Jason McCartney MP @JasonMcCartney #Employment UP 80,000 #Unemployment DOWN 24,000 No complacency. Lots done but more to do as we recover from Labour's Great Recession
New Tory slogan?
Kate Allen @StatsJournalist Local gov't employment down 48,000 quarter on quarter; central gov't emp't up 14,000 q-on-q. Public sector emp't down 104,000 year on year.
You haven't really got the hang of this government stuff have you ? To govern is to choose and that means messy compromises and never getting all you want. I find your last sentence one of the most depressing phrases I've read on PB for quite some time. Are you seriously saying it's better to carp virgin-like from the sidelines rather than get 50+% of what your electors want ?
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
You haven't really got the hang of this reading thing, have you ? To read what someone says and try and understand it is a vital part of participating in a forum like this. I find your contribution one of the most depressing things I've ever read on PB. Are you seriously saying that because I use the words "a recognition" that I am expressing my opinion or instead saying what I think others will say ?
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
Well let's see Mr Stodge I voted LD at the councils so that would hardly make me one of the sewer rat crew you occasionally blog about, but who knows ? However my point stands if you're saying LDs don't want to be in a government, and prefer ideological puirty to the sullied compromises of coalition ( with whoever ), then what's the point of the party ?
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
I look forward to TGOHF having a kind word to say about any LD but that might be .
Danny Alexander - excellent performer and a model LD MP - if they had 50 more of him they wouldn't be on 9% in the polls.
The only reason Danny isn't a Tory is the pitiful state of the Conservative and Unionist Party in Scotland - he went for next best. But you know that already.
You haven't really got the hang of this government stuff have you ? To govern is to choose and that means messy compromises and never getting all you want. I find your last sentence one of the most depressing phrases I've read on PB for quite some time. Are you seriously saying it's better to carp virgin-like from the sidelines rather than get 50+% of what your electors want ?
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
You haven't really got the hang of this reading thing, have you ? To read what someone says and try and understand it is a vital part of participating in a forum like this. I find your contribution one of the most depressing things I've ever read on PB. Are you seriously saying that because I use the words "a recognition" that I am expressing my opinion or instead saying what I think others will say ?
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
Well let's see Mr Stodge I voted LD at the councils so that would hardly make me one of the sewer rat crew you occasionally blog about, but who knows ? However my point stands if you're saying LDs don't want to be in a government, and prefer ideological puirty to the sullied compromises of coalition ( with whoever ), then what's the point of the party ?
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
A bold prediction. Hi Ed and Vince - Cammo here - fancy your old jobs back in Energy and Business - you get to see your pet policies through, a seat at the cabinet table and a nice office and limo ?
Jason Cowan @jason_manc Since June 2010, adjusted for FE jobs reclassification, public sector employment down 450,000 and private sector up 1.17 million.
Ned Simons @nedsimons 4m Somehow feel the UN secretary general might be a bit too busy to read a letter from Grant Shapps...
Lol - Ned and his slavish retweeters might want to ponder if the UN housing dept should not be too busy worrying about slums in the third world and homeless refugees from conflict to worry about somebody losing their spare bedroom - first world problems. What next - the UN agricultural dept to complain about the lack of fair trade coffee option in the Con HQ Nespresso machine ?
I don't see why he should be too busy to read a letter from the chairman of the governing party of the UK.
The UN always faces a crisis of legitimacy. It would be a brave Secretary General that ignored any communication from a P5 member.
I must say that I am probably more likely to vote Lib Dem than not as a result of what whey have done in Coalition. I do like their policy on taking the low paid out of tax - one of the most effective ways of helping those at the bottom end, I'd have thought. Plus they have generally been quite disciplined, rather more so on occasion than the Tories.
They have recognised that the economy was in a mess and needed mending. Labour are simply not credible on this key point, as far as I'm concerned.
Cable was quite good on the radio this morning; he sounded a bit tired though. What he is saying is unexceptional - there are good signs within the economy but much more needs to be done. How can anyone object to that?
Jason Cowan @jason_manc Since June 2010, adjusted for FE jobs reclassification, public sector employment down 450,000 and private sector up 1.17 million.
So there is 1.17million people who have benefited from the recovery.
Ned Simons @nedsimons 4m Somehow feel the UN secretary general might be a bit too busy to read a letter from Grant Shapps...
Lol - Ned and his slavish retweeters might want to ponder if the UN housing dept should not be too busy worrying about slums in the third world and homeless refugees from conflict to worry about somebody losing their spare bedroom - first world problems. What next - the UN agricultural dept to complain about the lack of fair trade coffee option in the Con HQ Nespresso machine ?
I don't see why he should be too busy to read a letter from the chairman of the governing party of the UK.
The UN always faces a crisis of legitimacy. It would be a brave Secretary General that ignored any communication from a P5 member.
Many non-flattering pix of the slums of Sao Paulo are now all over Twitter - silly woman.
Perhaps as a woman from Brazil she may have noticed the unsanitary and unregulated favela housing and gangs of free roaming street children afflicting the poor of her own cities. Perhaps she ought to address that before getting involved in whether state subsidised spare rooms are an essential human right in a country with a generous welfare state and better gini coefficient.
Tim, I don't understand 95% of your posts. I don't think it's me being thick, or in poor command of the English language (I'm a bestselling author after all), I just really don't get the syntax of most of it and they seem to be full of non-sequiturs or remarks aimed at the cognoscenti, of which I'm clearly not. They're like ticker-tapes of consciousness.
You don't have to take the blindest bit of notice of my suggestion, but it's that maybe, just maybe, you could post a little less frequently and with more forethought?
There used to be a button you could use to switch off Tim, and other bores. Whatever happened to that?
Tim, I don't understand 95% of your posts. I don't think it's me being thick, or in poor command of the English language (I'm a bestselling author after all), I just really don't get the syntax of most of it and they seem to be full of non-sequiturs or remarks aimed at the cognoscenti, of which I'm clearly not. They're like ticker-tapes of consciousness.
You don't have to take the blindest bit of notice of my suggestion, but it's that maybe, just maybe, you could post a little less frequently and with more forethought?
There used to be a button you could use to switch off Tim, and other bores. Whatever happened to that?
Jason Cowan @jason_manc Since June 2010, adjusted for FE jobs reclassification, public sector employment down 450,000 and private sector up 1.17 million.
So there is 1.17million people who have benefited from the recovery.
Or 30 million odd taxpayers who have 450,000 less employees on the nations payroll to subsidise?
You haven't really got the hang of this government stuff have you ? To govern is to choose and that means messy compromises and never getting all you want. I find your last sentence one of the most depressing phrases I've read on PB for quite some time. Are you seriously saying it's better to carp virgin-like from the sidelines rather than get 50+% of what your electors want ?
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
You haven't really got the hang of this reading thing, have you ? To read what someone says and try and understand it is a vital part of participating in a forum like this. I find your contribution one of the most depressing things I've ever read on PB. Are you seriously saying that because I use the words "a recognition" that I am expressing my opinion or instead saying what I think others will say ?
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
Well let's see Mr Stodge I voted LD at the councils so that would hardly make me one of the sewer rat crew you occasionally blog about, but who knows ? However my point stands if you're saying LDs don't want to be in a government, and prefer ideological puirty to the sullied compromises of coalition ( with whoever ), then what's the point of the party ?
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
A bold prediction. Hi Ed and Vince - Cammo here - fancy your old jobs back in Energy and Business - you get to see your pet policies through, a seat at the cabinet table and a nice office and limo ?
Ed and Vince may or may not be tempted by that but the Lib Dems as a whole would not .
On topic: I think it's a bit unlikely, frankly. The LibDems have a hard enough task as it is, and, try as I might, I simply can't see how they would help themselves by ditching Clegg before the GE in favour of an anti-coalitionista, a change which effectively says 'Yes, you were right, it was a disastrous mistake entering government and our entire raison d'être of the last 50 years has been shown to be a complete waste of time'. The Sarah Teather resignation note was interesting mostly for the fact that it shows that she really doesn't want to be in government at all - in which case, as Alanbrooke points out upthread, what's the point?
Of course swapping to, say, Vince, wouldn't have quite the same disadvantage, but equally it doesn't gain them much either.
For the LibDems, as for the Tories, there's really only one course of action which makes sense: Keep Buggering On.
Of course, after the election the dynamics will be different, and Farron might well emerge then as a natural choice. But if, as seems likely, it's a hung parliament, are the LibDems going to hide away and pretend they never really meant all that guff about the 'new politics' and parties working together? Do they want to play a part in government or not?
I must say that I am probably more likely to vote Lib Dem than not as a result of what whey have done in Coalition. I do like their policy on taking the low paid out of tax - one of the most effective ways of helping those at the bottom end, I'd have thought. Plus they have generally been quite disciplined, rather more so on occasion than the Tories.
They have recognised that the economy was in a mess and needed mending. Labour are simply not credible on this key point, as far as I'm concerned.
Cable was quite good on the radio this morning; he sounded a bit tired though. What he is saying is unexceptional - there are good signs within the economy but much more needs to be done. How can anyone object to that?
"But even such a joyful Lib Dem as Dr Cable must have been a little dispirited to read that everyone has written his speech this morning up as an attempt to undermine George Osborne."
"Fortunately, no-one has yet tried to dent his joyful demeanour by also suggesting that perhaps he’s trying to undermine his own boss Nick Clegg, who on the same day said ‘the clouds are lifting’ and the ‘sinews’ of the economy were starting to grow again."
I look forward to TGOHF having a kind word to say about any LD but that might be .
Danny Alexander - excellent performer and a model LD MP - if they had 50 more of him they wouldn't be on 9% in the polls.
The only reason Danny isn't a Tory is the pitiful state of the Conservative and Unionist Party in Scotland - he went for next best. But you know that already.
And the SLDs are now well on the way to being even more pitiful than the SCONs. Where will Jonah Danny go next?
Nuclear free zones: these were all the rage when I was a kid (Staffordshire was one, as I recall), and I wondered how such councils coped with the use of nuclear isotopes in medicine and industry. Were they banned as well?
If they were, they should thank their lucky stars that they were never attacked by a rhedosaurus thawed out by nuclear testing at the North Pole. That's what happened in The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms, and in the end, a very young Lee Van Cleef had to shoot it in a fairground with a nuclear isotope.
Steady unemployment figures, number of young unemployed people up however.
And
"Total pay rose by 1.1% compared with May to July 2012. Regular pay rose by 1.0% over the same period."
38 out of 39 months under this govt living standards have fallen. Except for those who got Osbornes bonus gift.
Ever thought that may be an unintended consequence of the minimum wage?
The percentage of the work force that are paid at or close to the minimum wage will increase with the length of time the minimum wage is in force.
And what would they be paid if there were no minimum wage?
This "recovery", such as it is, is looking increasingly top-heavy. The Tories better hope the electorate don't notice their own living standards, and are just thankful for the rosy looking tractor production stats.
A slightly higher rate in most cases, and a slightly lower rate in others. The minimum wage sets a level that employers know is the base and the going rate. There is no need or incentive to offer a higher rate to get people to come and work for you.
It has the unintended effect of levelling down pay rates for thousands of jobs in the low skills area.
No, sorry, that's nonsense.
You're seriously arguing that thousands of people currently earning the minimum wage would see an increase in their pay if it was abolished?
Yes, they would now earn more if it were never introduced.
Edit to add:
In addition thousands of people who were paid 20% or 30% more than the minimum wage have seen their pay migrate towards the minimum wage, giving them a lower relative income.
Jason Cowan @jason_manc Since June 2010, adjusted for FE jobs reclassification, public sector employment down 450,000 and private sector up 1.17 million.
So there is 1.17million people who have benefited from the recovery.
Jason Cowan @jason_manc Since June 2010, adjusted for FE jobs reclassification, public sector employment down 450,000 and private sector up 1.17 million.
So there is 1.17million people who have benefited from the recovery.
Or 30 million odd taxpayers who have 450,000 less employees on the nations payroll to subsidise?
450,000 less average salary pensions to fund from borrowing - a weight off the nation.
Ned Simons @nedsimons 4m Somehow feel the UN secretary general might be a bit too busy to read a letter from Grant Shapps...
Lol - Ned and his slavish retweeters might want to ponder if the UN housing dept should not be too busy worrying about slums in the third world and homeless refugees from conflict to worry about somebody losing their spare bedroom - first world problems. What next - the UN agricultural dept to complain about the lack of fair trade coffee option in the Con HQ Nespresso machine ?
I don't see why he should be too busy to read a letter from the chairman of the governing party of the UK.
The UN always faces a crisis of legitimacy. It would be a brave Secretary General that ignored any communication from a P5 member.
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
A bold prediction. Hi Ed and Vince - Cammo here - fancy your old jobs back in Energy and Business - you get to see your pet policies through, a seat at the cabinet table and a nice office and limo ?
Ed and Vince may or may not be tempted by that but the Lib Dems as a whole would not .
So the LDs are going to stay on the sidelines, depriving the nation of decisive government, ignoring the advice of their senior MPs - just to have a poll-revitalising break from the strains of leadership ?
Mr. Flashman (deceased), the UN poking its nose into the spare room subsidy/bedroom tax reminds me of when they bleated about the 'human rights' of the Dale Farm illegal occupiers. Furthermore, when Labour introduced identical measures as the so-called bedroom tax on private housing I don't recall the same protest and level of condemnation.
"...It is far too early, as a leader in this newspaper stated yesterday, to confuse his braggadocio with firm fact. He may believe that the alleged success of his austerity regime allows him to bestride the stage like a colossus, but the shadow Chancellor insists that he bestrides it like a colostomy bag. Mr Obsorne, posited Ed Balls in another newspaper yesterday, is full of crap..."
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
A bold prediction. Hi Ed and Vince - Cammo here - fancy your old jobs back in Energy and Business - you get to see your pet policies through, a seat at the cabinet table and a nice office and limo ?
Ed and Vince may or may not be tempted by that but the Lib Dems as a whole would not .
So the LDs are going to stay on the sidelines, depriving the nation of decisive government, ignoring the advice of their senior MPs - just to have a poll-revitalising break from the strains of leadership ?
Well its a stance I suppose.
Opposition is not staying on the sidelines by definition .
Kate Allen @StatsJournalist 6m Local gov't employment down 48,000 quarter on quarter; central gov't emp't up 14,000 q-on-q.
That'll be Frankie Maudes mythical Whitehall savings will it?
Looks more like the increase is from those employed in education.
Are the centralised Free Schools counted as direct employees of Gove?
I believe the correct term is 'disciples of Gove' but it will include free schools and academies, I would have thought.
"There were falls in employment in local government, public corporations and the Civil Service, but an increase in employment in central government. Part of the fall in local government employment and increase in central government employment can be explained by schools in England becoming academies. When a school becomes an academy its classification transfers from local government to central government. The fall in Civil Service employment is dominated by reductions in employment in the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Justice and the Department for Work and Pensions."
Mr. Flashman (deceased), the UN poking its nose into the spare room subsidy/bedroom tax reminds me of when they bleated about the 'human rights' of the Dale Farm illegal occupiers. Furthermore, when Labour introduced identical measures as the so-called bedroom tax on private housing I don't recall the same protest and level of condemnation.
If the UN aren't careful they could become the next EU commission - how much do we contribute to the UN - and how much salary, perks etc to the workers get for sticking their noses in ?
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
A bold prediction. Hi Ed and Vince - Cammo here - fancy your old jobs back in Energy and Business - you get to see your pet policies through, a seat at the cabinet table and a nice office and limo ?
Ed and Vince may or may not be tempted by that but the Lib Dems as a whole would not .
So the LDs are going to stay on the sidelines, depriving the nation of decisive government, ignoring the advice of their senior MPs - just to have a poll-revitalising break from the strains of leadership ?
Well its a stance I suppose.
Opposition is not staying on the sidelines by definition .
Mark - you're the LD expert - but I find the notion of a political party backing away from being in the government under any circumstances by their own choice baffling.
Mr. Flashman (deceased), the UN poking its nose into the spare room subsidy/bedroom tax reminds me of when they bleated about the 'human rights' of the Dale Farm illegal occupiers. Furthermore, when Labour introduced identical measures as the so-called bedroom tax on private housing I don't recall the same protest and level of condemnation.
If the UN aren't careful they could become the next EU commission - how much do we contribute to the UN - and how much salary, perks etc to the workers get for sticking their noses in ?
Apparently her role is unpaid, although maybe expenses are paid. Anyway she seems to have made her decision based on a meeting with Glasgow Council and some anecdotes, so she can't possibly be wrong.
You haven't really got the hang of this government stuff have you ? To govern is to choose and that means messy compromises and never getting all you want. I find your last sentence one of the most depressing phrases I've read on PB for quite some time. Are you seriously saying it's better to carp virgin-like from the sidelines rather than get 50+% of what your electors want ?
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
You haven't really got the hang of this reading thing, have you ? To read what someone says and try saying what I think others will say ?
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
Well let's see Mr Stodge I voted LD at the councils so that would hardly make me one of the sewer rat crew you occasionally blog about, but who knows ? However my point stands if you're saying LDs don't want to be in a government, and prefer ideological puirty to the sullied compromises of coalition ( with whoever ), then what's the point of the party ?
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
Sheesh Mark the LDs have been out of government for 80 odd years ( unless you want to count callaghan ). I mean are you going to regroup, have a think and come back in 2093 ? It may be that there are things you need to think through since the reality of coalition is less attractive than the theory but if you're seriously saying the LDs don't want to be in a govt, but want to play pick and choose from the sidelines, your simply telling the electorate you haven't matured in your period in office. Why not just become a lobbying group since that's what you're advocating.
@tim - So now Ed has delivered the speech of a visonary statesman acclaimed throughout the civilized world, what's the prediction for MORI's Leader ratings?
@tim - So now Ed has delivered the speech of a visonary statesman acclaimed throughout the civilized world, what's the prediction for MORI's Leader ratings?
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
A bold prediction. Hi Ed and Vince - Cammo here - fancy your old jobs back in Energy and Business - you get to see your pet policies through, a seat at the cabinet table and a nice office and limo ?
Ed and Vince may or may not be tempted by that but the Lib Dems as a whole would not .
So the LDs are going to stay on the sidelines, depriving the nation of decisive government, ignoring the advice of their senior MPs - just to have a poll-revitalising break from the strains of leadership ?
Well its a stance I suppose.
Opposition is not staying on the sidelines by definition .
Mark - you're the LD expert - but I find the notion of a political party backing away from being in the government under any circumstances by their own choice baffling.
I don't envisage circumstances where Conservatives or Labour would offer attractive enough terms for a Coalition after 2010 but I may be wrong .
Tim also thinks it fine to frequently post that female posters are passive aggressive, an accusation he does not level at males.
I would not take his opinions on misogyny seriously. He does know a bit about wine though.
Perhaps a little cream sherry would make the ladies less objectional to him? Provided they do the washing up while the men talk serious politics over brandy and cigars.
tim thinks it's mysogony to call a woman ..a woman..
He's got a point in this case. There's little justification for mentioning her gender other than as a slight. Replace "woman" with "gay" or "black" in that sentence and see how it looks.
Grant Shapps dismisses UN housing expert as "a gay from Brazil" Grant Shapps dismisses UN housing expert as "a black from Brazil"
Whether it's accurate or not isn't really relevant.
@tim - So now Ed has delivered the speech of a visonary statesman acclaimed throughout the civilized world, what's the prediction for MORI's Leader ratings?
tim thinks it's mysogony to call a woman ..a woman..
He's got a point in this case. There's little justification for mentioning her gender other than as a slight. Replace "woman" with "gay" or "black" in that sentence and see how it looks. Whether it's accurate or not is not really relevant.
Surely you need to replace 'woman' with 'man' to get a sensible comparison?
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for an unstable government in the UK. And then if you do a deal it's say one thing do another once more and a credibility hit to match Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
tim thinks it's mysogony to call a woman ..a woman..
He's got a point in this case. There's little justification for mentioning her gender other than as a slight. Replace "woman" with "gay" or "black" in that sentence and see how it looks. Whether it's accurate or not is not really relevant.
Surely you need to replace 'woman' with 'man' to get a sensible comparison?
I don't think so, not in this case, given the history of men dismissing women as "not knowing their place", etc.
tim thinks it's mysogony to call a woman ..a woman..
He's got a point in this case. There's little justification for mentioning her gender other than as a slight. Replace "woman" with "gay" or "black" in that sentence and see how it looks. Whether it's accurate or not is not really relevant.
Surely you need to replace 'woman' with 'man' to get a sensible comparison?
I don't think so, not in this case, given the history of men dismissing women as "not knowing their place", etc.
Heres Katie Hopkins who doesn't like geographical names for children and but called her daughter India
Katie Hopkins @KTHopkins 5m Ed Gove. Those using food banks often do so due to "poor financial management". Good man. Enough with the PC charitable tears.
Ed Gove? Surely she means Michael Gove, who had to pay £7k back in expenses and put his kids up in a £500 per night hotel at the taxpayers expense?
Trawling Katie Hopkins, a professional trolls tweets?
tim thinks it's mysogony to call a woman ..a woman..
He's got a point in this case. There's little justification for mentioning her gender other than as a slight. Replace "woman" with "gay" or "black" in that sentence and see how it looks. Whether it's accurate or not is not really relevant.
Surely you need to replace 'woman' with 'man' to get a sensible comparison?
I don't think so, not in this case, given the history of men dismissing women as "not knowing their place", etc.
Anorak.. Gay or Black does not denote or identify gender..If the person had been a man and referred to as "The man, who comes from Brazil", it would not have raised comment.
@tim - So now Ed has delivered the speech of a visonary statesman acclaimed throughout the civilized world, what's the prediction for MORI's Leader ratings?
No idea, you think Daves attempt to launch Sam missiles will have an effect?
LoL. Once upon a time (not that long ago) you'd be asking that question after some alleged Dave 'calamity'. Not so lippy now I see. Can't think why..
I'll be consistent with my prediction made immediately after the infamous vote: Dave's will increase slightly, Ed's a notch down. Conceivably both will slip a mite but if so Ed's will be more. So difference between the two will be -12/13 against previous -10.
But it's still way before the election, so it's only you that cares very much.
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
A bold prediction. Hi Ed and Vince - Cammo here - fancy your old jobs back in Energy and Business - you get to see your pet policies through, a seat at the cabinet table and a nice office and limo ?
Ed and Vince may or may not be tempted by that but the Lib Dems as a whole would not .
So the LDs are going to stay on the sidelines, depriving the nation of decisive government, ignoring the advice of their senior MPs - just to have a poll-revitalising break from the strains of leadership ?
Well its a stance I suppose.
Opposition is not staying on the sidelines by definition .
Mark - you're the LD expert - but I find the notion of a political party backing away from being in the government under any circumstances by their own choice baffling.
I don't envisage circumstances where Conservatives or Labour would offer attractive enough terms for a Coalition after 2010 but I may be wrong .
I think you meant 2015 - but the freudian slip is not surprising
Heres Katie Hopkins who doesn't like geographical names for children and but called her daughter India
Katie Hopkins @KTHopkins 5m Ed Gove. Those using food banks often do so due to "poor financial management". Good man. Enough with the PC charitable tears.
Ed Gove? Surely she means Michael Gove, who had to pay £7k back in expenses and put his kids up in a £500 per night hotel at the taxpayers expense?
Trawling Katie Hopkins, a professional trolls tweets?
Slow news day at Mersey Wine towers?
From someone who refers constantly to my posts and offers no original insight thats funny.
Heres Katie Hopkins who doesn't like geographical names for children and but called her daughter India
Katie Hopkins @KTHopkins 5m Ed Gove. Those using food banks often do so due to "poor financial management". Good man. Enough with the PC charitable tears.
Ed Gove? Surely she means Michael Gove, who had to pay £7k back in expenses and put his kids up in a £500 per night hotel at the taxpayers expense?
Trawling Katie Hopkins, a professional trolls tweets?
Slow news day at Mersey Wine towers?
From someone who refers constantly to my posts and offers no original insight thats funny.
Unlike you, I don't define my life by my posts on this site..
Shall we start a sweepstake for you breaking the 10,000 post barrier?
I don't think so, not in this case, given the history of men dismissing women as "not knowing their place", etc.
In other words it is you who is projecting prejudice on to a statement where there is none.
No, Richard, not at all. We have a group of people who have, for a long, long, long, time, been disadvantaged in society, been excluded from top jobs, suffered prejudice (sexism has no sounder foundation than racism). We then have a government minister who feels it's relevant to point out an individual is a woman whilst attacking her work.
I agree with you that he's unlikely to have intended a prejudiced statement, but it was clumsy at best. Surprised you can't see the potential for offence in the wording used.
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
A bold prediction. Hi Ed and Vince - Cammo here - fancy your old jobs back in Energy and Business - you get to see your pet policies through, a seat at the cabinet table and a nice office and limo ?
Ed and Vince may or may not be tempted by that but the Lib Dems as a whole would not .
So the LDs are going to stay on the sidelines, depriving the nation of decisive government, ignoring the advice of their senior MPs - just to have a poll-revitalising break from the strains of leadership ?
Well its a stance I suppose.
Opposition is not staying on the sidelines by definition .
Mark - you're the LD expert - but I find the notion of a political party backing away from being in the government under any circumstances by their own choice baffling.
I don't envisage circumstances where Conservatives or Labour would offer attractive enough terms for a Coalition after 2010 but I may be wrong .
I think you meant 2015 - but the freudian slip is not surprising
Perhaps as a woman from Brazil she may have noticed the unsanitary and unregulated favela housing and gangs of free roaming street children afflicting the poor of her own cities.
Hmm. Are you saying that NOBODY Brazilian should accept a UN job investigating alleged human right violations outside Brazil (which seems to be collective punishment for everyone with a Brazilian passport), or that the UN should not investigate alleged violations in Britain because things in Brazil are worse (as they undoubtedly are, but so what)?
I don't especially feel that the UN needed to check out this particular issue, but the nationality of the investigator is surely irrelevant.
My wife's college is now being absorbed into the public sector. This seems to be happening to pretty much all the colleges in Scotland, not sure if it is also happening south of the border. What this means is that the college loses its autonomy and separate legal standing, it is no longer allowed to have reserves and it can't borrow in its own right. I suspect it also means that my wife may well be a part of the central government increase in employment in the report today.
The figures today are good. They suggest that employers are becoming increasingly confident and willing to take on full time staff. I think we will see a lot more of this over the next 12 months which should help with aggregate demand. The effect on public spending may be more muted because in work benefits are (rightly) more generous in some respects than out of work benefits.
The argument about whether the minimum wage has reduced some incomes is a complicated one. There is certainly evidence that it has eliminated differentials at the semi-skilled level with more and more semi-skilled jobs being "caught up" by a minimum wage that has increased faster than their wages. I don't think that proves the point. The reason they have been "caught up" by the minimum wage is that their incomes were not rising as fast as the minimum wage has. If there was to be a shortage of such labour their wages could in theory accelerate again above the minimum wage. This clearly happens in some of the "hotter" parts of the country but not generally.
Greetings from Panama City (30C 88% RH). Just to get the plane to Colon (Atlantic end of the Canal) and then to Port Moresby, Singapore, Dubai and then home on Sunday).
If much of the SDLP end of the LDs has gone to Labour, will their MPs follow, so leaving the rest of the LD MPs to restore the Liberal party or to vote with the Cons?
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for an unstable government in the UK. And then if you do a deal it's say one thing do another once more and a credibility hit to match Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
No the line will be as in 2010 to talk to whichever party has the largest number of votes . Demonstrated to be true unlike the Conservatives Vote Lib Dem get Brown line . Whether those talks would lead anywhere is another matter .
Aorak.. Perhaps the Mnister should have said "This person".. hmm ..not really ..He referred to her by.. hey, guess what .. her gender.
It has the potential to cause offence. It was therefore an unwise turn of phrase for a government minister. Whether you or Mr Nabavi personally find it offensive is 100% irrelevant.
Surprised you can't see the potential for offence in the wording used.
I didn't either, and I think you'd have to be pretty touchy to see it that way. It's the sort of reaction I would have expected from a professional grievance-monger, not a considered poster such as yourself.
Interesting to see how bad this recession has been for male employment compared to female employment
"The number of men in work for May to July 2013 was 15.95 million, virtually the same as five years previously. However the number of men working full-time fell by 272,000 to reach 13.85 million,while the number of men working part-time increased by 281,000 to reach 2.10 million.
The number of women in work for May to July 2013 was 13.89 million, 318,000 higher than five years previously. Over the last five years the number of women working full-time increased by 39,000 to reach 7.94 million and the number of women working part-time increased by 279,000 to reach 5.95 million."
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for an unstable government in the UK. And then if you do a deal it's say one thing do another once more and a credibility hit to match Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
No the line will be as in 2010 to talk to whichever party has the largest number of votes . Demonstrated to be true unlike the Conservatives Vote Lib Dem get Brown line . Whether those talks would lead anywhere is another matter .
Sorry mark, immediately that's a bit credibility lite. If you've said upfront you won't go in to coalition ( and campaigned as such ) then what's there to discuss ? A supply and confidence arrangement simply means another GE at a time not of your choosing. If you go in to government having said you won't then you'll have more 30 pieces of silver accusations and chunk of your voters will be LD switchers to whoever for the next 5 years. Still it's your party to kill, I just can't see why you'd want to.
Surprised you can't see the potential for offence in the wording used.
I didn't either, and I think you'd have to be pretty touchy to see it that way. It's the sort of reaction I would have expected from a professional grievance-monger, not a considered poster such as yourself.
I've been very careful in what I've written. I'm not offended by what was said, and for the record, I think the UN should mind its own f*cking business. It's about the potential to cause offence to a section of the electorate who the Tories really, really, need to do better with. The polling bears that out in spades.
Stuff like this get's blown out of proportion and plays right into the hands of those who seek to paint the government as out of touch or misogynistic. Careless phrasing allows the opposition a free shot on goal - why not just avoid the pain in the first place?
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for an unstable government in the UK. And then if you do a deal it's say one thing do another once more and a credibility hit to match Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
No the line will be as in 2010 to talk to whichever party has the largest number of votes . Demonstrated to be true unlike the Conservatives Vote Lib Dem get Brown line . Whether those talks would lead anywhere is another matter .
Sorry mark, immediately that's a bit credibility lite. If you've said upfront you won't go in to coalition ( and campaigned as such ) then what's there to discuss ? A supply and confidence arrangement simply means another GE at a time not of your choosing. If you go in to government having said you won't then you'll have more 30 pieces of silver accusations and chunk of your voters will be LD switchers to whoever for the next 5 years. Still it's your party to kill, I just can't see why you'd want to.
I did not say that the Lib Dems would say upfront that they would not go into Coalition . You are misunderstanding what my personal opinion is of the likely result of any negotiations post 2015 . The line in 2015 as I said will be the same as in 2010 . My personal opinion ( and I could be wrong ) is that neither Labour nor the Conservatives would offer enough to for the Lib Dems to go into a Coalition . Supply and Confidence is not an option .
I agree with Vince to the extent that the necessity for the help to buy scheme needs to be reviewed in light of changing circumstances. The existence of the scheme seems to have underwritten housebuilders (Barratt Development's profits up 73% this morning) confidence and got them building again by persuading them that there will be demand for their spec builds. If things continue at their current pace it is quite likely that the housebuilding market will be operating a lot more normally by next year when the scheme is due to come into force.
I think Vince has again shown the way forward. I suspect the scheme will be refined so that it only operates in those areas of the country where the house market is struggling and will not operate in areas where it is not. I would expect some sort of taper for its application based on the rate of house price increases in a given area.
Calling any of this a split in the government is stretching it more than a bit. But desperate times and all that.
Shouldn't the Lib-Dems have put the breaks on "help to buy" before it was started?
The insane and much larger element hasn't started yet. You could make a case for relating it to new build and first time buyers. But remortgaging and non new build clicks in next January.
Perhaps.
Or maybe the Lib-Dems aren't really all that bothered about it and this is just part of the now, annual, Conference (and pre-Confrenece) nonsense we seem destined to go through every year.
Just think, after this year only one more Conference cycle to go through before the election...
You haven't really got the hang of this government stuff have you ? To govern is to choose and that means messy compromises and never getting all you want. I find your last sentence one of the most depressing phrases I've read on PB for quite some time. Are you seriously saying it's better to carp virgin-like from the sidelines rather than get 50+% of what your electors want ?
The LDs chances of being a majority government in the next 10 years are just above zero %, if you are typical of LD activist thinking, then just wind up the party, it serves no purpose.
You haven't really got the hang of this reading thing, have you ? To read what someone says and try and understand it is a vital part of participating in a forum like this. I find your contribution one of the most depressing things I've ever read on PB. Are you seriously saying that because I use the words "a recognition" that I am expressing my opinion or instead saying what I think others will say ?
Your chances of posting anything meaningful in the next ten years are just above zero. If you're typical of those opposed to the Liberal Democrats , then you might as well pack up and leave serious commenting to the adults, you serve no useful purpose,
Well let's see Mr Stodge I voted LD at the councils so that would hardly make me one of the sewer rat crew you occasionally blog about, but who knows ? However my point stands if you're saying LDs don't want to be in a government, and prefer ideological puirty to the sullied compromises of coalition ( with whoever ), then what's the point of the party ?
All parties need a time in opposition to regroup and rebuild . This is why the Lib Dems will not go into Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives after the next GE .
So, it's state funding for political parties, or Short Money?
I have no problem with UN employees being from any country (though like the EU there is a lot of poor promotions as a result of natonal lobbying) merely that the UK removal of spare room subsidy is a trivial issue compared with other housing issues in the world.
British housing policy is not perfect, and neither is human rights policy, but both are in the top 10% of the world. A sensible UN official would realise this.
Perhaps as a woman from Brazil she may have noticed the unsanitary and unregulated favela housing and gangs of free roaming street children afflicting the poor of her own cities.
Hmm. Are you saying that NOBODY Brazilian should accept a UN job investigating alleged human right violations outside Brazil (which seems to be collective punishment for everyone with a Brazilian passport), or that the UN should not investigate alleged violations in Britain because things in Brazil are worse (as they undoubtedly are, but so what)?
I don't especially feel that the UN needed to check out this particular issue, but the nationality of the investigator is surely irrelevant.
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for an unstable government in the UK. And then if you do a deal it's say one thing do another once more and a credibility hit to match Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
No the line will be as in 2010 to talk to whichever party has the largest number of votes . Demonstrated to be true unlike the Conservatives Vote Lib Dem get Brown line . Whether those talks would lead anywhere is another matter .
Sorry mark, immediately that's a bit credibility lite. If you've said upfront you won't go in to coalition ( and campaigned as such ) then what's there to discuss ? A supply and confidence arrangement simply means another GE at a time not of your choosing. If you go in to government having said you won't then you'll have more 30 pieces of silver accusations and chunk of your voters will be LD switchers to whoever for the next 5 years. Still it's your party to kill, I just can't see why you'd want to.
I did not say that the Lib Dems would say upfront that they would not go into Coalition . You are misunderstanding what my personal opinion is of the likely result of any negotiations post 2015 . The line in 2015 as I said will be the same as in 2010 . My personal opinion ( and I could be wrong ) is that neither Labour nor the Conservatives would offer enough to for the Lib Dems to go into a Coalition . Supply and Confidence is not an option .
Well so be it Mark, but I do find it interesting that Mr Stodge another LD chappy is of a similar opinion to yourself. If your views are representative of your party as a whole, you're in a pretty strange place and I've got to say the obvious negotiating ploy of "we don't want to talk" will in all likelihood backfire with the electorate.
Interesting to see how bad this recession has been for male employment compared to female employment
"The number of men in work for May to July 2013 was 15.95 million, virtually the same as five years previously. However the number of men working full-time fell by 272,000 to reach 13.85 million,while the number of men working part-time increased by 281,000 to reach 2.10 million.
The number of women in work for May to July 2013 was 13.89 million, 318,000 higher than five years previously. Over the last five years the number of women working full-time increased by 39,000 to reach 7.94 million and the number of women working part-time increased by 279,000 to reach 5.95 million."
Interesting figures, thanks. I wonder how much the change has been caused / accentuated by the recent law changes to paternity leave in 2011?
On the 'woman' debate; it is sloppy and silly language, but hardly misogynistic. I was taught that when writing anything official, such personal information should only be used if it is necessary for the point you are making. However if he did it in direct speech, it is a lot more forgiveable when it can be hard to come up with alternative wordings.
Shapps does have a point that it is strange that the team did not meet up with any government ministers or officials, yet did meet with the Daily Record. If that is really what happened, then a letter to her ultimate boss might be in order.
@tim - As I keep telling you, volumes of transactions in the housing market in much of the country had collapsed, with dire knock-on effects for other parts of the economy and for job mobility. If it's returning a bit towards more healthy levels of activity, that's great. It's the difference between a bubble and recovering from a serious illness.
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for an unstable government in the UK. And then if you do a deal it's say one thing do another once more and a credibility hit to match Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
No the line will be as in 2010 to talk to whichever party has the largest number of votes . Demonstrated to be true unlike the Conservatives Vote Lib Dem get Brown line . Whether those talks would lead anywhere is another matter .
Sorry mark, immediately that's a bit credibility lite. If you've said upfront you won't go in to coalition ( and campaigned as such ) then what's there to discuss ? A supply and confidence arrangement simply means another GE at a time not of your choosing. If you go in to government having said you won't then you'll have more 30 pieces of silver accusations and chunk of your voters will be LD switchers to whoever for the next 5 years. Still it's your party to kill, I just can't see why you'd want to.
I did not say that the Lib Dems would say upfront that they would not go into Coalition . You are misunderstanding what my personal opinion is of the likely result of any negotiations post 2015 . The line in 2015 as I said will be the same as in 2010 . My personal opinion ( and I could be wrong ) is that neither Labour nor the Conservatives would offer enough to for the Lib Dems to go into a Coalition . Supply and Confidence is not an option .
Well so be it Mark, but I do find it interesting that Mr Stodge another LD chappy is of a similar opinion to yourself. If your views are representative of your party as a whole, you're in a pretty strange place and I've got to say the obvious negotiating ploy of "we don't want to talk" will in all likelihood backfire with the electorate.
What negotiating ploy of "we don't want to talk " ? There would certainly be oodles of talk and no doubt the failure of the talks would be put on the Lib Dems by Conservatives and UKIP lite Conservatives by Lib Dems . The electorate would make their own decisions on where the fault for the failure lay .
What is the loose definition of a bestselling author? Perhaps someone who is assured of shelf space at WHS or the equivalent, whatever that is, with Amazon?
Good question.
Sunday Times top ten bestseller which I believe is one of the generally accepted benchmarks (top ten Amazon too).
Wow, if you include yourself in such exalted company I believe you to be Louise Mensch reincarnate and I claim my free copy of your latest blockbuster.
Chris Dillow @CJFDillow 1h Jobs in "real estate activities" have risen 15.9% in last year, accounting for 18.9% of all net new jobs. Construction jobs have been flat
Matthew Pointon @matpointon 1h Between Jun 12 and Jun 13, @statisticsONS says people working in 'real estate activities' increased by 77,000.
Bubble Boy needs to dump this Help To Buy crap ASAP.
It would be great if the housebuilding part of construction was going so well in every part of the country by early next year that this help was not required. I just fear that your natural sunny optimism is getting ahead of you a little here.
You could point to the PMIs for construction which have reported that housebuilding is the most rapidly expanding part of construction and that the prospects for future employment in the sector are improving very rapidly but I still think you are overstating the argument just a touch.
We agree that we need a lot more houses. Given the massive falls in the real price of housing since 2006 I think that George can afford to take a little time yet to be persuaded that this particular legacy has been fixed.
What happens to Vince Cable's mansion tax if the housing market implodes? As for Farron much depends on how many LDs are elected, & how supportive they are or were of the coalition. It is not impossible for Farron to be kicked out at a GE.
Cable should be focussing on encouraging firms to utilise at 3D printing or new technologies.
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for a Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
No the line will be as in 2010 to talk to whichever p . Whether those talks would lead anywhere is another matter .
Sorry mark, immediately that's a bit credibility lite. If you've said upfront you won't go in to ions and chunk of your voters will be LD switchers to whoever for the next 5 years. Still it's your party to kill, I just can't see why you'd want to.
I did not say that the Lib Dems would say upfront that they would not go into Coalition . You o for the Lib Dems to go into a Coalition . Supply and Confidence is not an option .
Well so be it Mark, but I do find it interesting that Mr Stodge another LD chappy is of a similar opinion to yourself. If your views are representative of your party as a whole, you're in a pretty strange place and I've got to say the obvious negotiating ploy of "we don't want to talk" will in all likelihood backfire with the electorate.
What negotiating ploy of "we don't want to talk " ? There would certainly be oodles of talk and no doubt the failure of the talks would be put on the Lib Dems by Conservatives and UKIP lite Conservatives by Lib Dems . The electorate would make their own decisions on where the fault for the failure lay .
Interesting that you only see negotiations with the Conservatives. I'd have thought Labour would still be a good possibility. As for the negotiating ploy as you well know saying you don't want to talk is one of the oldest tricks going.
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for a Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
No the line will be as in 2010 to talk to whichever p . Whether those talks would lead anywhere is another matter .
Sorry mark, immediately that's a bit credibility lite. If you've said upfront you won't go in to ions and chunk of your voters will be LD switchers to whoever for the next 5 years. Still it's your party to kill, I just can't see why you'd want to.
I did not say that the Lib Dems would say upfront that they would not go into Coalition . You o for the Lib Dems to go into a Coalition . Supply and Confidence is not an option .
Well so be it Mark, but I do find it interesting that Mr Stodge another LD chappy is of a similar opinion to yourself. If your views are representative of your party as a whole, you're in a pretty strange place and I've got to say the obvious negotiating ploy of "we don't want to talk" will in all likelihood backfire with the electorate.
What negotiating ploy of "we don't want to talk " ? There would certainly be oodles of talk and no doubt the failure of the talks would be put on the Lib Dems by Conservatives and UKIP lite Conservatives by Lib Dems . The electorate would make their own decisions on where the fault for the failure lay .
Interesting that you only see negotiations with the Conservatives. I'd have thought Labour would still be a good possibility. As for the negotiating ploy as you well know saying you don't want to talk is one of the oldest tricks going.
Negotiations with Labour are not excluded depending on the electoral arithmetic post 2015 .
Chris Dillow @CJFDillow 1h Jobs in "real estate activities" have risen 15.9% in last year, accounting for 18.9% of all net new jobs. Construction jobs have been flat
Matthew Pointon @matpointon 1h Between Jun 12 and Jun 13, @statisticsONS says people working in 'real estate activities' increased by 77,000.
Bubble Boy needs to dump this Help To Buy crap ASAP.
It would be great if the housebuilding part of construction was going so well in every part of the country by early next year that this help was not required. I just fear that your natural sunny optimism is getting ahead of you a little here.
You could point to the PMIs for construction which have reported that housebuilding is the most rapidly expanding part of construction and that the prospects for future employment in the sector are improving very rapidly but I still think you are overstating the argument just a touch.
We agree that we need a lot more houses. Given the massive falls in the real price of housing since 2006 I think that George can afford to take a little time yet to be persuaded that this particular legacy has been fixed.
Fiona Walsh @_fionawalsh 13m Return of the estate agent - MT @heatherstewart3 Extraordinary 9.9% rise in no of people employed in "real estate activities" in q2
A ten per cent rise in estate agents in one bloody quarter, how much more evidence do you need that there's a bubble coming.
May have to put off the cat cull for a while and take care of the shiny-suited hair-product- doused vermin instead.
No government has the cajones to re-base the UK housing market. It would if nothing else need a time machine to take us back to pre-1987, Big Bang and the invention/arrival in the UK of the "investment banker" and the determination to keep us there.
So in the absence of that, I will happily put my faith in Mark (Carney; no offence Senior) who, for well-elucidated reasons, is happy so far.
Cable should be focussing on encouraging firms to utilise at 3D printing or new technologies.
I'm a big fan of 3D printing. On a completely separate topic, I have my a friend has a copy of the liberator blueprints and subsequent developments.
"I know what you're thinking: "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I've kinda lost track myself. But being this is a .44."
On topic, this is the solution to the conundrum Mike mentioned recently, namely: Given the LibDem left seems to have gone Lab, and Gordon Brown voters generally aren't in a hurry to switch to Cameron, how could the Tories get a majority? The answer is for the LibDems to ditch Clegg and rebrand themselves to the left, so they lose voters to Lab and Con in more balanced portions.
The obvious Tory move would be to promote Clegg to the EU Commission, but like the boundary changes this is a case where Cameron's party won't let him do what he needs to do to win a majority.
May have to put off the cat cull for a while and take care of the shiny-suited hair-product- doused vermin instead.
LOL. You can spot an estate agent in a crowd from about 100m. Why is that, I wonder? And why do estate agent rejects all end up working in mobile phone stores?
Surprising there aren't more fires in estate agents, all that polyester must give off static shocks like crazy...
CON 34 (+4); LAB 37 (-3); LIB DEM 10 (n/c); UKIP 11 (n/c)
The latest Ipsos MORI Political Monitor shows a softening in Labour’s lead to just three points over the Conservatives. Meanwhile, Ed Miliband’s personal ratings continue their downward trend over the year.
Six in ten (60%) British adults say they are dissatisfied with Ed Miliband, while 24% are satisfied. His net satisfaction rating of -36 (% satisfied minus % dissatisfied) is his lowest ever, in line with the lowest scored by Mr Duncan-Smith and Mr Hague (-37).
Even among Labour supporters he has negative ratings, with 52% of Labour supporters dissatisfied with his performance and 40% satisfied. This is his lowest rating among his own supporters Ipsos MORI has recorded since he became leader.
The poll also shows that the public believe Mr Miliband trails Mr Cameron on some key leadership qualities. Almost twice as many people think Mr Cameron is a capable leader as think the same of Mr Miliband (53% and 28% respectively). Similarly, Mr Cameron is seen as the best leader in a crisis. 47% say Mr Cameron is good in a crisis compared with 20% who say the same of Mr Miliband. The Prime Minister is also the most likely to be seen as having sound judgement: 40% compared with 32% for Ed Miliband, 27% for Nick Clegg and 19% for Nigel Farage.
Just one in five (19%) think the Labour leader has got a lot of personality, while double (40%) think Mr Cameron does.
However, David Cameron leads his rivals on some negative characteristics. Seven in ten (70%) believe the Prime Minister is out of touch with ordinary people (49% Mr Miliband, 56% Mr Clegg, 36% Mr Farage). Eight in ten (79%) believe Mr Cameron looks after some sections of society more than others (58% each for all three other leaders). Around half of Britons believe the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister are more style than substance (52% and 51% respectively) while 46% say the same of Mr Farage and 41% for Mr Miliband.
Messrs Cameron and Miliband are tied on being seen to understand the problems facing Britain (50% and 52% respectively), while Mr Farage is the least likely to be perceived to understand Britain’s problems on 36%.
Unfortunately they do not focus exclusively on a quarter's increase in estate agents, a profession that has shrunk more than most over recent years, but interesting for all that.
As I said yesterday analyses that assume that the electorate in 2015 will be the same as it was in 2010 are somewhat flawed. 1m fewer public sector workers. 2.5m additional private sector workers. Less than a quarter of the private sector newbies in Unions. Record overall employment.
We are moving on and getting ourselves off the teat of the public purse.
Ed Miliband was rocked on the eve of the crucial party conference season today by an exclusive poll showing Labour’s lead crashing to just three points.
Ipsos MORI’s dramatic research reveals Labour has slipped three points from 40 per cent to 37 per cent since August, while David Cameron’s Conservatives are up four to 34 per cent.
Comments
@JasonMcCartney
#Employment UP 80,000 #Unemployment DOWN 24,000 No complacency. Lots done but more to do as we recover from Labour's Great Recession
New Tory slogan?
Kate Allen @StatsJournalist
Local gov't employment down 48,000 quarter on quarter; central gov't emp't up 14,000 q-on-q. Public sector emp't down 104,000 year on year.
Since June 2010, adjusted for FE jobs reclassification, public sector employment down 450,000 and private sector up 1.17 million.
The UN always faces a crisis of legitimacy. It would be a brave Secretary General that ignored any communication from a P5 member.
They have recognised that the economy was in a mess and needed mending. Labour are simply not credible on this key point, as far as I'm concerned.
Cable was quite good on the radio this morning; he sounded a bit tired though. What he is saying is unexceptional - there are good signs within the economy but much more needs to be done. How can anyone object to that?
She needs her sense of perspective sorting out.
Of course swapping to, say, Vince, wouldn't have quite the same disadvantage, but equally it doesn't gain them much either.
For the LibDems, as for the Tories, there's really only one course of action which makes sense: Keep Buggering On.
Of course, after the election the dynamics will be different, and Farron might well emerge then as a natural choice. But if, as seems likely, it's a hung parliament, are the LibDems going to hide away and pretend they never really meant all that guff about the 'new politics' and parties working together? Do they want to play a part in government or not?
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/isabel-hardman/2013/09/eeyore-cable-undermines-george-osborne-by-echoing-his-comments-on-the-economy/
"But even such a joyful Lib Dem as Dr Cable must have been a little dispirited to read that everyone has written his speech this morning up as an attempt to undermine George Osborne."
"Fortunately, no-one has yet tried to dent his joyful demeanour by also suggesting that perhaps he’s trying to undermine his own boss Nick Clegg, who on the same day said ‘the clouds are lifting’ and the ‘sinews’ of the economy were starting to grow again."
Alton Towers could so easily have been toast.
And so on.
Looks more like the increase is from those employed in education.
Well its a stance I suppose.
Interesting.
"...It is far too early, as a leader in this newspaper stated yesterday, to confuse his braggadocio with firm fact. He may believe that the alleged success of his austerity regime allows him to bestride the stage like a colossus, but the shadow Chancellor insists that he bestrides it like a colostomy bag. Mr Obsorne, posited Ed Balls in another newspaper yesterday, is full of crap..."
I believe the correct term is 'disciples of Gove' but it will include free schools and academies, I would have thought.
"There were falls in employment in local government, public corporations and the Civil Service, but an increase in employment in central government. Part of the fall in local government employment and increase in central government employment can be explained by schools in England becoming academies. When a school becomes an academy its classification transfers from local government to central government. The fall in Civil Service employment is dominated by reductions in employment in the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Justice and the Department for Work and Pensions."
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pse/public-sector-employment/q1-2013/stb-pse-2013q1.html?format=print
Apparently her role is unpaid, although maybe expenses are paid. Anyway she seems to have made her decision based on a meeting with Glasgow Council and some anecdotes, so she can't possibly be wrong.
It may be that there are things you need to think through since the reality of coalition is less attractive than the theory but if you're seriously saying the LDs don't want to be in a govt, but want to play pick and choose from the sidelines, your simply telling the electorate you haven't matured in your period in office. Why not just become a lobbying group since that's what you're advocating.
I would not take his opinions on misogyny seriously. He does know a bit about wine though.
Perhaps a little cream sherry would make the ladies less objectional to him? Provided they do the washing up while the men talk serious politics over brandy and cigars.
Grant Shapps dismisses UN housing expert as "a gay from Brazil"
Grant Shapps dismisses UN housing expert as "a black from Brazil"
Whether it's accurate or not isn't really relevant.
Personally that's not a line I would push.
In a campaign it's LDs campaigning for an unstable government in the UK. And then if you do a deal it's say one thing do another once more and a credibility hit to match Uni fees. Better to go with what you do want and haggle imo, at least it has legitimacy.
Slow news day at Mersey Wine towers?
I'm sure he doesn't need me to defend him but I've always found his interactions with me perfectly polite.
I'll be consistent with my prediction made immediately after the infamous vote: Dave's will increase slightly, Ed's a notch down. Conceivably both will slip a mite but if so Ed's will be more. So difference between the two will be -12/13 against previous -10.
But it's still way before the election, so it's only you that cares very much.
Shall we start a sweepstake for you breaking the 10,000 post barrier?
I agree with you that he's unlikely to have intended a prejudiced statement, but it was clumsy at best. Surprised you can't see the potential for offence in the wording used.
I don't especially feel that the UN needed to check out this particular issue, but the nationality of the investigator is surely irrelevant.
The figures today are good. They suggest that employers are becoming increasingly confident and willing to take on full time staff. I think we will see a lot more of this over the next 12 months which should help with aggregate demand. The effect on public spending may be more muted because in work benefits are (rightly) more generous in some respects than out of work benefits.
The argument about whether the minimum wage has reduced some incomes is a complicated one. There is certainly evidence that it has eliminated differentials at the semi-skilled level with more and more semi-skilled jobs being "caught up" by a minimum wage that has increased faster than their wages. I don't think that proves the point. The reason they have been "caught up" by the minimum wage is that their incomes were not rising as fast as the minimum wage has. If there was to be a shortage of such labour their wages could in theory accelerate again above the minimum wage. This clearly happens in some of the "hotter" parts of the country but not generally.
If much of the SDLP end of the LDs has gone to Labour, will their MPs follow, so leaving the rest of the LD MPs to restore the Liberal party or to vote with the Cons?
"The number of men in work for May to July 2013 was 15.95 million, virtually the same as five years previously. However the number of men working full-time fell by 272,000 to reach 13.85 million,while the number of men working part-time increased by 281,000 to reach 2.10 million.
The number of women in work for May to July 2013 was 13.89 million, 318,000 higher than five years previously. Over the last five years the number of women working full-time
increased by 39,000 to reach 7.94 million and the number of women working part-time increased by 279,000 to reach 5.95 million."
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_325094.pdf
Stuff like this get's blown out of proportion and plays right into the hands of those who seek to paint the government as out of touch or misogynistic. Careless phrasing allows the opposition a free shot on goal - why not just avoid the pain in the first place?
Seems a bit daft chiming up when things already up and running?
I think Vince has again shown the way forward. I suspect the scheme will be refined so that it only operates in those areas of the country where the house market is struggling and will not operate in areas where it is not. I would expect some sort of taper for its application based on the rate of house price increases in a given area.
Calling any of this a split in the government is stretching it more than a bit. But desperate times and all that.
Or maybe the Lib-Dems aren't really all that bothered about it and this is just part of the now, annual, Conference (and pre-Confrenece) nonsense we seem destined to go through every year.
Just think, after this year only one more Conference cycle to go through before the election...
British housing policy is not perfect, and neither is human rights policy, but both are in the top 10% of the world. A sensible UN official would realise this.
On the 'woman' debate; it is sloppy and silly language, but hardly misogynistic. I was taught that when writing anything official, such personal information should only be used if it is necessary for the point you are making. However if he did it in direct speech, it is a lot more forgiveable when it can be hard to come up with alternative wordings.
Shapps does have a point that it is strange that the team did not meet up with any government ministers or officials, yet did meet with the Daily Record. If that is really what happened, then a letter to her ultimate boss might be in order.
You could point to the PMIs for construction which have reported that housebuilding is the most rapidly expanding part of construction and that the prospects for future employment in the sector are improving very rapidly but I still think you are overstating the argument just a touch.
We agree that we need a lot more houses. Given the massive falls in the real price of housing since 2006 I think that George can afford to take a little time yet to be persuaded that this particular legacy has been fixed.
Cable should be focussing on encouraging firms to utilise at 3D printing or new technologies.
How about a Lib Dem ?
http://order-order.com/2013/09/11/deputy-speaker-runners-and-riders/
So in the absence of that, I will happily put my faith in Mark (Carney; no offence Senior) who, for well-elucidated reasons, is happy so far.
The obvious Tory move would be to promote Clegg to the EU Commission, but like the boundary changes this is a case where Cameron's party won't let him do what he needs to do to win a majority.
Surprising there aren't more fires in estate agents, all that polyester must give off static shocks like crazy...
CON 34 (+4); LAB 37 (-3); LIB DEM 10 (n/c); UKIP 11 (n/c)
The latest Ipsos MORI Political Monitor shows a softening in Labour’s lead to just three points over the Conservatives. Meanwhile, Ed Miliband’s personal ratings continue their downward trend over the year.
Six in ten (60%) British adults say they are dissatisfied with Ed Miliband, while 24% are satisfied. His net satisfaction rating of -36 (% satisfied minus % dissatisfied) is his lowest ever, in line with the lowest scored by Mr Duncan-Smith and Mr Hague (-37).
Even among Labour supporters he has negative ratings, with 52% of Labour supporters dissatisfied with his performance and 40% satisfied. This is his lowest rating among his own supporters Ipsos MORI has recorded since he became leader.
The poll also shows that the public believe Mr Miliband trails Mr Cameron on some key leadership qualities. Almost twice as many people think Mr Cameron is a capable leader as think the same of Mr Miliband (53% and 28% respectively). Similarly, Mr Cameron is seen as the best leader in a crisis. 47% say Mr Cameron is good in a crisis compared with 20% who say the same of Mr Miliband. The Prime Minister is also the most likely to be seen as having sound judgement: 40% compared with 32% for Ed Miliband, 27% for Nick Clegg and 19% for Nigel Farage.
Just one in five (19%) think the Labour leader has got a lot of personality, while double (40%) think Mr Cameron does.
However, David Cameron leads his rivals on some negative characteristics. Seven in ten (70%) believe the Prime Minister is out of touch with ordinary people (49% Mr Miliband, 56% Mr Clegg, 36% Mr Farage). Eight in ten (79%) believe Mr Cameron looks after some sections of society more than others (58% each for all three other leaders). Around half of Britons believe the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister are more style than substance (52% and 51% respectively) while 46% say the same of Mr Farage and 41% for Mr Miliband.
Messrs Cameron and Miliband are tied on being seen to understand the problems facing Britain (50% and 52% respectively), while Mr Farage is the least likely to be perceived to understand Britain’s problems on 36%.
Unfortunately they do not focus exclusively on a quarter's increase in estate agents, a profession that has shrunk more than most over recent years, but interesting for all that.
As I said yesterday analyses that assume that the electorate in 2015 will be the same as it was in 2010 are somewhat flawed. 1m fewer public sector workers. 2.5m additional private sector workers. Less than a quarter of the private sector newbies in Unions. Record overall employment.
We are moving on and getting ourselves off the teat of the public purse.
Lab 37 (-3) Con 34 (+4)
Ed Miliband was rocked on the eve of the crucial party conference season today by an exclusive poll showing Labour’s lead crashing to just three points.
Ipsos MORI’s dramatic research reveals Labour has slipped three points from 40 per cent to 37 per cent since August, while David Cameron’s Conservatives are up four to 34 per cent.