"I think the reason the economy's not had much impact on VI so far is that people aren't feeling it themselves"
Mr. Herdson is probably correct (as usual). However, I might suggest that in rural and semi-rural England at least the state of the economy might not have the pull on likely Conservative voters as it once did.
There are other issues that are claiming the voters attention and where they are jolly angry at the Conservatives. From a recent, admittedly unscientific, survey carried out during a recent meeting of the Hurstpierpoint and District Gentlemen's Temperance Association reasons given why members would not be voting Conservatives in May or in 2015 were: planning, immigration, Europe, Cameron is a two faced lying canute, energy (bills and policy), defence, overseas aid, planning and, oh, planning. Nobody mentioned the state of the economy or taxes.
Wildly unscientific I know, but I gently suggest that if Cameron and Co think that if the economy grows then they will win back their lost support, let alone new voters, they may be disappointed.
(O/T - Mr Llama - did you get my e-mail with address details? - J]
The fact that the pollsters may be having trouble accurately assessing UKIP support certainly makes politics interesting again. Things were getting a little boring because the polling firms had got so good at assessing the popularity of the three established main parties, (after many decades of trial and error, of course).
On the last thread I showed what yougov & opinium were making UKIP (National) on the days of the last few by elections compared with the actual results (constituency)
Only once were they anywhere near, the rest of the time miles under..
And this was from Eastleigh, Corby, Middlesbrough, South Shields.. varying types of seat
It is utterly crass of you to compare national VI polls with percentages polled in by elections . Just go back and look at the national VI polls at the time of say the Birmingham Hodge Hill and Leicester by elections in 2004 , the national polls had the Lib Dems at nothing like the levels polled in the by elections . Which figures were more applicable to the 2005 GE , it was the national VI polls and not the by election results .
Looking bleak for the Lib Dems then...
Not quite so bleak
LD VI Jan 2000 12-17% GE 2001 19% LD VI Jan 2004 18-19% GE 2005 22% LD VI Jan 2009 14-15% GE 2009 23%
Mr Senior you spent much of the last parliament convincing us that the best predictor of LD performance at a GE was their performance at local elections.
2011: 15% 2012: 16% 2013: 14%
And I was correct which is why I am expecting Lib Dems to get 16-17% in 2015 .
? The LD local election results show a 10 point drop on the last parliament, so you must surely be expecting ~13% in 2015?
Nope , because in previous parliaments we were in opposition and now we are in government so there will be an element of swing back which we cannot quantify as there is no previous precedent except possibly 1979 .
11 seats, 13.8% a drop of 4.5%. Not too sure the Liberals can draw comfort from the 79 result...
They were just saying on Radio 5 that Keith Wallis has offered to resign from the Met now he has pleaded guilty, but the Met say he can't resign as he's suspended. They want to put him through their disciplinary process first.
Will he still be getting paid whilst that process goes on?
On one hand, he shouldn't get any money. On the other, in other cases suspended officers might well be found not guilty, and they deserve to be paid whilst being investigated.
A difficult one.
Considering he has now pleaded guilty, it ought to be possible to complete a disciplinary process in no more than a couple of weeks. The plea alone should be enough to secure his dismissal.
It'll be all to do with the pension, won't it? If he resigns he gets to keep it; if he is fired, that may not be the case.
@Patrick And 35%-35% means EdM gets to Downing Street possibly with a majority
Unless Labour piles up huge majorities in seats they already hold, which I think is a possibility. Betting on Labour getting over 35% but less than 326 seats might be worth considering.
I think this is a key point. As Mike has previously posted, the reason the current system favours Labour is because of three factors
1) Lower turnout in Labour strongholds 2) The boundary changes not happening 3) Labour's vote being more efficiently distributed
Now 1 and 2 aren't going to change but 3 might:
The reasons for the Labour vote being more efficient are tactical anti-Tory voting and the fact that the LDs took a lot of votes from Labour in the north without winning many seats
In the north, we know from the local elections that we should expect big LD-Lab swings in seats such as Liverpool Wavertree, Hull N, Newcastle N etc but Lab already has all these seats Meanwhile in LD-Tory fights in the South, Lab has been massively squeezed. While many will stick with the LDs it is hard to see Labour not picking up at least a few wasted votes
These should make the Labour vote less efficient
Meanwhile the Tories will be worried about UKIP and will run big vote UKIP get Labour campaigns in the marginals. However, this won't happen in safe seats and I would expect UKIP to gain more votes in safe Tory seats without winning many.
This will make the Con vote more efficient.
Overall my theory is that LD-Lab switchers won't help Labour as much as they think
I think that you are correct for a lot of that post, but with your last line you miss the possibly key fact for Labour. LD to Lab switchers in Lab-Con marginals. These are the key seats of the whole election, the Libs wont be actively fighting them and their vote will dissipate - likely to Lab given all the data we have so far.
'A change to one of the founding principles of the EU – freedom of movement – should be introduced to prevent EU citizens travelling to Britain in search of a job, the shadow business secretary, Chuka Umunna, has said.'
I wonder what the pro EU immigration labour pb think of this ? they must be fuming with our chuka - lol
It is embarrassing to see the pro immigration people tying themselves in knots, realising no doubt that they were wrong all along, but too tied to a dogma to admit it. I actually feel sorry for them.
When levels of immigration concern run in the 70/80%, even the most pro-immigration supporter must realise they're utterly on the wrong side of opinion.
How embarrassing. Why don't they just stick to their guns? Have they no principles?
This isn't some small part of a manifesto that they can change their minds on, it is a massive part of how our country is run and particularly how that affects the poorer people in society
That's why a few weeks ago I wondered whether Labour introduced the minimum wage precisely because they knew mass immigration from the Accession 8 would lower wages for unskilled workers... at least they would have been showing they cared for their traditional supporters
Turns out it was a happy accident
Ummuna looks a complete no hoper on the last 24 hours performance
On Plebgate; there's still no answer to the question on everyone's lips, the only important question: why did Dave sit on the CCTV evidence for three months?
The fact that the pollsters may be having trouble accurately assessing UKIP support certainly makes politics interesting again. Things were getting a little boring because the polling firms had got so good at assessing the popularity of the three established main parties, (after many decades of trial and error, of course).
On the last thread I showed what yougov & opinium were making UKIP (National) on the days of the last few by elections compared with the actual results (constituency)
Only once were they anywhere near, the rest of the time miles under..
And this was from Eastleigh, Corby, Middlesbrough, South Shields.. varying types of seat
It is utterly crass of you to compare national VI polls with percentages polled in by elections . Just go back and look at the national VI polls at the time of say the Birmingham Hodge Hill and Leicester by elections in 2004 , the national polls had the Lib Dems at nothing like the levels polled in the by elections . Which figures were more applicable to the 2005 GE , it was the national VI polls and not the by election results .
Looking bleak for the Lib Dems then...
Not quite so bleak
LD VI Jan 2000 12-17% GE 2001 19% LD VI Jan 2004 18-19% GE 2005 22% LD VI Jan 2009 14-15% GE 2009 23%
Mr Senior you spent much of the last parliament convincing us that the best predictor of LD performance at a GE was their performance at local elections.
2011: 15% 2012: 16% 2013: 14%
And I was correct which is why I am expecting Lib Dems to get 16-17% in 2015 .
? The LD local election results show a 10 point drop on the last parliament, so you must surely be expecting ~13% in 2015?
Nope , because in previous parliaments we were in opposition and now we are in government so there will be an element of swing back which we cannot quantify as there is no previous precedent except possibly 1979 .
11 seats, 13.8% a drop of 4.5%. Not too sure the Liberals can draw comfort from the 79 result...
Compared to opinion polls in 1977/1978 of around 6%
On Plebgate; there's still no answer to the question on everyone's lips, the only important question: why did Dave sit on the CCTV evidence for three months?
"I think the reason the economy's not had much impact on VI so far is that people aren't feeling it themselves"
Mr. Herdson is probably correct (as usual). However, I might suggest that in rural and semi-rural England at least the state of the economy might not have the pull on likely Conservative voters as it once did.
There are other issues that are claiming the voters attention and where they are jolly angry at the Conservatives. From a recent, admittedly unscientific, survey carried out during a recent meeting of the Hurstpierpoint and District Gentlemen's Temperance Association reasons given why members would not be voting Conservatives in May or in 2015 were: planning, immigration, Europe, Cameron is a two faced lying canute, energy (bills and policy), defence, overseas aid, planning and, oh, planning. Nobody mentioned the state of the economy or taxes.
Wildly unscientific I know, but I gently suggest that if Cameron and Co think that if the economy grows then they will win back their lost support, let alone new voters, they may be disappointed.
But Cameron and Co (including the Lib Dems) message at the 2015 election will be, Don't let Labour ruin it again.
Given the broad trend of support for the coalition/Tories on general economic matters, it may be a successful strategy for them.
Absolutely, TSE.
It is not the relative comfort of the current journey which counts. It is the risk of another near-fatal crash if Labour get their hands back on the car-keys.
We are already seeing how Mansion Taxes and Miliband are frightening away foreign investors considering a move to London.
Once the full costs and consequences of moving away from Plan A become more widely known, the electorate will cling to Nurse for fear of worse.
Con: c.20% - see 1994-5 and 1997-9, then add in further potential losses now to UKIP Lab: c.22% - see 2008/9. LD: 5% - See 1950s, 1988-9, Scotland now.
It would take a perfect storm of conditions to get the shares down to those sorts of levels but I'd reckon on the rock-solid base being no higher.
I think Patrick's core figures may not be far out for GEs - in midterms when in Government we all drift lower but it's not that the core voters have deserted, just that some are only available for GEs. I disagree with Patrick that the "borrowed" leftish vote is not solid - as Mike and I have said and lots of polling evidence bears out, it's actually more solid than the Labour core, because they are switching for a specific reason ("We don't want another coalition with the Tories") rather than habit.
The only point on which we disagree is the impact of the economy. The general view is that people shift their votes with economic news, but there has been a marked shift in opinion about the economy since last spring, and it's had virtually no effect on voting intention. (If things turned sour I don't think it would make much difference either.)
I think the reason the economy's not had much impact on VI so far is that people aren't feeling it themselves (hence the living standards debate), so assume that either the stats are out or that it's other people (and specifically people not like them) who are benefitting.
The improving economy has had some sort of impact on VI. Labour's lead is half what it was 12 months ago. It's also had an impact on secondary questions in polls.
Bloody hell no,not huddersfeld,the deal better be good one for Bradford.
As a Bristol City fan I can tell you, we're pretty pleased about this!
Remember Gareth,my team haven't won at home since sept 28th and we have one win in 15 games,your club are on the up with a couple of signings and mine is on the way down.
All I can see about tomorrows result is 3 Points for Bristol ;-)
The fact that the pollsters may be having trouble accurately assessing UKIP support certainly makes politics interesting again. Things were getting a little boring because the polling firms had got so good at assessing the popularity of the three established main parties, (after many decades of trial and error, of course).
On the last thread I showed what yougov & opinium were making UKIP (National) on the days of the last few by elections compared with the actual results (constituency)
Only once were they anywhere near, the rest of the time miles under..
And this was from Eastleigh, Corby, Middlesbrough, South Shields.. varying types of seat
It is utterly crass of you to compare national VI polls with percentages polled in by elections . Just go back and look at the national VI polls at the time of say the Birmingham Hodge Hill and Leicester by elections in 2004 , the national polls had the Lib Dems at nothing like the levels polled in the by elections . Which figures were more applicable to the 2005 GE , it was the national VI polls and not the by election results .
Looking bleak for the Lib Dems then...
Not quite so bleak
LD VI Jan 2000 12-17% GE 2001 19% LD VI Jan 2004 18-19% GE 2005 22% LD VI Jan 2009 14-15% GE 2009 23%
Mr Senior you spent much of the last parliament convincing us that the best predictor of LD performance at a GE was their performance at local elections.
2011: 15% 2012: 16% 2013: 14%
And I was correct which is why I am expecting Lib Dems to get 16-17% in 2015 .
? The LD local election results show a 10 point drop on the last parliament, so you must surely be expecting ~13% in 2015?
Nope , because in previous parliaments we were in opposition and now we are in government so there will be an element of swing back which we cannot quantify as there is no previous precedent except possibly 1979 .
11 seats, 13.8% a drop of 4.5%. Not too sure the Liberals can draw comfort from the 79 result...
Compared to opinion polls in 1977/1978 of around 6%
The point is that national vote shares don't matter. It's what's happening in the marginals that count and here the evidence is much more positive for the yellows. In 8 key LD targets Lord Ashcroft found the LD just 3% behind CON.
'A change to one of the founding principles of the EU – freedom of movement – should be introduced to prevent EU citizens travelling to Britain in search of a job, the shadow business secretary, Chuka Umunna, has said.'
I wonder what the pro EU immigration labour pb think of this ? they must be fuming with our chuka - lol
It is embarrassing to see the pro immigration people tying themselves in knots, realising no doubt that they were wrong all along, but too tied to a dogma to admit it. I actually feel sorry for them.
When levels of immigration concern run in the 70/80%, even the most pro-immigration supporter must realise they're utterly on the wrong side of opinion.
How embarrassing. Why don't they just stick to their guns? Have they no principles?
This isn't some small part of a manifesto that they can change their minds on, it is a massive part of how our country is run and particularly how that affects the poorer people in society
That's why a few weeks ago I wondered whether Labour introduced the minimum wage precisely because they knew mass immigration from the Accession 8 would lower wages for unskilled workers... at least they would have been showing they cared for their traditional supporters
Turns out it was a happy accident
Ummuna looks a complete no hoper on the last 24 hours performance
It's worse than that, the pander doesn't even make sense. Sometimes there are political points to be scored by doing audacious u-turns and stealing the other side's clothes then running off with them before they can figure out what's happened, but this one's just a huge WTF.
Mr Llama - did you get my e-mail with address details?
I did indeed Mr. Hersham, did you not get my reply?
No, sorry, I don't think I did (just your first one that was automatically forwarded to my home account). But the ever ghastly tiscali (now talk-talk) has been 'rejecting' other messages this week!)
UKIP were arguably overestimated in the ComRes May 2013 local elections poll.
The final tally on all votes cast had them on 19.9%. ComRes on 22%
In seats that they contested the figure was 24.3%
UKIP didn't field a full slate of candidates. It's always going to be hard to be completely accurate in measuring support if that's the case. Com Res' effort was a very creditable one.
Con: c.20% - see 1994-5 and 1997-9, then add in further potential losses now to UKIP Lab: c.22% - see 2008/9. LD: 5% - See 1950s, 1988-9, Scotland now.
It would take a perfect storm of conditions to get the shares down to those sorts of levels but I'd reckon on the rock-solid base being no higher.
I think Patrick's core figures may not be far out for GEs - in midterms when in Government we all drift lower but it's not that the core voters have deserted, just that some are only available for GEs. I disagree with Patrick that the "borrowed" leftish vote is not solid - as Mike and I have said and lots of polling evidence bears out, it's actually more solid than the Labour core, because they are switching for a specific reason ("We don't want another coalition with the Tories") rather than habit.
The only point on which we disagree is the impact of the economy. The general view is that people shift their votes with economic news, but there has been a marked shift in opinion about the economy since last spring, and it's had virtually no effect on voting intention. (If things turned sour I don't think it would make much difference either.)
I think the reason the economy's not had much impact on VI so far is that people aren't feeling it themselves (hence the living standards debate), so assume that either the stats are out or that it's other people (and specifically people not like them) who are benefitting.
The improving economy has had some sort of impact on VI. Labour's lead is half what it was 12 months ago. It's also had an impact on secondary questions in polls.
Two years ago the Tories were in the lead in many polls. Then Osborne gave his March 2012 budget.
Con: c.20% - see 1994-5 and 1997-9, then add in further potential losses now to UKIP Lab: c.22% - see 2008/9. LD: 5% - See 1950s, 1988-9, Scotland now.
It would take a perfect storm of conditions to get the shares down to those sorts of levels but I'd reckon on the rock-solid base being no higher.
I think Patrick's core figures may not be far out for GEs - in midterms when in Government we all drift lower but it's not that the core voters have deserted, just that some are only available for GEs. I disagree with Patrick that the "borrowed" leftish vote is not solid - as Mike and I have said and lots of polling evidence bears out, it's actually more solid than the Labour core, because they are switching for a specific reason ("We don't want another coalition with the Tories") rather than habit.
The only point on which we disagree is the impact of the economy. The general view is that people shift their votes with economic news, but there has been a marked shift in opinion about the economy since last spring, and it's had virtually no effect on voting intention. (If things turned sour I don't think it would make much difference either.)
I think the reason the economy's not had much impact on VI so far is that people aren't feeling it themselves (hence the living standards debate), so assume that either the stats are out or that it's other people (and specifically people not like them) who are benefitting.
The improving economy has had some sort of impact on VI. Labour's lead is half what it was 12 months ago. It's also had an impact on secondary questions in polls.
Two years ago the Tories were in the lead in many polls. Then Osborne gave his March 2012 budget.
Surely, it was the Coalitions 2012 budget. Or don't the LD's have any input?
Just for the record, Sutton Coldfield is Tory nailed on for any election for ever. There are not enough fruitcakes in the electorate to give even a medium sized swing to UKIP. If you really want to lodge a protest vote in Sutton Coldfield, you vote Labour.
@Patrick And 35%-35% means EdM gets to Downing Street possibly with a majority
Unless Labour piles up huge majorities in seats they already hold, which I think is a possibility. Betting on Labour getting over 35% but less than 326 seats might be worth considering.
I think this is a key point. As Mike has previously posted, the reason the current system favours Labour is because of three factors
1) Lower turnout in Labour strongholds 2) The boundary changes not happening 3) Labour's vote being more efficiently distributed
Now 1 and 2 aren't going to change but 3 might:
The reasons for the Labour vote being more efficient are tactical anti-Tory voting and the fact that the LDs took a lot of votes from Labour in the north without winning many seats
In the north, we know from the local elections that we should expect big LD-Lab swings in seats such as Liverpool Wavertree, Hull N, Newcastle N etc but Lab already has all these seats Meanwhile in LD-Tory fights in the South, Lab has been massively squeezed. While many will stick with the LDs it is hard to see Labour not picking up at least a few wasted votes
These should make the Labour vote less efficient
Meanwhile the Tories will be worried about UKIP and will run big vote UKIP get Labour campaigns in the marginals. However, this won't happen in safe seats and I would expect UKIP to gain more votes in safe Tory seats without winning many.
This will make the Con vote more efficient.
Overall my theory is that LD-Lab switchers won't help Labour as much as they think
They'll help them in some seats, not in others. Seats with lots of public sector workers, for example (say, Cardiff North, Bolton West).
I don't see Lib Dem/Lab switchers being of much significance in the Southern marginal that Labour lost in 2010. I can't see any comeback for Labour in places like Kent, Hertfordshire, or Essex. UKIP seem to be the party that's becoming the opposition to the Conservatives in poorer parts of the South, where Labour used to be competitive.
'A change to one of the founding principles of the EU – freedom of movement – should be introduced to prevent EU citizens travelling to Britain in search of a job, the shadow business secretary, Chuka Umunna, has said.'
I wonder what the pro EU immigration labour pb think of this ? they must be fuming with our chuka - lol
It is embarrassing to see the pro immigration people tying themselves in knots, realising no doubt that they were wrong all along, but too tied to a dogma to admit it. I actually feel sorry for them.
When levels of immigration concern run in the 70/80%, even the most pro-immigration supporter must realise they're utterly on the wrong side of opinion.
How embarrassing. Why don't they just stick to their guns? Have they no principles?
This isn't some small part of a manifesto that they can change their minds on, it is a massive part of how our country is run and particularly how that affects the poorer people in society
That's why a few weeks ago I wondered whether Labour introduced the minimum wage precisely because they knew mass immigration from the Accession 8 would lower wages for unskilled workers... at least they would have been showing they cared for their traditional supporters
Turns out it was a happy accident
Ummuna looks a complete no hoper on the last 24 hours performance
It's worse than that, the pander doesn't even make sense. Sometimes there are political points to be scored by doing audacious u-turns and stealing the other side's clothes then running off with them before they can figure out what's happened, but this one's just a huge WTF.
Surely the logical conclusion of Ummuna's suggestion that the freedom of movement is for people with jobs lined up, not those seeking work, is UKIPs position of having a visa system?
Surely the logical conclusion of Ummuna's suggestion that the freedom of movement is for people with jobs lined up, not those seeking work, is UKIPs position of having a visa system?
I don't think you can draw any logical conclusion from anything he's saying is because he doesn't seem to be saying anything that makes enough sense to logically conclude anything from.
Was the planning discontent that there is too much being granted and we're despoiling the countryside or that there is not enough and it's too hard to do anything / I want an extension?
Mr. Patrick,
The biggest cause of grief was the promise that local communities would have a say in the development of their area and despite local plans being drawn up new developments are being forced through on the say so of government inspectors to the detriment of the communities, to the environment but to the profit of the developers. The perception is that communities can have a say but unless what they say meets the wishes of HMG they will be ignored. Cameron promised localism but has delivered the opposite.
On Plebgate; there's still no answer to the question on everyone's lips, the only important question: why did Dave sit on the CCTV evidence for three months?
He didn't.
I know. I thought you might all be missing tim!
;-)
Naturally, I'm looking forward to Miliband apologising to Mitchell at PMQs for what he said at two PMQs when the scandal broke.
Blowing my own trumpet for a minute: I was doubtful about Plebgate from the moment that the police log was released in the Sun. I came on here, and got (from memory) slagged off something rotten by the anti-Mitchell people.
I was right. Not only was I right, I was right for the right reasons. Which doesn't happen too often. ;-)
UKIP were arguably overestimated in the ComRes May 2013 local elections poll.
The final tally on all votes cast had them on 19.9%. ComRes on 22%
In seats that they contested the figure was 24.3%
UKIP didn't field a full slate of candidates. It's always going to be hard to be completely accurate in measuring support if that's the case. Com Res' effort was a very creditable one.
Agreed that it was a pretty accurate poll , although in the sample it was forecasting a turnout of around 56% absolutely certain to vote .
Snapped squinting outside a cafe in Bedford, his mouth stretched into an ominous grimace, the Chancellor treated the diners of the Chiff-Chaff Café to an extra dollop of Tory with their morning cuppa.
It was merely a misleading moment caught on camera for unfortunate Osborne, his expression of foreboding a distortion of the camera’s shutter.
Yes, indeed, the Conservatives were at no better than level-pegging as being the best party to manage the economy, in 2010.
How funny that seems today.
The Conservatives had done very little to strengthen their economic credentials in 2005-10. Indeed, prior to the Recession, they'd largely accepted that Brown had succeeded in abolishing the business cycle.
Snapped squinting outside a cafe in Bedford, his mouth stretched into an ominous grimace, the Chancellor treated the diners of the Chiff-Chaff Café to an extra dollop of Tory with their morning cuppa.
It was merely a misleading moment caught on camera for unfortunate Osborne, his expression of foreboding a distortion of the camera’s shutter.
The British Retail Consortium are the latest to make a prediction on aggregrate retail sales in December. They confirm the widely mixed picture, with prominent losers and gainers in the same sectors and with the online and 'clck'n'collect' channels winning.
Also confirmed is that Christmas Sales have, overall, grown but not at the rates seen earlier in 2013.
British retail sales growth unexpectedly slowed in December, according to data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) on Friday.
Sales rose 0.4% year-on-year last month compared to a rise of 0.6% in November, marking the lowest rate of growth of 2013.
Economists had pencilled in a rise of 0.8%.
“This is a respectable result overall, in line with our prediction that Christmas trading in 2013 would reflect that while confidence levels were higher than the previous year, this wasn't always matched by more money in pockets,” according to BRC Director General Helen Dickinson
Disappointing though these figures maybe, it does seem that consumers have left some fuel in the retail sales tank to take us through Q1 2014. Early confirmation this is the case are the BoE figures on household deposits which remained steady across the final quarter of 2014 and some impressive early figures from the January sales, John Lewis being the most prominent.
The British Retail Consortium are the latest to make a prediction on aggregrate retail sales in December. They confirm the widely mixed picture, with prominent losers and gainers in the same sectors and with the online and 'clck'n'collect' channels winning.
Also confirmed is that Christmas Sales have, overall, grown but not at the rates seen earlier in 2013.
British retail sales growth unexpectedly slowed in December, according to data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) on Friday.
Sales rose 0.4% year-on-year last month compared to a rise of 0.6% in November, marking the lowest rate of growth of 2013.
Economists had pencilled in a rise of 0.8%.
“This is a respectable result overall, in line with our prediction that Christmas trading in 2013 would reflect that while confidence levels were higher than the previous year, this wasn't always matched by more money in pockets,” according to BRC Director General Helen Dickinson
Disappointing though these figures maybe, it does seem that consumers have left some fuel in the retail sales tank to take us through Q1 2014. Early confirmation this is the case are the BoE figures on household deposits which remained steady across the final quarter of 2014 and some impressive early figures from the January sales, John Lewis being the most prominent.
Errr why's that disappointing ? We've bought less tat, haven't borrowed to pay for it and haven't run our savings down. You Brown Boys just don't get it.
Yes, indeed, the Conservatives were at no better than level-pegging as being the best party to manage the economy, in 2010.
How funny that seems today.
The Conservatives had done very little to strengthen their economic credentials in 2005-10. Indeed, prior to the Recession, they'd largely accepted that Brown had succeeded in abolishing the business cycle.
Osborne, the novitiate, had a baptism of fire.
He has emerged from the flames like the proverbial Phoenix.
The British people must not be given a say on whether to leave the European Union because it is a ‘lottery’ which way they will vote, Lord Mandelson claimed today.'
The Chilcot Inquiry may yet be published in the run up to the 2015 GE, and the economy being in far better place than it was when Labour left Office will also be a key factor.
Agree with Mike and Pulpstar - the Populus weightings are likely to be unrealistic for UKIP.
As Mike says, nothing much is happening to voting intention as we roll towards May 2015. I did notice a 5-point jump in today's double-edged rating for the Tories as being a party willing to say unpopular things - presumably this is a response to Osborne. But VI seems quite settled and people interpret this sort of thing in accordance with VI rather than vice versa - Tories think good, our man is brave and honest and he wants to slash someone else's benefits further, Labour voters think ugh, Osborne admits he wants to screw us all some more.
Things that might still shift VI substantially, apart from black swans:
Budget 2014 (budgets don't usually have a lasting effect though) Labour special conference (might be seen as boring internal matter or have small + or - effect) Trial verdicts (more likely to be seen in context of individuals IMO) Autumn statement (meh) Euro-election (important for narrative about UKIP - arguably the most significant coming event) Scottish referendum (obviously very important if Yes, perhaps a bit meh if No) Autumn conferences (don't usually shift much) Budget 2015 and election campaign (ditto)
And that's about it, isn't it? I'm exaggerating the no-change factors a bit, probably, but we tend to overstate the probability of radical shifts.
The British Retail Consortium are the latest to make a prediction on aggregrate retail sales in December. They confirm the widely mixed picture, with prominent losers and gainers in the same sectors and with the online and 'clck'n'collect' channels winning.
Also confirmed is that Christmas Sales have, overall, grown but not at the rates seen earlier in 2013.
British retail sales growth unexpectedly slowed in December, according to data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) on Friday.
Sales rose 0.4% year-on-year last month compared to a rise of 0.6% in November, marking the lowest rate of growth of 2013.
Economists had pencilled in a rise of 0.8%.
“This is a respectable result overall, in line with our prediction that Christmas trading in 2013 would reflect that while confidence levels were higher than the previous year, this wasn't always matched by more money in pockets,” according to BRC Director General Helen Dickinson
Disappointing though these figures maybe, it does seem that consumers have left some fuel in the retail sales tank to take us through Q1 2014. Early confirmation this is the case are the BoE figures on household deposits which remained steady across the final quarter of 2014 and some impressive early figures from the January sales, John Lewis being the most prominent.
Errr why's that disappointing ? We've bought less tat, haven't borrowed to pay for it and haven't run our savings down. You Brown Boys just don't get it.
I was wondering where you were lurking Mr. Brooke.
I had hoped that you would give priority to my earlier post on the current boom in Brummy Metal Bashing.
One thing I instinctively disagreed with Paul Nuttall on last night was this request for policeman to wear cameras to check they don't shoot unarmed people...
Isn't this like setting the field for bad bowling at the start of a test match? Surely the Police interview process should weed out the type of person who cant be trusted with a gun?
Richard said...
Sorry but I have to disagree with you. One could have said exactly the same thing about police interviewing suspects after arrest which used to be done without recording and which was very liable to corruption and 'adjustment ' or 'clarification'.
When someone has that amount of power and cannot be absolutely trusted (as the police certainly cannot by now) it is necessary to make use of whatever technology is available to keep them on the straight and narrow.
Believe me I am no particular fan of the police, having been thrown to the floor, handcuffed so tightly it left scars for months and put in a cell for the night for literally doing nothing, when I was 21.
They let me call my Dad at 4am and he came to pick me up, but when they overheard me telling him I had been banged up for no reason, they turned him away and didn't let me out till 530am!
So I have no doubt they can be corrupt
Maybe I am being too idealistic, but my point is that he kind of person that cant be trusted not to shoot someone, not to falsify confessions etc etc shouldnt be in the police force in the first place
I guess I am too naïve and what you're saying is we should assume they are all bent unless video evidence proves otherwise?
Seems a bit Big Brother to me
The people who want it want it for the opposite reasons but personally i think the police would be the main gainers all tolled. Live-streaming it would be even better as people could compare actual reality to the BBC version. That'd be a laugh.
I agree with you on that
I reckon if we suggested filming suspected criminals constantly, without any trial or reason other than we think they might be up to no good, the Human Rights lawyers would be tripping over themselves to say it "wasn't fair"
And rightfully so. That would be filming people "constantly" and they wouldn't have any choice about it. This recommendation is for police officers to be filmed when on active duty as part of a job they agreed to do.
Also confirmed is that Christmas Sales have, overall, grown but not at the rates seen earlier in 2013.
British retail sales growth unexpectedly slowed in December, according to data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) on Friday.
Sales rose 0.4% year-on-year last month compared to a rise of 0.6% in November, marking the lowest rate of growth of 2013.
Economists had pencilled in a rise of 0.8%.
“This is a respectable result overall, in line with our prediction that Christmas trading in 2013 would reflect that while confidence levels were higher than the previous year, this wasn't always matched by more money in pockets,” according to BRC Director General Helen Dickinson
Disappointing final quarter of 2014 and some impressive early figures from the January sales, John Lewis being the most prominent.
Errr why's that disappointing ? We've bought less tat, haven't borrowed to pay for it and haven't run our savings down. You Brown Boys just don't get it.
I was wondering where you were lurking Mr. Brooke.
I had hoped that you would give priority to my earlier post on the current boom in Brummy Metal Bashing.
Osborne bashers just don't seem to get it.
Well the metal bashing sector is getting back on its feet bit by bit despite the inaction of George Cable and Vince Osborne. It would be moving a bit faster if we had sensible banks who wanted to support jobs and rebalancing the economy. But this is not government policy so there's no pressure. I had lunch yesterday with a Midlands financier type who runs a trade finance outfit, his views on the banks made mine seem mild by comparison. For him however it's good news as he's picking up business at their expense. Better sell those RBS and Lloyds shares fast Mr Pole.
Surely the logical conclusion of Ummuna's suggestion that the freedom of movement is for people with jobs lined up, not those seeking work, is UKIPs position of having a visa system?
I don't think you can draw any logical conclusion from anything he's saying is because he doesn't seem to be saying anything that makes enough sense to logically conclude anything from.
The British people must not be given a say on whether to leave the European Union because it is a ‘lottery’ which way they will vote, Lord Mandelson claimed today.'
Also confirmed is that Christmas Sales have, overall, grown but not at the rates seen earlier in 2013.
British retail sales growth unexpectedly slowed in December, according to data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) on Friday.
Sales rose 0.4% year-on-year last month compared to a rise of 0.6% in November, marking the lowest rate of growth of 2013.
Economists had pencilled in a rise of 0.8%.
“This is a respectable result overall, in line with our prediction that Christmas trading in 2013 would reflect that while confidence levels were higher than the previous year, this wasn't always matched by more money in pockets,” according to BRC Director General Helen Dickinson
Disappointing final quarter of 2014 and some impressive early figures from the January sales, John Lewis being the most prominent.
Errr why's that disappointing ? We've bought less tat, haven't borrowed to pay for it and haven't run our savings down. You Brown Boys just don't get it.
I was wondering where you were lurking Mr. Brooke.
I had hoped that you would give priority to my earlier post on the current boom in Brummy Metal Bashing.
Osborne bashers just don't seem to get it.
Well the metal bashing sector is getting back on its feet bit by bit despite the inaction of George Cable and Vince Osborne. It would be moving a bit faster if we had sensible banks who wanted to support jobs and rebalancing the economy. But this is not government policy so there's no pressure. I had lunch yesterday with a Midlands financier type who runs a trade finance outfit, his views on the banks made mine seem mild by comparison. For him however it's good news as he's picking up business at their expense. Better sell those RBS and Lloyds shares fast Mr Pole.
Lloyds Banking Group PLC down a penny today to £0.84 but up from a low of £0.47 in March 2013.
Much easier for George to make money on selling the shares from the comfort of No 11 than hitting a lump of molten metal in Birmingham, Mr Brooke.
Still George and I are both in favour of a broad based recovery! And he does look so cute in blue dungarees.
And yes you are right about competition to the main high street banks in commercial lending is coming from outside the mainstream sector. This is good. In banking it is always the flea's bite that gets the elephant to move.
We should see much better business lending figures this year.
Also confirmed is that Christmas Sales have, overall, grown but not at the rates seen earlier in 2013.
British retail sales growth unexpectedly slowed in December, according to data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) on Friday.
ion that Christmas trading in 2013 would reflect that while confidence levels were higher than the previous year, this wasn't always matched by more money in pockets,” according to BRC Director General Helen Dickinson
Disappointing final quarter of 2014 and some impressive early figures from the January sales, John Lewis being the most prominent.
Errr why's that disappointing ? We've bought less tat, haven't borrowed to pay for it and haven't run our savings down. You Brown Boys just don't get it.
I was wondering where you were lurking Mr. Brooke.
I had hoped that you would give priority to my earlier post on the current boom in Brummy Metal Bashing.
Osborne bashers just don't seem to get it.
Lloyds Banking Group PLC down a penny today to £0.84 but up from a low of £0.47 in March 2013.
Much easier for George to make money on selling the shares from the comfort of No 11 than hitting a lump of molten metal in Birmingham, Mr Brooke.
Still George and I are both in favour of a broad based recovery! And he does look so cute in blue dungarees.
And yes you are right about competition to the main high street banks in commercial lending is coming from outside the mainstream sector. This is good. In banking it is always the flea's bite that gets the elephant to move.
We should see much better business lending figures this year.
"Much easier for George to make money on selling the shares from the comfort of No 11 than hitting a lump of molten metal in Birmingham, Mr Brooke."
Probably the stupidest thing you've written in a while Mr Pole, banks don't create our wealth businesses do. You're confusing asset inflation with economic activity. In a nutshell that's why the Tories are shedding votes outside their southern bastions.
You southern boys just can't get the idea of competition into your heads, too much like working for a living I suppose.
Bloody hell no,not huddersfeld,the deal better be good one for Bradford.
As a Bristol City fan I can tell you, we're pretty pleased about this!
Remember Gareth,my team haven't won at home since sept 28th and we have one win in 15 games,your club are on the up with a couple of signings and mine is on the way down.
All I can see about tomorrows result is 3 Points for Bristol ;-)
I really hope so. We have had a funny season in that we have only been mullered once against Posh and have lost 9 games by the odd goal while having a large number of 1-1 draws. We're 3rd from bottom and have only -3 goal difference. Under O'Driscoll we were nearly men but Cotterill has given us a little bit extra and we're looking much better. I went on Boxing Day and we beat Walsall 1-0 but it could have been 3 or 4.
Believe me I am no particular fan of the police, having been thrown to the floor, handcuffed so tightly it left scars for months and put in a cell for the night for literally doing nothing, when I was 21.
They let me call my Dad at 4am and he came to pick me up, but when they overheard me telling him I had been banged up for no reason, they turned him away and didn't let me out till 530am!
So I have no doubt they can be corrupt
Maybe I am being too idealistic, but my point is that he kind of person that cant be trusted not to shoot someone, not to falsify confessions etc etc shouldnt be in the police force in the first place
I guess I am too naïve and what you're saying is we should assume they are all bent unless video evidence proves otherwise?
Seems a bit Big Brother to me
The people who want it want it for the opposite reasons but personally i think the police would be the main gainers all tolled. Live-streaming it would be even better as people could compare actual reality to the BBC version. That'd be a laugh.
I agree with you on that
I reckon if we suggested filming suspected criminals constantly, without any trial or reason other than we think they might be up to no good, the Human Rights lawyers would be tripping over themselves to say it "wasn't fair"
And rightfully so. That would be filming people "constantly" and they wouldn't have any choice about it. This recommendation is for police officers to be filmed when on active duty as part of a job they agreed to do.
I am obviously on the wrong side of the argument on this one
Just seems to me that we shouldnt need to Police the Police... I agree they have been guilty of plenty of dodginess in the past, as I said I have fallen foul of it personally, but then who Polices those that Police the Police etc etc
People always find a way around these things, if an officer shot someone and the camera had "broken" would that officer be automatically guilty?
The times we live in... police arent trusted by the public to act within the law, teachers arent trusted by Parents to take care of their children, it really is a sorry state of affairs.
I fear it can only lead to the presumption of "innocent until proven guilty" being cast aside in the not so very distant...
Also confirmed is that Christmas Sales have, overall, grown but not at the rates seen earlier in 2013.
British retail sales growth unexpectedly slowed in December, according to data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) on Friday.
ion that Christmas trading in 2013 would reflect that while confidence levels were higher than the previous year, this wasn't always matched by more money in pockets,” according to BRC Director General Helen Dickinson
Disappointing final quarter of 2014 and some impressive early figures from the January sales, John Lewis being the most prominent.
Errr why's that disappointing ? We've bought less tat, haven't borrowed to pay for it and haven't run our savings down. You Brown Boys just don't get it.
I was wondering where you were lurking Mr. Brooke.
I had hoped that you would give priority to my earlier post on the current boom in Brummy Metal Bashing.
Osborne bashers just don't seem to get it.
Lloyds Banking Group PLC down a penny today to £0.84 but up from a low of £0.47 in March 2013.
Much easier for George to make money on selling the shares from the comfort of No 11 than hitting a lump of molten metal in Birmingham, Mr Brooke.
Still George and I are both in favour of a broad based recovery! And he does look so cute in blue dungarees.
And yes you are right about competition to the main high street banks in commercial lending is coming from outside the mainstream sector. This is good. In banking it is always the flea's bite that gets the elephant to move.
We should see much better business lending figures this year.
"Much easier for George to make money on selling the shares from the comfort of No 11 than hitting a lump of molten metal in Birmingham, Mr Brooke."
Probably the stupidest thing you've written in a while Mr Pole, banks don't create our wealth businesses do. You're confusing asset inflation with economic activity. In a nutshell that's why the Tories are shedding votes outside their southern bastions.
You southern boys just can't get the idea of competition into your heads, too much like working for a living I suppose.
Mr. Brooke.
I thought we were talking about "making money" rather than "creating wealth".
The first is easy to define and measure. The latter requires a bunch of economists to debate its definition.
Still I am with you in spirit even if I now have take a couple of hours off to visit my loony Aunt.
FPT: @taffys said: People here say Nuttall was rubbish, but he was the victim of a classic BBC QT ambush last night. At some point it probably occurred to him the audience was stacked full of NHS pilgrims and other inner city labour types.
Surely the fact it was held in Lewisham of all places (just after the Duggan verdict, coincidentally) would have been a clue. He should have left well alone.
Opinions that we are finding are mainstream in many parts of the country were greeted with stony silence.
Dimbleby's smirk said it all. ---------------------------------------------- I didn't say that Paul Nuttall was rubbish last night. I'm saying that I was disappointed with his performance and he should have been prepared for these BBC ambushes; re, the Romanian stooge who brought racism into the immigration debate. I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.
In vast numbers of jobs there is scrutiny and recording over the job that is being done. This isn't a lack of trust, it's just "trust but verify". And there is a strong case for particularly strong verification in a situation where people have discretion over the use of lethal force.
''I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.''
You're probably right he wasn't rubbish.
I think he was a bit unnerved when what he said about immigration was greeted by a stony silence. He was even more nonplussed when the Mirror lady tried to brand his comments racist.
He (and Farage for that matter), need to have a bit more light and shade in their speaking, and maybe even a little humour. They seem only to have one tone and quite a shrill one at that.
But you're right, when he saw it was Lewisham, he should have smelled a rat.
That said, Dimbleby did press Umanna on the topic, and it shows this is a subject Labour would really rather not speak about at all.
Yes, indeed, the Conservatives were at no better than level-pegging as being the best party to manage the economy, in 2010.
How funny that seems today.
The Conservatives had done very little to strengthen their economic credentials in 2005-10. Indeed, prior to the Recession, they'd largely accepted that Brown had succeeded in abolishing the business cycle.
Osborne, the novitiate, had a baptism of fire.
He has emerged from the flames like the proverbial Phoenix.
Who would have thought that in 2010?
He has emerged from the flames like a burnt, dishevelled plucked pigeon.
''I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.''
You're probably right he wasn't rubbish.
I think he was a bit unnerved when what he said about immigration was greeted by a stony silence. He was even more nonplussed when the Mirror lady tried to brand his comments racist.
He (and Farage for that matter), need to have a bit more light and shade in their speaking, and maybe even a little humour. They seem only to have one tone and quite a shrill one at that.
But you're right, when he saw it was Lewisham, he should have smelled a rat.
That said, Dimbleby did press Umanna on the topic, and it shows this is a subject Labour would really rather not speak about at all.
He should have been more savvy and known in advance that the BBC QT audience is always a hand-picked leftist circle-jerk.
Paddypower have a 'what price will Apple shares be at 31/12/14 market' Their price is $530 ish today -good value at 13/2 it being between 400 and 500 dollars imo
''I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.''
You're probably right he wasn't rubbish.
I think he was a bit unnerved when what he said about immigration was greeted by a stony silence. He was even more nonplussed when the Mirror lady tried to brand his comments racist.
He (and Farage for that matter), need to have a bit more light and shade in their speaking, and maybe even a little humour. They seem only to have one tone and quite a shrill one at that.
But you're right, when he saw it was Lewisham, he should have smelled a rat.
That said, Dimbleby did press Umanna on the topic, and it shows this is a subject Labour would really rather not speak about at all.
He should have been more savvy and known in advance that the BBC QT audience is always a hand-picked leftist circle-jerk.
Representative of Lewisham.
I didn't watch it but I'd be more worried for UKIP if he was getting rapturous applause in such a left wing place !
Yes, indeed, the Conservatives were at no better than level-pegging as being the best party to manage the economy, in 2010.
How funny that seems today.
The Conservatives had done very little to strengthen their economic credentials in 2005-10. Indeed, prior to the Recession, they'd largely accepted that Brown had succeeded in abolishing the business cycle.
Osborne, the novitiate, had a baptism of fire.
He has emerged from the flames like the proverbial Phoenix.
Who would have thought that in 2010?
He has emerged from the flames like a burnt, dishevelled plucked pigeon.
FPT: @taffys said: People here say Nuttall was rubbish, but he was the victim of a classic BBC QT ambush last night. At some point it probably occurred to him the audience was stacked full of NHS pilgrims and other inner city labour types.
Surely the fact it was held in Lewisham of all places (just after the Duggan verdict, coincidentally) would have been a clue. He should have left well alone.
Opinions that we are finding are mainstream in many parts of the country were greeted with stony silence.
Dimbleby's smirk said it all. ---------------------------------------------- I didn't say that Paul Nuttall was rubbish last night. I'm saying that I was disappointed with his performance and he should have been prepared for these BBC ambushes; re, the Romanian stooge who brought racism into the immigration debate. I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.
Or another way of looking at it would be that there was a larger Christmas peak than usual, that the index has returned to where it was through most of October and it's still well above it's position through most of 2012-13. I'd give it another month before deciding whether it's a natural correction or a crash.
Surely the real "community leader" would be the mayor? Typically the term seems to be used to mean "self-appointed spokesman for a (non-white) ethnic group"...
FPT: @taffys said: People here say Nuttall was rubbish, but he was the victim of a classic BBC QT ambush last night. At some point it probably occurred to him the audience was stacked full of NHS pilgrims and other inner city labour types.
Surely the fact it was held in Lewisham of all places (just after the Duggan verdict, coincidentally) would have been a clue. He should have left well alone.
Opinions that we are finding are mainstream in many parts of the country were greeted with stony silence.
Dimbleby's smirk said it all. ---------------------------------------------- I didn't say that Paul Nuttall was rubbish last night. I'm saying that I was disappointed with his performance and he should have been prepared for these BBC ambushes; re, the Romanian stooge who brought racism into the immigration debate. I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.
Judging by the comments below the line (Normally favourable to UKIP in the Telegraph) it is seen as a valid and normal tactic if you're Labour inclined ! It is odd that a Labour supporting comment got so many upvotes in the Telegraph - perhaps the emails and beepers went off that morning to upvote the comment...
@Patrick And 35%-35% means EdM gets to Downing Street possibly with a majority
Unless Labour piles up huge majorities in seats they already hold, which I think is a possibility. Betting on Labour getting over 35% but less than 326 seats might be worth considering.
I think this is a key point. As Mike has previously posted, the reason the current system favours Labour is because of three factors
1) Lower turnout in Labour strongholds 2) The boundary changes not happening 3) Labour's vote being more efficiently distributed
4) most third-party seats are former Tory seats....
''I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.''
You're probably right he wasn't rubbish.
I think he was a bit unnerved when what he said about immigration was greeted by a stony silence. He was even more nonplussed when the Mirror lady tried to brand his comments racist.
He (and Farage for that matter), need to have a bit more light and shade in their speaking, and maybe even a little humour. They seem only to have one tone and quite a shrill one at that.
But you're right, when he saw it was Lewisham, he should have smelled a rat.
That said, Dimbleby did press Umanna on the topic, and it shows this is a subject Labour would really rather not speak about at all.
He should have been more savvy and known in advance that the BBC QT audience is always a hand-picked leftist circle-jerk.
QT / the Beeb will usually contact all the main parties locally (don't know if this extends to UKIP yet; I suspect not) and ask if they'd like some seats. It's probably an easy way to fill the audience and to ensure some lively points are put.
Does anyone neutral watch QT these days anyway? It seems like a programme a least a decade past its sell-by date given more modern means of politicians interacting with the public.
''I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.''
You're probably right he wasn't rubbish.
I think he was a bit unnerved when what he said about immigration was greeted by a stony silence. He was even more nonplussed when the Mirror lady tried to brand his comments racist.
He (and Farage for that matter), need to have a bit more light and shade in their speaking, and maybe even a little humour. They seem only to have one tone and quite a shrill one at that.
But you're right, when he saw it was Lewisham, he should have smelled a rat.
That said, Dimbleby did press Umanna on the topic, and it shows this is a subject Labour would really rather not speak about at all.
He should have been more savvy and known in advance that the BBC QT audience is always a hand-picked leftist circle-jerk.
QT / the Beeb will usually contact all the main parties locally (don't know if this extends to UKIP yet; I suspect not) and ask if they'd like some seats. It's probably an easy way to fill the audience and to ensure some lively points are put.
Does anyone neutral watch QT these days anyway? It seems like a programme a least a decade past its sell-by date given more modern means of politicians interacting with the public.
For those who anticipate a Treaty agreement by 2017 for Cam to referendum us about, observe the stately progress of the banking agreement. The heads of state have now agreed it, after a year or so of discussion. They expect a year or so of tricky negotiations with the Parliament. A second proposed agreement on promoting structural reform, intended to go with the banking agreement, will be discussed at the next meeting. When's that? Oh, in October.
For those who anticipate a Treaty agreement by 2017 for Cam to referendum us about, observe the stately progress of the banking agreement. The heads of state have now agreed it, after a year or discussion. They expect a year or so of tricky negotiations with the Parliament. A second proposed agreement on promoting structural reform, intended to go with the banking agreement, will be discussed at the next meeting. When's that? Oh, in October.
Two classic examples of how the EU is a bureaucratic, dysfunctional organisation that we're better off out of.
''I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.''
You're probably right he wasn't rubbish.
I think he was a bit unnerved when what he said about immigration was greeted by a stony silence. He was even more nonplussed when the Mirror lady tried to brand his comments racist.
He (and Farage for that matter), need to have a bit more light and shade in their speaking, and maybe even a little humour. They seem only to have one tone and quite a shrill one at that.
But you're right, when he saw it was Lewisham, he should have smelled a rat.
That said, Dimbleby did press Umanna on the topic, and it shows this is a subject Labour would really rather not speak about at all.
He should have been more savvy and known in advance that the BBC QT audience is always a hand-picked leftist circle-jerk.
QT / the Beeb will usually contact all the main parties locally (don't know if this extends to UKIP yet; I suspect not) and ask if they'd like some seats. It's probably an easy way to fill the audience and to ensure some lively points are put.
Does anyone neutral watch QT these days anyway? It seems like a programme a least a decade past its sell-by date given more modern means of politicians interacting with the public.
Is anyone 'neutral' ?
I'd imagine that people interested enough in politics to want to watch QT are unlikely to be "netural". Non-partisan perhaps, but not neutral.
yes the term 'community leaders ' does annoy me especially when used by media that should know better. It is patronising to ethnic minorities for a start as it assumes they all think as one and this one opinion can be expressed through some (usually) inarticulate man (they rarely are women) . The 'community leader ' enforces a stereotype as well ,being either elderly with a white beard for the Muslim 'community' or a slightly dodgy man but claiming to be now on the straight and narrow and working with 'youths' for the black 'community' CAN THE MEDIA GET RID OF THE TERM PLEASE
Surely the real "community leader" would be the mayor? Typically the term seems to be used to mean "self-appointed spokesman for a (non-white) ethnic group"...
Often with the same sort of occupational background as "Italian-American community leaders."
''I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.''
You're probably right he wasn't rubbish.
I think he was a bit unnerved when what he said about immigration was greeted by a stony silence. He was even more nonplussed when the Mirror lady tried to brand his comments racist.
He (and Farage for that matter), need to have a bit more light and shade in their speaking, and maybe even a little humour. They seem only to have one tone and quite a shrill one at that.
But you're right, when he saw it was Lewisham, he should have smelled a rat.
That said, Dimbleby did press Umanna on the topic, and it shows this is a subject Labour would really rather not speak about at all.
He should have been more savvy and known in advance that the BBC QT audience is always a hand-picked leftist circle-jerk.
QT / the Beeb will usually contact all the main parties locally (don't know if this extends to UKIP yet; I suspect not) and ask if they'd like some seats. It's probably an easy way to fill the audience and to ensure some lively points are put.
Does anyone neutral watch QT these days anyway? It seems like a programme a least a decade past its sell-by date given more modern means of politicians interacting with the public.
Is anyone 'neutral' ?
OK, perhaps I should have said does anyone who is not pretty much sure who they're going to vote for next time watch it?
The point is that when it began, it was an innovation and genuinely brought the public closer to MPs. They couldn't even watch them in action in parliament at the time, for goodness sake and had only recently been allowed to listen. Phone-ins were rare. The opportunity for direct or even indirect interaction was minimal. Today, there are far better and more direct ways for politicians to connect with the public (and as we all know, QT audiences are not really public anyway). It might be entertainment; it's not really informative.
For those who anticipate a Treaty agreement by 2017 for Cam to referendum us about, observe the stately progress of the banking agreement. The heads of state have now agreed it, after a year or so of discussion. They expect a year or so of tricky negotiations with the Parliament. A second proposed agreement on promoting structural reform, intended to go with the banking agreement, will be discussed at the next meeting. When's that? Oh, in October.
I'm far from a Eurosceptic, but it's not an organisation noted for dynamic decision-making. A new Treaty by 2017? Rofl.
This is a really good argument for being out of the EU. A country needs to be agile and fleet of foot, like a speedboat. The EU is an oil tanker; it takes miles to slow down and turning it takes hours.
(Cue people breaking down this rather awful analogy)
Given what I take to be the demography of Lewisham, the audience wouldn't have needed to be stacked with placemen for Nuttall to get a very rough ride.
If UKIP's spokesmen are going to look bad anywhere, its there.
Maybe the BBC told Nuttall 'Oh its in....er......London'
QT / the Beeb will usually contact all the main parties locally (don't know if this extends to UKIP yet; I suspect not) and ask if they'd like some seats. It's probably an easy way to fill the audience and to ensure some lively points are put.
Does anyone neutral watch QT these days anyway? It seems like a programme a least a decade past its sell-by date given more modern means of politicians interacting with the public.
I've been in a QT audience having gone through exactly that process - being nominated via a special interest group quota system. I was told that my question was shortlisted and I was specifically seated accordingly for a camera angle in case they reached me on their timed list ... so I know how contrived the event is.
Speaking to the crowd in the entrance lobby I found that everyone I spoke to was partisan and either selected in a similar way or they were so determined to appear that they applied frequently and were quite prepared to travel long distances to put their point of view (as opposed to wanting to ask a question to find an answer).
The planning was both fascinating and disturbing in a Kafka sort of way. How the BBC can peddle the lie of audience balance with a straight face is incredible.
I don't watch QT as I get annoyed ,sometimes by the politiicans on it but always by the audience clapping or booing . Booing or clapping can totally distort the perceived view by the audience of an answer by a politician . If they must persist in letting people clap or boo then the BBC should do instant surveys of the audience which can be shown at the end of the programme on certain key questions or answers
"... fleet of foot, like a speedboat ... (Cue people breaking down this rather awful analogy) "
Well, Bernard Woolley wouldn't have let that one slip past him.. He would have made some comment about speedboats not being capable of being fleet of foot because they don't actually have feet.
Given what I take to be the demography of Lewisham, the audience wouldn't have needed to be stacked with placemen for Nuttall to get a very rough ride.
If UKIP's spokesmen are going to look bad anywhere, its there.
Maybe the BBC told Nuttall 'Oh its in....er......London'
Agreed, although they I was based in Portsmouth when the BBC 'phoned me up out of the blue and told me my name had been put forward for the audience. It was filmed in London.
Further to my question earlier in the week, I have set up a Diplomacy game on PlayDiplomacy. The game is PB2014 and the password is OGH. Please join. Happy stabbing!
I agree with you on the clapping issue. It just encourages mob pandering rather than thorough discussion, and completely stops speakers with contrarian views from expanding on them.
Further to my question earlier in the week, I have set up a Diplomacy game on PlayDiplomacy. The game is PB2014 and the password is OGH. Please join. Happy stabbing!
So far he registered players are:
DJDave1979 GeoffM corporeal HurstLlama
Plus I see from Twitter Miss Plato has expressed an interest in joining (from experience lady players always up the stab quotient).
Can you create a "new" law like that? Does the old one disappear? Become a subsection? An article?
I don't think you've thought this through, sunshine.
I don't think you get the irony of a right wing loon like yourself accusing the BBC of left wing bias in the composition of an audience in which you have taken part .
Can you create a "new" law like that? Does the old one disappear? Become a subsection? An article?
I don't think you've thought this through, sunshine.
I don't think you get the irony of a right wing loon like yourself accusing the BBC of left wing bias in the composition of an audience in which you have taken part .
Further to my question earlier in the week, I have set up a Diplomacy game on PlayDiplomacy. The game is PB2014 and the password is OGH. Please join. Happy stabbing!
So far he registered players are:
DJDave1979 GeoffM corporeal HurstLlama
Plus I see from Twitter Miss Plato has expressed an interest in joining (from experience lady players always up the stab quotient).
Comments
This isn't some small part of a manifesto that they can change their minds on, it is a massive part of how our country is run and particularly how that affects the poorer people in society
That's why a few weeks ago I wondered whether Labour introduced the minimum wage precisely because they knew mass immigration from the Accession 8 would lower wages for unskilled workers... at least they would have been showing they cared for their traditional supporters
Turns out it was a happy accident
Ummuna looks a complete no hoper on the last 24 hours performance
Mr Llama - did you get my e-mail with address details?
I did indeed Mr. Hersham, did you not get my reply?
It is not the relative comfort of the current journey which counts. It is the risk of another near-fatal crash if Labour get their hands back on the car-keys.
We are already seeing how Mansion Taxes and Miliband are frightening away foreign investors considering a move to London.
Once the full costs and consequences of moving away from Plan A become more widely known, the electorate will cling to Nurse for fear of worse.
Remember Gareth,my team haven't won at home since sept 28th and we have one win in 15 games,your club are on the up with a couple of signings and mine is on the way down.
All I can see about tomorrows result is 3 Points for Bristol ;-)
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/11/05/3-days-before-ge2010-voters-in-the-marginals-rated-gordon-as-best-person-to-lead-britain-through-economic-crisis/
I don't see Lib Dem/Lab switchers being of much significance in the Southern marginal that Labour lost in 2010. I can't see any comeback for Labour in places like Kent, Hertfordshire, or Essex. UKIP seem to be the party that's becoming the opposition to the Conservatives in poorer parts of the South, where Labour used to be competitive.
The biggest cause of grief was the promise that local communities would have a say in the development of their area and despite local plans being drawn up new developments are being forced through on the say so of government inspectors to the detriment of the communities, to the environment but to the profit of the developers. The perception is that communities can have a say but unless what they say meets the wishes of HMG they will be ignored. Cameron promised localism but has delivered the opposite.
Naturally, I'm looking forward to Miliband apologising to Mitchell at PMQs for what he said at two PMQs when the scandal broke.
Blowing my own trumpet for a minute: I was doubtful about Plebgate from the moment that the police log was released in the Sun. I came on here, and got (from memory) slagged off something rotten by the anti-Mitchell people.
I was right. Not only was I right, I was right for the right reasons. Which doesn't happen too often. ;-)
Snapped squinting outside a cafe in Bedford, his mouth stretched into an ominous grimace, the Chancellor treated the diners of the Chiff-Chaff Café to an extra dollop of Tory with their morning cuppa.
It was merely a misleading moment caught on camera for unfortunate Osborne, his expression of foreboding a distortion of the camera’s shutter.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iv-drip/sinister-osborne-will-haunt-your-dreams-9051686.html
The British Retail Consortium are the latest to make a prediction on aggregrate retail sales in December. They confirm the widely mixed picture, with prominent losers and gainers in the same sectors and with the online and 'clck'n'collect' channels winning.
Also confirmed is that Christmas Sales have, overall, grown but not at the rates seen earlier in 2013.
British retail sales growth unexpectedly slowed in December, according to data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) on Friday.
Sales rose 0.4% year-on-year last month compared to a rise of 0.6% in November, marking the lowest rate of growth of 2013.
Economists had pencilled in a rise of 0.8%.
“This is a respectable result overall, in line with our prediction that Christmas trading in 2013 would reflect that while confidence levels were higher than the previous year, this wasn't always matched by more money in pockets,” according to BRC Director General Helen Dickinson
Disappointing though these figures maybe, it does seem that consumers have left some fuel in the retail sales tank to take us through Q1 2014. Early confirmation this is the case are the BoE figures on household deposits which remained steady across the final quarter of 2014 and some impressive early figures from the January sales, John Lewis being the most prominent.
He has emerged from the flames like the proverbial Phoenix.
Who would have thought that in 2010?
The British people must not be given a say on whether to leave the European Union because it is a ‘lottery’ which way they will vote, Lord Mandelson claimed today.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537029/We-let-people-decide-Mandelson-warns-against-LOTTERY-giving-voters-say-leaving-European-Union.html
I had hoped that you would give priority to my earlier post on the current boom in Brummy Metal Bashing.
Osborne bashers just don't seem to get it.
Well the metal bashing sector is getting back on its feet bit by bit despite the inaction of George Cable and Vince Osborne. It would be moving a bit faster if we had sensible banks who wanted to support jobs and rebalancing the economy. But this is not government policy so there's no pressure. I had lunch yesterday with a Midlands financier type who runs a trade finance outfit, his views on the banks made mine seem mild by comparison. For him however it's good news as he's picking up business at their expense. Better sell those RBS and Lloyds shares fast Mr Pole.
Much easier for George to make money on selling the shares from the comfort of No 11 than hitting a lump of molten metal in Birmingham, Mr Brooke.
Still George and I are both in favour of a broad based recovery! And he does look so cute in blue dungarees.
And yes you are right about competition to the main high street banks in commercial lending is coming from outside the mainstream sector. This is good. In banking it is always the flea's bite that gets the elephant to move.
We should see much better business lending figures this year.
"Much easier for George to make money on selling the shares from the comfort of No 11 than hitting a lump of molten metal in Birmingham, Mr Brooke."
Probably the stupidest thing you've written in a while Mr Pole, banks don't create our wealth businesses do. You're confusing asset inflation with economic activity. In a nutshell that's why the Tories are shedding votes outside their southern bastions.
You southern boys just can't get the idea of competition into your heads, too much like working for a living I suppose.
Just seems to me that we shouldnt need to Police the Police... I agree they have been guilty of plenty of dodginess in the past, as I said I have fallen foul of it personally, but then who Polices those that Police the Police etc etc
People always find a way around these things, if an officer shot someone and the camera had "broken" would that officer be automatically guilty?
The times we live in... police arent trusted by the public to act within the law, teachers arent trusted by Parents to take care of their children, it really is a sorry state of affairs.
I fear it can only lead to the presumption of "innocent until proven guilty" being cast aside in the not so very distant...
I thought we were talking about "making money" rather than "creating wealth".
The first is easy to define and measure. The latter requires a bunch of economists to debate its definition.
Still I am with you in spirit even if I now have take a couple of hours off to visit my loony Aunt.
@taffys said:
People here say Nuttall was rubbish, but he was the victim of a classic BBC QT ambush last night. At some point it probably occurred to him the audience was stacked full of NHS pilgrims and other inner city labour types.
Surely the fact it was held in Lewisham of all places (just after the Duggan verdict, coincidentally) would have been a clue. He should have left well alone.
Opinions that we are finding are mainstream in many parts of the country were greeted with stony silence.
Dimbleby's smirk said it all.
----------------------------------------------
I didn't say that Paul Nuttall was rubbish last night. I'm saying that I was disappointed with his performance and he should have been prepared for these BBC ambushes; re, the Romanian stooge who brought racism into the immigration debate. I've seen him perform much better on the hustings and in other venues.
In vast numbers of jobs there is scrutiny and recording over the job that is being done. This isn't a lack of trust, it's just "trust but verify". And there is a strong case for particularly strong verification in a situation where people have discretion over the use of lethal force.
You're probably right he wasn't rubbish.
I think he was a bit unnerved when what he said about immigration was greeted by a stony silence. He was even more nonplussed when the Mirror lady tried to brand his comments racist.
He (and Farage for that matter), need to have a bit more light and shade in their speaking, and maybe even a little humour. They seem only to have one tone and quite a shrill one at that.
But you're right, when he saw it was Lewisham, he should have smelled a rat.
That said, Dimbleby did press Umanna on the topic, and it shows this is a subject Labour would really rather not speak about at all.
Send her my best wishes George.
I didn't watch it but I'd be more worried for UKIP if he was getting rapturous applause in such a left wing place !
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2292995/Question-Time-How-Labour-Party-planted-diehard-supporter-audience-attack-UKIP-panellist.html
They wouldn't have needed to hand pick them in Lewisham I wouldn't have thought.
And the news is not so hot after all; at least not according to the Baltic Dry Index:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-10/baltic-dry-index-collapses-35-worst-start-year-30-years
Typically when people respond only by saying they are laughing at the other side it's because they don't have good arguments to rebut it.
Love it and I think that "a place that has community leaders" mgiht become a popular euphemism in 2014.
Surely the real "community leader" would be the mayor? Typically the term seems to be used to mean "self-appointed spokesman for a (non-white) ethnic group"...
It is odd that a Labour supporting comment got so many upvotes in the Telegraph - perhaps the emails and beepers went off that morning to upvote the comment...
Does anyone neutral watch QT these days anyway? It seems like a programme a least a decade past its sell-by date given more modern means of politicians interacting with the public.
http://www.euractiv.com/euro-finance/leaders-hail-banking-union-antic-news-532515?utm_source=EurActiv Newsletter&utm_campaign=a9ca49f7e3-newsletter_weekly_update&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bab5f0ea4e-a9ca49f7e3-245514803
I'm far from a Eurosceptic, but it's not an organisation noted for dynamic decision-making. A new Treaty by 2017? Rofl.
CAN THE MEDIA GET RID OF THE TERM PLEASE
5pm Sunday is the deadline if you'd like to take part in Leaders & Finance, which is available here:
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/leaders-finance-2014/
The PB competition closes at 7pm Monday:
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/pb2014/
Thanks,
DC
The point is that when it began, it was an innovation and genuinely brought the public closer to MPs. They couldn't even watch them in action in parliament at the time, for goodness sake and had only recently been allowed to listen. Phone-ins were rare. The opportunity for direct or even indirect interaction was minimal. Today, there are far better and more direct ways for politicians to connect with the public (and as we all know, QT audiences are not really public anyway). It might be entertainment; it's not really informative.
(Cue people breaking down this rather awful analogy)
Given what I take to be the demography of Lewisham, the audience wouldn't have needed to be stacked with placemen for Nuttall to get a very rough ride.
If UKIP's spokesmen are going to look bad anywhere, its there.
Maybe the BBC told Nuttall 'Oh its in....er......London'
Speaking to the crowd in the entrance lobby I found that everyone I spoke to was partisan and either selected in a similar way or they were so determined to appear that they applied frequently and were quite prepared to travel long distances to put their point of view (as opposed to wanting to ask a question to find an answer).
The planning was both fascinating and disturbing in a Kafka sort of way. How the BBC can peddle the lie of audience balance with a straight face is incredible.
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2014/01/meow-meow-user-stabs-mum-then-cuts-his-own-penis-off-at-christmas/
Well, Bernard Woolley wouldn't have let that one slip past him.. He would have made some comment about speedboats not being capable of being fleet of foot because they don't actually have feet.
Will be a rough ride for any centre-right types/the Gov't/
I agree with you on the clapping issue. It just encourages mob pandering rather than thorough discussion, and completely stops speakers with contrarian views from expanding on them.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BdoV9unCQAAsYtX.png:large
But apparently we don't pick up on anything else. News, what news?
Does the old one disappear? Become a subsection? An article?
I don't think you've thought this through, sunshine.
Anyone can do it. I'm going to do it now myself:
Accusing others of 'crying' on internet forums, the new Godwin's Law.
(Hugh's redefinition is now out of date.)
DJDave1979
GeoffM
corporeal
HurstLlama
Plus I see from Twitter Miss Plato has expressed an interest in joining (from experience lady players always up the stab quotient).
Is DJ Dave an old nomme de guerre of David Roe?
Everyone be terrified.