As predicted Gove shits all over the inept tory spinners by strongly hinting the tories are indeed trying to dream up their own policy on cost of living/fuel prices.
They've been trailing a 'compulsory-best-rate' deal, and single-format-for-comparison-shopping for yonks.
Trailing and hinting but not making particularly concrete plans. When you have Gove saying little Ed has correctly identified the problem he's not doing that as a favour to labour but as a prelude to their own announcement on how to tackle that problem.
That 10point lead was the strange one, as was the sudden move from 4/5 points to 0 and 1. if you take 4-5 as the baseline, and ignore the 10, it makes sense. They've lost half the bounce, if the poll is accurate. But we'll only have a rough idea by next week and I see the Mail is already prebriefing on announcements.
Grandiose.
It wasn't a starter for 10!
It was a tease.
Red Rag claimed how wonderful it was that YouGov delivered a 10% lead on the day before Ed's speech not realising (if you accept that YouGov were fixing their polls as he had alleged for the earlier low leads) that the 10% top of the range lead was being used as a benchmark against which Miliband's speech would be judged.
Less wordily, Red Rag and Surby fell straight into the elephant trap.
That 10point lead was the strange one, as was the sudden move from 4/5 points to 0 and 1. if you take 4-5 as the baseline, and ignore the 10, it makes sense. They've lost half the bounce, if the poll is accurate. But we'll only have a rough idea by next week and I see the Mail is already prebriefing on announcements.
Grandiose.
It wasn't a starter for 10!
It was a tease.
Red Rag claimed how wonderful it was that YouGov delivered a 10% lead on the day before Ed's speech not realising (if you accept that YouGov were fixing their polls as he had alleged for the earlier low leads) that the 10% top of the range lead was being used as a benchmark against which Miliband's speech would be judged.
Less wordily, Red Rag and Surby fell straight into the elephant trap.
Deary me, do try and keep up with it. Labour did not have a 10% lead with Yougov directly before the speech, it was 8%. The 10% was with a different polling company and anyone with half a brain knows you do not compare results from different polling companies. You will have to wait a few more weeks for another BRBM poll. Come on Avery LP that was child stuff.
That 10point lead was the strange one, as was the sudden move from 4/5 points to 0 and 1. if you take 4-5 as the baseline, and ignore the 10, it makes sense. They've lost half the bounce, if the poll is accurate. But we'll only have a rough idea by next week and I see the Mail is already prebriefing on announcements.
Grandiose.
It wasn't a starter for 10!
It was a tease.
Red Rag claimed how wonderful it was that YouGov delivered a 10% lead on the day before Ed's speech not realising (if you accept that YouGov were fixing their polls as he had alleged for the earlier low leads) that the 10% top of the range lead was being used as a benchmark against which Miliband's speech would be judged.
Less wordily, Red Rag and Surby fell straight into the elephant trap.
That's the second University Challenge reference you've made today, Avery.
Regardless, at some point you'll have to start posting from your own perspective - the truth after all is what matters in the end.
Anyone who believes a Tory majority isn't possible in 2015, (because of the old boundaries requiring a lead of about 10% or whatever the reason may be), can get a 30% return from Betfair by betting on both a Labour majority and a hung Parliament.
I take it you don't bet since you've overlooked the small matter of Betfair's 5% commission which reduces the return from this combination bet to 27.16%.
Furthermore a better return of 34.13% is available by staking the "Hung Parliament" element of the bet (51.19%) with Ladbrokes at 2.62 net rather than with Betfair at 2.35 gross.
That 10point lead was the strange one, as was the sudden move from 4/5 points to 0 and 1. if you take 4-5 as the baseline, and ignore the 10, it makes sense. They've lost half the bounce, if the poll is accurate. But we'll only have a rough idea by next week and I see the Mail is already prebriefing on announcements.
Grandiose.
It wasn't a starter for 10!
It was a tease.
Red Rag claimed how wonderful it was that YouGov delivered a 10% lead on the day before Ed's speech not realising (if you accept that YouGov were fixing their polls as he had alleged for the earlier low leads) that the 10% top of the range lead was being used as a benchmark against which Miliband's speech would be judged.
Less wordily, Red Rag and Surby fell straight into the elephant trap.
Deary me, do try and keep up with it. Labour did not have a 10% lead with Yougov directly before the speech, it was 8%. The 10% was with a different polling company and anyone with half a brain knows you do not compare results from different polling companies. You will have to wait a few more weeks for another BRBM poll. Come on Avery LP that was child stuff.
Hopi Sen @hopisen 53m @jruddy99@ianabrooks think about it: it undermines out argument: if we're happy you can freeze prices now, why do prices have to be frozen?
Hopi Sen showing once again that he's the thinking man's lefty.
That 10point lead was the strange one, as was the sudden move from 4/5 points to 0 and 1. if you take 4-5 as the baseline, and ignore the 10, it makes sense. They've lost half the bounce, if the poll is accurate. But we'll only have a rough idea by next week and I see the Mail is already prebriefing on announcements.
Grandiose.
It wasn't a starter for 10!
It was a tease.
Red Rag claimed how wonderful it was that YouGov delivered a 10% lead on the day before Ed's speech not realising (if you accept that YouGov were fixing their polls as he had alleged for the earlier low leads) that the 10% top of the range lead was being used as a benchmark against which Miliband's speech would be judged.
Less wordily, Red Rag and Surby fell straight into the elephant trap.
Deary me, do try and keep up with it. Labour did not have a 10% lead with Yougov directly before the speech, it was 8%. The 10% was with a different polling company and anyone with half a brain knows you do not compare results from different polling companies. You will have to wait a few more weeks for another BRBM poll. Come on Avery LP that was child stuff.
Are you saying it was a bull trap, Red Rag?
No, I am saying anyone who is foolish enough to compare polls from different pollsters is talking Bull Trap.
Interesting that Scotland's ethnic minority population doubled from 2% to 4% between 2001 and 2011. That's probably about the same as England's in the late 1970s.
That 10point lead was the strange one, as was the sudden move from 4/5 points to 0 and 1. if you take 4-5 as the baseline, and ignore the 10, it makes sense. They've lost half the bounce, if the poll is accurate. But we'll only have a rough idea by next week and I see the Mail is already prebriefing on announcements.
Grandiose.
It wasn't a starter for 10!
It was a tease.
Red Rag claimed how wonderful it was that YouGov delivered a 10% lead on the day before Ed's speech not realising (if you accept that YouGov were fixing their polls as he had alleged for the earlier low leads) that the 10% top of the range lead was being used as a benchmark against which Miliband's speech would be judged.
Less wordily, Red Rag and Surby fell straight into the elephant trap.
That's the second University Challenge reference you've made today, Avery.
Regardless, at some point you'll have to start posting from your own perspective - the truth after all is what matters in the end.
Well, I think I am the only one who watched it, Grandiose! Or if I wasn't no one else has commented.
And I am not sure the pursuit of truth on daily polling shifts is that high a calling. The humour of the battle is best.
Hopi Sen @hopisen 53m @jruddy99@ianabrooks think about it: it undermines out argument: if we're happy you can freeze prices now, why do prices have to be frozen?
Hopi Sen showing once again that he's the thinking man's lefty.
Arguments about something making less difference are always a bit strange.
Telling two children that the toy they're arguing over isn't any good anyway doesn't help solve the argument.
The Tories would be better off showing that (as Hopi Sen says in other tweets) there's a big difference between freezing your tariff and a legalised freeze, particularly where funding large infrastructure projects are concerned.
Binding and enforceable draft UNSC resolution on Syrian chemical weapons decommissioning agreed by permanent members.
It is not a Chapter VII resolution and there is no provision for referral to the Hague for war crimes prosecution.
Job done. Well done Obama. Well done Putin.
Evening, Comrade Avery! I see you are still in Armchair Warmonger mode?
War, Sunil?
Who is talking of war?
Did you not note my consistent predictions that this would be the outcome.
Even allowing for Chuvapp Miliband doing his best to torpedo HMS Peace and USS Diplomacy.
Comrade Avery! We agreed the other day that Ed single-handedly saved our Great British Motherland from entering another grubby Mideast war!
Tovarich Sunil.
The party line has changed.
I have asked Tovarich Lavrentia to inform you of the new orthodoxy.
Perhaps perpetual roundtripping on the Moscow-Vladivostok run?
Seven wonderful days of overheated carriages and views of snow and pine trees. Repeated ad infinitum.
Strange that you mention Southend, Comrade Fox. This summer I have walked the original route of the A13 (ie., as originally set out in 1922) from London's Aldgate to Shoeburyness and back - albeit in several short stages. Something like a 90 mile round trip, taking 7 weeks!
Hopi Sen @hopisen 53m @jruddy99@ianabrooks think about it: it undermines out argument: if we're happy you can freeze prices now, why do prices have to be frozen?
Hopi Sen showing once again that he's the thinking man's lefty.
Comrade Richard! Shouldn't that be "Hopeless" Sen?
@glenoglaza1: #bbcqt Douglas Alexander says he, Ed M and Alistair Darling called for Damian mcBride to be sacked but G Brown ignored them
EdM and McBride worked together for many years and became close friends ( McBride thought and claims ). Yet behind Damien's back EdM was scheming and pouring poison into Brown's ear. The more we learn about EdM , the more sinister and disturbing he becomes.
Mole Valley LD hold LD 423 Con 236 UKIP 101 Turnout a very respectable 49%
Unusually high turnout, any reason, or was it the good weather?
Turnout is always pretty high in mole Valley as a whole
There must be some constituencies that struggle to get over that figure in the GE. Very impressive figure.
In 2010 (Thirsk and Malton excluded), five failed to make 50% turnout: Manchester Central (44.31), Leeds Central (46.01), Birmingham Ladywood (48.66), Glasgow North East (49.13), Blackley & Broughton (49.22). Manchester Central has a significantly larger electorate.
Mole Valley LD hold LD 423 Con 236 UKIP 101 Turnout a very respectable 49%
Unusually high turnout, any reason, or was it the good weather?
Turnout is always pretty high in mole Valley as a whole
There must be some constituencies that struggle to get over that figure in the GE. Very impressive figure.
In 2010 (Thirsk and Malton excluded), five failed to make 50% turnout: Manchester Central (44.31), Leeds Central (46.01), Birmingham Ladywood (48.66), Glasgow North East (49.13), Blackley & Broughton (49.22). Manchester Central has a significantly larger electorate.
However I am concerned that you are not aware that our railway engineers have created a service that can cover the same distance in a matter of days rather than weeks.
Binding and enforceable draft UNSC resolution on Syrian chemical weapons decommissioning agreed by permanent members.
It is not a Chapter VII resolution and there is no provision for referral to the Hague for war crimes prosecution.
Job done. Well done Obama. Well done Putin.
Evening, Comrade Avery! I see you are still in Armchair Warmonger mode?
War, Sunil?
Who is talking of war?
Did you not note my consistent predictions that this would be the outcome.
Even allowing for Chuvapp Miliband doing his best to torpedo HMS Peace and USS Diplomacy.
Comrade Avery! We agreed the other day that Ed single-handedly saved our Great British Motherland from entering another grubby Mideast war!
Tovarich Sunil.
The party line has changed.
I have asked Tovarich Lavrentia to inform you of the new orthodoxy.
Perhaps perpetual roundtripping on the Moscow-Vladivostok run?
Seven wonderful days of overheated carriages and views of snow and pine trees. Repeated ad infinitum.
Strange that you mention Southend, Comrade Fox. This summer I have walked the original route of the A13 (ie., as originally set out in 1922) from London's Aldgate to Shoeburyness and back - albeit in several short stages. Something like a 90 mile round trip, taking 7 weeks!
I don't think advertising does try to sell clean clothes, they try to develop brand loyalty by trying to create a brand that the customer wants to self associate with.
Politically this translates to a party wanting to associate itself with the self image of the target voter. We are the party that cares about the issues that matter to you, that wants you to have the best chance in life, the chance that you deserve, the chance that the other party wants to deprive you of.
A conference speech is a bit like selling soap powder. The presentation needs to have novelty to get noticed. I am sure that roger can advise on this, as he constantly has to come up with novel ways of selling the same old soap. Politicians face the same problem.
No one ever sells soap powder. They sell a means to clean, fresh-smelling clothes.
If the presentation of a conference speech is approached with that in mind, it doesn't need to rely on stunts. Just good content and memorable lines that sell the product that you're trying to sell.
I'm from a lefty generation that really dislikes the whole advertising industry (though I worked in it for a while and the people are as pleasant as anyone else), and thinks it's disgusting how it's crept into politics, ours and everyone else's. For some reason politics as soap powder seems particularly virulent in Anglo-Saxon countries, reaching its nadir in the USA. But once one party starts to do it successfully, it's hard to avoid joining in.
People don't entirely buy into this. I treasure the constituent who upbraided me for trying to tell her Labour would make her better off, rather than concentrate on important stuff like overseas aid. It's an extreme case, but most people want governments that do a mixture of good stuff for them and good stuff for the surrounding world.
Where politics becomes interesting, though, is when you try to change perspectives, rather than merely insert yourself into the landscape of existing ones. That's why politicians like Thatcher and Blair were interesting in a way that, say, Major and Callaghan were not.
Avery LP - Did you give a predicted percentage increase in the polls for Tory VI after Camerons speech?
No, Red Rag.
But I won't misinterpret a YouGov poll showing a Labour lead of 10% on its eve!
Can you show me this fabled Yougov poll showing Labour in front by 10% pre-Ed M's speech. Just admit it you were wrong. You didn't realise it was a BMRB poll and you got it wrong. The fact you then compared it to the Yougov polls does make you look foolish, but I am sure you can live with that.
I see that the marketing men at the energy companies have turned Ed Miliband into their own sort of Barry Scott figure - a cartoonish personification of their super-doopa-mega deals. I must say, it's all a bit embarrassing.
Avery LP - I will make it easier for you. This is your so called 10% Labour lead Yougov poll pre-Ed Speech. The TNS/BMRB bit gives it away that it is not a Yougov.
Avery LP - I will make it easier for you. This is your so called 10% Labour lead Yougov poll pre-Ed Speech. The TNS/BMRB bit gives it away that it is not a Yougov.
Avery LP - I will make it easier for you. This is your so called 10% Labour lead Yougov poll pre-Ed Speech. The TNS/BMRB bit gives it away that it is not a Yougov.
Avery LP - I will make it easier for you. This is your so called 10% Labour lead Yougov poll pre-Ed Speech. The TNS/BMRB bit gives it away that it is not a Yougov.
Now, no more comparing polls from different pollsters, it makes you look even more silly.
It is the principle not the money that counts, Red Rag.
As Ed was saying at conference ...
That is a very poor way of admitting you were wrong, however, seen you have done it publically it will suffice.
I have no qualms at all about admitting I am wrong, Red Rag.
I look to Dr. Johnson on such matters:
Via Boswell:
A lady once asked [Dr. Johnson] how he came to define 'pastern', the knee of a horse: instead of making an elaborate defence, as might be expected, he at once answered, "Ignorance, Madam, pure ignorance."
But in this case I plead ignorance of fact not principle.
I couldn't disagree more. The PB community as a whole have been about the best guide in the UK blogsphere when it comes to instant reaction to political developments since before the 2005 GE. That is why the site is so highly regarded, and why its followed by many in the political and media Westminster bubble. What has been interesting recently, is the sudden rise in trolling posters who seem determined to spend their time here on the site undermining and trashing other posters as a collective under various tagteam nicknames.
We have had various times in the past where the dividing lines here on certain issues have crossed partisan political lines, or the instant reaction of the media has been challenged and proved incorrect. I remember the way that Blair's defence of Gordon Brown as the 'clunking fist' at PMQ's was initially regarded a masterful defence of his colleague when it was in fact no such thing. It was in fact Blair sticking the boot into his nemesis and portraying him in the most unattractive light. Some of us here on PB called it as a backhanded compliment from the moment Blair sat down.
"Politics (and much of medical consultation skills) are very much about understanding what the voter (patient) wants out of the transaction, and persuading them that what is on offer is just what they need."
Medical consultation does resemble politics in that often the patient/voter wants something that they do not need, and needs something else entirely. Thatcher and Blair were transformative in that they recognised this. Advertising does this also to a degree, creating desires for products that the customer did not know that they needed. Who knew that they needed an iPad ten years ago?
The art of sales is one taught to me by my father, who was a very good salesman. There are several rules:
1) Know and understand your customer, and their desires.
2) Believe in the product. If you cannot believe in your own product , then you cannot sell it
3) A good deal is only a good deal if a both parties go away thinking it is a good deal even after the joy of purchase has passed. A returning customer is the easiest sale, because they have bought from you before. A ripped off customer will not return.
The final one is very pertinent in the current political climate. Voters feel ripped off: Kippers by Cast Iron Dave, LibDem switchers by the tuition fee debacle; New Labour voters like me by Blairs warmongering and Browns privatisation of the NHS.
Our current parties are like bad salesmen, concentrating on this months target, or the next election, and not of the long-term interest of the customer/voter.
I think Ed Milliband's speech was disappointing, in that it was all about short term, and will not be seen to be a good deal by the post election electorate. It was not transformative, but rather a regression to the Labour comfort zone.
That link appears to be wrong. The correct one is below.
"Fewer than a third of voters have confidence Labour could improve the NHS (31%), freeze gas and electricity prices for two years (30%) or build 200,000 new houses a year by 2020 (25%), while about half of the public (49%, 50% and 50%, respectively) is openly doubtful that Labour could keep these three promises."
That link appears to be wrong. The correct one is below.
"Fewer than a third of voters have confidence Labour could improve the NHS (31%), freeze gas and electricity prices for two years (30%) or build 200,000 new houses a year by 2020 (25%), while about half of the public (49%, 50% and 50%, respectively) is openly doubtful that Labour could keep these three promises."
Is Tim Ok - I mean I don't normally inquire as to the health of individuals who don't post for a bit on a comment section of a website, but he is the exception to prove the rules...
Anyone who believes a Tory majority isn't possible in 2015, (because of the old boundaries requiring a lead of about 10% or whatever the reason may be), can get a 30% return from Betfair by betting on both a Labour majority and a hung Parliament.
I take it you don't bet since you've overlooked the small matter of Betfair's 5% commission which reduces the return from this combination bet to 27.16%.
Furthermore a better return of 34.13% is available by staking the "Hung Parliament" element of the bet (51.19%) with Ladbrokes at 2.62 net rather than with Betfair at 2.35 gross.
Added some of that 13/8 NOM to my position for the next GE - Ladbrokes better odds than Betfair
Hopi Sen @hopisen 53m @jruddy99@ianabrooks think about it: it undermines out argument: if we're happy you can freeze prices now, why do prices have to be frozen?
Hopi Sen showing once again that he's the thinking man's lefty.
the obvious answer to Hopi is that what it shows is the energy companies can only offer these deals in the knowledge that only a few will take them up on it. Those without the Internet or the time to switch, or who are on prepay meters, can't benefit from fixed tariffs. Cameron's policy will make such deals disappear; Ed's will extend them to everyone (assuming they don't make massive price rises before Labour get in)
@glenoglaza1: #bbcqt Douglas Alexander says he, Ed M and Alistair Darling called for Damian mcBride to be sacked but G Brown ignored them
EdM and McBride worked together for many years and became close friends ( McBride thought and claims ). Yet behind Damien's back EdM was scheming and pouring poison into Brown's ear. The more we learn about EdM , the more sinister and disturbing he becomes.
So... he put what he believed was right over the interests of his friends?
TGOHF Glad to see you are using Mohammad Sahaf as your avatar. Met him numerous times when he was Minister of State and then Foreign Minister. But will always remember him for his stint on the roof of the Palestine Hotel as Information Minister.
I see that the marketing men at the energy companies have turned Ed Miliband into their own sort of Barry Scott figure - a cartoonish personification of their super-doopa-mega deals. I must say, it's all a bit embarrassing.
What's so embarrassing ? Being associated with cheaper energy deals ?
@glenoglaza1: #bbcqt Douglas Alexander says he, Ed M and Alistair Darling called for Damian mcBride to be sacked but G Brown ignored them
EdM and McBride worked together for many years and became close friends ( McBride thought and claims ). Yet behind Damien's back EdM was scheming and pouring poison into Brown's ear. The more we learn about EdM , the more sinister and disturbing he becomes.
OK, let me get this right ! He finds out McBride is upto no good. He goes and tells their boss this. And, he was "scheming and pouring poison" ?
In the YouGov poll on EdM's policies, votes for 16 year-olds was strongly opposed (64/28) by all parties, all ages groups and all regions including Scotland.
YG roundup: 40/33/9/11 approval -26, as noted last night (the headline says -27 but it's wrong). Labour improves sharply on "seems old and tired": 28 (-4) to Con 32 (+2), and the "heart in the right place" lead extends from 9 to 12 due to a Tory drop, and they've regained the lead on "putting the past behind it", but the advantage on "appeals to the whole country" drops: 49% think the Tories only appeal to one sector (-3), 23% think this of Labour (+3). Nothing else significant.
Overall the impact of the Labour conference seems to have been to sharpen and renew the party's image (to a modest extent) and improve Ed's rating, while also shifting critical views from amused tolerance to a degree of fear and dislike. I don't attach importance to the voting intention rating - I think we'll be down to a low lead after Cameron and then settle back to 4-5. But the conference has been useful all the same in hardening the already rather solid voting intention further.
Fox: yes, sorry, I shortened your quote as I ran into the character limit. Advertising as you describe it is fine, but not how it's usually practiced today, inside or outside politics. (Not yet persuaded of iPads either!)
tim takes a break now and then but I hope he'll be back: he does the grit in the oyster role better than any of us.
Do Populus know that it is becoming a bit of a laughing stock?
In normal terms, this translates as
Lab 39% Con 32% LD 14% UKIP 8% Green 3%
Why does predicting a 72% turnout make Populus a laughing stock ?
I agree. In fact all pollsters should really show where the don't knows/ won't votes are. I think many of the more significant polling movements are within that very large group.
I think the reason that pollsters tend to ignore them is that most of the did not vote at the last election either and score poorly on certainty to vote but that is not always the case. 1992 was probably better explained by movements in this group than errors in polling per se.
I have, depressingly, come to the conclusion that Labour and Ed Miliband will in fact win the next election with an outright majority.
Dave and the Tories (and the LibDems) are playing the game of thinking what the country needs and trying to do that - and selling this to the electorate. This makes for good government but is not necessarily good for winning elections.
Labour under Ed M are playing a completely different game. They are playing the game of: 'what are people most pissed off about and what can I promise them that will tickle their G-spot the most'. This makes for disastrous government but good electoral politics. Red Ed knows how persuadable the voters he needs are and how short our memories are / how high our tolerance of Labour's record in power is.
He'll get about 38% (despite being wiped out in the south-east) , a small but workable majority and proceed to dethrone Gordon Brown as the worst prime minisater we'd had for a century.
"The number of adoptions has surged to a 21-year high with almost 4,000 children finding permanent new homes in the past year. Older children and mixed race youngsters waiting to be adopted fared particularly well with a sharp rise in placements for both groups, usually considered difficult to place. The figures suggest that sweeping reforms to a system riddled with bureaucracy and inertia are beginning to bear fruit. The Times has been campaigning for change since 2010, in particular that more children taken into care should be considered for adoption and for the process to be accelerated. Altogether 3,980 children were adopted in the year to this March, 15 per cent higher than the previous year and 28 per cent higher than in 2011." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/families/article3880388.ece
This morning on the BBC World Service I listened to a fascinating program about the economic and rapidly turning into a humanitarian crisis of Venezuela, the root cause of it was the price fixing and nationalisation of assets by the state.
I would suggest that people should listen to this program before considering setting off down this road of extreme intervention into the markets. Venezuela – Out of Stock
I have, depressingly, come to the conclusion that Labour and Ed Miliband will in fact win the next election with an outright majority.
Dave and the Tories (and the LibDems) are playing the game of thinking what the country needs and trying to do that - and selling this to the electorate. This makes for good government but is not necessarily good for winning elections.
Labour under Ed M are playing a completely different game. They are playing the game of: 'what are people most pissed off about and what can I promise them that will tickle their G-spot the most'. This makes for disastrous government but good electoral politics. Red Ed knows how persuadable the voters he needs are and how short our memories are / how high our tolerance of Labour's record in power is.
He'll get about 38% (despite being wiped out in the south-east) , a small but workable majority and proceed to dethrone Gordon Brown as the worst prime minisater we'd had for a century.
You are clearly suffering from melancholy Patrick. Ed Miliband has shown himself to be unprincipled, opportunistic and only capable of short termism. It is undoubtedly much easier to get away with that in the gold fish bowl of the modern media where anything more than a week old is history and therefore irrelevant. The general distrust of experts also makes their contributions less telling than it should although in this case I think they made a point by their unanimity.
I remain optimistic that although many of the details of Ed's proposals will have been forgotten already the public are left with a sense of unease, distrust and suspicion of incompetence. There is still a long way to go and Ed's standing is already at levels no opposition leader has won from.
It show that UK gas prices are almost the lowest in Europe (source Ofgem) but reveals how really low they are in the USA which is bringing in fracking.
Also shows the impact of Green taxes on the UK energy bills.
“The advanced economies as a whole are doing a bit better. That’s going to help the UK as a whole. These are more traditional export markets so that matters," he said.
"Within the UK, we are probably leading the pack of the major advanced economies as we speak right now. But of course we had the deepest recession so we are coming back from that."
Mr Carney said the sustainability of the recovery would be underpinned by getting more people into work and increasing wages. "That’s going to come from sustained demand and a balanced recovery,” he said.
Personally I am relieved that more QE is seemingly off the table.
Patrick, you worry too much. Ed Miliband didn't just invent populist pandering. It's the basis of most of the bits of the current government's social policy that you hear about, and there will be plenty more before the election.
More generally, there are four kinds of policies. There are policies that sound bad and are bad, which nobody bothers with. There are policies that sound good and are good, but these have already been done, with a few exceptions where they upset a key constituency of the previous governing party. There are policies that sound bad but are good, which is what governments spend most of their time on. Finally there are policies that sound good but are bad, which is what election campaigns are fought over.
Indeed, Mr. Tokyo, but it takes a special kind of speech to bugger up investment in a sector we desperately need investment in whilst still in opposition.
Still, it's not as if Miliband was responsible for not building more power stations or increasing energy prices. Wait a minute...
Payments to senior Caerphilly council officers were unlawful, says auditor An investigation has concluded that one-off payments to two top officials – understood to total around £218,000 – were unlawful.
I have, depressingly, come to the conclusion that Labour and Ed Miliband will in fact win the next election with an outright majority.
Dave and the Tories (and the LibDems) are playing the game of thinking what the country needs and trying to do that - and selling this to the electorate. This makes for good government but is not necessarily good for winning elections.
Labour under Ed M are playing a completely different game. They are playing the game of: 'what are people most pissed off about and what can I promise them that will tickle their G-spot the most'. This makes for disastrous government but good electoral politics. Red Ed knows how persuadable the voters he needs are and how short our memories are / how high our tolerance of Labour's record in power is.
He'll get about 38% (despite being wiped out in the south-east) , a small but workable majority and proceed to dethrone Gordon Brown as the worst prime minisater we'd had for a century.
Patrick, a while back I read a quote on another blog which has stuck with me ever since - "the Left learned some time ago there are votes to be had in ruining a nation."
When you understand this, you understand why the likes of EdM thinks it's good politics to take us down the Venezuela road.
Good morning comrades. As the autumn sun glistens on the red flag in Kremlin Bobajob, I am able to announce that PB.com will be nationalised to secure the joy for future generations.
Like Patrick I expect a Labour majority: the number of occasions that can radically change attitudes (conferences, Budgets, Queen's Speeches etc.) is dwindling and not much is changing as ex-LibDems patiently await the chance to stuff the government and everyone else votes much as before, give or take the Kippers. There are always black swans, but they too get fewer as time trickles away. There will be some interesting trials starting end-October, though it's hard to see them changing VI much, for the same reason as McBride hasn't shifted votes.
But I think both friends and enemies are underestimating both Eds in ways that will both please some and disappoint others. EdM is anything but short-term and has been willing to annoy members intensely by the careful pace of his measured long-term strategy: he has his eye on systematic reform of British power structures - Murdoch, political parties, dominant companies. Conference speeches are of course mainly about immediate impact - it's hard to remember most of them a year or two later. EdB, by contrast, is an intelligent, fairly conventional politician - he will disappoint those on the left who expect radical Keynesianism, and those on the right who expect Labour to implode in some sort of Venezualan populism.
Like Patrick I expect a Labour majority: the number of occasions that can radically change attitudes (conferences, Budgets, Queen's Speeches etc.) is dwindling and not much is changing as ex-LibDems patiently await the chance to stuff the government and everyone else votes much as before, give or take the Kippers. There are always black swans, but they too get fewer as time trickles away. There will be some interesting trials starting end-October, though it's hard to see them changing VI much, for the same reason as McBride hasn't shifted votes.
But I think both friends and enemies are underestimating both Eds in ways that will both please some and disappoint others. EdM is anything but short-term and has been willing to annoy members intensely by the careful pace of his measured long-term strategy: he has his eye on systematic reform of British power structures - Murdoch, political parties, dominant companies. Conference speeches are of course mainly about immediate impact - it's hard to remember most of them a year or two later. EdB, by contrast, is an intelligent, fairly conventional politician - he will disappoint those on the left who expect radical Keynesianism, and those on the right who expect Labour to implode in some sort of Venezualan populism.
How was Ed M long-termist whilst at DECC? What did he do whilst at DECC that was in any way positive wrt energy security?
Do you agree that he was, in fact, utterly hopeless during his time there?
It’s like that UKIP conference awkwardness never happened judging by last night’s council by-election results. Their vote held strong, coming in at 22% in St. James on Tendring and 32% in Storrington on West Sussex. Up north they polled 25% in Barnsley, which is worth noting considering they didn’t even run a candidate last time round. The big result of the night came from Crockenhill and Well Hill on Sevenoaks, where UKIP’s Steve Lindsay gained the seat from Labour.
UKIP are forever banging on about how their vote is not just made up of disaffected right-wingers, but Labour supporters and voters in the north. Last night they held strong in the south, improved in the north and gained a seat from Labour. Where the Tories held seats they did so with a reduced vote share. Maybe they have a point…
@Plato - I think the lesson to be learned from the UKIP conference is to never underestimate the voter appeal of whacking Michael Crick over the head. - It should become a sport for all political parties.
It’s like that UKIP conference awkwardness never happened judging by last night’s council by-election results. Their vote held strong, coming in at 22% in St. James on Tendring and 32% in Storrington on West Sussex. Up north they polled 25% in Barnsley, which is worth noting considering they didn’t even run a candidate last time round. The big result of the night came from Crockenhill and Well Hill on Sevenoaks, where UKIP’s Steve Lindsay gained the seat from Labour.
UKIP are forever banging on about how their vote is not just made up of disaffected right-wingers, but Labour supporters and voters in the north. Last night they held strong in the south, improved in the north and gained a seat from Labour. Where the Tories held seats they did so with a reduced vote share. Maybe they have a point…
I couldn't disagree more. The PB community as a whole have been about the best guide in the UK blogsphere when it comes to instant reaction to political developments since before the 2005 GE. That is why the site is so highly regarded, and why its followed by many in the political and media Westminster bubble. What has been interesting recently, is the sudden rise in trolling posters who seem determined to spend their time here on the site undermining and trashing other posters as a collective under various tagteam nicknames.
We have had various times in the past where the dividing lines here on certain issues have crossed partisan political lines, or the instant reaction of the media has been challenged and proved incorrect. I remember the way that Blair's defence of Gordon Brown as the 'clunking fist' at PMQ's was initially regarded a masterful defence of his colleague when it was in fact no such thing. It was in fact Blair sticking the boot into his nemesis and portraying him in the most unattractive light. Some of us here on PB called it as a backhanded compliment from the moment Blair sat down.
This is a pearl beyond price ! Posters who get almost everything wrong about everything are the best guide in the blogosphere when in comes to instant reaction to political developments ?You missed a word out....the site is the best for instant over reaction to political developments. As for people in the media and Westminster following this blog, they do so because of the knowledge and experience of Mike Smithson, not for the claptrap and hysteria that comes underneath in the comments section,
@glenoglaza1: #bbcqt Douglas Alexander says he, Ed M and Alistair Darling called for Damian mcBride to be sacked but G Brown ignored them
EdM and McBride worked together for many years and became close friends ( McBride thought and claims ). Yet behind Damien's back EdM was scheming and pouring poison into Brown's ear. The more we learn about EdM , the more sinister and disturbing he becomes.
OK, let me get this right ! He finds out McBride is upto no good. He goes and tells their boss this. And, he was "scheming and pouring poison" ?
Huh ?
Surely the principled thing to have done upon finding out the dirty-tricks McBride was up to would have been to confront him directly rather than going behind his back and maintaining the friendly face?
A quick question to our financially aware members.
Is it possible to put any Royal Mail shares into an isa and if so how soon could I sell them?
The Prospectus is not out yet but minimum investment by the public will be £750. It is not yet known if you will have to make 100% payment on application or whether the payment is in two stages. Once you have been allotted the shares usually they can be sold at any time. New issues can be quite volatile - have been known to go up sharply and then down. Best wait for the prospectus.
Comments
PS You do know you have set yourself up for a fall with this.
Trailing and hinting but not making particularly concrete plans.
When you have Gove saying little Ed has correctly identified the problem he's not doing that as a favour to labour but as a prelude to their own announcement on how to tackle that problem.
It wasn't a starter for 10!
It was a tease.
Red Rag claimed how wonderful it was that YouGov delivered a 10% lead on the day before Ed's speech not realising (if you accept that YouGov were fixing their polls as he had alleged for the earlier low leads) that the 10% top of the range lead was being used as a benchmark against which Miliband's speech would be judged.
Less wordily, Red Rag and Surby fell straight into the elephant trap.
The party line has changed.
I have asked Tovarich Lavrentia to inform you of the new orthodoxy.
Surely exile to the far end of the Southend line would be sufficient re-education of the wrecker known as Sunil?
Regardless, at some point you'll have to start posting from your own perspective - the truth after all is what matters in the end.
Seven wonderful days of overheated carriages and views of snow and pine trees. Repeated ad infinitum.
Have you not been following the words of the great leader?
And I am not sure the pursuit of truth on daily polling shifts is that high a calling. The humour of the battle is best.
Telling two children that the toy they're arguing over isn't any good anyway doesn't help solve the argument.
The Tories would be better off showing that (as Hopi Sen says in other tweets) there's a big difference between freezing your tariff and a legalised freeze, particularly where funding large infrastructure projects are concerned.
Taken from http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout10.htm
Barnsley Lab hold Lab 1240 UKIP 457 Con 81 Eng Dem 78
West Sussex Con Hold Con 1037 UKIP 729 LD 364 Green 131
However I am concerned that you are not aware that our railway engineers have created a service that can cover the same distance in a matter of days rather than weeks.
"There are no Labour poll leads in Baghdad!"
But I won't misinterpret a YouGov poll showing a Labour lead of 10% on its eve!
People don't entirely buy into this. I treasure the constituent who upbraided me for trying to tell her Labour would make her better off, rather than concentrate on important stuff like overseas aid. It's an extreme case, but most people want governments that do a mixture of good stuff for them and good stuff for the surrounding world.
Where politics becomes interesting, though, is when you try to change perspectives, rather than merely insert yourself into the landscape of existing ones. That's why politicians like Thatcher and Blair were interesting in a way that, say, Major and Callaghan were not.
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/news-and-events/labour-lead-conservative-party-by-ten-points
Now, no more comparing polls from different pollsters, it makes you look even more silly.
As Ed was saying at conference ...
Night Comrades....and Tim ;-)
I look to Dr. Johnson on such matters:
Via Boswell:
A lady once asked [Dr. Johnson] how he came to define 'pastern', the knee of a horse: instead of making an elaborate defence, as might be expected, he at once answered, "Ignorance, Madam, pure ignorance."
But in this case I plead ignorance of fact not principle.
We have had various times in the past where the dividing lines here on certain issues have crossed partisan political lines, or the instant reaction of the media has been challenged and proved incorrect. I remember the way that Blair's defence of Gordon Brown as the 'clunking fist' at PMQ's was initially regarded a masterful defence of his colleague when it was in fact no such thing. It was in fact Blair sticking the boot into his nemesis and portraying him in the most unattractive light. Some of us here on PB called it as a backhanded compliment from the moment Blair sat down.
YouGov - Widespread scepticism over Labour pledges
You cut out my last paragraph:
"Politics (and much of medical consultation skills) are very much about understanding what the voter (patient) wants out of the transaction, and persuading them that what is on offer is just what they need."
Medical consultation does resemble politics in that often the patient/voter wants something that they do not need, and needs something else entirely. Thatcher and Blair were transformative in that they recognised this. Advertising does this also to a degree, creating desires for products that the customer did not know that they needed. Who knew that they needed an iPad ten years ago?
The art of sales is one taught to me by my father, who was a very good salesman. There are several rules:
1) Know and understand your customer, and their desires.
2) Believe in the product. If you cannot believe in your own product , then you cannot sell it
3) A good deal is only a good deal if a both parties go away thinking it is a good deal even after the joy of purchase has passed. A returning customer is the easiest sale, because they have bought from you before. A ripped off customer will not return.
The final one is very pertinent in the current political climate. Voters feel ripped off: Kippers by Cast Iron Dave, LibDem switchers by the tuition fee debacle; New Labour voters like me by Blairs warmongering and Browns privatisation of the NHS.
Our current parties are like bad salesmen, concentrating on this months target, or the next election, and not of the long-term interest of the customer/voter.
I think Ed Milliband's speech was disappointing, in that it was all about short term, and will not be seen to be a good deal by the post election electorate. It was not transformative, but rather a regression to the Labour comfort zone.
"Fewer than a third of voters have confidence Labour could improve the NHS (31%), freeze gas and electricity prices for two years (30%) or build 200,000 new houses a year by 2020 (25%), while about half of the public (49%, 50% and 50%, respectively) is openly doubtful that Labour could keep these three promises."
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/09/26/widespread-scepticism-over-labour-pledges/
Actually, I think I may be able to do everything without any downtime at all, if things go accoring to plan :-)
Big smile from me :-)
Many thanks! Have a safe flight.
Cameron's policy will make such deals disappear; Ed's will extend them to everyone (assuming they don't make massive price rises before Labour get in)
I can see why a Tory would find that disturbing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24174343
Huh ?
Appreciate all the work you do on the site. Have a good flight.
Overall the impact of the Labour conference seems to have been to sharpen and renew the party's image (to a modest extent) and improve Ed's rating, while also shifting critical views from amused tolerance to a degree of fear and dislike. I don't attach importance to the voting intention rating - I think we'll be down to a low lead after Cameron and then settle back to 4-5. But the conference has been useful all the same in hardening the already rather solid voting intention further.
Fox: yes, sorry, I shortened your quote as I ran into the character limit. Advertising as you describe it is fine, but not how it's usually practiced today, inside or outside politics. (Not yet persuaded of iPads either!)
tim takes a break now and then but I hope he'll be back: he does the grit in the oyster role better than any of us.
I think the reason that pollsters tend to ignore them is that most of the did not vote at the last election either and score poorly on certainty to vote but that is not always the case. 1992 was probably better explained by movements in this group than errors in polling per se.
Dave and the Tories (and the LibDems) are playing the game of thinking what the country needs and trying to do that - and selling this to the electorate. This makes for good government but is not necessarily good for winning elections.
Labour under Ed M are playing a completely different game. They are playing the game of: 'what are people most pissed off about and what can I promise them that will tickle their G-spot the most'. This makes for disastrous government but good electoral politics. Red Ed knows how persuadable the voters he needs are and how short our memories are / how high our tolerance of Labour's record in power is.
He'll get about 38% (despite being wiped out in the south-east) , a small but workable majority and proceed to dethrone Gordon Brown as the worst prime minisater we'd had for a century.
Cheer up, how bad can Ed Balls be with the Treasury people to keep him in check, oh, hang on, damn.
"The number of adoptions has surged to a 21-year high with almost 4,000 children finding permanent new homes in the past year. Older children and mixed race youngsters waiting to be adopted fared particularly well with a sharp rise in placements for both groups, usually considered difficult to place. The figures suggest that sweeping reforms to a system riddled with bureaucracy and inertia are beginning to bear fruit. The Times has been campaigning for change since 2010, in particular that more children taken into care should be considered for adoption and for the process to be accelerated. Altogether 3,980 children were adopted in the year to this March, 15 per cent higher than the previous year and 28 per cent higher than in 2011." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/families/article3880388.ece
I would suggest that people should listen to this program before considering setting off down this road of extreme intervention into the markets.
Venezuela – Out of Stock
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01h039h
I remain optimistic that although many of the details of Ed's proposals will have been forgotten already the public are left with a sense of unease, distrust and suspicion of incompetence. There is still a long way to go and Ed's standing is already at levels no opposition leader has won from.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24238708
It show that UK gas prices are almost the lowest in Europe (source Ofgem) but reveals how really low they are in the USA which is bringing in fracking.
Also shows the impact of Green taxes on the UK energy bills.
“The advanced economies as a whole are doing a bit better. That’s going to help the UK as a whole. These are more traditional export markets so that matters," he said.
"Within the UK, we are probably leading the pack of the major advanced economies as we speak right now. But of course we had the deepest recession so we are coming back from that."
Mr Carney said the sustainability of the recovery would be underpinned by getting more people into work and increasing wages.
"That’s going to come from sustained demand and a balanced recovery,” he said.
Personally I am relieved that more QE is seemingly off the table.
I’m reminded of characters and setting from a Kenneth Grahame novel. - Are they as charming as they sound?
More generally, there are four kinds of policies.
There are policies that sound bad and are bad, which nobody bothers with.
There are policies that sound good and are good, but these have already been done, with a few exceptions where they upset a key constituency of the previous governing party.
There are policies that sound bad but are good, which is what governments spend most of their time on.
Finally there are policies that sound good but are bad, which is what election campaigns are fought over.
Indeed, Mr. Tokyo, but it takes a special kind of speech to bugger up investment in a sector we desperately need investment in whilst still in opposition.
Still, it's not as if Miliband was responsible for not building more power stations or increasing energy prices. Wait a minute...
Hotel folds after receiving £700,000 in public funding.
Business went bust owing £154,000 despite backing from Welsh Government.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/hotel-folds-after-receiving-700000-6095648
Payments to senior Caerphilly council officers were unlawful, says auditor
An investigation has concluded that one-off payments to two top officials – understood to total around £218,000 – were unlawful.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/payments-senior-caerphilly-council-officers-6101306
When you understand this, you understand why the likes of EdM thinks it's good politics to take us down the Venezuela road.
But I think both friends and enemies are underestimating both Eds in ways that will both please some and disappoint others. EdM is anything but short-term and has been willing to annoy members intensely by the careful pace of his measured long-term strategy: he has his eye on systematic reform of British power structures - Murdoch, political parties, dominant companies. Conference speeches are of course mainly about immediate impact - it's hard to remember most of them a year or two later. EdB, by contrast, is an intelligent, fairly conventional politician - he will disappoint those on the left who expect radical Keynesianism, and those on the right who expect Labour to implode in some sort of Venezualan populism.
Do you agree that he was, in fact, utterly hopeless during his time there?
UKIP are forever banging on about how their vote is not just made up of disaffected right-wingers, but Labour supporters and voters in the north. Last night they held strong in the south, improved in the north and gained a seat from Labour. Where the Tories held seats they did so with a reduced vote share. Maybe they have a point…
http://order-order.com/2013/09/27/godfrey-who/
A quick question to our financially aware members.
Is it possible to put any Royal Mail shares into an isa and if so how soon could I sell them?
As for people in the media and Westminster following this blog, they do so because of the knowledge and experience of Mike Smithson, not for the claptrap and hysteria that comes underneath in the comments section,
No?
It is not yet known if you will have to make 100% payment on application or whether the payment is in two stages. Once you have been allotted the shares usually they can be sold at any time. New issues can be quite volatile - have been known to go up sharply and then down. Best wait for the prospectus.