politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Next LAB leader betting price on Yvette Cooper starts to ea
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Next LAB leader betting price on Yvette Cooper starts to ease as the focus moves to Umunna and Hunt:
There’s a great piece in the Sunday Telegraph today by Matthew d’Ancona in which he identifies rising LAB stars Chuka Umunna and Tristram Hunt as the Blair and Brown next generation Labour.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2485412/Tom-Watson-union-vote-rigging-scandal-Explosive-accusation-Labour-candidate-Falkirk-seat.html
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/11/02/article-2485412-0409F45E0000044D-834_306x456.jpg
Hunt has made an indifferent impression as Shadow Education Secretary and does he have the hinterland and depth of support for a run as leader ?
Another factor to be mulled over is timing. If you consider as I do that :
Ed Milband will never be Prime Minister
then Ed will be gone by the summer of 2015 and therefore the viable candidates are already amongst the usual suspects - Not an overly thrilling prospect !!
The best rule of thumb is that anyone in the running now, almost certainly won't get it.
" But, whatever happens on the great board, these two politicians already represent something significant: a cohort of senior Labour politicians not defined by the Blair-Brown rivalry or the political contours of that era.....
........When the two Eds shuffle off the stage – in 2015 if Labour loses, or much later if it prevails – it will be their generation’s turn. Once again, as if cyclically, the party has “two bright boys” close to the helm. They personify the end of New Labour. The question is whether they have truly learnt its lessons."
Given the hangover from the last government, and the dysfunctional relationship between the two Eds over what, if anything, to concede over it - a fresh break may be what Lavour needs. "It was that lot that wrecked it" has far less potency against the new boys.
(Unless of course like the Tories, they were to pick a spectacular dud who needs to be replaced asap)
Net well:
Cameron: -18 (+4)
Miliband: -28 (+3)
Coalition managing economy: -12 (+8)
Unite Falkirk fix?
Prob did : 41
Prob not: 11
Don't know: 48
Labour reopen Falkirk enquiry?
Yes: 43
No: 18
DK: 39
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/cdntzyn7rn/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-011113.pdf
I wouldn't want to place too much emphasis on a single event but his Emergency Question was very poorly attended by Labour MPs, he was duffed over by Gove and Labour members seem to enjoy the ribbing Hunt received a little too well.
One other thoughtlet. Labour are not good regicides. If Ed got pretty close but no cigar he might be given another run as was Kinnock in 1987 and then the field widens even further !!
Cameron is probably in a similar position, so in the event that the LibDems manage to end up with kingmaker power in 2015 they'll have some serious leverage.
Tactics which involved baying mobs of protesters descending on the homes of oil refinery executives with the effect of intimidating their wives and children.
Wives and children who live in constant fear of it happening again.
But the mob didn’t stop at just intimidating them. It went to surrounding houses telling neighbours how evil they were.
No, what’s evil is a union boss who sanctions this kind of bullying.
So why hasn’t Miliband properly condemned these bully-boy squads?
Ah yes – he needs their money."
Mail on Sunday
Sunday Times
Sun on Sunday
Sunday Express
Sunday Telegraph
Sunday Mirror:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/carole-malone-column-union-tactics-2669432#ixzz2jZ7UgNYq
Fine to spot value in the market and trade accordingly but in terms of picking a winner I'm not sure there's a surer way presently than borrowing Peter the Punter's horse racing predictive pin and sticking it in one of the candidates.
Unusually for me put me down as a "Don't Know".
Has very atypical VI for Rest of South:
Con: 37; LAB:38; LD: 9 UKIP:14
Do you think the coalition government is
managing the economy well or badly? -12(-20)
In your opinion how good or bad is the state of
Britain's economy at the moment? -29(-33)
How do you think the financial situation of your
household will change over the next 12months?
Better: 13 (15)
Worse: 41(47)
Would you personally prefer working for a male
or female boss?
Male: 30
Female: 14
Dont mind: 56
Women reply : 36/14/50
Con 290 .. Labour 280 .. LibDem 40
might see Miliband remain as LotO to harry a Coalition with a tiny majority.
July 2015 or later 1.56
If Milliband wins a working majority, then he is safe. An indecisive result (as seems possible) and we enter uncharted waters.
It just says Yvette (who she?) Cooper has been invisible and is less likely to replace Ed when he goes....
The fact that the two young pretenders are tightening in the race indicates that the markets don`t think there`ll be a leadership contest till the next election.
Betfair - UK politics - Matched bet sums - Leaderboard
Next UK General Election - Most Seats GBP 155,720
Next UK General Election - Overall Majority GBP 101,916
Scotland Independence Referendum 2014 - Winner GBP 35,801
Next Conservative Leader GBP 15,410
Next Prime Minister GBP 9,809
Next Liberal Democrat Leader GBP 6,611
Next UK General Election - Party Leaders GBP 5,061
Next Labour Leader GBP 3,497
Leader Exit Dates - Ed Miliband GBP 718
London Mayoral Election 2016 - Winner GBP 412
Would agree re Liz Kendall. We clashed at a debate in front of leading FTSE CEOs and Trade Unionists. She made the point of seeking me out at lunch and asking if we could meet for dinner. Since then we have had some very good exchanges at quite a few private dinners. She has a brain and uses it to think widely and long term.
"We find it extraordinary that any witness, let alone a Chief Constable, should seek to
correct the evidence given by another, particularly when that witness is a sworn officer,
and given the nature of the investigation on which this inquiry focuses."
It is a serious matter to mislead a Committee of this House and DS Hinton will be
recalled to the Committee to apologise for this. If he fails to apologise, that would
constitute a prima facie contempt of the House. We are referring DS Hinton to the
IPCC."
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmhaff/756-i/756.pdf
YouGov:
Should: 43
Should not: 18
- Gregor Poynton, a candidate for the seat, has laid blame with Miliband ally
- Accused him of 'shenanigans' including packing party with Unite members
- Party leadership 'knew what was going on' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2485412/Tom-Watson-union-vote-rigging-scandal-Explosive-accusation-Labour-candidate-Falkirk-seat.html#ixzz2jZKZgIJ2
" Seventy per cent of voters believe that the BBC licence fee should be abolished or cut, according to a new ICM poll for The Sunday Telegraph.
Nearly half of those questioned – 49 per cent – said the charge should be scrapped entirely, while a further 21 per cent said the current £145.50 price should be reduced.
There was wide support for the idea of the BBC developing alternative sources of income, such as through advertising, while ending its funding from the licence fee.
Only one in 10 voters was willing to see the fee increase in line with inflation when ministers next re-write the BBC’s Charter in 2016. " http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10423117/BBC-licence-fee-should-be-cut-or-scrapped-poll-finds.html
Chuka and Tristram may be many things, but neither of them remotely comes close to being a bampot.
http://news.sky.com/story/1162215/gordon-brown-in-ex-politician-blunder
When can the electors of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath expect to be informed of their MP's decision?
You were on stronger ground with Falkirk as a non-story....
"And over 70% do not believe the BBC has a bias to the left."
The BBC costs about £12 a month with no commercials and dozens of radio stations.
Sky charge £75 a month with commercials and no radio stations.
Someone ought to try a value for money poll against the commercial stations.
FWIW I think the 41% is an outlier, but the Labour vote is hardening up. I've been frank before about canvassing showing that the LD-Lab switch is solid but the classic Lab/Tory vote much less certain. That is now becoming significantly less true.
I wonder if Alistair Darling would be tempted if a vacancy arose?
Sky don't charge 75 pounds a month, I certainly don't pay that and I have sky sports, its about 45 and worth every penny, Most of the stuff on the BBC is lowest common denominator space filling(BBC2 and BBC 4 excepted) and its also jammed up with repeats, Now they want to ruin the Great British Bake Off by putting it on BBC1 .... It'll be vox pops voting people off soon and it''ll ruin it...
Mr. Roger, there's a difference between something that's paid for by tax and something that's entirely voluntary. If people don't want Sky, they don't have Sky.
"The Complete
Bundle
£67.25a month
Over 80 channels
TV Box Sets on demand
and Sky 3D
66 HD channels
240 free-to-air-channels
All 11 Sky Movies HD channels
All 6 Sky Sports HD channels"
As there has already been 1.8% growth this year,are they suggesting growth this quarter will be negative?
I also didn't mention the mobile phone research, or the change in the teacher numbers - to name but two.
Neither did you - I put that down to space and brevity, rather than selectivity.
Besides, no-one knows how the current licence fee model will be able to work in the medium to long term. New technology is going to render that model increasingly redundant.
There are many ways forward; sadly, none of them are ideal. The sooner the blind BBC fans realise this, the better for the BBC and broadcasting (and the other areas the BBC's put its tentacles).
If Ed loses the GE there will be huge infighting between the unions on one side and the Blairites on the other. Personally I think they will lurch further to the Left, which means the drifting odds on Tommy Cooper make her decent value, as the unions can control her through her husband.
Alternatively I would make Darling a much better bet than the fop and Obama-lite, or even someone not currently an MP. I might have a small bet on either David Miliband or James Purnell, not beyond the realms of possibility as if the Tories lose they will parachute Boris in to a safe seat, no reason why Labour wouldn't do the same.
Hunt would be a gift for the Tories.
"The Complete
Bundle"
Well thanks for that. Mine is £75 a month so I'll call them!
If I had the choice between all that Sky gives me for £75 a month or just BBC radio and BBC 4 I'd choose the BBC package even if it cost 5x as much. It's just exceptional value.
What the BBC should do is switch off all services for a day then get the Telegraph to ask the same question,
Of course, if you tell me I have to watch it in order to become a 'nice' person in your view, please tell me to do so.
"
Make another quango to decide how much they get if you insist, but this system is ridiculous.
Something like 5% of the money they collect from the license fee is spent collecting the license fee. (This BBC page says 3.5%, but they're playing silly buggers with the numbers - for example, a chunk of the income they're dividing by the cost is already coming out of taxation and getting paid to them directly by the government, so they'd still get it if Capita went out on strike and refused to collect fees for them.)
And that's before we start on the costs to the courts, and all the other money they're wasting that ends up getting paid by somebody else.
As I've said passim, I can't see a solution that would maintain the BBC in its current form. As you said below, moving it to general taxation could lead to political interference, and lead to calls from other broadcasters for some of the money.
That's the problem. There doesn't seem to be an easy answer. I wish there was. Just because I criticise some aspects of the BBC, does not mean that I dislike the totality.
On a similar point: people were making a big thing of the Great British Bake Off moving to BBC One from BBC Two next year. I can understand why this may have been a big thing a decade or two ago, but in these days of multi-channel, multi-platform entertainment, does it really make a difference? If so, why?
Perhaps we should introduce a new tax in London on free newspapers like the Evening Standard or Metro. After all everyone has the potential to read them even if they choose not to. So why not tax people for the right to read them?
Ed is too weak to make them fairer.
... As I understand it TV in the UK is now fully digitised. Everyone does essentially watch through a platform - Freeview, Virgin, Sky etc (and the BBC actually pays to be on the privately-owned platforms, bizarrely enough). But given that, why would it be difficult to block BBC channel reception for people who opt out of paying the licence fee? It may need some technical transitioning, but surely it is relatively simple to do. There would be an issue with radio and internet, but that would be a call for the BBC to make. Sky runs plenty of free to access websites and also partners with radio stations - it had a tie-up with TalkSport for a while if memory serves me right. Other stations, such as ITV and Channel 4, could stay free to view via the same platforms, just as they are now.
All of the above does not seem that tricky to me, which means there is bound to be a huge flaw somewhere; but if on the off-chance I am right, it looks a pretty neat solution to me by easily allowing anyone who does not want to pay the licence fee not to have to, without adversely affecting those who do.
" Sunday’s poll finds that 43 per cent of voters want to open up licence fee funds to other rival TV and radio companies, who would compete for the money. There is widespread support for the BBC finding alternative revenue streams such as advertising, while scrapping the licence fee, with 63 per cent in favour of such reform.
However, the findings on the future of the licence fee itself represent the most striking indication of public opinion. About half of voters – 49 per cent - want the fee scrapped, more than double the next most popular option, to cut it, which is backed by 21 per cent.
Among those aged 55-64, more than half - 55 per cent - want the fee to be abolished. Only 10 per cent say they would support increasing the licence fee in line with inflation, while almost one in five, 18 per cent, think the licence fee should be frozen at the current level of £145.50 for a colour TV licence. Just 0.3 per cent of respondents support an above-inflation increase in the licence fee.
Martin Boon, director of ICM research, said it appeared that the “writing is on the wall” for the 90 year-old funding arrangement.
“The public appear to be putting the BBC licence fee on a notice period. They do not think the BBC merits exclusive access to it, and they certainly don't think the BBC should be solely reliant on it. In a multi-channel environment in which half the public think the licence fee should be scrapped, it's hard to imagine that the next settlement can offer generous terms.
“If the public had their way, the licence fee could easily be seen as the next victim of austerity resetting.”
Here is very clear polling evidence. But apparently is all irrelevant. Laughable wishful thinking from Labourites who know full well that they get an easier ride, and like State-Things.
Perhaps we should just randomly pick things out for you to pay tax on even though you never use them.
Sounds massively appealing.
Under the proposals put forward by Mr Miliband, private firms would be able to claim back about a third of the cost of raising their staff-members' wages to the living wage - amounting to £445 on average per worker, although it could potentially reach £1,000.
Labour claims the plan will save money because benefit bills would go down and tax revenues would increase.
But costs to businesses would rise as a result of signing up. And those that do so could only claim the money back for one year.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24786397
Slim it down to 2 tv channels, one cutting edge and high brow mixed, the other a BBC1 type channel. Plus regional for local news. Do the same, with radio.
Flog the rest.
past four it by a levy on all other broadcasters, levy set by their market share / audience numbers.
BBC could also do innovative stuff to establish it before settling it, eh Asian.network.
Sky Sports isn't bad value at the moment for £34pcm as you get the rugby internationals, the Ashes and indeed and of course all the football, most of them in HD, so I have signed up. The rest of their programming is pretty mediocre and therefore I always cancel my sub (through Virgin) when the cricket isn't on.
The BBC, by contrast, is superb value at around £12 a month. I suppose if you have loads of time on your hands you might sign up to Sky for the mega US series - but I can't devote 24 hours of my life to watching those so probably better for the box-set fetishists on here.
If you're forced to pay for something - you're likelier to consume some of it - trying to avoid all of the BBC is pretty hard. And why should a consumer do so?
Let them choose whether to pay for it or not. If I was forced to pay £145 to Tesco but shopped in Sainsbury's by preference - why shouldn't I pop along and get a dozen bags of groceries that'd I'd already paid for?
"So you are agreeing with Roger's false statements which have already been shown to be complete garbage?"
W"hen it comes to posters like Tim and Roger I would say 'false' is just about loaded to perfection."
I repeat my Sky bill for TV is £75 a month without broadband phone or anything else.
You really are a creepy piece of work Tyndall.
Far and away the most unpleasant poster on here. If I say something it's to the best of my knowledge true.
MODERATED
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2485825/Esther-Rantzen-leads-calls-law-compel-doctors-teachers-social-workers-report-suspected-cases-child-abuse.html
Must have had her eyes and ears covered for most of her working career.
The BBC is a long way from producing the best programmes these days in almost every genre. Even those programmes they do commission are often made by private companies outside the BBC. If the programmes are good enough to be shown they would appear on other channels if the BBC were not there.
Like a lot of people these days the BBC is a long way down my choice of channels for viewing. There is only one programme I watch 'religiously' (when it is actually on) and certainly when it comes to current affairs and news output I simply don't watch the BBC output as I find it predictable and biased.
Would the world be a worse place without the BBC as it is today? Maybe, maybe not. But is it worth paying £145 a year for? For me certainly not.
1 - It is only for 1 year. After which time, there is no guarantee of this so-called Living Wage continuing to be paid
2 - It doesn't appear that it will actually put more money in the pockets of those who need it - as any additional money will be taken away from tax credits and other means-tested benefits.
It is another attempt at political sleight of hand - and deserves to be exposed for the sham it is.