politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review : September 14th 2017
Comments
-
You think they are going to contest more next time? I'd have thought it more likely that they field even fewer!justin124 said:
But UKIP actually polled 1.8% - not 1% - and that was in the context of contesting circa 350 seats. Had they fought every constituency they would surely have reached 3%.HYUFD said:
Survation have UKIP on 4%, up 3% on the general election, cut them back to 1% and add them to the Tory total and you also get the Tories on 41% without the Tories winning a single Labour or LD switcher.TheScreamingEagles said:
Survation who called the election spot on say otherwise.HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election
But you know better than the pollster that called the election right.0 -
I have no idea - that probably depends on attiudes to any Brexit deal.RobD said:
You think they are going to contest more next time? I'd have thought it more likely that they field even fewer!justin124 said:
But UKIP actually polled 1.8% - not 1% - and that was in the context of contesting circa 350 seats. Had they fought every constituency they would surely have reached 3%.HYUFD said:
Survation have UKIP on 4%, up 3% on the general election, cut them back to 1% and add them to the Tory total and you also get the Tories on 41% without the Tories winning a single Labour or LD switcher.TheScreamingEagles said:
Survation who called the election spot on say otherwise.HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election
But you know better than the pollster that called the election right.0 -
"Give Up"?TheScreamingEagles said:Eddie Izzard has said that he will give up comedy to run for Parliament – hoping to become the country’s first transgender MP.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/09/11/eddie-izzard-could-give-up-comedy-to-become-first-transgender-mp/
0 -
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
Even if you add 2.2% rather than 3% to the 38% Tory total with Survation they still get to 40%justin124 said:
But UKIP actually polled 1.8% - not 1% - and that was in the context of contesting circa 350 seats. Had they fought every constituency they would surely have reached 3%.HYUFD said:
Survation have UKIP on 4%, up 3% on the general election, cut them back to 1% and add them to the Tory total and you also get the Tories on 41% without the Tories winning a single Labour or LD switcher.TheScreamingEagles said:
Survation who called the election spot on say otherwise.HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election
But you know better than the pollster that called the election right.0 -
Isn't it common sense to have one person trained as a medic in each team?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
Dead parrot certainly. But Mrs May?HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election0 -
We have empirical data on that contest.DavidL said:
Dead parrot certainly. But Mrs May?HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election
0 -
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
Well you could say little difference but the polling suggests soDavidL said:
Dead parrot certainly. But Mrs May?HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election0 -
Are they really proposing sending out fire engine instead of ambulances? I thought it was more for situations where the fire engine arrived first.dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
Not in Birmingham.dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
But the election revealed that many UKIP voters do not vote Tory as their second preference. Yes, they would pick up more than Labour - but of that 2.2% I doubt that the Tories would receive more than 1.2% whilst Labour could add 0.4%. Other UKIP voters would switch to minor parties or stay at home.HYUFD said:
Even if you add 2.2% rather than 3% to the 38% Tory total with Survation they still get to 40%justin124 said:
But UKIP actually polled 1.8% - not 1% - and that was in the context of contesting circa 350 seats. Had they fought every constituency they would surely have reached 3%.HYUFD said:
Survation have UKIP on 4%, up 3% on the general election, cut them back to 1% and add them to the Tory total and you also get the Tories on 41% without the Tories winning a single Labour or LD switcher.TheScreamingEagles said:
Survation who called the election spot on say otherwise.HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election
But you know better than the pollster that called the election right.0 -
We're trained to a higher standard than yer average first aider, but it really is just basic life support, DR ABC, with a bit extra thrown in, tourniquets, and knowing what questions to ask. We don't give medication, intubate, or give pain relief.As I say, it's a cheap stopgap. You phone an Ambulance, you expect a paramedic to turn up. We turn up in a fire service van and fire service uniform. We get away with it because the public generally trust us, and we give off an air of confidence. I've had a few arse twitching moments, though. I genuinely enjoyed doing it, but we have trialled if for a few years now. It needs funding now.RobD said:
Isn't it common sense to have one person trained as a medic in each team?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
If you were trapped in a car you'd want a fire engine. @TwistedFireStopper will no doubt correct me if I am wrong but do a lot of firemen not have paramedic training, defibulators etc?dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......0 -
One says nothing which leaves some ambiguity about their lack of judgment, the other speaks (although also says very little) and removes all doubt. The parrot edges it for me.RobD said:
We have empirical data on that contest.DavidL said:
Dead parrot certainly. But Mrs May?HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election0 -
Some brigades ado turn out pumps to EFR calls. We use a small van kitted out as a mini fire appliance. It's a bastardised vehicle not fit for either service.RobD said:
Are they really proposing sending out fire engine instead of ambulances? I thought it was more for situations where the fire engine arrived first.dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
Indeed it would, but if I fell down some stairs dislocated my elbow and broke my arm (as I did a couple of years ago), I'd need and want an ambulance. Triaging is an important skill. Fire fighters may have some of the training and skills needed, as do Police, but it is not their role.DavidL said:
If you were trapped in a car you'd want a fire engine. @TwistedFireStopper will no doubt correct me if I am wrong but do a lot of firemen not have paramedic training, defibulators etc?dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
A paramedic is a highly trained professional able to administer drugs such as adrenaline to re-start a heart.0 -
We are not paramedic trained. We're all trained in basic life support and do have defibs, but just the ones you find in a rural phone box. It's not fun waiting for an ambulance when you're at limit of your expertise.DavidL said:
If you were trapped in a car you'd want a fire engine. @TwistedFireStopper will no doubt correct me if I am wrong but do a lot of firemen not have paramedic training, defibulators etc?dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
OK that does sound a bit stupid! No doubt it is costing money to have you guys do that? Why not use that money to get some more real ambulances?TwistedFireStopper said:
We're trained to a higher standard than yer average first aider, but it really is just basic life support, DR ABC, with a bit extra thrown in, tourniquets, and knowing what questions to ask. We don't give medication, intubate, or give pain relief.As I say, it's a cheap stopgap. You phone an Ambulance, you expect a paramedic to turn up. We turn up in a fire service van and fire service uniform. We get away with it because the public generally trust us, and we give off an air of confidence. I've had a few arse twitching moments, though. I genuinely enjoyed doing it, but we have trialled if for a few years now. It needs funding now.RobD said:
Isn't it common sense to have one person trained as a medic in each team?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
Read the polling crosstabs, the vast majority of those new UKIP voters voted Tory in June and the man they want to lead the Tories is Boris (who is also surprisingly the favourite of Tory and Labour voters, LDs favour Rudd)justin124 said:
But the election revealed that many UKIP voters do not vote Tory as their second preference. Yes, they would pick up more than Labour - but of that 2.2% I doubt that the Tories would receive more than 1.2% whilst Labour could add 0.4%. Other UKIP voters would switch to minor parties or stay at home.HYUFD said:
Even if you add 2.2% rather than 3% to the 38% Tory total with Survation they still get to 40%justin124 said:
But UKIP actually polled 1.8% - not 1% - and that was in the context of contesting circa 350 seats. Had they fought every constituency they would surely have reached 3%.HYUFD said:
Survation have UKIP on 4%, up 3% on the general election, cut them back to 1% and add them to the Tory total and you also get the Tories on 41% without the Tories winning a single Labour or LD switcher.TheScreamingEagles said:
Survation who called the election spot on say otherwise.HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election
But you know better than the pollster that called the election right.0 -
Osborne would have her 'chopped up in bags in his freezer' - now Cable sees May as
“handcuffed to a radiator in the basement of a flat in Beirut”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/15/theresa-may-like-hostage-handcuffed-radiator-beirut-brexit-sir/0 -
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......
0 -
I think we just don't know. Impossible to predict this far out and given the benefits/changes/chaos* Brexit may or may not bring in next two or three years.stevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......
What we can say is that the idea that Jezza will be PM is no longer the source of just outright laughter. It really could happen.
* Delete as you see fit0 -
This makes you stop and think:
"The Bank rate of 0.25pc, when deflated by the CPI measure of inflation, currently at 2.9pc, gives us a rate of minus 2.65pc."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/14/hooked-dangerous-drug-low-interest-rates/0 -
We're cheap. We stop the ambos getting fined for missing targets, and they pay our service for each call. Our Chief gets a pat on the back for"modernising" us, and the public get reduced fire cover and a shit ambulance experience. I'm good, but I ain't no paramedic.RobD said:
OK that does sound a bit stupid! No doubt it is costing money to have you guys do that? Why not use that money to get some more real ambulances?TwistedFireStopper said:
We're trained to a higher standard than yer average first aider, but it really is just basic life support, DR ABC, with a bit extra thrown in, tourniquets, and knowing what questions to ask. We don't give medication, intubate, or give pain relief.As I say, it's a cheap stopgap. You phone an Ambulance, you expect a paramedic to turn up. We turn up in a fire service van and fire service uniform. We get away with it because the public generally trust us, and we give off an air of confidence. I've had a few arse twitching moments, though. I genuinely enjoyed doing it, but we have trialled if for a few years now. It needs funding now.RobD said:
Isn't it common sense to have one person trained as a medic in each team?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
If we are to go down this route that will clearly have to change rather than doing this on the cheap.TwistedFireStopper said:
We are not paramedic trained. We're all trained in basic life support and do have defibs, but just the ones you find in a rural phone box. It's not fun waiting for an ambulance when you're at limit of your expertise.DavidL said:
If you were trapped in a car you'd want a fire engine. @TwistedFireStopper will no doubt correct me if I am wrong but do a lot of firemen not have paramedic training, defibulators etc?dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
Its tough at the top. And where Mrs May is too.CarlottaVance said:Osborne would have her 'chopped up in bags in his freezer' - now Cable sees May as
“handcuffed to a radiator in the basement of a flat in Beirut”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/15/theresa-may-like-hostage-handcuffed-radiator-beirut-brexit-sir/
But Cable is never going to beat Mr Bean. Its all downhill for him.0 -
And who exactly is borrowing at base rate?rottenborough said:This makes you stop and think:
"The Bank rate of 0.25pc, when deflated by the CPI measure of inflation, currently at 2.9pc, gives us a rate of minus 2.65pc."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/14/hooked-dangerous-drug-low-interest-rates/
Borrowing is typically to my knowledge done at base+x% depending upon credit worthiness, security etc
I've got a mortgage at base+3% which I think is quite cheap which means I'm borrowing at 3.25% or when you deflate by inflation 0.35%0 -
That's why we rejected the 2%. What are we still trialling? It'll work, but it needs funding and the politics needs sorting out. Our trial gets the ambos out of a hole on the cheap, but if we get funded to do it, we take money off them. It's a problem.DavidL said:
If we are to go down this route that will clearly have to change rather than doing this on the cheap.TwistedFireStopper said:
We are not paramedic trained. We're all trained in basic life support and do have defibs, but just the ones you find in a rural phone box. It's not fun waiting for an ambulance when you're at limit of your expertise.DavidL said:
If you were trapped in a car you'd want a fire engine. @TwistedFireStopper will no doubt correct me if I am wrong but do a lot of firemen not have paramedic training, defibulators etc?dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
If you were in a serious accident, you'd take a fire fighter in 5 minutes over an ambulance in 15. Fire Fighters might not be 'medics' in the full sense, but they know enough to make the difference between life and death in a serious road accident.dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
0.35 is still pretty low. Historically, off-the-scale low.Philip_Thompson said:
And who exactly is borrowing at base rate?rottenborough said:This makes you stop and think:
"The Bank rate of 0.25pc, when deflated by the CPI measure of inflation, currently at 2.9pc, gives us a rate of minus 2.65pc."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/14/hooked-dangerous-drug-low-interest-rates/
Borrowing is typically to my knowledge done at base+x% depending upon credit worthiness, security etc
I've got a mortgage at base+3% which I think is quite cheap which means I'm borrowing at 3.25% or when you deflate by inflation 0.35%0 -
Yes I would. But the situation you describe ought not to occur.TonyE said:
If you were in a serious accident, you'd take a fire fighter in 5 minutes over an ambulance in 15. Fire Fighters might not be 'medics' in the full sense, but they know enough to make the difference between life and death in a serious road accident.dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cuts
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficiencies
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?
If you were trapped in a car you'd want a fire engine. @TwistedFireStopper will no doubt correct me if I am wrong but do a lot of firemen not have paramedic training, defibulators etc?
We are not paramedic trained. We're all trained in basic life support and do have defibs, but just the ones you find in a rural phone box. It's not fun waiting for an ambulance when you're at limit of your expertise.
If we are to go down this route that will clearly have to change rather than doing this on the cheap.
That's why we rejected the 2%. What are we still trialling? It'll work, but it needs funding and the politics needs sorting out. Our trial gets the ambos out of a hole on the cheap, but if we get funded to do it, we take money off them. It's a problem.
The wider issue is where the public expect the pay rises to come from and the support for cuts to budgets is much higher than labour thought0 -
That's why I'm not against us doing EFR in principle . If I can help anybody, I will, but it's just a cheap stopgap and not sustainable.TonyE said:
If you were in a serious accident, you'd take a fire fighter in 5 minutes over an ambulance in 15. Fire Fighters might not be 'medics' in the full sense, but they know enough to make the difference between life and death in a serious road accident.dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/15/four-lions-factor-how-terrorist-incompetence-is-saving-lives
"Barry: He disrupted the establishment.
Omar: How?!
Barry: He Took out a sheep."0 -
I have no doubt you and your fellow firefighters will do everything possible to help in any situationTwistedFireStopper said:
That's why I'm not against us doing EFR in principle . If I can help anybody, I will, but it's just a cheap stopgap and not sustainable.TonyE said:
If you were in a serious accident, you'd take a fire fighter in 5 minutes over an ambulance in 15. Fire Fighters might not be 'medics' in the full sense, but they know enough to make the difference between life and death in a serious road accident.dixiedean said:
If I have an accident I want an ambulance not a fire engine. What next, a bin Lorry to a burglary?TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have an issue with doing First Response, but it needs to be funded and we need to have enhanced training. During the trial, we turn up , hold their hand, give them oxygen and attempt CPR if it goes South while waiting for a proper Ambulance to turn up. Doing FR takes fire fighters off fire engines, which means an appliance not available for its primary task.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I very much doubt you would play at being an ambulance but it is a good point, but innovation is often the way to create efficienciesTwistedFireStopper said:
We've just rejected a 2% deal that was tied to us carrying on a trial of First Responding in place of NHS Ambulances. It's just been used as a stopgap so that Ambulance Trusts don't get fined for missing attendance times and it gives our SMT brownie points with the government. We dont have enough engines or fire fighters to do the job we're supposed to do, without playing at being an Ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It makes it likely that a 2% - 2.5% is the most that HMG will offer to nurses, teachers, police, firefighters and the military with less for pen pushers paid for by a combination of small tax rises and some budget cutsSean_F said:
That's not a bad poll for the Conservatives.RobD said:
Surprised cuts are still reasonably popular.HYUFD said:How should public sector pay rises be paid for poll? https://mobile.twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/908666668913655808
0 -
O/T Have we noticed this Reuters article? It suggests some positive movement in the EU towards a sensible deal:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner
0 -
It suggests the position is the same as it's always been. The last time similar comments were in the media you suggested they had climbed down on sequencing but they hadn't.Richard_Nabavi said:O/T Have we noticed this Reuters article? It suggests some positive movement in the EU towards a sensible deal:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner0 -
-
Reality away from the all pervading nonsense of Juncker and the commission.Richard_Nabavi said:O/T Have we noticed this Reuters article? It suggests some positive movement in the EU towards a sensible deal:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner
It is not beyond possibility the commission will receive new instructions from the Council post TM speech in Florence next week and the following heads of government meeting0 -
Certainly they climbed down on sequencing. Their opening position was that we couldn't even start talking until after we'd left. Admittedly that was so utterly barmy as a position that (as I pointed out at the time) anyone could see it wouldn't survive five minutes' contact with reality.williamglenn said:
It suggests the position is the same as it's always been. The last time similar comments were in the media you suggested they had climbed down on sequencing but they hadn't.Richard_Nabavi said:O/T Have we noticed this Reuters article? It suggests some positive movement in the EU towards a sensible deal:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner
The significance of the new comments seems to be that they are becoming aware of the damage their intransigence is doing. Otherwise why say anything?
Of course, there's no guarantee that they will be sensible. We shall see.0 -
Parity postponed?
Pound leaps to highest since aftermath of Brexit vote
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/pound-leaps-to-highest-since-aftermath-of-brexit-vote0 -
Very qualified LOL, given terrorists only have to get it right once. It's a bit like listing the things King Jong Un can't *yet* do after each missile test.Pong said:https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/15/four-lions-factor-how-terrorist-incompetence-is-saving-lives
"Barry: He disrupted the establishment.
Omar: How?!
Barry: He Took out a sheep."0 -
Remarkably consistent - no noticeable shift in opinion despite Corbyn expecting to be PM sooner rather than laterTheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Add in the combined criticism of the UK and Europe business leaders demanding both sides resolve the issue with tariff free access their are signs the narrative is changingRichard_Nabavi said:
Certainly they climbed down on sequencing. Their opening position was that we couldn't even start talking until after we'd left. Admittedly that was so utterly barmy as a position that (as I pointed out at the time) anyone could see it wouldn't survive five minutes' contact with reality.williamglenn said:
It suggests the position is the same as it's always been. The last time similar comments were in the media you suggested they had climbed down on sequencing but they hadn't.Richard_Nabavi said:O/T Have we noticed this Reuters article? It suggests some positive movement in the EU towards a sensible deal:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner
The significance of the new comments seems to be that they are becoming aware of the damage their intransigence is doing. Otherwise why say anything?
Of course, there's no guarantee that they will be sensible. We shall see.0 -
The original guidelines on this are below. To quote Theresa May, "Nothing has changed!"Richard_Nabavi said:
Certainly they climbed down on sequencing. Their opening position was that we couldn't even start talking until after we'd left. Admittedly that was so utterly barmy as a position that (as I pointed out at the time) anyone could see it wouldn't survive five minutes' contact with reality.williamglenn said:
It suggests the position is the same as it's always been. The last time similar comments were in the media you suggested they had climbed down on sequencing but they hadn't.Richard_Nabavi said:O/T Have we noticed this Reuters article? It suggests some positive movement in the EU towards a sensible deal:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner
The significance of the new comments seems to be that they are becoming aware of the damage their intransigence is doing. Otherwise why say anything?
Of course, there's no guarantee that they will be sensible. We shall see.
5. While an agreement on a future relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom as such can only be finalised and concluded once the United Kingdom has become a third country, Article 50 TEU requires to take account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union in the arrangements for withdrawal. To this end, an overall understanding on the framework for the future relationship should be identified during a second phase of the negotiations under Article 50 TEU. We stand ready to engage in preliminary and preparatory discussions to this end in the context of negotiations under Article 50 TEU, as soon as the European Council decides that sufficient progress has been made in the first phase towards reaching a satisfactory agreement on the arrangements for an orderly withdrawal.0 -
Good for reducing inflationCarlottaVance said:Parity postponed?
Pound leaps to highest since aftermath of Brexit vote
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/pound-leaps-to-highest-since-aftermath-of-brexit-vote0 -
Sounds like you are beginning to panic Williamwilliamglenn said:
The original guidelines on this are below. To quote Theresa May, "Nothing has changed!"Richard_Nabavi said:
Certainly they climbed down on sequencing. Their opening position was that we couldn't even start talking until after we'd left. Admittedly that was so utterly barmy as a position that (as I pointed out at the time) anyone could see it wouldn't survive five minutes' contact with reality.williamglenn said:
It suggests the position is the same as it's always been. The last time similar comments were in the media you suggested they had climbed down on sequencing but they hadn't.Richard_Nabavi said:O/T Have we noticed this Reuters article? It suggests some positive movement in the EU towards a sensible deal:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner
The significance of the new comments seems to be that they are becoming aware of the damage their intransigence is doing. Otherwise why say anything?
Of course, there's no guarantee that they will be sensible. We shall see.
5. While an agreement on a future relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom as such can only be finalised and concluded once the United Kingdom has become a third country, Article 50 TEU requires to take account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union in the arrangements for withdrawal. To this end, an overall understanding on the framework for the future relationship should be identified during a second phase of the negotiations under Article 50 TEU. We stand ready to engage in preliminary and preparatory discussions to this end in the context of negotiations under Article 50 TEU, as soon as the European Council decides that sufficient progress has been made in the first phase towards reaching a satisfactory agreement on the arrangements for an orderly withdrawal.0 -
Given how the pound collapsed during Mrs May's speech last year, Parity might just happen at the start of October during the Tory conference.CarlottaVance said:Parity postponed?
Pound leaps to highest since aftermath of Brexit vote
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/pound-leaps-to-highest-since-aftermath-of-brexit-vote0 -
It may not interest many on here but the abolition of the tolls next year on the Severn bridges is great news for Wales and the West of England0
-
No - it will strengthen due to the prospect of higher interest ratesTheScreamingEagles said:
Given how the pound collapsed during Mrs May's speech last year, Parity might just happen at the start of October during the Tory conference.CarlottaVance said:Parity postponed?
Pound leaps to highest since aftermath of Brexit vote
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/pound-leaps-to-highest-since-aftermath-of-brexit-vote0 -
We've been through all this before. It's not exactly hard to find the truth:williamglenn said:
The original guidelines on this are below. To quote Theresa May, "Nothing has changed!"Richard_Nabavi said:
Certainly they climbed down on sequencing. Their opening position was that we couldn't even start talking until after we'd left. Admittedly that was so utterly barmy as a position that (as I pointed out at the time) anyone could see it wouldn't survive five minutes' contact with reality.williamglenn said:
It suggests the position is the same as it's always been. The last time similar comments were in the media you suggested they had climbed down on sequencing but they hadn't.Richard_Nabavi said:O/T Have we noticed this Reuters article? It suggests some positive movement in the EU towards a sensible deal:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/britain-not-at-back-of-queue-for-eu-trade-deal-commissioner
The significance of the new comments seems to be that they are becoming aware of the damage their intransigence is doing. Otherwise why say anything?
Of course, there's no guarantee that they will be sensible. We shall see.
5. While an agreement on a future relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom as such can only be finalised and concluded once the United Kingdom has become a third country, Article 50 TEU requires to take account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union in the arrangements for withdrawal. To this end, an overall understanding on the framework for the future relationship should be identified during a second phase of the negotiations under Article 50 TEU. We stand ready to engage in preliminary and preparatory discussions to this end in the context of negotiations under Article 50 TEU, as soon as the European Council decides that sufficient progress has been made in the first phase towards reaching a satisfactory agreement on the arrangements for an orderly withdrawal.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36678222
I'm hardly likely to make up something so well-known, am I?0 -
That however is the point. Because it "really could happen", it makes it less likely that it will happen, since -by the rules of self denying prophecy -people will turn out in greater numbers to stop it.rottenborough said:
I think we just don't know. Impossible to predict this far out and given the benefits/changes/chaos* Brexit may or may not bring in next two or three years.stevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......
What we can say is that the idea that Jezza will be PM is no longer the source of just outright laughter. It really could happen.
* Delete as you see fit0 -
Re Ashcroft - it's very good that so few people (from all parties) favour more borrowing.
In terms of funding through cuts in other areas - that's exactly what has happened this week with police and prison officers - total budgets are unchanged so by definition increase in pay must be funded by cuts elsewhere within police / prison budgets.0 -
And by definition bad for labour and especially Corbyn with his mad cap ideasMikeL said:Re Ashcroft - it's very good that so few people (from all parties) favour more borrowing.
In terms of funding through cuts in other areas - that's exactly what has happened this week with police and prison officers - total budgets are unchanged so by definition increase in pay must be funded by cuts elsewhere within police / prison budgets.0 -
Harsh...
@DPJHodges: Nicola Sturgeon had better watch it. She's in danger of becoming the SNP's Theresa May.0 -
TheScreamingEagles said:
Given how the pound collapsed during Mrs May's speech last year, Parity might just happen at the start of October during the Tory conference.CarlottaVance said:Parity postponed?
Pound leaps to highest since aftermath of Brexit vote
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/pound-leaps-to-highest-since-aftermath-of-brexit-vote
When our erstwhile masters in the EU purport to mark our homework in October with, "could do better " parity is possible, at least in the short term.TheScreamingEagles said:
Given how the pound collapsed during Mrs May's speech last year, Parity might just happen at the start of October during the Tory conference.CarlottaVance said:Parity postponed?
Pound leaps to highest since aftermath of Brexit vote
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/pound-leaps-to-highest-since-aftermath-of-brexit-vote0 -
It is the greatest sadness that people cannot be persuaded 1. to vote on the actual question before them and 2. to vote for the outcome they actually desire. It is a myth that we ever voted 52:48 to leave the EU; we voted 52:48 that Cameron and Osborne are posh twats, and we only voted that way on the understanding that it was Remain maj. nailed on. There is no answer, unless we go all Swiss and have referendums every 5 minutes until the novelty of using them as protest votes wears off.stevef said:
That however is the point. Because it "really could happen", it makes it less likely that it will happen, since -by the rules of self denying prophecy -people will turn out in greater numbers to stop it.rottenborough said:
I think we just don't know. Impossible to predict this far out and given the benefits/changes/chaos* Brexit may or may not bring in next two or three years.stevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......
What we can say is that the idea that Jezza will be PM is no longer the source of just outright laughter. It really could happen.
* Delete as you see fit0 -
Not with interest rates set to rise in NovemberTheScreamingEagles said:
Given how the pound collapsed during Mrs May's speech last year, Parity might just happen at the start of October during the Tory conference.CarlottaVance said:Parity postponed?
Pound leaps to highest since aftermath of Brexit vote
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/pound-leaps-to-highest-since-aftermath-of-brexit-vote0 -
I see how you'd infer that Labour gains came from the Lib Dems. But it didn't look that way to me, admittedly in a very Tory seat. Amongst people I know I saw Brexit backing former Labour voters going Tory and generally non committed people turning out to back Labour. My feeling was that there is an unreported backlash against Brexit building up and pulling in people who don't usually vote and/or vote Tory without giving it much thought. Pure anecdote, but the polling statistics haven't been much use lately.HYUFD said:
The Tories also put on 4% from the locals to the general, almost all the Labour gains came from the LDs who were down 11% in the general from the locals and Corbyn has already squeezed them about as far as he cananothernick said:
Labour put on about 13% between the local elections in May and the General election a month later. When VI moves as quickly as that conventional wisdom about where parties ought to be in the polls at a given point in the parliamentary/economic cycle is pretty useless.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Labour's position is now far stronger than most people thought possible a few months ago.
Meanwhile the Tories sink ever deeper into the Brexit mire which will surely engulf them completely in the next couple of years.0 -
In the county council elections the Tories got 38% Labour got 27% and the LDs 18%.Recidivist said:
I see how you'd infer that Labour gains came from the Lib Dems. But it didn't look that way to me, admittedly in a very Tory seat. Amongst people I know I saw Brexit backing former Labour voters going Tory and generally non committed people turning out to back Labour. My feeling was that there is an unreported backlash against Brexit building up and pulling in people who don't usually vote and/or vote Tory without giving it much thought. Pure anecdote, but the polling statistics haven't been much use lately.HYUFD said:
The Tories also put on 4% from the locals to the general, almost all the Labour gains came from the LDs who were down 11% in the general from the locals and Corbyn has already squeezed them about as far as he cananothernick said:
Labour put on about 13% between the local elections in May and the General election a month later. When VI moves as quickly as that conventional wisdom about where parties ought to be in the polls at a given point in the parliamentary/economic cycle is pretty useless.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Labour's position is now far stronger than most people thought possible a few months ago.
Meanwhile the Tories sink ever deeper into the Brexit mire which will surely engulf them completely in the next couple of years.
In the general election the Tories got 42% Labour got 40% and the LDs got 7% so the figures tend to back it up0 -
I wasn't disputing it, just pointing out that it didn't chime with what I heard people saying. I don't go around quizzing people so my sample size is small and self selecting. But sometimes the obvious conclusion isn't the correct one. Under the headline figures there might have been a lot of Brexit inspired switching in both directions between Labour and the Tories. That the Tories picked up a couple of wins from Labour while losing quite a few to them is consistent with that idea.HYUFD said:
In the county council elections the Tories got 38% Labour got 27% and the LDs 18%.Recidivist said:
I see how you'd infer that Labour gains came from the Lib Dems. But it didn't look that way to me, admittedly in a very Tory seat. Amongst people I know I saw Brexit backing former Labour voters going Tory and generally non committed people turning out to back Labour. My feeling was that there is an unreported backlash against Brexit building up and pulling in people who don't usually vote and/or vote Tory without giving it much thought. Pure anecdote, but the polling statistics haven't been much use lately.HYUFD said:
The Tories also put on 4% from the locals to the general, almost all the Labour gains came from the LDs who were down 11% in the general from the locals and Corbyn has already squeezed them about as far as he cananothernick said:
Labour put on about 13% between the local elections in May and the General election a month later. When VI moves as quickly as that conventional wisdom about where parties ought to be in the polls at a given point in the parliamentary/economic cycle is pretty useless.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Labour's position is now far stronger than most people thought possible a few months ago.
Meanwhile the Tories sink ever deeper into the Brexit mire which will surely engulf them completely in the next couple of years.
In the general election the Tories got 42% Labour got 40% and the LDs got 7% so the figures tend to back it up0 -
Significant. Not because the Brexit bill is actually falling. But because David Davis is gearing up to accept the bill, whatever it is.
Brexit Secretary: EU divorce bill now '£60bn and falling'0 -
Borderline off topic, I find that you can put up to £15000 into euros, dollars and a few other currencies on a Post Office Travel Money Card, which as far as I can see comes to the same thing as having current accounts in the relevant currencies. I am strongly inclined to create a little nest egg to cover next year's euroland holiday at the current rate.Big_G_NorthWales said:
No - it will strengthen due to the prospect of higher interest ratesTheScreamingEagles said:
Given how the pound collapsed during Mrs May's speech last year, Parity might just happen at the start of October during the Tory conference.CarlottaVance said:Parity postponed?
Pound leaps to highest since aftermath of Brexit vote
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/9/15/pound-leaps-to-highest-since-aftermath-of-brexit-vote0 -
Quite possibly and the LDs tend to poll higher in council elections than general elections.Recidivist said:
I wasn't disputing it, just pointing out that it didn't chime with what I heard people saying. I don't go around quizzing people so my sample size is small and self selecting. But sometimes the obvious conclusion isn't the correct one. Under the headline figures there might have been a lot of Brexit inspired switching in both directions between Labour and the Tories. That the Tories picked up a couple of wins from Labour while losing quite a few to them is consistent with that idea.HYUFD said:
In the county council elections the Tories got 38% Labour got 27% and the LDs 18%.Recidivist said:
I see how you'd infer that Labour gains came from the Lib Dems. But it didn't look that way to me, admittedly in a very Tory seat. Amongst people I know I saw Brexit backing former Labour voters going Tory and generally non committed people turning out to back Labour. My feeling was that there is an unreported backlash against Brexit building up and pulling in people who don't usually vote and/or vote Tory without giving it much thought. Pure anecdote, but the polling statistics haven't been much use lately.HYUFD said:
The Tories also put on 4% from the locals to the general, almost all the Labour gains came from the LDs who were down 11% in the general from the locals and Corbyn has already squeezed them about as far as he cananothernick said:
Labour put on about 13% between the local elections in May and the General election a month later. When VI moves as quickly as that conventional wisdom about where parties ought to be in the polls at a given point in the parliamentary/economic cycle is pretty useless.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Labour's position is now far stronger than most people thought possible a few months ago.
Meanwhile the Tories sink ever deeper into the Brexit mire which will surely engulf them completely in the next couple of years.
In the general election the Tories got 42% Labour got 40% and the LDs got 7% so the figures tend to back it up
However while there was certainly some Tory to Labour movement over the dementia tax in particular that was outweighed overall by the combined LD, Green, UKIP and SNP switching to Labour0 -
A Cologne statement read: "Due to the enormous demand for tickets, it would have been sensible, not least for security reasons, to allow more than the allocated 5% of stadium capacity to the guest fans.
"It was apparent that thousands of people from Cologne would seek to avoid the restrictions and get tickets in every way possible.
"One such way would be through the help of Arsenal supporters, who passed on their tickets to the FC fans. Some as gifts, but some also for horrendous prices.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41277425
And Remainers on here think we're unreasonable. We've got nothing on the Germans.0 -
Speaking of Germany an Infratest poll yesterday had the AfD on 12% (the same voteshare UKIP got here in 2015) in a clear third and just 8% behind the SPD. The CDU is a clear first on 37% though still down on the last general electiontlg86 said:A Cologne statement read: "Due to the enormous demand for tickets, it would have been sensible, not least for security reasons, to allow more than the allocated 5% of stadium capacity to the guest fans.
"It was apparent that thousands of people from Cologne would seek to avoid the restrictions and get tickets in every way possible.
"One such way would be through the help of Arsenal supporters, who passed on their tickets to the FC fans. Some as gifts, but some also for horrendous prices.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41277425
And Remainers on here think we're unreasonable. We've got nothing on the Germans.
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/dimap.htm0 -
I get the feeling Mike's going to be writing a thread on this
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/9087410439396597780 -
Nothing has changed AFAIK. EU negotiating guidelines allow a direction to be set for a future trade arrangement and they acknowledge the UK has requested a comprehensive FTA. The actual negotiations however aren't part of A50, but will take place after Brexit. This means amongst other things that any Article 50 cash settlement can't be tied to a specific trade arrangement as it won't exist at that time of withdrawal. It could be tied to a transition arrangement but the amount may be more than an exit fee in that case. It's semantic though. The withdrawal agreement will say such and such a future arrangement has been agreed in principle, such and such transition arrangements apply; such and such an amount is payable.Richard_Nabavi said:
We've been through all this before. It's not exactly hard to find the truth:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36678222
I'm hardly likely to make up something so well-known, am I?0 -
That poll does have a bit of a look of an outlier about it. Now, outliers have sometimes been right when herding happens among the rest but 12 is the best score that AfD have had since February (when they probably really were about there). My instinct would be to say that it was an unfortunately timed MoE boost for them. That said, the SPD have been on a decline through the campaign and it wouldn't be a surprise for some of that lost share to go AfD (in a general splintering).HYUFD said:
Speaking of Germany an Infratest poll this week has the AfD on 12% (the same voteshare UKIP got here in 2015) in a clear third and just 8% behind the SPD. The CDU is a clear first on 37% though still down on the last general electiontlg86 said:A Cologne statement read: "Due to the enormous demand for tickets, it would have been sensible, not least for security reasons, to allow more than the allocated 5% of stadium capacity to the guest fans.
"It was apparent that thousands of people from Cologne would seek to avoid the restrictions and get tickets in every way possible.
"One such way would be through the help of Arsenal supporters, who passed on their tickets to the FC fans. Some as gifts, but some also for horrendous prices.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41277425
And Remainers on here think we're unreasonable. We've got nothing on the Germans.
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/dimap.htm
However, Merkel is still going to have a job on her hands forming a stable government. The one thing that is clear is that no-one else will be able to do so but:
CDU(+CSU but I'm going to take them as one for convenience) + FDP: probably won't have the numbers. Knife-edge at best
CDU+Green: also won't have the numbers.
CDU+Green+FDP: Greens very probably won't work with FPD.
CDU+SDP: Unlikely to be up for another Grand Coalition when it's killing them.
CDU+Linke: Lol. Not the numbers anyway.
CDU+AfD: No-one will go near them and that's how they like it.
If I had to guess right now, I'd predict a CDU-FDP coalition with some kind of confidence and supply understanding with the Greens.0 -
Quite possibly and the CSU probably won't work with the Greens either or it could just be a CDU/CSU minority governmentdavid_herdson said:
That poll does have a bit of a look of an outlier about it. Now, outliers have sometimes been right when herding happens among the rest but 12 is the best score that AfD have had since February (when they probably really were about there). My instinct would be to say that it was an unfortunately timed MoE boost for them. That said, the SPD have been on a decline through the campaign and it wouldn't be a surprise for some of that lost share to go AfD (in a general splintering).HYUFD said:
Speaking of Germany an Infratest poll this week has the AfD on 12% (the same voteshare UKIP got here in 2015) in a clear third and just 8% behind the SPD. The CDU is a clear first on 37% though still down on the last general electiontlg86 said:A Cologne statement read: "Due to the enormous demand for tickets, it would have been sensible, not least for security reasons, to allow more than the allocated 5% of stadium capacity to the guest fans.
"It was apparent that thousands of people from Cologne would seek to avoid the restrictions and get tickets in every way possible.
"One such way would be through the help of Arsenal supporters, who passed on their tickets to the FC fans. Some as gifts, but some also for horrendous prices.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41277425
And Remainers on here think we're unreasonable. We've got nothing on the Germans.
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/dimap.htm
However, Merkel is still going to have a job on her hands forming a stable government. The one thing that is clear is that no-one else will be able to do so but:
CDU(+CSU but I'm going to take them as one for convenience) + FDP: probably won't have the numbers. Knife-edge at best
CDU+Green: also won't have the numbers.
CDU+Green+FDP: Greens very probably won't work with FPD.
CDU+SDP: Unlikely to be up for another Grand Coalition when it's killing them.
CDU+Linke: Lol. Not the numbers anyway.
CDU+AfD: No-one will go near them and that's how they like it.
If I had to guess right now, I'd predict a CDU-FDP coalition with some kind of confidence and supply understanding with the Greens.0 -
In a few weeks' time the Germans might wish they had first past the post.0
-
Satisfaction ratings for Merkel's government are the highest going into the election of any of her previous defences.
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/9087544810928865300 -
Why? They have had years and years of coalitions at national and local level. It doesn't seem to have harmed them. If a black, green yellow coalition is required by the numbers, then that will happen. It is how things are done.tlg86 said:In a few weeks' time the Germans might wish they had first past the post.
0 -
I was talking to a German friend who follows politics closely. FWIW he was confident the SPD would agree a coalition with the CDU if no viable alternative was available. It is expected of them and politicians prefer to be in government than not to be, so they can rationalise it. The other person at our table went along with his analysis.0
-
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......0 -
HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election
Well it did get them at least one vote. I went full Tory on GE day, although these days I just pine for the days of the coalition. Now that was a government you could tolerate.0 -
And in the comment piece it goes on to say labour have lost the 8 point lead they had over the conservatives 46 - 38 last time - now 42 - 41TheScreamingEagles said:I get the feeling Mike's going to be writing a thread on this
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/908741043939659778
Looks like the Independent are giving 'fake' headlines0 -
I think Johnson's genuinely popular days are behind him, frankly. He's been in the public I too long to be particularly endearing anymore.Mexicanpete said:
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......0 -
And on Mike's theory that the leader ratings are what counts, his issue with the SPD is Schultz. "Small town mayor" he just doesn't have the credibility as leader that Merkel enjoys.FF43 said:I was talking to a German friend who follows politics closely. FWIW he was confident the SPD would agree a coalition with the CDU if no viable alternative was available. It is expected of them and politicians prefer to be in government than not to be, so they can rationalise it. The other person at our table went along with his analysis.
0 -
I'll admit to not knowing that much about German politics, but I wouldn't assume all of those parties would work together.dixiedean said:
Why? They have had years and years of coalitions at national and local level. It doesn't seem to have harmed them. If a black, green yellow coalition is required by the numbers, then that will happen. It is how things are done.tlg86 said:In a few weeks' time the Germans might wish they had first past the post.
If there is another grand coalition, the other parties will continue to grow at the expense of the SPD. Come the next election, I doubt that the grand coalition will be a possibility.FF43 said:I was talking to a German friend who follows politics closely. FWIW he was confident the SPD would agree a coalition with the CDU if no viable alternative was available. It is expected of them and politicians prefer to be in government than not to be, so they can rationalise it. The other person at our table went along with his analysis.
0 -
Maybe raging is pushing it but a success is perfectly possibleMexicanpete said:
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......0 -
All very well but most polls have the CDU down on the 2013 election, just the SPD are also downwilliamglenn said:Satisfaction ratings for Merkel's government are the highest going into the election of any of her previous defences.
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/9087544810928865300 -
A success has to be raging before the average person not already on board will recognise it as success.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Maybe raging is pushing it but a success is perfectly possibleMexicanpete said:
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......-1 -
There may be a black yellow coalition there won't be one including the Greens as the CSU won't have it, confidence and supply at bestdixiedean said:
Why? They have had years and years of coalitions at national and local level. It doesn't seem to have harmed them. If a black, green yellow coalition is required by the numbers, then that will happen. It is how things are done.tlg86 said:In a few weeks' time the Germans might wish they had first past the post.
0 -
Remember that in 2013 Merkel came very close to an absolute majority and outperformed all the final polls.HYUFD said:All very well but most polls have the CDU down on the 2013 election, just the SPD are also down
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/archiv/2013.htm
If there are some surprises with the minor parties underperforming, the arithmetic could suddenly look very different.0 -
Perhaps the best since the New Labour government of 1997-2001 to some eyes but there we gokle4 said:HYUFD said:
No they don't, for starters the pollsters were overcompensating for 2015 so the Tories never had a 20 point lead anyway and Corbyn will actually have to win Tory voters next time not just squeeze the LD, Green and SNP and UKIP votes as he mainly did last time. Clearly about 40%+ of the electorate would vote Tory to stop Corbyn even if a dead parrot was leading the ToriesTheScreamingEagles said:
Oh yes they do.HYUFD said:
No they don't, Cameron trailed in almost half the polls in 2015 as did Major in 1992 and both won majorities.TheScreamingEagles said:
But the Tories need a 25% poll lead going into the general election campaign.DavidL said:Not a lot of movement between the big two, is there? Consistent with the tied poll this week.
Should Labour not be worried about this? The government is taking brick bats from remainers in the media every day, they are having even harsher swipes from Osborne, they seem in a muddle and to have very few ideas, the country is sick of austerity and wages are falling in real terms. If Labour can't build a substantial lead now, then when?
Corbyn loves campaigning, Mrs May doesn't.
Boris is also.more likely to be leading the Tories than May and he is probably the best campaigner the Tories have having won 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum, Corbyn for all his gains still lost the last general election
Well it did get them at least one vote. I went full Tory on GE day, although these days I just pine for the days of the coalition. Now that was a government you could tolerate.0 -
For Labour to sink to circa 50 seats I stick by 'raging', nonetheless I will be surprised if Brexit (in the short term at least) is anything but a fiasco!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Maybe raging is pushing it but a success is perfectly possibleMexicanpete said:
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......0 -
The latest Survation has Boris the favoured successor of both Tories and voters as a whole, with Tories 21% want him to succeed May, followed by 15% for JRM and 12% for Hammond, with voters as a whole 19% want him to succeed May followed by JRM on 9% and Hammond on 8%kle4 said:
I think Johnson's genuinely popular days are behind him, frankly. He's been in the public I too long to be particularly endearing anymore.Mexicanpete said:
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......
http://survation.com/labours-poll-lead-mays-challengers/0 -
Boris if he takes over will call a general election by mid 2020Mexicanpete said:
For Labour to sink to circa 50 seats I stick by 'raging', nonetheless I will be surprised if Brexit (in the short term at least) is anything but a fiasco!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Maybe raging is pushing it but a success is perfectly possibleMexicanpete said:
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......
0 -
Even those final 2013 polls had the CDU polling higher then they are now and the AfD are polling significantly higher than they were thenwilliamglenn said:
Remember that in 2013 Merkel came very close to an absolute majority and outperformed all the final polls.HYUFD said:All very well but most polls have the CDU down on the 2013 election, just the SPD are also down
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/archiv/2013.htm
If there are some surprises with the minor parties underperforming, the arithmetic could suddenly look very different.0 -
Boris if he has any sense will call an election while his stock remains high, i.e. straight after he becomes PM.HYUFD said:
Boris if he takes over will call a general election by mid 2020Mexicanpete said:
For Labour to sink to circa 50 seats I stick by 'raging', nonetheless I will be surprised if Brexit (in the short term at least) is anything but a fiasco!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Maybe raging is pushing it but a success is perfectly possibleMexicanpete said:
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......0 -
So did the CDU/CSU get as many seats as they did because the FDP and the AFD just missed the 5% threshold?williamglenn said:
Remember that in 2013 Merkel came very close to an absolute majority and outperformed all the final polls.HYUFD said:All very well but most polls have the CDU down on the 2013 election, just the SPD are also down
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/archiv/2013.htm
If there are some surprises with the minor parties underperforming, the arithmetic could suddenly look very different.0 -
He wouldn't become PM until autumn 2019 at the earliest most likely, May having stepped down as Tory leader in late spring allowing a summer leadership contest, so October 2019 is also a possibility as well as Spring 2020Mexicanpete said:
Boris if he has any sense will call an election while his stock remains high, i.e. straight after he becomes PM.HYUFD said:
Boris if he takes over will call a general election by mid 2020Mexicanpete said:
For Labour to sink to circa 50 seats I stick by 'raging', nonetheless I will be surprised if Brexit (in the short term at least) is anything but a fiasco!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Maybe raging is pushing it but a success is perfectly possibleMexicanpete said:
With a clown like Corbyn behind the Labour wheel, a popular Tory running their show and Brexit turning into a raging success, yes it is possible. The first condition is a given, the second plausible (Mr Johnson?) but the third condition highly unlikely.RobD said:
Tory landslide 1931-stylestevef said:Self denying prophecies are a powerful force in politics. Predict something is going to happen and the opposite occurs. In 2010, the Tories were expected to comfortably defeat Gordon Brown, and there was a hung parliament. In 2015, Labour was expected to be the biggest party in a hung parliament -and there was a Tory majority. In 2017, the Tories were expected to win a landslide, and there was a hung parliament.
The wide expectation is that Corbyn will win next time......0 -
Not entirely convinced by that. The German Greens are not our Greens. They support Merkel on many issues. UK Greens are more like Die Linke.HYUFD said:
There may be a black yellow coalition there won't be one including the Greens as the CSU won't have it, confidence and supply at bestdixiedean said:
Why? They have had years and years of coalitions at national and local level. It doesn't seem to have harmed them. If a black, green yellow coalition is required by the numbers, then that will happen. It is how things are done.tlg86 said:In a few weeks' time the Germans might wish they had first past the post.
0 -
Expense account rail update:
' Work to bring HS2 to Sheffield could leave commuters facing more than five years of disruption, according to a presentation seen by the BBC.
According to the PowerPoint presentation, provided as part of a Freedom of Information request, the "station footprint would expand beyond current boundary to encroach the tram and road network".
It adds: "Such an outcome is anticipated to drive infrastructure costs and lead to disruption of at least five years, requiring reconfiguration of both tram and road networks."
The documents also suggests that to make way for HS2 one train an hour could be removed from the Dearne Valley line and impact on journey times between Sheffield and Leeds. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-412775600 -
Yes but there is no way the CSU would agree to a deal with the Greens ahead of the AfD, especially as their conservative base in Bavaria would erupt. A minority government is more likely than a full coalition with the Greensdixiedean said:
Not entirely convinced by that. The German Greens are not our Greens. They support Merkel on many issues. UK Greens are more like Die Linke.HYUFD said:
There may be a black yellow coalition there won't be one including the Greens as the CSU won't have it, confidence and supply at bestdixiedean said:
Why? They have had years and years of coalitions at national and local level. It doesn't seem to have harmed them. If a black, green yellow coalition is required by the numbers, then that will happen. It is how things are done.tlg86 said:In a few weeks' time the Germans might wish they had first past the post.
0 -
Yes.tlg86 said:
So did the CDU/CSU get as many seats as they did because the FDP and the AFD just missed the 5% threshold?williamglenn said:
Remember that in 2013 Merkel came very close to an absolute majority and outperformed all the final polls.HYUFD said:All very well but most polls have the CDU down on the 2013 election, just the SPD are also down
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/archiv/2013.htm
If there are some surprises with the minor parties underperforming, the arithmetic could suddenly look very different.
0
