Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Safe as houses?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Safe as houses?
Housing has long had a special place in the Tory party’s heart. A “property owning democracy” in Mrs Thatcher’s vision. It has also proved a nightmare as the rises in interest rates, negative equity and repossessions in the 1990’s showed. Now the problem is different: people desperate to own a home (the young) are shut out by sky high prices (at least in some places), the difficulties of saving for a deposit while renting and the lack of sufficient affordable homes. The interests of existing homeowners, a sometimes impenetrable and lengthy planning system, the effects of QE inflating asset prices, the attraction of property as an “investment” for those from less secure countries and inertia have combined to make the Tories’ cherished property-owning democracy more of a chimera than it once seemed. This has not been helped by the number of Ministers dealing with this: 18 junior Ministers between 1997 – 2018. Only in January 2018 was Housing moved to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and given a Cabinet Minister. There have been three: Sajid Javid (for 3 months), James Brokenshire and now Robert Jenrick.
Comments
Because I think that it ultimately depends on the depth of dislike people have for a candidate.
Let me give you an example. Back in 1997, Martin Bell stood against Neil Hamilton in Tatton. Few people voted for Martin Bell. Lots of people voted against Neil Hamilton. And the latter lost badly.
So, really the question is - for the 65% of the population that are not Trump's base - how much do they dislike him? Is it a lot? Or is a little?
If you look back at 2016, both Ms Clinton and Mr Trump had really high unfavourables. But if you asked people who disliked both "if you had to vote for one of them, which would it be", then they went by large margins for Trump over Clinton.
In Wisconsin, which Trump won by a whisker, people who disliked both Trump and Clinton, went for Trump by 37 percentage points.
This time around, people who dislike both prefer Biden by large margins over Trump. Now maybe they won't come out to vote this time around. But if they do...
Simply: I'm not convinced by the "Republicans" are more enthused argument. And here's why. Back in 1980, Registered Democrats were 45% of the electorate, and Registered Republicans were 40%. Just 15% were Independent. Now, fewer than 29% of voters are Registered Republicans, and Independents have just overtaken them. Enthusing a diminishing portion of the electorate, frankly, isn't enough any more.
Why?
Because at the start I though Cyclefree was going to look at the huge issue of housing policy rather than the more prosaic issue of a dodgy Conservative Minister who should have been out of his job weeks ago.
Obviously the latter is still important and I think the article nails it very well. But I would so much rather have read about how to fix our long term housing issues.
Fox Fisher, Drew Davies and Ugla Stefanía Kristjönudóttir Jónsdóttir said they could no longer work with the Blair Partnership, the London-based agency that represents all aspects of the Harry Potter author’s work, because they were not convinced the company “supports our rights at all avenues”.
A spokeswoman said it would always champion diverse voices and believe in freedom of speech for all but it was not willing to have staff “re-educated” to meet the demands of a small group of clients.
(Guardian)
I don't blame it for being more in the usual @Cyclefree ouvre though, but yes, I was expecting a thundering manifesto to clear the slums, demolish the tower blocks, and ensure every English(wo)man (and Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish
Thank you for the thread topic, @Cyclefree and I'm sure Robert Jenrick will have plenty of acceptable and credible answers when these questions are put to him.
He's got plenty of time on his side - even if the Tories are out for 15 years after the next election, he'll be in his mid-50s so a leadership bid - why not?
On other matters, I see Boris "Good News" Johnson is lining up to provide us with more good cheer tomorrow with a further easing of restrictions. It's so much easier when it's good news being dished out rather than bad - he's learnt that from Sunak. Everyone loves you if you are saying what they want to hear.
Now, to be fair, and I try to be, I'm going to say something I didn't think I would say.
I think the British people have done pretty damn well dealing with Covid-19.
Hindsight is 20/20 and we all wish sometimes we could do back and do things differently. More than 60,000 have died and that is frankly terrible but in spite of mixed and occasionally contradictory guidance from Government and science most people have behaved responsibly and appropriately through this crisis and kudos to us all.
I'm deeply sorry for those who have lost loved ones and for those whose health continues to be blighted by this terrible virus and I fully understand why many remain nervous and fearful. No one can fault the heroism of the NHS and so many public and private sector workers who have performed above and beyond when the country needed them. I'd single out road haulage - brilliant, just brilliant.
We all deserve a pat on the back - I've tried but I've tweaked my shoulder.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=33&v=QMdsh_4RHJs&feature=emb_title
It's the same reason communists didn't want democracy in Eastern European countries during the cold war: they knew they wouldn't win the elections.
There is a theme of contempt for law and due process in this government which really worries me. I am keeping a beady eye on them.
Obviously, under any other PM, Jenrick would have been shut away in a small room with a tumbler of whisky and a loaded revolver by now. Even if he hasn't technically done anything wrong, he has brought the system into disrepute, and that isn't on.
The trouble is that this isn't a government that navigates by whether something is on or not.
It's a point I have seen Laura McInerney (who as an education journalist has seen Gove and Cummings close up for years) make. Unless you can point to a triplet of a specific rule broken, a specific sanction and someone who can enforce the sanction, the rule doesn't exist for these guys.
Hence nobody losing their job over prorogation. Hence Dom surviving Durhamgate. As long as you stay loyal to The Boss, he will see you all right. In a way, it's an ingenious bit of man management; appoint people so compromised that they have to stay loyal to you.
Because their political antennae are so poor, they won't notice the gradual decay in their reputation and support. And each bit of erosion is negligible anyway. And the only people who can enforce a sanction are the general public in 2024, or Conservative MPs if they can get an internal majority against the PM together.
This isn't a good thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mO4qhwEPshw
What's particularly interesting about it is that it featured on PoliticsJoe, which has a very left-ish tinge. However, Oli Dugmore, the interviewer, allows Douglas Murray to develop his arguments, listens to what he has to say, gently challenges him on some of it, and reflects on and considers some of his points - you can see him doing it.
It's very good. No interruptions. No point scoring. It's a sad reminder of how good political interviews used to be.
I think Douglas Murray got fairer treatment here than he would have done on Newsnight or Channel 4 news.
Full respect to Oli Dugmore.
Yesterday the odds were ~4 on 'next cabinet minister to resign'. I cannot see it happening. They will just bluff it out.
I mean why even bother resigning just to be rehired a little later. Skip the charade, stay in post and celebrate with previous 'disgraced cabinet minister's', Williamson and Patel.
I don't see what registration has to do with anything since the question is of all voters for a given candidate, irrespective of Rep/Dem/Ind registration.
Latest Fox poll
https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2020/06/Fox_June-13-16-2020_National_Topline_June-18-Release.pdf
Enthusiasm for your candidate to win / Fear the other / candidate might win / (Don’t know)
13-16 Jun 20 [overall] 41% / 51% / 9%
Biden supporters 31% / 63% / 5%
Trump supporters 62% / 33% /5%
27-29 Sep 16 [overall] 38% / 57% / 5%
Clinton supporters 44% / 54% / 2%
Trump supporters 35% / 61% / 4%
Are Trump voters answering polls right now really that different to Trump voters 4 years ago so as to explain away the change in numbers?
There are going to voters Donald. And you don't like voters do you?
No 10 protecting its back not Jenrick’s.
Plus given how incredibly hard it is to get an agent as a writer, I'm sure these three slots will be taken up very quickly.
Interestingly alliterative names, though.
(Aside: what happens to Icelandic surnames in a polyamorous relationship?)
When they lost the High Court action on the PP by Tower Hamlets, the Ministerial reason for caving was based on admission of appearance of bias, which I think is code for 'looks stinky, but doesn't actually stink:
"A consent order approved by the planning court said: “The first defendant [secretary of state] accepts that the decision letter was unlawful by reason of apparent bias and should be quashed.”
@Cyclefree, I think the account is not quite correct. Probably not that material to the basic point though.
Liability for CiL becomes active at commencement of development. Granting of PP establishes the liability to be paid later.
In 5 above no liability had been established at the 14 January, as no PP existed - so no payment could be due. What they came in just ahead of was Tower Hamlets voting to implement their proposals for CiL (previous approved by the Govt) so that all future relevant PPs granted after that date would become liable.
So if Mr J had not approved the PP then that one or a future one would be processed after the CiL had become active (and presumably affordables etc or the quality or density of the housing would have been adjusted to generate the £40 million or whatever amount was due).
The standard bearers of this government do have some previous in riding roughshod over legal, constitutional and ethical considerations. Looks like Jenrick should go, but won't. Mind you, Conor Burns's crime has already been forgotten it seems, and his behaviour was so disgraceful he should have had the Tory whip removed.
The global head office is in Cambridgeshire but the other head office is in California
It will be inreresting
My wife and I have been in Denplan for years and they are very good
They paid for a repair to a filling in New Zealand, an emergency repair for my wife in Uxbridge just before we flew to Canada, and repair to my crown which fell out on my way to Heathrow 2 years ago
As well as most general treatment
Those are the same two words used by Trump's first cousin on the Isle of Lewis in Scotland.
"(Donald) Trump is now looking into legal action amid reports she signed a non-disclosure agreement in 2001 banning her from talking about their relationship, according to The Daily Beast." ("Their relationship" here probably means Trump's with his father, Mary's grandfather.)
Haha - legal action! Good luck with that!
But the shorter answer is: Boris? Collective responsibility? Hahahahahaha.....
If Jenrick does get the boot, the questions about Cummings will start again.
That being said... this isn't really a big deal for ARM (except in terms of credibility), because of the nature of the relationship they have with Apple.
So, ARM sells two types of licenses:
1. You can buy their designs, make the chips yourself (with their designs), and you pay a small price per unit you ship. This is the model that most of the world uses.
2. You can buy an "architectural license", which is a one off fee, to use their architecture, and then you design your own chips.
Most ARM chips that you'll find in (non-Apple) phones are based around ARM's own designs and people like Qualcomm or Samsung or Mediatek just add a few things to their designs.
Architectural licenses, where you design your own chips to ARM's standards, are less common, and there's no "per unit" element. Apple designs its own chips to ARM's standards. So the benefit to ARM financially from this is probably pretty small.
Not so unusual these days - even Tesla has its own chips.
TV takes its style from this, I think, and the belief that you gain audience by being combative and making every interview into a battle. And perhaps it's true - it's hard to explain the popularity of the Paxman genre otherwise. But it doesn't appeal to me - like Casino I'd rather the interviewer explored the opinions of the subject, including politely asking difficult questions, and let the viewers - generally consenting adults - make their own minds up.
But that seems to me to be a diversion from the fact that at least from the date of the November dinner, the Minister was potentially compromised. So it raises to me the issue of whether the Minister caved in when challenged in order to avoid the fact of that dinner coming out.
At any event, the story stinks.
Anyway, Labour are devoting their Opposition Day to this on Wednesday. Will the hapless Chris Pincher again be sent in to bat while Jenrick furtively lurks in the tea room?
They have had on shall we say the establishment in Neil Ferguson, to an opposing view via members of "independent sage", right through to the more far out academic view.
It looks a pretty brutal disavowal of Jenrick, anyway.
Guido stirring up shit but Labour is right to do this
But yes his wife may be rich.
I put that in because it is such a contrast with so many other 27 year olds unable to buy anything at all, let alone a Grade 1 listed house, and the casual acceptance that the number of affordable houses could be reduced - in a city where affordability is a very real issue.
I know there's a pandemic on but this is still a big issue, someone at Downing Street or CCHQ must know this is going to get very messy.
https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1275116073944154114?s=19
With Nova Launcher on Android, you can make Android look like anything, but it looks modern with little work. I am surprised Apple haven't gone for circular flat style icons that everybody else has gone to.
Unlike the US, our police funding has not risen as crime has fallen.
I do think you are slightly naive about politics though. We all know that politicians are often sent out with a brief to deflect from the core issue, shift the focus onto something else, not answer the question (perhaps with good reason!). Of course the viewer is going to be irritated by that and interviewers seem to think they are the peoples' representative. On balance I'd still see it as preferable to a supine approach which you often see elsewhere in the world - for obvious reasons.
There was the tragic Fiona Jones, that prize bellend Patrick Mercer, and now the shameless Robert Jenrick.
BUPA have said they will not cover the cost of the PPE and like others on here I have been told I must stump up £7 a visit for the PPE costs.
My sister went last week to the same dentist and was really annoyed to find out that the PPE consisted of a squeeze of hand sanitiser and one of those paper masks you can buy for pennies.
It is shameful how shameless Jenrick and Boris Johnson really are.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1275148213528526861?s=09
If he starts ranting about corruption he will miss the mark. He needs to ask - repeatedly - why Jenrick did not recuse himself after that dinner and when he told his officials the full story of what happened there.
It would also help if he had some inside knowledge of how tables at fund-raising dinners are organised and whether the Minister knows in advance e where he will be sitting. Because that part of the story does not smell right to me either. But what do I know? Perhaps it is lucky dip.
MP for Newark, a constituency which has fared badly for MPs over the last couple of decades. The awful Fiona Jones who got off a charge of electoral fraud by claiming the rules were too difficult to understand, the equally awful Patrick Mercer who tried to sell Parliamentary questions and now Jenrick.
A shame that on paper it is one of the safest seats in the country.
It's a damn shame that Microsoft threw in the towel.