@tim, @Jonathan - Yes, looks like we're winning that argument.
Quite how the Guardian will react to being told Osborne and IDS were right all along, and that housing benefit needs to be drastically cut, remains to be seen, of course.
@tim, @Jonathan - Yes, looks like we're winning that argument.
Quite how the Guardian will react to being told Osborne and IDS were right all along, and that housing benefit needs to be drastically cut, remains to be seen, of course.
There was another article which showed that over part (I think) of the period when crime was falling, the number of people going to prison was rising, which might also be a factor.
At any event, a fall in crime is good news and probably a result of a number of factors.
Interesting post from Ben Goldacre how vaccine scares are cultural - not Scientific - phenomena - and hence how different countries have different scares - and the scares are almost as old as vaccination itself:
Spending on housing benefit has risen from £14 billion ten years ago to £21 billion today. That is close to a 50 per cent increase over and above inflation.
Costs are completely out of control. We now spend more on housing benefit than we do on the police and on universities combined. .... It is clear that the system of housing benefit is in dire need for reform
If Labour have finally stopped their absurd denial of these obvious truths, then that is great. I look forward to them voting in favour of the next round of reforms to housing benefit so we can start targeting resources more effectively.
I also look forward to seeing pigs flying around Queen Elizabeth Tower.
Surely housing benefits cut would "take money out of the economy" and "put growth at risk" ??
I realise you had to move on from "but an immigrant might be involved in the building works" and "but a homeowner might buy something from IKEA", but the idea was surely to move to better reasons for opposing building, not worse ones.
Problem tim is that nobody sane believes Labour will cut the benefit before or after these houses are built - Labour can't cut benefits - they don't have the nuts.
I look forward to Labour's new housing policy being as successful in knocking down large parts of our Northern Cities as Prescott's Pathfinder initiative.
@tim - Yes, much more needs to be done to get housing benefit under control. Now that Labour have accepted this and will no doubt, therefore, support Osborne against shroud-waving attacks from the BBC, Guardian etc, perhaps progress can be made more rapidly.
What is clear from these figures is that the Coalition has worked very hard with the oil companies to increase investment in the North Sea. The benefits of the additional investment are not due to be reflected in increased output until late 2013 and 2014, so this underpins the general forecasts of stronger growth in 2014-15 seen in recent forecasts.
The unionists told us it was declining and was worth nothing, now it is saving the country, you could not make it up , unionists have lying in their genetics.
Spending on housing benefit has risen from £14 billion ten years ago to £21 billion today. That is close to a 50 per cent increase over and above inflation.
Costs are completely out of control. We now spend more on housing benefit than we do on the police and on universities combined.
I look froward to seeing Cammie and Osbrowne's crackdown on "out of control" welfare spending for pensions.
@tim - No, they'll campaign on 'we'll spend lots more money, on the off-chance that in ten years time that might or might not reduce demand for housing benefit'.
Or, at least, they'll try that on, then retreat when it is torn to shreds by the commentators and think-tanks.
Housing benefit goes to landlords, where's the political cost in cutting it by building houses?
Building houses and reducing the amount of government money you throw at the demand side of the property market reduces house prices. Stupid British people, ie most of them, like high house prices, because it makes them feel rich. That's why Labour didn't fix the problem last time.
That said, it's one of those rare policies that both sounds good in opposition and is good in practice, so if they made a big deal of it in opposition you could probably rely on Labour to follow through in government.
What is clear from these figures is that the Coalition has worked very hard with the oil companies to increase investment in the North Sea. The benefits of the additional investment are not due to be reflected in increased output until late 2013 and 2014, so this underpins the general forecasts of stronger growth in 2014-15 seen in recent forecasts.
The unionists told us it was declining and was worth nothing, now it is saving the country, you could not make it up , unionists have lying in their genetics.
A bit of a parochial assessment, malcolm.
Richard Tyndall knows better than me, but new technology and higher oil prices have meant that more reserves have become technically and commercially feasible to develop in the North Sea. What was needed to access the additional reserves was increased investment.
The Treasury has targetted new development with tax incentives and the industry has responded. What these figures show is that investment in the North Sea Oil and Gas development has been far higher than anticipated at the time the coalition government were elected.
The increased investments should yield higher production output starting from the end of 2013 and gaining momentum through 2014. It should be noted though that output has been on a downward trend since the late 1990s so the additional capacity may not get us back to peak outputs just hold the decline.
Newspapers reject Levenson - ho ho hacked off fail
I think you mean Letwin/Cameron Fop Fail.
I can't see how returning to the press version of the old failed toothless PCC could ever be a problem. Everyone knows the newspapers will behave themselves for the next few years if they promise to.
Newspaper industry representatives are to reject cross-party plans for press regulation, and are to publish an alternative royal charter.
What?!
Just who. The. F* do these people think they are?
They're just very sensibly following the advice of Harriet Harman:
"I think it would really help Leveson if newspaper editors came forward with a solution. We have had a good scoping of the issues, but now it is time for the editors to lay their cards on the table. They need to propose the solution, rather than have one imposed upon them."
Spending on housing benefit has risen from £14 billion ten years ago to £21 billion today. That is close to a 50 per cent increase over and above inflation.
Costs are completely out of control. We now spend more on housing benefit than we do on the police and on universities combined.
I look froward to seeing Cammie and Osbrowne's crackdown on "out of control" welfare spending for pensions.
Source - Govt. Medium-term benefit expenditure tables and caseload table from 1948/49 to 2016/17
Pork
You need to take into account is the extent of state subsidy involved in providing social housing at below market rents and not just look at a single benefit cost.
The capital value of social housing stock will be depressed if the rental yield is below market rates. If you raise rental yield and associated housing benefit to market or near market levels current expenses will rise but there will be a counterbalancing rise in fixed asset values. So what the government loses on the swings it gains on the roundabouts.
The movement to market pricing facilitates rebalancing of the housing market from public to private sector supply; creates liquidity in the housing stock ownership, management and rental markets; and gives incentives for private capital to be injected into residential property construction and management.
Sometimes you need to peel away the cupule from the acorn to realise its nutritional value.
I sense the PB Tories don't understand (part 354) the political issue here
Joey Jones @joeyjonessky 8m Big slap from newspapers for PM. He may have felt he went the extra mile to protect their concerns, but now all thrown back in his face.
When do they ever?
Not to mention this is yet another easy win for the lib dems as they can effortlessly put it back onto the political agenda then sit back and laugh as Cammie is caught haplessly in the crossfire looking clueless.
Good for the newspapers. The PM should adopt this position now and tear up the old one Labour, the Lib-Dems and Hacked Off's billionaire backers tried to foist on the press.
Let's hope our elected Parliament - David Cameron in particular - grow a spine and dish out a stiff lesson in democracy to these "Newspaper Executives".
I sense the PB Tories don't understand (part 354) the political issue here
Joey Jones @joeyjonessky 8m Big slap from newspapers for PM. He may have felt he went the extra mile to protect their concerns, but now all thrown back in his face.
What do you expect when you send a wet like Oliver Letwin.
Ed Balls not having fun on WATO with the ComRes polling results being quoted to him "your highest support has been 24% now it's down to 20%...why should George Osborne believe you if the public don't?"
I sense the PB Tories don't understand (part 354) the political issue here
Joey Jones @joeyjonessky 8m Big slap from newspapers for PM. He may have felt he went the extra mile to protect their concerns, but now all thrown back in his face.
When do they ever?
Not to mention this is yet another easy win for the lib dems as they can effortlessly put it back onto the political agenda and sit back and laugh as Cammie is caught haplessly in the crossfire looking clueless.
You two are such a class act. If the PM backs down facing a Labour/Lib-Dem majority for statutory reform then he's lost and its a Labour victory. If the newspapers reject it, its a problem solely for the PM. Nice try. This was a terrible mess begrudgingly accepted, nobody who believes in a free press (seemingly only the Tories and every paper bar the Guardian/Independent) will bemoan its demise.
Anyone know when we're due to get the standard revisions to the GDP data? Do we have to wait until the next quarter to have a better idea whether or not we actually went into recession again?
Not that it really matters, as we've effectively been in one long recession this whole time, but politically a backwards revision is far more managable (if the next quarter also has growth anyway).
Sometimes you need to peel away the cupule from the acorn to realise its nutritional value.
Spin away Seth O Logue, but the govt. figures are crystal clear. The amount spent on pensions massively overshadows every other section of welfare spending.
Anyone know when we're due to get the standard revisions to the GDP data? Do we have to wait until the next quarter to have a better idea whether or not we actually went into recession again?
Not that it really matters, as we've effectively been in one long recession this whole time, but politically a backwards revision is far more managable (if the next quarter also has growth anyway).
Revisions of the GDP figure happen before the next one is published normally. Such revisions are not normally that big and almost certainly not enough to push it into negative territory.
The odds of it being revised to being negative are about as likely as tim/Mick going a day without using the word "fop".
Sometimes you need to peel away the cupule from the acorn to realise its nutritional value.
Spin away Seth O Logue, but the govt. figures are crystal clear. The amount spent on pensions massively overshadows everything else spent on welfare.
So what? Those on pensions have paid taxes into the system for decades based on the notion that when they retire they'll get their pension, they've paid for it. Welfare is not remotely the same.
The principles behind Lord Leveson's report were sensible, but the proposed method of implementation was completely half-assed. It needed a lot more thought.
Journalists tweeting pictures of Churchill and portraying themselves as titans fighting for free speech, however, are making idiots of themselves.
I does seem that the Coalition through Herculean and unpopular effort have got the UK out of the Blair/Brown/New Labour gutter. I wish Italy had politicians of Osborne's callibre and mettle. Alas no.
Sometimes you need to peel away the cupule from the acorn to realise its nutritional value.
Spin away Seth O Logue, but the govt. figures are crystal clear. The amount spent on pensions massively overshadows everything else spent on welfare.
So what? Those on pensions have paid taxes into the system for decades based on the notion that when they retire they'll get their pension, they've paid for it. Welfare is not remotely the same.
Pensions is part of welfare spending. You can't be stupid enough not to realise that surely?
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 1m I imagine Dave and George will be more than a bit peeved that papers have pushed good GDP figs down running order with rival charter story..
You thought Man Cries At Funeral Near Other Man was going to dominate the news agenda for weeks, if not months, and might even turn the next two general elections.
To put it politely, it didn't quite turn out that way, did it?
Your assessment of newsworthiness must henceforth be seen in the light of that ridiculous mistake.
Ah - but who can forget farmer tim's excitement over a horse? Ridden by former Prime Minister David Cameron...
I imagine Dave and George will be more than a bit peeved that papers have pushed good GDP figs down running order with rival charter story..
On Tom newton dunn ,what I've seen of him and the sun's political strategy against labour so far have failed,he comes across as a posh clown with out a clue how to get a great political story.
Sometimes you need to peel away the cupule from the acorn to realise its nutritional value.
Spin away Seth O Logue, but the govt. figures are crystal clear. The amount spent on pensions massively overshadows everything else spent on welfare.
So what? Those on pensions have paid taxes into the system for decades based on the notion that when they retire they'll get their pension, they've paid for it. Welfare is not remotely the same.
Pensions is part of welfare spending. You can't be stupid enough not to realise that surely?
Point.
Your Head.
----
Given you'd already separated pensions from "everything else spent on welfare" my reply was on the same basis. Should have been obvious to anyone not stupid, I'll realise I need to dumb-down what I'm saying next time I guess. I'm sorry I didn't realise I was talking to a goldfish who'd forget what they themselves wrote a minute before.
Point is still valid even if it went over your head. Pensioners have paid taxes for decades, the rest of welfare is not guaranteed to be the same. Supporting pensioners who've retired is a design not flaw of the system - supporting those who can't be arsed to work is a flaw.
nobody who believes in a free press (seemingly only the Tories and every paper bar the Guardian/Independent) will bemoan its demise.
Seemingly only most journalists since the NUJ said they backed the govt. proposals.
We've yet to hear how measures like not having Dacre and his chums on the board of a new PCC is "the end of press freedom" but no doubt his adoring spinners on here can tell us.
nobody who believes in a free press (seemingly only the Tories and every paper bar the Guardian/Independent) will bemoan its demise.
Seemingly only most journalists since the NUJ said they backed the govt. proposals.
We've yet to hear how measures like not having Dacre and his chums on the board of a new PCC is "the end of press freedom" but no doubt his adoring spinners on here can tell us.
A Union != most journalists.
That's like saying the NUT is the same as most teachers.
Tyres for the next 3 races are: "In Spain, the hard and medium will be used; in Monaco the soft and super-soft; and in Canada the medium and the super-soft. "
Mostly written the early mini-review of the season to date. I plan to post that early next week on pb2.
Point is still valid even if it went over your head.
You tried ineptly to draw a false distinction over pensions and welfare by stating " Welfare is not remotely the same." It is welfare you silly billy. No amount of amusing pointing at your head can stop that from being a fact.
Pensioners have paid taxes for decades, the rest of welfare is not guaranteed to be the same.
Not guaranteed? Do I sense you did actually grasp that other people do actually pay taxes and benefit from welfare too?
Now run along and have a look at the chart again petal, and tell me what the % of welfare spend is for jobseekers allowance for a start. Here's a clue, it's not 46% like pensions are. It is in fact just tiny, tiny bit lower than that.
It amazes me to see what lengths this blog goes to dish the Labour party. It would seem that Mike Smithson et al is funded by the Conservative party
Oh please, that's aburd. He's not a fan of Ed M though. But it's worthy noting that the Conservatives have been in downward trend for about a year, and every other week it seems like they are worried about the impact on UKIP or giving up on 2015, so turnabout's fair play. There's been a trend of anti-labour stories all over the political world in recent weeks, or at least to temper the optimism of Labour, so it's not necessarily an agenda, just a reflection of current thinking that has everyone scrutinizing Labour, looking for issue.
But jumping to the 'this is harsh on x, so must be a paid lackey of Y' argument is just lazy.
I knew that would make you foam at the mouth dear. Yes, imagine it, a union. They aren't illegal you know no matter how much some far right fruitcakes seem to want that.
I'm starting to think that maybe - just maybe - Cameron will somehow stay in office after the next election. He doesn't deserve to, and will be in spite of his own best efforts to blow it, and it may even be in some kind of awful grand coalition with Labour - but I just have a hunch he will be there a while longer and Miliband won't make it.
Comments
Quite how the Guardian will react to being told Osborne and IDS were right all along, and that housing benefit needs to be drastically cut, remains to be seen, of course.
Intriguing development in the debate over Press regulation about to unfold. Watch this space! #Leveson
'Big hint from Labour on housing'
Free houses?
There was another article which showed that over part (I think) of the period when crime was falling, the number of people going to prison was rising, which might also be a factor.
At any event, a fall in crime is good news and probably a result of a number of factors.
http://www.badscience.net/2013/04/how-vaccine-scares-respect-local-cultural-boundaries/
Spending on housing benefit has risen from £14 billion ten years ago to £21 billion today. That is close to a 50 per cent increase over and above inflation.
Costs are completely out of control. We now spend more on housing benefit than we do on the police and on universities combined.
....
It is clear that the system of housing benefit is in dire need for reform
Emergency Budget, 22 June 2010
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jun/22/emergency-budget-full-speech-text
If Labour have finally stopped their absurd denial of these obvious truths, then that is great. I look forward to them voting in favour of the next round of reforms to housing benefit so we can start targeting resources more effectively.
I also look forward to seeing pigs flying around Queen Elizabeth Tower.
I have 2 new policies!!! - Unfortunately it's because I've just renewed the car and house insurance!
11:55 AM - 25 Apr 2013
http://straighttothesource.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/welfare-spending-2011-2012.jpg
Source - Govt. Medium-term benefit expenditure tables and caseload table from 1948/49 to 2016/17
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22294722
Or, at least, they'll try that on, then retreat when it is torn to shreds by the commentators and think-tanks.
That said, it's one of those rare policies that both sounds good in opposition and is good in practice, so if they made a big deal of it in opposition you could probably rely on Labour to follow through in government.
Richard Tyndall knows better than me, but new technology and higher oil prices have meant that more reserves have become technically and commercially feasible to develop in the North Sea. What was needed to access the additional reserves was increased investment.
The Treasury has targetted new development with tax incentives and the industry has responded. What these figures show is that investment in the North Sea Oil and Gas development has been far higher than anticipated at the time the coalition government were elected.
The increased investments should yield higher production output starting from the end of 2013 and gaining momentum through 2014. It should be noted though that output has been on a downward trend since the late 1990s so the additional capacity may not get us back to peak outputs just hold the decline.
What could possibly go wrong?
What?!
Just who. The. F* do these people think they are?
Just a reminder, no talking, directly, or indirectly about phone hacking
"I think it would really help Leveson if newspaper editors came forward with a solution. We have had a good scoping of the issues, but now it is time for the editors to lay their cards on the table. They need to propose the solution, rather than have one imposed upon them."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan/24/leveson-inquiry-harrietharman
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2308397/Evgeny-Lebedev-Russian-tycoon-owns-Independent-20k-gift-Hacked-Off.html
Goodness gracious. Excessive amounts of chicken. Whatever next?
Pork
You need to take into account is the extent of state subsidy involved in providing social housing at below market rents and not just look at a single benefit cost.
The capital value of social housing stock will be depressed if the rental yield is below market rates. If you raise rental yield and associated housing benefit to market or near market levels current expenses will rise but there will be a counterbalancing rise in fixed asset values. So what the government loses on the swings it gains on the roundabouts.
The movement to market pricing facilitates rebalancing of the housing market from public to private sector supply; creates liquidity in the housing stock ownership, management and rental markets; and gives incentives for private capital to be injected into residential property construction and management.
Sometimes you need to peel away the cupule from the acorn to realise its nutritional value.
CON 29%
LAB 29%
LIB 22%
OTHER/DON'T KNOW 20%
Not to mention this is yet another easy win for the lib dems as they can effortlessly put it back onto the political agenda then sit back and laugh as Cammie is caught haplessly in the crossfire looking clueless.
Let's hope our elected Parliament - David Cameron in particular - grow a spine and dish out a stiff lesson in democracy to these "Newspaper Executives".
Not that it really matters, as we've effectively been in one long recession this whole time, but politically a backwards revision is far more managable (if the next quarter also has growth anyway).
Cam will shrug and offer a free vote...
Goodness gracious. Excessive amounts of chicken. Whatever next?
Phew, Pork. That was a close escape.
You are luckier than Boy George!
The odds of it being revised to being negative are about as likely as tim/Mick going a day without using the word "fop".
Journalists tweeting pictures of Churchill and portraying themselves as titans fighting for free speech, however, are making idiots of themselves.
Marvellous
Your Head.
----
Given you'd already separated pensions from "everything else spent on welfare" my reply was on the same basis. Should have been obvious to anyone not stupid, I'll realise I need to dumb-down what I'm saying next time I guess. I'm sorry I didn't realise I was talking to a goldfish who'd forget what they themselves wrote a minute before.
Point is still valid even if it went over your head. Pensioners have paid taxes for decades, the rest of welfare is not guaranteed to be the same. Supporting pensioners who've retired is a design not flaw of the system - supporting those who can't be arsed to work is a flaw.
We've yet to hear how measures like not having Dacre and his chums on the board of a new PCC is "the end of press freedom" but no doubt his adoring spinners on here can tell us.
That's like saying the NUT is the same as most teachers.
1m - is that how many sales in newspapers the sun have lost since he became political editor ;-)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22290968
Tyres for the next 3 races are:
"In Spain, the hard and medium will be used; in Monaco the soft and super-soft; and in Canada the medium and the super-soft. "
Mostly written the early mini-review of the season to date. I plan to post that early next week on pb2.
Now run along and have a look at the chart again petal, and tell me what the % of welfare spend is for jobseekers allowance for a start. Here's a clue, it's not 46% like pensions are. It is in fact just tiny, tiny bit lower than that.
But jumping to the 'this is harsh on x, so must be a paid lackey of Y' argument is just lazy.
Tell me, how many journalists do you think know sex tourists? Does that prove or disprove there aren't many? You tell me.
NUJ membership around 38,000.
2010 estimate of number of UK mainstream journalists around 40,000.