservative supporters is +55 (76% satisfied, 21% dissatisfied).
31% are satisfied with Ed Miliband’s performance as Labour leader, while 54% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -23. Mr Miliband’s net rating among Labour supporters is +4 (48% satisfied, 44% dissatisfied).
22% are satisfied with Nick Clegg’s performance as Deputy Prime Minister, while 65% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -43. This is not far off his lowest ever point of -45 in October 2012.
28% are satisfied with Nigel Farage’s performance as UKIP leader, while 41% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -13, the lowest since Ipsos MORI started recording his personal ratings in March 2013.
@david_kendrick1 - Well, at least you're honest enough to admit you're working for a Labour government.
Just don't blame me if you get what you wish for, or at least the first part. You certainly won't get a referendum under a Labour government, and, even if you did, why on earth would there be any less 'scaremongering' under PM Miliband than PM Cameron?
There wouldn't be less scaremongering under a labour govt--it would be pretty similar.
But a united Tory party, hungry to regain power, joing with UKIP and BOO for a well-organised OUT campaign? That would be attractive: then the UK would be warm favourites to leave the EU.
35% of British adults are satisfied with David Cameron’s performance as Prime Minister, while 56% are dissatisfied. This gives him a net rating (% satisfied minus % dissatisfied) of -21. Mr Cameron’s net rating among Conservative supporters is +55 (76% satisfied, 21% dissatisfied).
31% are satisfied with Ed Miliband’s performance as Labour leader, while 54% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -23. Mr Miliband’s net rating among Labour supporters is +4 (48% satisfied, 44% dissatisfied).
22% are satisfied with Nick Clegg’s performance as Deputy Prime Minister, while 65% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -43. This is not far off his lowest ever point of -45 in October 2012.
28% are satisfied with Nigel Farage’s performance as UKIP leader, while 41% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -13, the lowest since Ipsos MORI started recording his personal ratings in March 2013.
All those China-is-doomed demographers will have to think again. tim.
Too late
Global population reduction of 20% would do any harm - given that it was humanly achieved.
I believe that the number of children being born globally has already begun to decline. There's not much that could be done humanely to speed this demographic adjustment along.
The normally sensible Richard N needs to lay off the hyperbole tablets. These "huge price to pay" forecasts of doom if Labour wins are laughable. It will be fine guys.
Incidentally, I would like to remind UKIPpers considering voting for another party that the Morris Dancer Party retains not only the policy to leave the EU, but also to invade France. Cast off those limp-wristed, weak-kneed Faragians and vote Morris Dancer!
@DanHannanMEP: The UK grew 8 times as fast as the eurozone in the last quarter...
per capita?
Using GDP on its own back when population size changed very slowly was one thing but at the moment not using per capita could be massively distorting the real picture - not that anyone knows what the true headcount actually is of course.
But a united Tory party, hungry to regain power, joing with UKIP and BOO for a well-organised OUT campaign? That would be attractive: then the UK would be warm favourites to leave the EU.
That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Firstly you're relying on Labour actually delivering a referendum. And, even if they did, on the Stay In side, you'd still have Labour, the LibDems, the BBC, the CBI, the TUC and half of a demoralised and weakened Conservative Party. Unless you can make it a referendum on Ed Miliband, the chances of a Leave result are much the same as they would be in 2016 under Cameron. The difference is that you'd certainly get the referendum under Cameron; why on earth would Miliband want to hold a referendum if he wasn't 100% certain of winning it? Even then, it's hard to see what he gains by it.
The chance of getting out of the EU is the probability of a referendum being held (R) multiplied by the chance of you winning the referendum (W). R is close to 100% if there's a Conservative majority, close to 0% if there's a Labour government. W is not much different between the two (quite low either way IMO, but Kippers keep telling us that there's a majority in favour of leaving, so what do I know?).
On what basis? I don't know if you run a business, employ people or trade with Europe but I guess not. Leaving the EU would be hugely damaging to British business.
Comments
Yet it seems far from likely that he will.
The argument that Labour used when Cameron first committed to a referendum way down the road was "four years of uncertainty". But that becomes less convincing with every month that ticks by.
Anything that lets Miliband/Labour in is almost certainly bad for them - referendum or not.
Conservative strategy with UKIP will be precisely that anything which splits the right wing vote increases the likelihood of a LibLabLeft bloc.
"Vote Farage, Get Miliband - more Europe, more immigrants etc etc."
The question is how much they'll take heed of the warning. It's easy to say you'll vote a particular way when you aren't actually being called upon to do it, but on judgement day how many will stick with the devil they know?
The current Scottish government almost never blames things on the Dewar, McLeish or McConnell governments. In fact, post mortem, Dewar is far more respected and fondly remembered in pro-independence circles than he is within his own party. McLeish has been a revelation, and is the nearest Scotland has to an elder statesman. McConnell is almost entirely forgotten already, which is quite astonishing when you remember that he only left office six years ago.
There would be little point in blaming McConnell for anything for the simple reason that most voters would shrug their shoulders and say "Who?"
This is a fascinating page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_Secretary_for_Finance
Note how the Labour/Lib Dem coalition governments had four finance ministers in 5 years, whereas the SNP government has had the same finance minister throughout its term in office. That makes it hard to "blame" previous administrations because nobody remembers the nobodies who were responsible.
If it turns out that it is impossible, or (more likely) that we get only limited concessions, then the country will need to decide whether we leave or not. The balance of the argument is, IMO, moving slightly towards us having to leave, mainly because of the attacks on the City following the last government's completely unnecessary surrender of regulatory powers over our most important industry to people indifferent to or actively hostile to it. What an A1 disaster of Blair and Brown that was - was can they have been thinking??? It's going to be extremely hard to reverse, and, if we can't reverse it, we might have to leave.
But it would be bonkers to have a referendum whilst all these matters are still in flux, and the EU itself is likely to change. The Eurozone banking union issue hasn't gone away - there will have to be big changes in the Eurozone.
Meanwhile, north of the border, the Yes campaign knows exactly who it is meant to be appealing to. The contrast in the clarity of visions north and south of the border will become clear when people go to the polling stations.
I wonder if Ed "No growth without plan B" Balls has discussed this with Ed "Joining Euro depends how long I am PM" Miliband?
If Ed thinks he can without a referendum he will.
Tail fails.
Assembled masses laugh at tail.
...unless the people who actually control Sterling don't agree, in which case we will use something else. Don't worry, it'll be fine...
There will be no referendum under Labour.
A Conservative government is the only chance of a referendum which we have, and it's probably the only chance we'll get in a generation. UKIP are working hard to throw it away.
Some madder Ukippers may want to gamble that a unicorn will bring a referendum in 2021 under a Con govt (no certainty of that ).
But the EU is one of those massively unpredictable issues that both Labour and Tory leaders wish would stay in the long grass.
If Ed Miliband commits to a referendum it is would be such a dramatic move (and shift in Labour's long standing position) that it will have unpredictable effects on Labour MPs, the Unions and its supporters.
Ed is in a string position as it is. He'd probably be better served to say he supports Britain's membership of the EU (he won't lose any votes over that) and let the Tories and UKIP fight it out.
The EU is the Tories' achilles heel. There's no doubt about that. It is very difficult for Cameron, whatever his detractors think.
Or are they so gobsmacked by Dave's awesome powers that they think they can't win if he's recommending staying in?
Lifetime achievement award: Sir George Reid, SNP (former Presiding Officer), who is recovering from surgery for bladder cancer and sent a video message expressing thanks.
Of the other individual awards, three were won by Labour politicians, two by the SNP and one by the Greens. There was also a cross-party award in the local government category, and the homelessness charity Shelter Scotland won Public Campaign or Campaigner of the Year award, for highlighting the iniquities of the bedroom tax..
Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill won the award for Political Impact of the Year
Best Scot at Westminster: Douglas Alexander, the Labour MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South and Shadow Foreign Secretary.
Donald Dewar Debater of the Year: Labour leader Johann Lamont.
One to Watch: Kezia Dugdale, Shadow Education Secretary and an impressive media performer.
Politics and Business Award: Environment Secretary Richard Lochhead, for his tireless work in promoting the country's food and drink industry around the globe.
Scottish Local Politician of the Year Award: awarded jointly to the leaders (Gary Robinson, Angus Campbell and Steven Heddle) of our three island councils - Orkney, Shetland and Comhairle nan Eilean Siar - for their Our Islands Our Future campaign
There was a new category this year, E-Politician of the Year, recognising the best use of the electronic and social media. The award went to Green MSP Patrick Harvie, who was an early adopter of these techniques and has built up more than 11,000 followers on Twitter.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/wider-political-news/landmark-victory-as-salmond-crowned-politician-of-the-year.22708413
Not a single Tory or Lib Dem winner. Go figure.
Elsewhere, Wales play Argentina (Welsh should win) and Ireland face Australia in what should be the closest match of those I've mentioned.
On Sunday, Scotland face South Africa. Whilst Scotland seems to have more attacking potential than it has for years it's hard to see them beating the Springboks. Anyway, I'll have a quick look on Ladbrokes and Betfair and see if anything jumps out at me.
I agree, with Len pulling them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24947207
But, by all means, you carry on slagging Scotland off.
5 years of Ed and we might be signed up to Van Rompouy as head of state.
The man is an absolute disgrace with his age old arguments that have been discredited. Everything he said was scientific opinion (vested interests) and not evidence based proof.
Very pleased the audience didn't go wild with applause, even they can see he is talking bollocks. As for Creasey, very pretty but seriously dim.
And no-one mentioned shale gas as the reason the US has reduced carbon emissions.
What are they going to tell us next, that we will lose three million jobs if we leave the EU.....
A dose of Balls may cure them, but sadly the collateral damage on the country will be a heavy price to pay.
Maybe they are just frit.
We've had a whole week of good economics and not a single bit of ramping.
If winning the GE is Miliband's overarching objective then I agre he should offer a referendum. With the current polling, cost of living / recovery not helping me theme and a referendum on offer then I'd be very surprised if he didn't become PM in 2015.
And as PM in power with the BBC, CBI, LinDems and a whole bunch of other players in trucj he damn well ought to be able to engineer a 'stay in' vote on Europe if that is what he really thinks is good for us. Either way we should be asked and if the the answer is 'Out' then fine.
The point they keep missing is that they need to subsequently work with a lot of the people they are attacking if they want to win an Out vote. They're painting themselves into the same isolated corner the AV folk did.
The European Commission will make "key announcements" about the Gibraltar border issue within the next hour, a spokesperson said.
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-11-15/eu-gibraltar/
What are the chances this pleases no one?
'Under a deal introduced by Labour, the majority of family doctors dropped responsibility for out-of-hours care, yet saw their earnings rise instantly by almost one third.
BMA negotiators later admitted the terms, which brought average GP incomes to more than £100,000 were so generous that they thought the Government was “having a laugh”.
And we now the A&E car crash resulting from this stupidity.
I would also think that they believe they have a good chance of winning if opinion polls are anything to go by.
To campaign on the idea of BOO but not be willing to put it to the test would shatter their credibility.
Betting PostMy rugby betting is fairly infrequent and a bit patchy, so follow at your own risk. I've bet with small stakes, but made a relatively large number of bets.
Betfair:
I've backed the All Blacks to beat us by 25.5+ points at just over 5. We were ropey against Australia, and after a great first half against Argentina we were distinctly unimpressive. I suspect there's a reasonable prospect we'll get murdered.
Ireland to beat Australia at 2.16. I think the Aussies aren't so hot, and the Irish have O'Connell back.
Ladbrokes:
In the half/full-time market I've backed Australia to lead and Ireland to win at 8. Happened to us, the Irish could do the same.
I've also backed Ireland to win by 13 points or more at 6.5. Whilst I suspect it'll be a little tighter, I think the odds are too long [it occurs to me I'll be a bigger Ireland than England fan on Saturday].
South Africa to beat Scotland by 13 points plus at 1.73. I think this'll be quite likely to happen.
Lastly, a pair of Wales to win bets. To beat the Argies by 21-30 points at 5, and (with half the usual stake) to beat them by 31-40 at 13. Argentina have had a torrid time of things and Wales is a good side.
The blunt fact of the matter is that UKIPers and those tempted to support them have absolutely no faith whatsoever in Cameron's willingness to play fair on this and therefore do not want to see him in control of the referendum process. Even if a referendum does happen - not a given, I for one strongly suspect that in the event of a Conservative majority Cameron will find some way of saying the time isn't right if there's a serious prospect of Yes losing - Cameron sceptics strongly suspect that it will be against a background of Cameron going to Europe, claiming whatever token concessions he manages to secure represent a triumphant vindication for his position and he's protected Britain's interests for a generation and he's therefore going to recommend a Yes vote, along with the official opposition, the CBI, the TUC, etc. And that when a Yes vote has been secured by fair means or foul that the issue has been closed down for a generation.This is after all the patten of every single renegotiation ever undetaken by a British government.
UKIPers, etc. want a referendum. They do not want one where the referendum process is controlled at every stage by fanatical Europhiles willing to lie, cheat, bend or break the rules and generally do whatever it takes to get a Yes vote - and they're pretty damn sure that that's what they'd get in any referendum called by David Cameron.
'There's a default part of me that thinks it's all over for the Tories in 2015 if Ed Miliband commits to an EU referendum.'
The Conman's done a U-turn on almost every other policy area,so why not one more?
Problem is that by May 2015 will anyone believe him.
I think cretin was the word used upthread...
The EU Commission has said it has found no evidence that checks by Spanish authorities at the Gibraltor border broke European Law.
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-11-15/eu-gibraltar/
Oh well, it'll please the Spanish...
Paging Mr Farage!
No chance.
"And we now the A&E car crash resulting from this stupidity."
Just an amazing coincidence,GP's working less A&E numbers up.
Perhaps even too generous to the SNP - u16 voting etc.
As it happens, I think they are correct if they think that. I don't believe that a referendum would produce a Get Out result, for the reasons you list. Fear, uncertainty and doubt would win as usual, and it would be incredibly easy for the Stay In side to play on the uncertainty, as indeed Alex Salmond is finding in another context. This is even more true because (again, rather as with the SNP) there isn't actually any coherent answer from UKIP as to what exactly they envisage if we do leave.
Where their analysis is 100% wrong is in thinking that there might not be a referendum if there's a Conservative majority. Anyone who has recently been to any gathering of more than about three Conservative Party members will have no doubt that there's absolutely zero chance of the promise being reneged on.
' Bombshell from Ken Livingstone: Labour DID borrow too much, in "act of cowardice" @eveningstandard http://t.co/Qzc1lz6dof'
Has the Conman already apologized for this?
But UKIP are no longer representing a marginal position. Significant parts of the Tory Party are now BOO. They have a decent chance of getting their way using traditional political tactics. They should just drop the referendum thing, embrace traditional British constitutional principles over funny foreign ways and try to get MPs elected, either in their own party or in Con, who will vote to leave the EU.
Con 32 (-3)
LD 8 (-1)
UKIP 8 (-2)
Greens 7 (+3)
Mr Miliband has suffered a sharp fall in the number of Labour supporters expressing satisfaction with him.
Among the general public, 31 per cent are satisfied, down from 36. But among Labour supporters, the figure has fallen faster from 61 per cent to 48.
The shrewdies within UKIP realise that we are odds-against winning an OUT referendum against PM Cameron, who would be the self-selected leader of the IN campaign. We think it would be almost entirely based on scaremongering.
Nobody believes that Cameron is the man to lead us out of the EU---not even Richard Nabavi.
From the commentary, I'm assuming Cameron's approval rating is c.35% or so.
The Green Surge!!!
Has anyone seen our Irish friend?
I imagine he's drinking himself silly right now, and going to wake up in Bournemouth tomorrow morning.
Just don't blame me if you get what you wish for, or at least the first part. You certainly won't get a referendum under a Labour government, and, even if you did, why on earth would there be any less 'scaremongering' under PM Miliband than PM Cameron?
The Kraken field, which is estimated to contain nearly 140m barrels of oil, is majority-owned by Aberdeen-based EnQuest.
The construction phase of the project is expected to support 20,000 jobs.
EnQuest also expects to take on an average of about 1,000 operational jobs in the UK for each year of Kraken's 25-year life.
The development, which was approved by the Department of Energy and Climate Change, is the largest investment announced in the UK North Sea this year.
Kraken's two heavy oil fields will receive tax allowances introduced by the UK government in a bid to stimulate investment in the sector.
Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne said: "This is a big investment that will create jobs and boost the British economic plan.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-24954495
What would a Yes vote do to the tax allowances?
35% of British adults are satisfied with David Cameron’s performance as Prime Minister, while 56% are dissatisfied. This gives him a net rating (% satisfied minus % dissatisfied) of -21. Mr Cameron’s net rating among Conservative supporters is +55 (76% satisfied, 21% dissatisfied).
31% are satisfied with Ed Miliband’s performance as Labour leader, while 54% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -23. Mr Miliband’s net rating among Labour supporters is +4 (48% satisfied, 44% dissatisfied).
22% are satisfied with Nick Clegg’s performance as Deputy Prime Minister, while 65% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -43. This is not far off his lowest ever point of -45 in October 2012.
28% are satisfied with Nigel Farage’s performance as UKIP leader, while 41% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -13, the lowest since Ipsos MORI started recording his personal ratings in March 2013.
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3295/Half-of-Britons-feel-no-benefit-of-economic-growth.aspx
31% are satisfied with Ed Miliband’s performance as Labour leader, while 54% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -23. Mr Miliband’s net rating among Labour supporters is +4 (48% satisfied, 44% dissatisfied).
22% are satisfied with Nick Clegg’s performance as Deputy Prime Minister, while 65% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -43. This is not far off his lowest ever point of -45 in October 2012.
28% are satisfied with Nigel Farage’s performance as UKIP leader, while 41% are dissatisfied, giving him a net rating of -13, the lowest since Ipsos MORI started recording his personal ratings in March 2013.
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3295/Half-of-Britons-feel-no-benefit-of-economic-growth.aspx
Dave -21
Ed - 23
Clegg -43
Farage -13 (his lowest rating ever)
Leader ratings, we love them. LoL.
The sooner we're out, the better.
These "huge price to pay" forecasts of doom if Labour wins are laughable.
It will be fine guys.
Falkirk.
Using GDP on its own back when population size changed very slowly was one thing but at the moment not using per capita could be massively distorting the real picture - not that anyone knows what the true headcount actually is of course.
The chance of getting out of the EU is the probability of a referendum being held (R) multiplied by the chance of you winning the referendum (W). R is close to 100% if there's a Conservative majority, close to 0% if there's a Labour government. W is not much different between the two (quite low either way IMO, but Kippers keep telling us that there's a majority in favour of leaving, so what do I know?).