politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Prof John Curtice suggests that LAB is not going to have an ea

El_Capitano said:

HYUFD said:

If they both got the same degree classification and do the same amount of extra curricula activities, absolutely

Dude. It's "extra-curricular". With an R. I'm not sure whether you went to an inner-city comp or Eton but it doesn't make much difference if you're not going to listen to what they teach you.

(Sorry. Couldn't resist.)

Interestingly the plural of curriculum vitae is Curricula vitae.
See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/curriculum vitae

In extra curricular, curricular is presumably NOT the plural of curriculum.

El_Capitano said:

This is very, very good on the "hollowing out" of local council services: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/04/crumbling-britain-how-austerity-hollowing-out-heart-tory-somerset

I'm lucky enough to live in a more affluent rural area than West Somerset. But the story is broadly the same. The drip-drip cuts to education and children's services, in particular, are genuinely affecting kids' life chances.

It is enormously to the discredit of Corbyn and Cable that they have failed to make any of this an issue for the local elections.

One silver lining for me personally of a Labour Gov't might hopefully be a bit of 'redistribution' to less affluent areas via a bit more central grant for the various councils. The councils will probably sperlunk it up the wall rather than making the council tax more reasonable though.

MarqueeMark said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

Your previoius experience of how things are going means we certainly listen to your feedback!

I did try to caveat the above comment with the fact that it's all second-hand (though from people who I have reasonable confidence in). I've not had chance to get out on the doorstep myself.

david_herdson said:

MarqueeMark said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

Your previoius experience of how things are going means we certainly listen to your feedback!

I did try to caveat the above comment with the fact that it's all second-hand (though from people who I have reasonable confidence in). I've not had chance to get out on the doorstep myself.

Surely Osset ward will be a gain ?

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Capitano, where would you get the money from to either maintain or increase said budgets? Foreign aid?

Well, there are shibboleths I'd de-fund but which I won't mention here because the resulting bunfight would drown out any sensible argument!

But on a more general level, I'd pay more tax for better services. I can afford to pay more, and since the service I currently get is substandard, I want to pay for it to be better. Our county council tax is going up by 5.99% this year and to be honest I'm glad: the reduction in service provision over the last few years has been embarrassing, yet the amount of disposable income in our (prosperous) town is clearly at an all-time high. Something is wrong with this.

More specifically, I'd move to unitaries in all rural areas. The current two-tier system is not fit for purpose in an age of very low budgets, but is also increasingly ill-suited for areas like most of the South-East where significant housing development is planned: the split between local planning (district) and infrastructure planning (county) means that Section 106/CIL funding slips through the cracks, and the local authorities are left having to fund infrastructure improvements that should be funded by the developers.

Alanbrooke said:

Roger said:

It's as I feared. Once out of london you're in Hartlepool

that's a cruel way to describe France

I was going to stretch a point and include Ludlow in the 'London' section. Anyway hope the Mayday fair doesn't prove too onerous

El_Capitano said:

More specifically, I'd move to unitaries in all rural areas.

For sure. Any idea how to get a proposal like that started ?

hunchman said:

Roger said:

OT More bullshit from Netanyahu.

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-great-show-glaring-flaw-3-takeaways-from-bibi-s-iran-lied-speech-1.6045586

For once we agree Woger. Bravo!

That's good to know. By the way a big hallo from all those Big Issue sellers who followed your advice on the stock market

Pulpstar said:

david_herdson said:

MarqueeMark said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

Your previoius experience of how things are going means we certainly listen to your feedback!

I did try to caveat the above comment with the fact that it's all second-hand (though from people who I have reasonable confidence in). I've not had chance to get out on the doorstep myself.

Surely Osset ward will be a gain ?

I wouldn't bank on it, though obviously it's one that we're targetting. Ossett is currently split Con/Lab/UKIP, though the UKIP councillor has defected to us and is standing again under our flag this time. However, we've not won it in a non-GE year since 2011, so it's not an easy nut to crack.

OldKingCole said:

El_Capitano said:

This is very, very good on the "hollowing out" of local council services: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/04/crumbling-britain-how-austerity-hollowing-out-heart-tory-somerset

I'm lucky enough to live in a more affluent rural area than West Somerset. But the story is broadly the same. The drip-drip cuts to education and children's services, in particular, are genuinely affecting kids' life chances.

It is enormously to the discredit of Corbyn and Cable that they have failed to make any of this an issue for the local elections.

Education at least has been removed from the control of elected councillors and handed over to corporate managers. My teacher grandchildren speak of job descriptions in upper levels of their heirarchies which were completely unknown to my teacher wife.

There is something in that, absolutely. The travails of multi-academy trusts such as the notorious Bright Tribe are painful to watch.

But local councils can still do a lot. Of the two schools I know best, one is still local-authority controlled, the other is an academy under the local Diocese (so, effectively, a charity). Both are very good schools, and recognised as such by Ofsted.

The county council still, in theory, has significant statutory responsibilities for these and all schools. Special needs support. Attendance. Exclusion. All of that.

I say "in theory" because, in practice, it is fulfilling almost none of these. When the schools phone to ask the LA officers for support, they are told bluntly that it isn't available any more. Every answer is phrased around "how can we avoid committing to any spending" rather than "how do we fulfil our statutory obligations", let alone "how do we do what's best for the child".

What this means is that schools are now spending more and more time fire-fighting the troubled, disruptive kids, and less time educating the 95%. I am lucky enough not to have a kid in an affected class, but there are a couple of classes I'm aware of where, frankly, I would withdraw my kid and go private. I place no blame on the teachers or the school management: I don't see what else they can do and I know the financial resources they are committing to these troubled kids are already way out of proportion. They have been let down by the local authority and, by extension, by a Government which is not willing to fund them properly.

Pulpstar said:

El_Capitano said:

More specifically, I'd move to unitaries in all rural areas.

For sure. Any idea how to get a proposal like that started ?

It's happening in Bucks. It's happening in Northants, though under the rather unfortunate circumstances of the existing County Council going bust. It may happen in Oxfordshire (county and two districts pro, three districts anti). One side-effect of Sajid Javid's elevation will be to stall this for a while: he had a few applications in his in-tray.

Really it needs a national party to adopt it as policy. It should be a natural fit for the Conservatives, but unfortunately there are too many shire Tories who see the erosion of their hard-fought powerbase. (That's certainly the case here with West Oxon and Cherwell, even though the county is Conservative-controlled and likely to remain so.)

I'm expecting Labour to lose seats in places like Leeds that normally elect by thirds but where there are all-out elections due to boundary changes. In wards where we hold all 3 seats we could easily lose one to Green or Lib Dem due to "traffic light" voting.

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

philiph said:

DavidL said:

The error in this analysis, in my opinion, is that Brexit is going to play any material part in the way people vote. There are a few sad obsessives about it but their votes are generally not in play anyway.

Votes will be decided on the usual desire to kick a government that is struggling a bit, frustration with an economy which has not provided wage growth for too many for too long, that has not provided affordable homes for a generation, that has in addition loaded half that generation with debt so that they end up paying more tax than people have since Lawson, with the widely held perception that "austerity" is some sort of morally defective choice rather than a desire to head to a situation where we live within our means and no doubt irritation with the local councils about less frequent bin collections etc.

National polling at the moment, especially the last 2 Yougovs, suggest the Tories might do ok but will those who don't see an alternative to a fairly lacklustre government be as motivated to vote as those who want to kick the machine when the government of the country is not at risk? I have my doubts.

In addition labour and cons are both euro sceptic to some extent, unless Corbyn has changed to euro enthusiast

Anyone who thinks voting Labour is an effective way of preventing Brexit really hasn't been paying attention. But I don't believe they are numerically significant anyway.

It’s the same as people who think voting Labour will help them buy a house in central London.

Oooh, I don't know, total economic collapse would probably lower Central London prices (denominated in US Dollars).

It’ll be fantastic for people paying in cash dollars, and very very sh!t for anyone wanting a mortgage in pounds - which of course covers most of the Corbyn enthusiasts.

El_Capitano said:

Pulpstar said:

El_Capitano said:

More specifically, I'd move to unitaries in all rural areas.

For sure. Any idea how to get a proposal like that started ?

It's happening in Bucks. It's happening in Northants, though under the rather unfortunate circumstances of the existing County Council going bust. It may happen in Oxfordshire (county and two districts pro, three districts anti). One side-effect of Sajid Javid's elevation will be to stall this for a while: he had a few applications in his in-tray.

Really it needs a national party to adopt it as policy. It should be a natural fit for the Conservatives, but unfortunately there are too many shire Tories who see the erosion of their hard-fought powerbase. (That's certainly the case here with West Oxon and Cherwell, even though the county is Conservative-controlled and likely to remain so.)

In Bucks the Conservative County Council want the unitary to be based on the County Council

But the Conservative District Councils want two unitary councils based on combinations of the District Councils.

They await a final decision fom the new Sec of State who's name is BROKENSHIRE !

notme said:

El_Capitano said:

This is very, very good on the "hollowing out" of local council services: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/04/crumbling-britain-how-austerity-hollowing-out-heart-tory-somerset

I'm lucky enough to live in a more affluent rural area than West Somerset. But the story is broadly the same. The drip-drip cuts to education and children's services, in particular, are genuinely affecting kids' life chances.

It is enormously to the discredit of Corbyn and Cable that they have failed to make any of this an issue for the local elections.

You can say theres been a hollowing of social services which has happened as growth in demand has happened. The idea that there's cuts in eduction however is utter nonsense. This is the very first year in over thirty years that education spending has stayed level. Saying that this is hollowing out is the equivalent of asking a morbidly obese man to reduced his daily calorific intake from 4,000 a day down to 3,500.

You would be stunned if you stepped foot into a modern school. The resources in both staff and resources is extraordinary and a long long way from anything we would have known as our own experiences twenty years ago.

Oh, I step foot into modern schools all the time.

Education spending is... different to how it was. Twenty years ago there were no multi-academy trusts or free schools. This has undoubtedly affected the profile of spending - I won't pronounce here on whether this is more or less efficient - but I don't think you can make a direct comparison that "there is 5% more education spending, therefore schools have 5% more to spend on doing the same job as they had to do 20 years ago".

But my primary concern is with the support and funding that schools are given to cope with disruptive kids, and that has, without question, been very severely affected.

I think this part of that leaflet is pretty important, but is being ignored.

"The leaflet appears to refer to an outbreak of the disease at a primary school within the Cradley and Wollescote ward, where Razzaq is a candidate.

The outbreak was revealed by local Labour councillor Tim Crumpton, who was later berated by the council for broadcasting confidential information, which he denied, The Stourbridge News reported."

nunuone said:

I think this part of that leaflet is pretty important, but is being ignored.

"The leaflet appears to refer to an outbreak of the disease at a primary school within the Cradley and Wollescote ward, where Razzaq is a candidate.

The outbreak was revealed by local Labour councillor Tim Crumpton, who was later berated by the council for broadcasting confidential information, which he denied, The Stourbridge News reported."

http://www.stourbridgenews.co.uk/news/16147568.Councillor_says_he_was_threatened_after_raising_public_health_concern/

This story is shocking but is happening up and down the country, this is what uncontrolled mass migration leads to.

" Cllr Crumpton linked the outbreak, which results from unsanitary conditions, to claims that Public Health officials had discovered around 25 people living in a tiny flat with one toilet in Lye High Street.

He told the chamber he had been informed there were 25 to 26 people in one flat above a shop and that he’d been told this by "Public Health people”."

This is happening in London as well.

nunuone said:

nunuone said:

I think this part of that leaflet is pretty important, but is being ignored.

"The leaflet appears to refer to an outbreak of the disease at a primary school within the Cradley and Wollescote ward, where Razzaq is a candidate.

The outbreak was revealed by local Labour councillor Tim Crumpton, who was later berated by the council for broadcasting confidential information, which he denied, The Stourbridge News reported."

http://www.stourbridgenews.co.uk/news/16147568.Councillor_says_he_was_threatened_after_raising_public_health_concern/

This story is shocking but is happening up and down the country, this is what uncontrolled mass migration leads to.

" Cllr Crumpton linked the outbreak, which results from unsanitary conditions, to claims that Public Health officials had discovered around 25 people living in a tiny flat with one toilet in Lye High Street.

He told the chamber he had been informed there were 25 to 26 people in one flat above a shop and that he’d been told this by "Public Health people”."

This is happening in London as well.

He should have named the council official that threatened him.
Then let the official publicly defend his actions.

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/991233050704039936

I can see SJ having a shot at becoming PM but he'll need Theresa to go quite quickly as the longer he's at Home the greater the chance it'll destroy him like it does most the politicians running that department...

Rumour has it that was why Theresa put both Boris and Amber into their respective positions:

A Tory MP once told me that May had chosen the most poisonous chalice for Rudd to sip at the cabinet table in order to break her spirit. Her energy would be harnessed to the consolidation of the prime minister’s Home Office legacy, while any ambitions she might have to copy May’s route to No 10, perhaps as the champion of a liberal Tory faction, would be burned up in the process. [...] A former Downing Street aide reports a similar calculation behind the placement of Boris Johnson in the Foreign Office. In that case, May was exploiting not diligence but its opposite. Johnson’s ambitions to be leader would be hobbled by the demands of a serious job, which would expose his congenital unseriousness. (That, too, appears to be working.)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/30/theresa-may-point-leader-stay-still-political-upheaval

Theresa doesn't like Sajid much, so presumably the same plan's afoot.

Stark_Dawning said:

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/991233050704039936

I can see SJ having a shot at becoming PM but he'll need Theresa to go quite quickly as the longer he's at Home the greater the chance it'll destroy him like it does most the politicians running that department...

Rumour has it that was why Theresa put both Boris and Amber into their respective positions:

A Tory MP once told me that May had chosen the most poisonous chalice for Rudd to sip at the cabinet table in order to break her spirit. Her energy would be harnessed to the consolidation of the prime minister’s Home Office legacy, while any ambitions she might have to copy May’s route to No 10, perhaps as the champion of a liberal Tory faction, would be burned up in the process. [...] A former Downing Street aide reports a similar calculation behind the placement of Boris Johnson in the Foreign Office. In that case, May was exploiting not diligence but its opposite. Johnson’s ambitions to be leader would be hobbled by the demands of a serious job, which would expose his congenital unseriousness. (That, too, appears to be working.)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/30/theresa-may-point-leader-stay-still-political-upheaval

Theresa doesn't like Sajid much, so presumably the same plan's afoot.

Or Javid is May's John Major

nunuone said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

But didn't you make another post on Thursday saying maybe you had an over reaction and that your nerves had calm down?

Yes. But as you say, while I cast a little doubt on my Wednesday thoughts, I didn't repudiate them.

Stark_Dawning said:

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/991233050704039936

I can see SJ having a shot at becoming PM but he'll need Theresa to go quite quickly as the longer he's at Home the greater the chance it'll destroy him like it does most the politicians running that department...

Rumour has it that was why Theresa put both Boris and Amber into their respective positions:

A Tory MP once told me that May had chosen the most poisonous chalice for Rudd to sip at the cabinet table in order to break her spirit. Her energy would be harnessed to the consolidation of the prime minister’s Home Office legacy, while any ambitions she might have to copy May’s route to No 10, perhaps as the champion of a liberal Tory faction, would be burned up in the process. [...] A former Downing Street aide reports a similar calculation behind the placement of Boris Johnson in the Foreign Office. In that case, May was exploiting not diligence but its opposite. Johnson’s ambitions to be leader would be hobbled by the demands of a serious job, which would expose his congenital unseriousness. (That, too, appears to be working.)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/30/theresa-may-point-leader-stay-still-political-upheaval

Theresa doesn't like Sajid much, so presumably the same plan's afoot.

So she deliberately hobbles and undermines her government just to undermine two potential leadership rivals at a moment she won the leadership uncontested?

Not sure I buy that. She definitely took LBJ's advice wrt Johnson though.

Stark_Dawning said:

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/991233050704039936

I can see SJ having a shot at becoming PM but he'll need Theresa to go quite quickly as the longer he's at Home the greater the chance it'll destroy him like it does most the politicians running that department...

Rumour has it that was why Theresa put both Boris and Amber into their respective positions:

A Tory MP once told me that May had chosen the most poisonous chalice for Rudd to sip at the cabinet table in order to break her spirit. Her energy would be harnessed to the consolidation of the prime minister’s Home Office legacy, while any ambitions she might have to copy May’s route to No 10, perhaps as the champion of a liberal Tory faction, would be burned up in the process. [...] A former Downing Street aide reports a similar calculation behind the placement of Boris Johnson in the Foreign Office. In that case, May was exploiting not diligence but its opposite. Johnson’s ambitions to be leader would be hobbled by the demands of a serious job, which would expose his congenital unseriousness. (That, too, appears to be working.)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/30/theresa-may-point-leader-stay-still-political-upheaval

Theresa doesn't like Sajid much, so presumably the same plan's afoot.

It was much more to do with having a vocal and visible Remainer in the Cabinet. May still has respect for Rudd attending the Brexit debate so soon after the death of her father.

david_herdson said:

nunuone said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

But didn't you make another post on Thursday saying maybe you had an over reaction and that your nerves had calm down?

Yes. But as you say, while I cast a little doubt on my Wednesday thoughts, I didn't repudiate them.

Did the dementia tax come up on every other doorstep ?

For all the Tories woes regarding Brexit, windrush there isn't anything like that policy floating about at the moment.

HYUFD said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

I think you are right, while the general election result was better for Labour than expected and worse for the Tories I think this week's local elections will be the reverse.

Everyone is expecting big Labour gains while forgetting Labour won the NEV by 2% anyway when these wards were last up and most polls now have it at least tied

Agreed. And as has been said, if there is a swing to Labour in London, there has to be a larger than average swing away from Labour in the rest of the country.

Owen Jones
‏VERIFIED ACCOUNT @OwenJones84

This is urgent. Labour won’t make gains on Thursday unless more of you who want a socialist society volunteer to come and canvass. SIGN UP >> http://www.facebook.com/owenjones84/events …

Young Jones having another attack of the Vapours.

Slackbladder said:

Jonathan said:

Stark_Dawning said:

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/991233050704039936

I can see SJ having a shot at becoming PM but he'll need Theresa to go quite quickly as the longer he's at Home the greater the chance it'll destroy him like it does most the politicians running that department...

Rumour has it that was why Theresa put both Boris and Amber into their respective positions:

A Tory MP once told me that May had chosen the most poisonous chalice for Rudd to sip at the cabinet table in order to break her spirit. Her energy would be harnessed to the consolidation of the prime minister’s Home Office legacy, while any ambitions she might have to copy May’s route to No 10, perhaps as the champion of a liberal Tory faction, would be burned up in the process. [...] A former Downing Street aide reports a similar calculation behind the placement of Boris Johnson in the Foreign Office. In that case, May was exploiting not diligence but its opposite. Johnson’s ambitions to be leader would be hobbled by the demands of a serious job, which would expose his congenital unseriousness. (That, too, appears to be working.)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/30/theresa-may-point-leader-stay-still-political-upheaval

Theresa doesn't like Sajid much, so presumably the same plan's afoot.

So she deliberately hobbles and undermines her government just to undermine two potential leadership rivals at a moment she won the leadership uncontested?

Not sure I buy that. She definitely took LBJ's advice wrt Johnson though.

On the other hand, she had to give those jobs to someone. HO is notorious for being a 'difficult' department where you could find yourself in problems, and Johnson did need a high profile role as the 'leading' leaver.

FO is an absolute cakewalk compared to HO, a tough gig.

malcolmg said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

NickPalmer said:

HYUFD said:

Justine Greening says companies should discriminate against Old Etonian applicants as their grades were easier to achieve than those from some state schools.

Does not sound very conservative to me

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/discriminate-against-job-applicants-from-eton-says-former-education-secretary-justine-greening-m0w3fb86k

Isn't it accepted wisdom that companies look beyond the simple grade to assess the personality, including getting a decent degree from an unpromising-looking background? When I select someone I'm mildly impressed if they've got a first, but someone who's succeeded against the odds is worth a close look too and may be preferable. I'm not sure she's really saying more than that.

All rounders who have achieved outside the classroom by all means but I prefer to judge on merit and of course once you get to university it is a level playing field whether you went to an 'inadequate' or 'requires improvement' comprehensive or Eton or Westminster

So you think that someone with 3 Bs from Eton has the same merit as someone with 3 Bs from an inner-city comp?

As a Tory of course he/she does , any chap going to Eton must be a good egg , thick or not.

No, just because I do not believe in inverse snobbery does not stop me judging people on their merits rather than the school they went to

Slackbladder said:

Owen Jones
‏VERIFIED ACCOUNT @OwenJones84

This is urgent. Labour won’t make gains on Thursday unless more of you who want a socialist society volunteer to come and canvass. SIGN UP >> http://www.facebook.com/owenjones84/events …

Young Jones having another attack of the Vapours.

Having 600,000 members is one thing.

Having 600,000 activists is quite another.

An issue for the membership in all political parties.

Slackbladder said:

Owen Jones
‏VERIFIED ACCOUNT @OwenJones84

This is urgent. Labour won’t make gains on Thursday unless more of you who want a socialist society volunteer to come and canvass. SIGN UP >> http://www.facebook.com/owenjones84/events …

Young Jones having another attack of the Vapours.

Good, hopefully we will see many of those who want a 'socialist society' tramping the streets of Wandsworth, Westminster and Chelsea where I am sure the swing voters in their expensive houses in central London will be convinced by their preaching Marxism on the doorstep

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

I think you are right, while the general election result was better for Labour than expected and worse for the Tories I think this week's local elections will be the reverse.

Everyone is expecting big Labour gains while forgetting Labour won the NEV by 2% anyway when these wards were last up and most polls now have it at least tied

Agreed. And as has been said, if there is a swing to Labour in London, there has to be a larger than average swing away from Labour in the rest of the country.

Yes the Tories could even make net gains outside London

HYUFD said:

Slackbladder said:

Owen Jones
‏VERIFIED ACCOUNT @OwenJones84

This is urgent. Labour won’t make gains on Thursday unless more of you who want a socialist society volunteer to come and canvass. SIGN UP >> http://www.facebook.com/owenjones84/events …

Young Jones having another attack of the Vapours.

Good, hopefully we will see many of those who want a 'socialist society' tramping the streets of Wandsworth, Westminster and Chelsea where I am sure the swing voters in their expensive houses in central London will be convinced by their preaching Marxism on the doorstep

Plenty of people in very expensive houses where I was campaigning at the GE were voting Labour in protest at the Cons retoxification, I assure you.

Of course if you are in a very expensive house you can weather the storm of the increased Labour cost of government better than the little people (as I thought but didn't tell them).

More trouble for May...

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

I think you are right, while the general election result was better for Labour than expected and worse for the Tories I think this week's local elections will be the reverse.

Everyone is expecting big Labour gains while forgetting Labour won the NEV by 2% anyway when these wards were last up and most polls now have it at least tied

Agreed. And as has been said, if there is a swing to Labour in London, there has to be a larger than average swing away from Labour in the rest of the country.

Yes the Tories could even make net gains outside London

They certainly should with all of those ex-Kipper seats up for grabs on top of a swing to the Tories.

CD13 said:

There won't be another referendum. The very act of calling it would be political suicide. An act of 'extreme bravery' as Sir Humphrey would say. You may as well say to the electorate ... "Do what we say in future."

Of course there won't. That's why politicians need to keep saying it won't happen every five minutes just in case anyone forgets...

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/991261825969917952

maybe they should just try training more at home

David_Evershed said:

Pulpstar said:

david_herdson said:

nunuone said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

But didn't you make another post on Thursday saying maybe you had an over reaction and that your nerves had calm down?

Yes. But as you say, while I cast a little doubt on my Wednesday thoughts, I didn't repudiate them.

Did the dementia tax come up on every other doorstep ?

For all the Tories woes regarding Brexit, windrush there isn't anything like that policy floating about at the moment.

The biggest issue for Tier 1 councils is that adult and child social care is absorbing 60% of their expenditure and increasing towards 80%.

However, the solution is not in the hands of councils but central government.

Yes but politically the inevitable council tax rise is akin to boiling a frog (Also people think it'll go up no matter who is in) whereas the 'dementia tax' was shiny and new . People definitely didn't want to touch it for the very first time.

justin124 said:

rottenborough said:

Morning all,

I decent result in London will allow Labour to avoid looking at the truth I suspect. That is that out in the marginals outside London, they are not doing anywhere near as well as an Opposition approaching mid-term should be.

They are performing better than Labour managed under Gaitskell in 1960/1961 - and indeed than under Kinnock in 1984/85 & 1988!

Kinnock of course lost both the 1987 and 1992 general elections and it was Wilson not Gaitskill who won in 1964

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

I think you are right, while the general election result was better for Labour than expected and worse for the Tories I think this week's local elections will be the reverse.

Everyone is expecting big Labour gains while forgetting Labour won the NEV by 2% anyway when these wards were last up and most polls now have it at least tied

Agreed. And as has been said, if there is a swing to Labour in London, there has to be a larger than average swing away from Labour in the rest of the country.

Yes the Tories could even make net gains outside London

They certainly should with all of those ex-Kipper seats up for grabs on top of a swing to the Tories.

Quite possibly though Labour will get some of the ex-Kippers too

rottenborough said:

Alanbrooke said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/991261825969917952

maybe they should just try training more at home

Doesn't solve today's problems. Takes 8 years or more iirc.

HMG has been in power that long and done nothing

same for their predecessors

the NHS just doesn't plan its personnel needs properly

Pulpstar said:

David_Evershed said:

Pulpstar said:

david_herdson said:

nunuone said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

I don't have any direct canvass contact from this year's locals, so take what I say here with a pinch of salt. However, the feedback I've had from experienced activists across several wards in my part of the world has been encouragingly positive for the Tories. I'd be very surprised if we don't make any gains in Wakefield. I'd settle for a net +2 to +3 (out of 21 wards, with one defence), but it could be more (it could be less too, though I'd be very surprised and disappointed if there are no net gains).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

But didn't you make another post on Thursday saying maybe you had an over reaction and that your nerves had calm down?

Yes. But as you say, while I cast a little doubt on my Wednesday thoughts, I didn't repudiate them.

Did the dementia tax come up on every other doorstep ?

For all the Tories woes regarding Brexit, windrush there isn't anything like that policy floating about at the moment.

The biggest issue for Tier 1 councils is that adult and child social care is absorbing 60% of their expenditure and increasing towards 80%.

However, the solution is not in the hands of councils but central government.

Yes but politically the inevitable council tax rise is akin to boiling a frog (Also people think it'll go up no matter who is in) whereas the 'dementia tax' was shiny and new . People definitely didn't want to touch it for the very first time.

Council tax, National Insurance and Income tax will be the source for extra social care and NHS funds.

The general election result killed off the idea of a 'dementia tax' for good

Alanbrooke said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/991261825969917952

maybe they should just try training more at home

Maybe all the part time lady doctors could work full time?

I'll get my coat.

The BBC employed household names on “an elegant form of zero hours contract”, a tribunal has heard, as three BBC news presenters appealed against a £920,000 tax bill.

Joanna Gosling, David Eades and Tim Willcox were “pushed by the BBC” into setting up personal service companies, an arrangement that allowed the corporation to avoid paying ­employers’ National Insurance contributions. But the contracts came with no benefits and amounted to “no work, no pay”, the court heard.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/01/bbc-put-presenters-elegant-form-zero-hours-pay-court-hears/

With this and Cliff case, the bbc taxpayer could be paying a shit tonne of cash.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Alanbrooke said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/991261825969917952

maybe they should just try training more at home

That Frank Lampard on the cover went to a posh school. He could have got into medicine, I expect, with his O-level Latin and public support for the Conservative Party.

medicine is oversubscribed at something like 10-1

there are more than enough capable candidates, even male ones

rottenborough said:

More trouble for May...

None of it amounts to a row of beans it seems......

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/991277540084998144

another increasing Tory lead....what if this is more like 2015 where the tories end up with a 7% lead?

HYUFD said:

Pulpstar said:

David_Evershed said:

Pulpstar said:

david_herdson said:

nunuone said:

david_herdson said:

GIN1138 said:

david_herdson said:

Kind of on-topicish.

).

I remember you coming on to PB three nights before the 2017 general election and saying your canvassing had shown it was all going down the pan for Theresa and Con!

Everyone thought your account had been hacked!

For accuracy, it was the Wednesday, and it was based on the reactions to delivering knock-up letters - but yes, I remember TSE contacting me (message, I think, not phone call?), to check whether I had posted the comment or not. I hadn't seen the reaction it caused as i just made a couple of quick posts then settled to to eat and then put the kid to bed.

But that was a first-hand experience; this isn't quite. However, I still feel reasonably confident. My biggest concern is piling up a load of good seconds - though that of itself would be progress. I still can't see us not doing better here this year than in 2014.

But didn't you make another post on Thursday saying maybe you had an over reaction and that your nerves had calm down?

Yes. But as you say, while I cast a little doubt on my Wednesday thoughts, I didn't repudiate them.

Did the dementia tax come up on every other doorstep ?

For all the Tories woes regarding Brexit, windrush there isn't anything like that policy floating about at the moment.

The biggest issue for Tier 1 councils is that adult and child social care is absorbing 60% of their expenditure and increasing towards 80%.

However, the solution is not in the hands of councils but central government.

Yes but politically the inevitable council tax rise is akin to boiling a frog (Also people think it'll go up no matter who is in) whereas the 'dementia tax' was shiny and new . People definitely didn't want to touch it for the very first time.

Council tax, National Insurance and Income tax will be the source for extra social care and NHS funds.

The general election result killed off the idea of a 'dementia tax' for good

Dementia tax already exists.

Unless you have assets worth less than £23,250, you pay for your own residential and nursing care apart from a small allowance.

nunuone said:

rottenborough said:

More trouble for May...

None of it amounts to a row of beans it seems......

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/991277540084998144

another increasing Tory lead....what if this is more like 2015 where the tories end up with a 7% lead?

Windrush seems to have absolutely no impact.