It needs to be remembered that in 1992 the Conservatives still lost 40 seats.
Because of the landslide majorities Thatcher had won they could afford to lose support and still win an election.
They do not have the same safety margin now - to remain in government they are likely to need to increase support.
Which brings us to the cheerleaders dilemma - for the Conservatives to gain increased support in constituency X or among demographic Y they have to conceed that the Conservatives underachieved in these places in 2010. Which goes against their fundamental belief that 2010 was a great electoral triumph for Cameron and Osborne and could not have been bettered by listening to outsiders.
The double think they require to reconcile these beliefs is a source of amusement.
"I will never, ever forgive the Labour party for allowing this mass immigration with no demands put on what people should be paid when they come to this country. I will never forgive them for destroying the jobs of my mates, because they allowed their jobs to be undercut with stupid thinking on Europe, letting them all in, so they can live 10 to a room, working for Polish wages”
It needs to be remembered that in 1992 the Conservatives still lost 40 seats.
Because of the landslide majorities Thatcher had won they could afford to lose support and still win an election.
They do not have the same safety margin now - to remain in government they are likely to need to increase support.
Which brings us to the cheerleaders dilemma - for the Conservatives to gain increased support in constituency X or among demographic Y they have to conceed that the Conservatives underachieved in these places in 2010. Which goes against their fundamental belief that 2010 was a great electoral triumph for Cameron and Osborne and could not have been bettered by listening to outsiders.
The double think they require to reconcile these beliefs is a source of amusement.
Don't know who you've been listening to.
I thought it was pretty well-established consensus that Cameron did ok overall, after a poor campaign, and a very cynical performance by Labour. England was solid, Scotland very bad, and Wales surprised on the upside.
Without Banks and Bankers we would grind to a halt within a few days.. get real...or throw your credit card away..etc .. forget all of the things you rely on banks to do for you and how would anyone get a mortgage or even arrange the payments .. forget direct debits..cheque books... be paid in cash every week...
"I will never, ever forgive the Labour party for allowing this mass immigration with no demands put on what people should be paid when they come to this country. I will never forgive them for destroying the jobs of my mates, because they allowed their jobs to be undercut with stupid thinking on Europe, letting them all in, so they can live 10 to a room, working for Polish wages”
Not in other cultures. It is quite common for surnames to be different between fathers and sons.
I have a Keralan friend with only one name. For the sake of form filling (many do not accept a single name as an option!) He uses his fathers name as a first name.
It is not just in Asia, in Iceland it is normal for fathers and sons to have different surnames.
I doubt the 1992 result offers too much comfort, both the 2010 and 2005 BBC exit polls were pretty much spot on. Even in 1992 only NOP had Labour with a clear lead and, as has been pointed out, all the polls have now greatly improved their methodology. The UKIP vote though could still make the election hard to predict
"In addition to his work with the church and the Co-op, the Rev. Flowers has been involved in a number of high-profile public roles.
He served as a Labour councillor on the City of Bradford Council for ten years, and, in 2010, was appointed by Labour leader Ed Miliband to the party's finance and industry board.
He has also been involved with a number of charities, including the Terrence Higgins Trust, where he remains a trustee, and the Lifeline Project, which works in the field of drug abuse."
StuartD I think the Tories now have to accept that in Scotland they are largely confined to a spectator role, rather like the Canadian Tories in Quebec, with the main battle between the nationalists and Labour and to a lesser extent the Liberals
"In addition to his work with the church and the Co-op, the Rev. Flowers has been involved in a number of high-profile public roles.
He served as a Labour councillor on the City of Bradford Council for ten years, and, in 2010, was appointed by Labour leader Ed Miliband to the party's finance and industry board.
He has also been involved with a number of charities, including the Terrence Higgins Trust, where he remains a trustee, and the Lifeline Project, which works in the field of drug abuse."
It needs to be remembered that in 1992 the Conservatives still lost 40 seats.
Because of the landslide majorities Thatcher had won they could afford to lose support and still win an election.
They do not have the same safety margin now - to remain in government they are likely to need to increase support.
Which brings us to the cheerleaders dilemma - for the Conservatives to gain increased support in constituency X or among demographic Y they have to conceed that the Conservatives underachieved in these places in 2010. Which goes against their fundamental belief that 2010 was a great electoral triumph for Cameron and Osborne and could not have been bettered by listening to outsiders.
The double think they require to reconcile these beliefs is a source of amusement.
Don't know who you've been listening to.
I thought it was pretty well-established consensus that Cameron did ok overall, after a poor campaign, and a very cynical performance by Labour. England was solid, Scotland very bad, and Wales surprised on the upside.
Overall a B/B+
But significant improvement needed.
Might I suggest you read what the cheerleaders write here.
NB I do not include you among their number, as I've said before you are the man Cameron should have been.
Your analysis is reasonable - you need to break down England into different regions and demographics to understand how much the Conservative strategy failed in 2010 - but yet again you are too generous with your final mark, a dangerous fault when trying to help.
But do you think that the Conservative leadership acknowleges it needs 'significant improvement' ?
If its planing on refighting 1992 then its in a defensive mode aiming to hold what it has and doesn't accept that it undereachieved in 2010.
What has undermined the Conservatives is the complacent self-satisfaction together with the lack of curiosity of their leadership. When Cameron and Osborne travel from government office to Conservative function, from photostunt to TV studio do they ever look out the car window and notice how things are changing and wonder about the electoral effects thereof ? I have my doubts.
StuartD I think the Tories now have to accept that in Scotland they are largely confined to a spectator role, rather like the Canadian Tories in Quebec, with the main battle between the nationalists and Labour and to a lesser extent the Liberals
Speaking of the Tories and Scotland:
'Labour can't stick working with toxic Better Together'
Many Labour activists "simply cannot stomach" working alongside the Conservatives in the pro-Union Better Together campaign, the chairman of Scottish Labour has admitted.
In comments which expose the tensions between the main partners in the No camp, Jackson Cullinane also claimed Scottish Labour had been "bounced" into its unwanted partnership with the Conservatives on the issue, and warned the alliance could come back "to haunt Labour in electoral terms".
StuartD I think the Tories now have to accept that in Scotland they are largely confined to a spectator role, rather like the Canadian Tories in Quebec, with the main battle between the nationalists and Labour and to a lesser extent the Liberals
Iirc at the last GE the Conservative vote was pretty close to the Liberal and SNP in vote numbers, just spread out badly to result in few seats.
There are two Scottish seats behind Peter Snow in the photo at the top. It is instructive to see what has happened to these "Tory seats" since then:
General Election 1992: Edinburgh West 1st place: Conservative James Douglas-Hamilton 18,071 37.0%
General Election 2010: Edinburgh West 3rd place: Conservative Stewart Geddes 10,767 23.2%
________________________________________________
General Election 1992: Eastwood 1st place: Conservative Allan Stewart 24,124 46.8%
General Election 1992: East Renfrewshire 2nd place: Conservative Richard Cook 15,567 30.4%
The collapse in Edinburgh West is similar to that in other middle class urban constituencies throught Britain.
Eastwood / East Renfrewshire though was a utterly dredful result (and repeated in 2011 despite the Holyrood boundaries being more advantageous to the Conservatives). IIRC only Brent N, Ealing N and Micham & Morden have had bigger Con-Lab swings since 1992 and E/ER does not have the demographic change reason of the London constituencies.
'Former Glasgow lord provost and Labour heavyweight Alex Mosson reveals he will vote Yes in 2014 independence referendum' - Mosson, a former Clyde shipyard worker, said the recent announcement by BAE Systems to cut more than 800 jobs in Scotland had strengthened his belief in independence.
Last week another senior Labour figure, Sir Charles Gray, leader of Strathclyde Regional Council from 1986-92, also said he would be voting for independence.
It's quite interesting Stuart, these fairly high profile Labour figures coming out for Yes. As I have said before, I hope it's a No for emotional reasons, although were I Scottish, I am sure I would vote Yes. It seems the rational position. Presumably the key part of the Yes strategy is to create a Labourites for Independence faction?
'Former Glasgow lord provost and Labour heavyweight Alex Mosson reveals he will vote Yes in 2014 independence referendum' - Mosson, a former Clyde shipyard worker, said the recent announcement by BAE Systems to cut more than 800 jobs in Scotland had strengthened his belief in independence.
Last week another senior Labour figure, Sir Charles Gray, leader of Strathclyde Regional Council from 1986-92, also said he would be voting for independence.
It's quite interesting Stuart, these fairly high profile Labour figures coming out for Yes. As I have said before, I hope it's a No for emotional reasons, although were I Scottish, I am sure I would vote Yes. It seems the rational position. Presumably the key part of the Yes strategy is to create a Labourites for Independence faction?
StuartD I think the Tories now have to accept that in Scotland they are largely confined to a spectator role, rather like the Canadian Tories in Quebec, with the main battle between the nationalists and Labour and to a lesser extent the Liberals
Iirc at the last GE the Conservative vote was pretty close to the Liberal and SNP in vote numbers, just spread out badly to result in few seats.
Indeed.
It is the SLDs who will be fulfilling "a spectator roll".
Bobajob - There is already such a group of Labour supporters for independence, website here: http://www.labourforindy.com/
SD I would imagine such Labourites will also have to grit their teeth to work with the SNP, Referendums do that, after all when else would you have had Tony Benn and Enoch Powell campaigning together than the EEC referendum?
'Former Glasgow lord provost and Labour heavyweight Alex Mosson reveals he will vote Yes in 2014 independence referendum' - Mosson, a former Clyde shipyard worker, said the recent announcement by BAE Systems to cut more than 800 jobs in Scotland had strengthened his belief in independence.
Last week another senior Labour figure, Sir Charles Gray, leader of Strathclyde Regional Council from 1986-92, also said he would be voting for independence.
It's quite interesting Stuart, these fairly high profile Labour figures coming out for Yes. As I have said before, I hope it's a No for emotional reasons, although were I Scottish, I am sure I would vote Yes. It seems the rational position. Presumably the key part of the Yes strategy is to create a Labourites for Independence faction?
My apologies. Excuse my ignorance. Interesting. I am starting to have this really odd feeling that Yes may just squeak it. I have no idea why as the polling evidence suggests it's in the bag for No. But in the last few days, I don't know. Just got an odd hunch.
StuartD I think the Tories now have to accept that in Scotland they are largely confined to a spectator role, rather like the Canadian Tories in Quebec, with the main battle between the nationalists and Labour and to a lesser extent the Liberals
Iirc at the last GE the Conservative vote was pretty close to the Liberal and SNP in vote numbers, just spread out badly to result in few seats.
Indeed.
It is the SLDs who will be fulfilling "a spectator roll".
Referendum etc to go, what the fallout of that will be is very brave to predict confidently.
Bobajob - There is already such a group of Labour supporters for independence, website here: http://www.labourforindy.com/
SD I would imagine such Labourites will also have to grit their teeth to work with the SNP, Referendums do that, after all when else would you have had Tony Benn and Enoch Powell campaigning together than the EEC referendum?
Labour and the SNP are both parties of the centre-left. I realise that the SNP has a centre-right faction, but my understanding is that is relatively small. I am sure Stuart will elucidate?
'Former Glasgow lord provost and Labour heavyweight Alex Mosson reveals he will vote Yes in 2014 independence referendum' - Mosson, a former Clyde shipyard worker, said the recent announcement by BAE Systems to cut more than 800 jobs in Scotland had strengthened his belief in independence.
Last week another senior Labour figure, Sir Charles Gray, leader of Strathclyde Regional Council from 1986-92, also said he would be voting for independence.
It's quite interesting Stuart, these fairly high profile Labour figures coming out for Yes. As I have said before, I hope it's a No for emotional reasons, although were I Scottish, I am sure I would vote Yes. It seems the rational position. Presumably the key part of the Yes strategy is to create a Labourites for Independence faction?
My apologies. Excuse my ignorance. Interesting. I am starting to have this really odd feeling that Yes may just squeak it. I have no idea why as the polling evidence suggests it's in the bag for No. But in the last few days, I don't know. Just got an odd hunch.
Bobajob - There is already such a group of Labour supporters for independence, website here: http://www.labourforindy.com/
SD I would imagine such Labourites will also have to grit their teeth to work with the SNP, Referendums do that, after all when else would you have had Tony Benn and Enoch Powell campaigning together than the EEC referendum?
Labour and the SNP are both parties of the centre-left. I realise that the SNP has a centre-right faction, but my understanding is that is relatively small. I am sure Stuart will elucidate?
Yes.
Note that Labour and the SNP (and the LibDems, Greens and others) worked extremely well together within Scotland FORward organisation, during the campaign for a Yes-Yes vote in the devolution referendum of 1997. Our activists tend to get on well with each other.
'Former Glasgow lord provost and Labour heavyweight Alex Mosson reveals he will vote Yes in 2014 independence referendum' - Mosson, a former Clyde shipyard worker, said the recent announcement by BAE Systems to cut more than 800 jobs in Scotland had strengthened his belief in independence.
Last week another senior Labour figure, Sir Charles Gray, leader of Strathclyde Regional Council from 1986-92, also said he would be voting for independence.
It's quite interesting Stuart, these fairly high profile Labour figures coming out for Yes. As I have said before, I hope it's a No for emotional reasons, although were I Scottish, I am sure I would vote Yes. It seems the rational position. Presumably the key part of the Yes strategy is to create a Labourites for Independence faction?
My apologies. Excuse my ignorance. Interesting. I am starting to have this really odd feeling that Yes may just squeak it. I have no idea why as the polling evidence suggests it's in the bag for No. But in the last few days, I don't know. Just got an odd hunch.
Betfair: Yes 6.2 No 1.18
Madness. Utter madness.
It's not utter madness - it's a reflection of people thinking that polling this far out from a vote is extremely unlikely to shift significantly. People placing complete faith in this may like to look at campaigns such as the AV referendum, the recent Senate abolition referendum in Ireland, the first Lisbon and Nice referendums in Ireland etc... The polling ahead of the Hollyrood 2011 election is superficially another example but I think it's slightly different as split voting there may not have been accounted for as well as it might have been.
corporeal True but it reinforces the failure of the Tories to emerge as the main opposition to Labour in Scotland
Bobajob Rural nationalists are often known as 'Tartan Tories'
SD Of course in Quebec the Yes campaign made it very tight, but No still squeeked it. Historically British referendums back the status quo, normally by around 2:1, so it would be going against the trend
@Neil: - "It's not utter madness - it's a reflection of people thinking that polling this far out from a vote is extremely unlikely to shift significantly. People placing complete faith in this may like to look at campaigns such as the AV referendum, the recent Senate abolition referendum in Ireland, the first Lisbon and Nice referendums in Ireland etc... The polling ahead of the Hollyrood 2011 election is superficially another example but I think it's slightly different as split voting there may not have been accounted for as well as it might have been."
Can you think of any elections where the polling 10 months out has *** NOT **** shifted significantly? I can't.
Of course there is the argument that Andy Parsons made on 'Mock the Week' that polls show more English voters back Scottish independence than Scots, so the Scots will vote No to annoy the English!
Perhaps Labour need to wipe 2011 from the record as well.
"In that role I was also able to give the Treasury’s support for a new Private Members Bill that led to the creation of the first ever ‘super-mutual’ bringing Britannia Building Society and the Co-op Bank together in the interests of customers, rather than the banking elite."
Not in other cultures. It is quite common for surnames to be different between fathers and sons.
I have a Keralan friend with only one name. For the sake of form filling (many do not accept a single name as an option!) He uses his fathers name as a first name.
It is not just in Asia, in Iceland it is normal for fathers and sons to have different surnames.
Er, in Iceland people don't really have surnames, you have a patronymic (or a matronymic, if that's your preference). For example, President Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson should be referred to as Ólafur, not as Mr Grímsson, which is something British news media consistently get wrong.
Can you think of any elections where the polling 10 months out has *** NOT **** shifted significantly? I can't.
Yes - I gave a few examples of referendums, particularly those from Ireland which has had far more referendums in modern times than the UK, where that unexpected (from the bookies' / punters' perspective) shift happened. Where polling has showed a consistent lead of the kind 'no' currently has this kind of shift has tended to be the exception rather than the rule. Without looking I guess whatever polling there was in Scotland in '97 showed consistent 'yes' / 'yes' leads?
Just heard the trailer for R4's Westminster Hour. They will cover the launch of a new left-of-Labour party apparently? Jesus wept.
b@BBCWestminHour: And we report on plans for new left wing group in British politics - will @LeftUnityUK make bigger impact than predecessors? @BBCRadio4 10pm
Just heard the trailer for R4's Westminster Hour. They will cover the launch of a new left-of-Labour party apparently? Jesus wept.
Could there be just enough space for a UKIP of the left? That would be fun.
You vastly overestimate the organisational abilities of these people. The only thing they will agree on is that every other group involved is trying to infiltrate the national executive. And they'll be right. How many times have we been here before? The irony (from my biased pov of course) being that there is a left-of-Labour party already out there and they've been making slow, steady, non-sectarian progress for about 15 years now.
It carefully avoids his work. Must be a banker then.
But cannot bring himself to call his work as a banker ! What is he ashamed of ?
He appears to work in their Corporate Affairs Division - sounds like he may be a company lobbyist/'external affairs' person. So not really a banker. Who cares anyway?
Just heard the trailer for R4's Westminster Hour. They will cover the launch of a new left-of-Labour party apparently? Jesus wept.
Could there be just enough space for a UKIP of the left? That would be fun.
You vastly overestimate the organisational abilities of these people. The only thing they will agree on is that every other group involved is trying to infiltrate the national executive. And they'll be right. How many times have we been here before? The irony (from my biased pov of course) being that there is a left-of-Labour party already out there and they've been making slow, steady, non-sectarian progress for about 15 years now.
Indeed - although why you are in it given your right wing views on many issues is a mystery to many of us on here!
To me this says so much about left-of-Labour intiatives. It represents their glory and futility (though it doesnt touch on the bitter sectarianism which is also a key feature of any such movement). I give you the left-of-Labour poetry collection:
Just heard the trailer for R4's Westminster Hour. They will cover the launch of a new left-of-Labour party apparently? Jesus wept.
Could there be just enough space for a UKIP of the left? That would be fun.
You vastly overestimate the organisational abilities of these people. The only thing they will agree on is that every other group involved is trying to infiltrate the national executive. And they'll be right. How many times have we been here before? The irony (from my biased pov of course) being that there is a left-of-Labour party already out there and they've been making slow, steady, non-sectarian progress for about 15 years now.
Indeed - although why you are in it given your right wing views on many issues is a mystery to many of us on here!
Just heard the trailer for R4's Westminster Hour. They will cover the launch of a new left-of-Labour party apparently? Jesus wept.
Could there be just enough space for a UKIP of the left? That would be fun.
You vastly overestimate the organisational abilities of these people. The only thing they will agree on is that every other group involved is trying to infiltrate the national executive. And they'll be right. How many times have we been here before? The irony (from my biased pov of course) being that there is a left-of-Labour party already out there and they've been making slow, steady, non-sectarian progress for about 15 years now.
Indeed - although why you are in it given your right wing views on many issues is a mystery to many of us on here!
You have as much knowledge of my views on political issues as you have of other posters' gender and age. I appreciate the interest but it's entirely misplaced.
Maybe it would be worth putting a very long-term bet on Ranil Jayawardena becoming prime minister one day. He's certainly going to be Tory MP for NE Hampshire for a very long time, if he so wishes.
Referendum etc to go, what the fallout of that will be is very brave to predict confidently.
The SLDs are going to be slaughtered in 2015 whatever the outcome of the referendum.
Are you basing the non-effect of the referendum on any reasoning you'd care to share?
I think the referendum result could have an impact on the 2015 GE. It's just that I think the SLDs will be slaughtered either way. If the SNP is impacted negatively by a loss in 2014 (I'm not sure they will be as much as others sometimes suggest) then maybe the SLDs will hold on to more seats than otherwise (NE Fife for example) but either way the election results and polling we've had since 2010 have showed the SLDs are going to take a massive hit in 2015 and the only question is how bad will it be.
Ranil Jayawardena win North East Hampshire Conservative selection. He's a Cllr in Basingstoke. He inherits a 35.1% majority
So a Sinhalese effectively becomes a Tory MP. To be welcomed by both Cameron and Rajapaksa !
Will he be the first MP of Sinhalese origin ?
It would take a 28.2% swing to UKIP to deny him that privilege.
Nirj Deva was MP for Brentford & Isleworth from 1992 to 1997, although I'm not sure whether he was Sinhalese or Tamil.
Labour selected a Tamil-heritage candidate for Harrow East yesterday in the shape of Uma Kumaran, so two Sri Lankan heritage candidates selected in as many days, from opposite sides of the ethnic divide.
Patronymics/matronymics are the origin of many surnames: Johnson, Williamson, but also the Welsh Jones and Williams, the Russian Abrohamovic and the Arabic Ben/Bin, though Arabic also has the formation Abu- meaning father of.
Patronymics have fossilized in England into Surnames, but remain in their original form in some cultures.
Not in other cultures. It is quite common for surnames to be different between fathers and sons.
I have a Keralan friend with only one name. For the sake of form filling (many do not accept a single name as an option!) He uses his fathers name as a first name.
It is not just in Asia, in Iceland it is normal for fathers and sons to have different surnames.
Er, in Iceland people don't really have surnames, you have a patronymic (or a matronymic, if that's your preference). For example, President Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson should be referred to as Ólafur, not as Mr Grímsson, which is something British news media consistently get wrong.
Very different circumstances. Libya comprised urgent reactive strikes, whilst Afghanistan and Iraq had full invasions after months, if not years, of planning.
Iraq and planning in same sentence?
doesn't seem right.
The only real planning Labour did was on how to present their lie.
Who would have thought it, Labour a neo cons bi***
If Nick Clegg really wants to help hard-working people why is he pressing for an increase in the income tax threshold rather than the National Insurance threshold given that the latter tax is only levied on earned income rather than all income?
If Nick Clegg really wants to help hard-working people why is he pressing for an increase in the income tax threshold rather than the National Insurance threshold given that the latter tax is only levied on earned income rather than all income?
If Nick Clegg really wants to help hard-working people why is he pressing for an increase in the income tax threshold rather than the National Insurance threshold given that the latter tax is only levied on earned income rather than all income?
And there are probably hundreds of thousands of very low paid people who wont benefit from an IT threshold rise (because they are already below it) but who would benefit from a rise in the employee (and self-employed) NI threshold.
Very different circumstances. Libya comprised urgent reactive strikes, whilst Afghanistan and Iraq had full invasions after months, if not years, of planning.
Iraq and planning in same sentence?
doesn't seem right.
The only real planning Labour did was on how to present their lie.
Who would have thought it, Labour a neo cons bi***
I disagree. The military planning for the invasions went very well, in both cases.
What went wrong was the political planning for the aftermath. Or lack thereof.
Patronymics/matronymics are the origin of many surnames: Johnson, Williamson, but also the Welsh Jones and Williams, the Russian Abrohamovic and the Arabic Ben/Bin, though Arabic also has the formation Abu- meaning father of.
Patronymics have fossilized in England into Surnames, but remain in their original form in some cultures.
Not in other cultures. It is quite common for surnames to be different between fathers and sons.
I have a Keralan friend with only one name. For the sake of form filling (many do not accept a single name as an option!) He uses his fathers name as a first name.
It is not just in Asia, in Iceland it is normal for fathers and sons to have different surnames.
Er, in Iceland people don't really have surnames, you have a patronymic (or a matronymic, if that's your preference). For example, President Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson should be referred to as Ólafur, not as Mr Grímsson, which is something British news media consistently get wrong.
On the Welsh note, the traditional Welsh formulation was Ap/Ab (Llywelyn ap Gruffudd would be Llywelyn the son of Gruffudd) which got corrupted into a lot of surnames. Price coming out of Ap Rhys, and Bowen out of Ab Owen, etc.
Maybe the Paul Sykes donation to UKIP will prompt the other parties to agree a maximum gift level.
LOL. Yep that would be typical. As long as they are benefiting the big parties do nothing about donations even if their money is coming from crooked sources.
But as soon as one of the smaller parties starts to benefit they all start trying to bring in rules to stop it.
I would not be surprised if it happened as it just about sums up the hypocrisy of the three main parties.
A bit embarrassing for McNulty not to even get shortlisted but hardly a surprise. One of their more interesting selections and surely a Lab gain in 2015. Is Lembit still in the race for the Lib Dem nomination or have the weeded out the no-hopers yet?
I would not be surprised if it happened as it just about sums up the hypocrisy of the three main parties.
They would be doing the right thing even if you suspect it was for the wrong reasons (I doubt it would be as the main parties still pull in far more than UKIP will). The guy has stated he wants to donate whatever it takes to allow UKIP to win next year. What better reason could there be to ban this practice than to point out that it shouldnt be possible to donate enough money to allow a party to win an election like this.
If Nick Clegg really wants to help hard-working people why is he pressing for an increase in the income tax threshold rather than the National Insurance threshold given that the latter tax is only levied on earned income rather than all income?
Because NI is widely believed to fund the NHS, pensions and the welfare state generally.
It is therefore assumed to be a 'good thing' and cuts to it are therefore a 'bad thing'.
Whereas income tax being called a tax is assumed to be a 'bad thing' and cuts to it are therefore a 'good thing'.
Ranil Jayawardena win North East Hampshire Conservative selection. He's a Cllr in Basingstoke. He inherits a 35.1% majority
So a Sinhalese effectively becomes a Tory MP. To be welcomed by both Cameron and Rajapaksa !
Will he be the first MP of Sinhalese origin ?
It would take a 28.2% swing to UKIP to deny him that privilege.
Nirj Deva was MP for Brentford & Isleworth from 1992 to 1997, although I'm not sure whether he was Sinhalese or Tamil.
Labour selected a Tamil-heritage candidate for Harrow East yesterday in the shape of Uma Kumaran, so two Sri Lankan heritage candidates selected in as many days, from opposite sides of the ethnic divide.
Deva is actually of Indian (Rajasthani) descent who was born in Colombo:
For those worried by the aging ti!mebomb, I bring you good news: we are getting younger and have a dependency rate that will be lower than 60 years ago, if you use accurate measures.
If Nick Clegg really wants to help hard-working people why is he pressing for an increase in the income tax threshold rather than the National Insurance threshold given that the latter tax is only levied on earned income rather than all income?
Because NI is widely believed to fund the NHS, pensions and the welfare state generally.
It is therefore assumed to be a 'good thing' and cuts to it are therefore a 'bad thing'.
Whereas income tax being called a tax is assumed to be a 'bad thing' and cuts to it are therefore a 'good thing'.
And because every penny they spend increasing the employee NI threshold is a penny that doesnt contribute towards the "we raised IT threshold to x per annum" election posters. Policy making by politicians, it isnt always pretty.
Just heard the trailer for R4's Westminster Hour. They will cover the launch of a new left-of-Labour party apparently? Jesus wept.
Could there be just enough space for a UKIP of the left? That would be fun.
They already tried it with the Greens who are to the left of the official Labour party. Though they got one seat in parliament, since then it's been downhill all the way. Epic fail.
Yeh, so what? The man makes lying his trade mark. They should put him in a film: "Carry on lying".
You wrote "again" - how can a 9 month old story be "again"? Not Cameron lying here....,..
Carlotta, you may remember pastygate the day that Cammo claimed to have eaten a pasty from a shop that no longer existed. Well, he hasn't stopped, shall we say, stretching the truth to all and sundry.
Signatures were faked during Falkirk selection process, says report Note taken by Unite officials claims Labour leadership was 'well aware of Unite's political strategy activities in Falkirk'
The allegations are likely to intensify the calls for the Labour party to reopen the inquiry into claims that Unite improperly used a scheme to encourage trade unionists to join the Labour party to boost supporters during the selection process in Falkirk. Labour abandoned the enquiry after evidence was withdrawn by two key witnesses.
Though they got one seat in parliament, since then it's been downhill all the way. Epic fail.
Since the Green's Westminster breakthrough in 2010 they have: (1) increased the number of Cllrs at local authority level (2) maintained the number of MSPs (different party admittedly) (3) retained their seat in Stormont (again a different party) (4) generally improved poll ratings (though at the levels registered it's always difficult to take these too seriously) (5) aim to increase representation in Brussels next year.
That doesnt seem to me to be a particularly downhill trajectory. Just more of the solid progress that has been going on for 15 years and produced a breakthrough in Westminster that UKIP show few signs of being able to replicate.
@MikeK - all politicians "add artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative" - I haven't seen evidence that Cameron is noticeably worse (or better) than others.....the debt/deficit one was particularly egregious and he was rightly called out on it.....
Though they got one seat in parliament, since then it's been downhill all the way. Epic fail.
Since the Green's Westminster breakthrough in 2010 they have: (1) increased the number of Cllrs at local authority level (2) maintained the number of MSPs (different party admittedly) (3) retained their seat in Stormont (again a different party) (4) generally improved poll ratings (though at the levels registered it's always difficult to take these too seriously) (5) aim to increase representation in Brussels next year.
That doesnt seem to me to be a particularly downhill trajectory. Just more of the solid progress that has been going on for 15 years and produced a breakthrough in Westminster that UKIP show few signs of being able to replicate.
UKIP have, by a very very long way (and second place is the Referendum party of '97) got more votes than any other party at a GE without winning a seat.
Just heard the trailer for R4's Westminster Hour. They will cover the launch of a new left-of-Labour party apparently? Jesus wept.
Could there be just enough space for a UKIP of the left? That would be fun.
They already tried it with the Greens who are to the left of the official Labour party. Though they got one seat in parliament, since then it's been downhill all the way. Epic fail.
That's a lie, as proved by Neil. You need to be careful, you'll get films made about you called carry on lying.
Though they got one seat in parliament, since then it's been downhill all the way. Epic fail.
That doesnt seem to me to be a particularly downhill trajectory. Just more of the solid progress that has been going on for 15 years and produced a breakthrough in Westminster that UKIP show few signs of being able to replicate.
I'd add two other factors - there is a well established "Green" movement in a Europe, which I presume the UK parties engage with - somethíng Farage will not do (and good for him) with the Le Pens of Europe, and the Green world view also seems a bit more developed than the (effectively) single issue of UKIP - which is really immigration.
Comments
Because of the landslide majorities Thatcher had won they could afford to lose support and still win an election.
They do not have the same safety margin now - to remain in government they are likely to need to increase support.
Which brings us to the cheerleaders dilemma - for the Conservatives to gain increased support in constituency X or among demographic Y they have to conceed that the Conservatives underachieved in these places in 2010. Which goes against their fundamental belief that 2010 was a great electoral triumph for Cameron and Osborne and could not have been bettered by listening to outsiders.
The double think they require to reconcile these beliefs is a source of amusement.
"I will never, ever forgive the Labour party for allowing this mass immigration with no demands put on what people should be paid when they come to this country. I will never forgive them for destroying the jobs of my mates, because they allowed their jobs to be undercut with stupid thinking on Europe, letting them all in, so they can live 10 to a room, working for Polish wages”
http://tinyurl.com/ojzc9qo
I would call myself an "investment banker". My father insists that I am not a "proper banker" but only a "financial adviser".
Financial services is a good generic term
I thought it was pretty well-established consensus that Cameron did ok overall, after a poor campaign, and a very cynical performance by Labour. England was solid, Scotland very bad, and Wales surprised on the upside.
Overall a B/B+
But significant improvement needed.
General Election 1992: Edinburgh West
1st place: Conservative James Douglas-Hamilton 18,071 37.0%
General Election 2010: Edinburgh West
3rd place: Conservative Stewart Geddes 10,767 23.2%
________________________________________________
General Election 1992: Eastwood
1st place: Conservative Allan Stewart 24,124 46.8%
General Election 1992: East Renfrewshire
2nd place: Conservative Richard Cook 15,567 30.4%
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/People/article1341640.ece
RIP To Dorothy Lessing too
I have a Keralan friend with only one name. For the sake of form filling (many do not accept a single name as an option!) He uses his fathers name as a first name.
It is not just in Asia, in Iceland it is normal for fathers and sons to have different surnames.
"In addition to his work with the church and the Co-op, the Rev. Flowers has been involved in a number of high-profile public roles.
He served as a Labour councillor on the City of Bradford Council for ten years, and, in 2010, was appointed by Labour leader Ed Miliband to the party's finance and industry board.
He has also been involved with a number of charities, including the Terrence Higgins Trust, where he remains a trustee, and the Lifeline Project, which works in the field of drug abuse."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/business-news-markets-live/10455159/Profile-Rev.-Paul-Flowers.html
A poacher turned gamekeeper.
NB I do not include you among their number, as I've said before you are the man Cameron should have been.
Your analysis is reasonable - you need to break down England into different regions and demographics to understand how much the Conservative strategy failed in 2010 - but yet again you are too generous with your final mark, a dangerous fault when trying to help.
But do you think that the Conservative leadership acknowleges it needs 'significant improvement' ?
If its planing on refighting 1992 then its in a defensive mode aiming to hold what it has and doesn't accept that it undereachieved in 2010.
What has undermined the Conservatives is the complacent self-satisfaction together with the lack of curiosity of their leadership. When Cameron and Osborne travel from government office to Conservative function, from photostunt to TV studio do they ever look out the car window and notice how things are changing and wonder about the electoral effects thereof ? I have my doubts.
'Labour can't stick working with toxic Better Together' http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/labour-cant-stick-working-with-toxic-better-together.22716960
Eastwood / East Renfrewshire though was a utterly dredful result (and repeated in 2011 despite the Holyrood boundaries being more advantageous to the Conservatives). IIRC only Brent N, Ealing N and Micham & Morden have had bigger Con-Lab swings since 1992 and E/ER does not have the demographic change reason of the London constituencies.
It's quite interesting Stuart, these fairly high profile Labour figures coming out for Yes. As I have said before, I hope it's a No for emotional reasons, although were I Scottish, I am sure I would vote Yes. It seems the rational position. Presumably the key part of the Yes strategy is to create a Labourites for Independence faction?
It already exists.
http://www.labourforindy.co.uk/
https://www.facebook.com/labourforindependence
As does:
https://www.facebook.com/LiberalDemocratVotersForIndependence
It is the SLDs who will be fulfilling "a spectator roll".
SD I would imagine such Labourites will also have to grit their teeth to work with the SNP, Referendums do that, after all when else would you have had Tony Benn and Enoch Powell campaigning together than the EEC referendum?
http://www.labourforindy.co.uk/
https://www.facebook.com/labourforindependence
As does:
https://www.facebook.com/LiberalDemocratVotersForIndependence
@HYUFD @ Stuart
My apologies. Excuse my ignorance.
Interesting.
I am starting to have this really odd feeling that Yes may just squeak it. I have no idea why as the polling evidence suggests it's in the bag for No. But in the last few days, I don't know. Just got an odd hunch.
Referendum etc to go, what the fallout of that will be is very brave to predict confidently.
My apologies. Excuse my ignorance.
Interesting.
I am starting to have this really odd feeling that Yes may just squeak it. I have no idea why as the polling evidence suggests it's in the bag for No. But in the last few days, I don't know. Just got an odd hunch.
Betfair: Yes 6.2 No 1.18
Madness. Utter madness.
Note that Labour and the SNP (and the LibDems, Greens and others) worked extremely well together within Scotland FORward organisation, during the campaign for a Yes-Yes vote in the devolution referendum of 1997. Our activists tend to get on well with each other.
Madness. Utter madness.
It's not utter madness - it's a reflection of people thinking that polling this far out from a vote is extremely unlikely to shift significantly. People placing complete faith in this may like to look at campaigns such as the AV referendum, the recent Senate abolition referendum in Ireland, the first Lisbon and Nice referendums in Ireland etc... The polling ahead of the Hollyrood 2011 election is superficially another example but I think it's slightly different as split voting there may not have been accounted for as well as it might have been.
Bobajob Rural nationalists are often known as 'Tartan Tories'
SD Of course in Quebec the Yes campaign made it very tight, but No still squeeked it. Historically British referendums back the status quo, normally by around 2:1, so it would be going against the trend
Can you think of any elections where the polling 10 months out has *** NOT **** shifted significantly? I can't.
That would be fun.
Their website suggests that is Ken Loach and a couple of mates.
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/blog_comments/call_for_submissions_nlp_poetry_collection
He is pb's resident contrarian.
And peerless at it.
He also likes cocktails.
A super hero.
Remember back to the time of Damian McBride and "Redrag" - with the odd exception it was "very quiet over there".
Labour selected a Tamil-heritage candidate for Harrow East yesterday in the shape of Uma Kumaran, so two Sri Lankan heritage candidates selected in as many days, from opposite sides of the ethnic divide.
Patronymics have fossilized in England into Surnames, but remain in their original form in some cultures.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/1117/487254-michael-d-higgins-queen-elizabeth/
Self-made businessman promises to do “whatever it takes” to help Ukip top the polls in May
doesn't seem right.
The only real planning Labour did was on how to present their lie.
Who would have thought it, Labour a neo cons bi***
What went wrong was the political planning for the aftermath. Or lack thereof.
The Lab shortlist of Brent Central is
Butler
Sabina Khan (a businesswoman whose best selling point is probably not being Butler)
a Dr former Army Officer (the one at the top http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iDeOMa-JWxE/UmrkQkNipuI/AAAAAAAAIII/ezJOf9QWmKU/s1600/Sundar.jpg)
a local Cllr working for a bank (but backed by GMB)
Dhanda, the former MP from Gloucester
All BME. Not afro-carribbean black men though.
But as soon as one of the smaller parties starts to benefit they all start trying to bring in rules to stop it.
I would not be surprised if it happened as it just about sums up the hypocrisy of the three main parties.
A bit embarrassing for McNulty not to even get shortlisted but hardly a surprise. One of their more interesting selections and surely a Lab gain in 2015. Is Lembit still in the race for the Lib Dem nomination or have the weeded out the no-hopers yet?
It is therefore assumed to be a 'good thing' and cuts to it are therefore a 'bad thing'.
Whereas income tax being called a tax is assumed to be a 'bad thing' and cuts to it are therefore a 'good thing'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirj_Deva
http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f6598
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/is-cameron-a-liar-now-for-the-official-verdict-8475851.html
Signatures were faked during Falkirk selection process, says report
Note taken by Unite officials claims Labour leadership was 'well aware of Unite's political strategy activities in Falkirk'
The allegations are likely to intensify the calls for the Labour party to reopen the inquiry into claims that Unite improperly used a scheme to encourage trade unionists to join the Labour party to boost supporters during the selection process in Falkirk. Labour abandoned the enquiry after evidence was withdrawn by two key witnesses.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/17/falkirk-signatures-faked-selection-unite
That doesnt seem to me to be a particularly downhill trajectory. Just more of the solid progress that has been going on for 15 years and produced a breakthrough in Westminster that UKIP show few signs of being able to replicate.
http://youtu.be/82tyhwxpWLw?t=7m01s
In 2009 their annual spend was £1.2 million.
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-subject/political-parties-campaigning-and-donations/political-parties-annual-accounts/2012#UKIP
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-24977405