I think you're a welcome addition to the state, but can I suggest you try a new username? Even as someone that dislikes Cameron, I find it just diminishes your credibility. It comes across like the people that use "Bliar", but as it begins every one of your posts even well-written posts are affected by it.
Well said, same as Bruin... just lacks humour.
Just read the Dan Hodges piece too. A bit rubbish tonight; sometimes he tries to hard to kick Ed Miliband, looking for angles where none really exist. Hodges is better when he gets juicy quotes off Shadow Cabinet members and gives his take on the intra-Labour rivalries and splits.
Am i cracking up or is that last table 4 years old? Whats the particular relevance now?
Look at the trend from 1992 to 2010.
I see that but why are we talking about it now rather than in 2010?
Because more and more people are undecided and looking at alternative parties, you may not have noticed, but for the first time in over a century, a party other than the Tories or Lab finished first in a nationwide election.
Wake up and smell the coffee everyone. UKIP is here and here to stay!
You thought that in 2009 when you got 16% of the vote at the comedy elections. Then a year later, at the one that mattered, you got 3%.
UKIP is here to stay like the Monster Raving Loony Party. Many of the same supporters.
Could have been worse I suppose. They could have followed your lead and voted for a racist party.
If they voted UKIP they certainly did vote for a racist party.
The BNP in blazers.
Nope. You were the only one stupid enough to vote for a party made up of former BNP members and their fans.
You really should be ashamed but I am guessing you are not. I wonder what that says about you?
Whilst I agree with you about AIFE, how do you feel about UKIP actively recruiting "Decent" BNPers?
UKIP have a policy - unchanged - that no former BNP member can join the party.
We cannot account for who vote for the party, anymore than any other party, only who we allow in and unlike any of the other parties UKIP have a clear ban on anyone who has been a BNP member.
Bond would apparently rather vote for the ex-BNP members and the racists who were kicked out of UKIP.
Serious question, but how do they know that someone filling in a form and sending in the cheque isn't a BNP member, former or otherwise?
The BNP membership list was leaked a few years back, wasn't it?
UKIP have a policy - unchanged - that no former BNP member can join the party.
We cannot account for who vote for the party, anymore than any other party, only who we allow in and unlike any of the other parties UKIP have a clear ban on anyone who has been a BNP member.
Bond would apparently rather vote for the ex-BNP members and the racists who were kicked out of UKIP.
Richard
The ban on former BNP members derives from a carve up between the two parties when it was agreed that BNP should fight the urban constituencies and UKIP plough their furrow in the shires. With the collapse of the BNP this no longer applies.
And Professor Sked now seems to have found a 1997 vintage membership application form for UKIP and he has shown it to Stuart Jeffries of the Guardian:
Up until 1997 I [Alan Sked, then leader of UKIP] managed to keep UKIP a liberal – with a small 'l' – centre, moderate party. Our membership application form from the time – ah, here it is! [1997 application form he was looking for] – shows how much it has changed."
He hands me the form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: "It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster."
"They got rid of all that after I left," says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election.
Sorry Mike but that is a terrible slur on a great man.
That quote was never made by Monnet. It was made by the British Conservative academic Adrian Hilton who was ascribing those sentiments to Monnet.
I may disagree with the whole concept of a united Europe and much of what Monnet wanted but he was always utterly honest about his intentions and vision. At no time did he ever suggest that people should be tricked into union. That particular trait seems to be reserved mostly for British politicians who know how unpopular the concept of ever closer union is and so do their best to hide the true nature of the EU. European politicians have, on the whole, beeen far more honest about it.
Seems a tad unfair on British Politicians in that they aren't they only ones in the frame. France, the Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland have all had referendums where the idea of ever closer union has been rejected. The wishes of the electorate has in each case been circumvented either by being made to vote again or by their vote being ignored and the measure introduced anyway. Against that UK politicians have been the gold standard of honesty - they didn't even bother to give us a choice.
The ban on former BNP members derives from a carve up between the two parties when it was agreed that BNP should fight the urban constituencies and UKIP plough their furrow in the shires. With the collapse of the BNP this no longer applies.
And Professor Sked now seems to have found a 1997 vintage membership application form for UKIP and he has shown it to Stuart Jeffries of the Guardian:
Up until 1997 I [Alan Sked, then leader of UKIP] managed to keep UKIP a liberal – with a small 'l' – centre, moderate party. Our membership application form from the time – ah, here it is! [1997 application form he was looking for] – shows how much it has changed."
He hands me the form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: "It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster."
"They got rid of all that after I left," says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election.
Any comment?
Alan Sked is a Heath character who hated the fact he lost control of the party he founded because he disagreed on whether it should send MEPs to Brussels.
His opinion on UKIP is worthless as it is fed by envy and wounded pride. The ban on former BNP members has nothing to do with any carve ups and was, in part, a result of attempts by the BNP to infiltrate UKIP and turn it into another version of themselves. Some of those Bond was happily voting for were expelled from the party for their involvement in that plan.
That said, since I know you have said that you are not interested in facts, only politics, I know you will not be swayed by this argument.
Governments do not always gain in the final year. It didn't happen in 78/79 when voters swung against Callaghan in the final year. Even in the run up to the 83 election the Tories had a bigger poll lead in June/July 82 than at the June 83 election. More recently the PNS in May 96 was Lab 43 Con 29 - the outcome a year later was Lab 44 Con 31 - very little Tory recovery there. The period 2000/2001 , I believe, saw a fall in Labour's lead with little change between 2004 and 2005.
Do we not qualify as being in extraordinary times? As the wonderful and wonderfully acute polling question has it: "partly to blame, not learned, might do it again."
Has ever a polling company so accurately provided the basis upon which an entire election campaign will be run?
Am i cracking up or is that last table 4 years old? Whats the particular relevance now?
Look at the trend from 1992 to 2010.
I see that but why are we talking about it now rather than in 2010?
Because more and more people are undecided and looking at alternative parties, you may not have noticed, but for the first time in over a century, a party other than the Tories or Lab finished first in a nationwide election.
Wake up and smell the coffee everyone. UKIP is here and here to stay!
You thought that in 2009 when you got 16% of the vote at the comedy elections. Then a year later, at the one that mattered, you got 3%.
UKIP is here to stay like the Monster Raving Loony Party. Many of the same supporters.
Could have been worse I suppose. They could have followed your lead and voted for a racist party.
If they voted UKIP they certainly did vote for a racist party.
The BNP in blazers.
Nope. You were the only one stupid enough to vote for a party made up of former BNP members and their fans.
You really should be ashamed but I am guessing you are not. I wonder what that says about you?
Whilst I agree with you about AIFE, how do you feel about UKIP actively recruiting "Decent" BNPers?
UKIP have a policy - unchanged - that no former BNP member can join the party.
We cannot account for who vote for the party, anymore than any other party, only who we allow in and unlike any of the other parties UKIP have a clear ban on anyone who has been a BNP member.
Bond would apparently rather vote for the ex-BNP members and the racists who were kicked out of UKIP.
Serious question, but how do they know that someone filling in a form and sending in the cheque isn't a BNP member, former or otherwise?
No. But anyone who is found to have been a member in the past is expelled.
I am not sure if they ever made use of that leaked BNP membership list from a few years ago. I have no idea of what the legal status of that would be.
They say that there is nothing like the prospect of electoral defeat to concentrate politicians’ minds. Britain’s least worried leader should be David Cameron.
his team contrasts with Miliband’s assemblage of Brown holdovers (Balls, Cooper, Coaker and so on) and such callow operators as Chuka Umunna and the Hon Tristram Hunt, whose quest for celebrity will be their downfall. Politics is more than show business for pretty people, and an opportunistic barrage of populist attacks on banks, energy companies and the like merely portend a national future as Venezuela with rain, or at least what the French electorate has just comprehensively rejected.
Our local hospitals are now trying to recruit over 100 nurses from Portugal and Spain. Apparently they think it may be harder because there is a perception from the UKIP win that they will be less welcome in the UK. I think UKIP policy would be to allow in nurses if we left the EU but they must accept that the perception of nurses and other skilled workers may be different. Personally if being treated I could not care less from whence someone comes only that they are competent.
By the way the nurses are needed because of increasing demands from elderly people and shortage of trained UK nurses. I guess that most elderly people are from the UK. Is this recruitment programme common across the country?
I asked earlier what are you offering that Labour are -8.4 behind the Conservatives in vote share 2015 GE. So for example it would be 31% Labour 39.4 Conservative?
It would be rather arrogant to bet on my own models. I'll take my chances on the established markets, thank-you.
Frit ? or, no confidence in your Dr. Who machine ?
Yeah, whatever...
I just find my betting balance rises when the market is emotionless, impersonal, liquid and capable of accepting large stakes...
The task of a conservative in this moment, it seems to me, is not to resolve this struggle for either side – an impossibility anyway. It is to attempt to keep these two tendencies from going to war with each other in politics and culture. It is to retain a sense of national coherence and continuity in the midst of large-scale social change. That may prove impossible, but it can be done (look at the London Olympics opening and closing ceremonies). And it’s what David Cameron is now apparently trying to do. And about time. Over the next few years, Cameron and his successor will be confronting not only the possibility of Britain’s withdrawal from the EU but also the possibility of an end to the United Kingdom, if Scotland votes for independence. Both moves, it seems to me, are signs of an attempt by the English and Scottish to reassert control of their own destinies and to preserve their own cultural identities – which is why it would be foolish not to take both possibilities seriously. They remind me at least of a vital truth: that national identity remains the most potent and democratic form of political association. Screw with that, and you’ll merely have nationalism come back at you, with nostrils flaring. Europe’s elites have indeed screwed with that over the last decade or so. We have to hope the backlash does not destroy more than it builds.
....SNP support was apparently overestimated while that for the Conservatives was underestimated.......doubtless some will ask whether the discrepancy is a sign that some polls at least might be overestimating Yes support too.
Is Curtice suggesting that there is a climate of political intimidation in Scotland that is encouraging No supporters to keep their thoughts to themselves?
Did you see Salmond on the Euro Elections show? What a bully!
Failed to see the calling-UKIP-racist ploy had failed miserably and blamed the BBC!
UKIP's 1st elected representative in Scotland! Result of the night morning?
Sorry Mike but that is a terrible slur on a great man.
That quote was never made by Monnet. It was made by the British Conservative academic Adrian Hilton who was ascribing those sentiments to Monnet.
I may disagree with the whole concept of a united Europe and much of what Monnet wanted but he was always utterly honest about his intentions and vision. At no time did he ever suggest that people should be tricked into union. That particular trait seems to be reserved mostly for British politicians who know how unpopular the concept of ever closer union is and so do their best to hide the true nature of the EU. European politicians have, on the whole, beeen far more honest about it.
Seems a tad unfair on British Politicians in that they aren't they only ones in the frame. France, the Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland have all had referendums where the idea of ever closer union has been rejected. The wishes of the electorate has in each case been circumvented either by being made to vote again or by their vote being ignored and the measure introduced anyway. Against that UK politicians have been the gold standard of honesty - they didn't even bother to give us a choice.
Not sure about Ireland bit in France, Holland and Denmark the pro-EU politicians have generally been very clear about the benefits as they see them of a federal Europe and the JEF and other EU -federalist organisations are well supported and campaign openly. People in those countries are - or at least until recently were - clear about what 'ever closer union' ,meant. It seems to be uniquely in Britain that our politicians try to pretend we can have an EU on our own terms and hide what the - perfectly honourable - intentions of the founding fathers were.
Am i cracking up or is that last table 4 years old? Whats the particular relevance now?
Look at the trend from 1992 to 2010.
I see that but why are we talking about it now rather than in 2010?
Because more and more people are undecided and looking at alternative parties, you may not have noticed, but for the first time in over a century, a party other than the Tories or Lab finished first in a nationwide election.
Wake up and smell the coffee everyone. UKIP is here and here to stay!
You thought that in 2009 when you got 16% of the vote at the comedy elections. Then a year later, at the one that mattered, you got 3%.
UKIP is here to stay like the Monster Raving Loony Party. Many of the same supporters.
Could have been worse I suppose. They could have followed your lead and voted for a racist party.
If they voted UKIP they certainly did vote for a racist party.
The BNP in blazers.
Nope. You were the only one stupid enough to vote for a party made up of former BNP members and their fans.
You really should be ashamed but I am guessing you are not. I wonder what that says about you?
Whilst I agree with you about AIFE, how do you feel about UKIP actively recruiting "Decent" BNPers?
UKIP have a policy - unchanged - that no former BNP member can join the party.
We cannot account for who vote for the party, anymore than any other party, only who we allow in and unlike any of the other parties UKIP have a clear ban on anyone who has been a BNP member.
Bond would apparently rather vote for the ex-BNP members and the racists who were kicked out of UKIP.
Serious question, but how do they know that someone filling in a form and sending in the cheque isn't a BNP member, former or otherwise?
No. But anyone who is found to have been a member in the past is expelled.
I am not sure if they ever made use of that leaked BNP membership list from a few years ago. I have no idea of what the legal status of that would be.
Thanks. I did wonder a bit about that old list too, but it would be a bit dodgy to use it under the personal data protection laws.
....SNP support was apparently overestimated while that for the Conservatives was underestimated.......doubtless some will ask whether the discrepancy is a sign that some polls at least might be overestimating Yes support too.
Is Curtice suggesting that there is a climate of political intimidation in Scotland that is encouraging No supporters to keep their thoughts to themselves?
Did you see Salmond on the Euro Elections show? What a bully!
Failed to see the calling-UKIP-racist ploy had failed miserably and blamed the BBC!
UKIP's 1st elected representative in Scotland! Result of the night morning?
Given that you keep telling us there is a huge majority for No, I would have thought it is the other way round.
Up until 1997 I [Alan Sked, then leader of UKIP] managed to keep UKIP a liberal – with a small 'l' – centre, moderate party. Our membership application form from the time – ah, here it is! [1997 application form he was looking for] – shows how much it has changed."
He hands me the form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: "It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster."
"They got rid of all that after I left," says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election.
Any comment?
Alan Sked is a Heath character who hated the fact he lost control of the party he founded because he disagreed on whether it should send MEPs to Brussels.
His opinion on UKIP is worthless as it is fed by envy and wounded pride. The ban on former BNP members has nothing to do with any carve ups and was, in part, a result of attempts by the BNP to infiltrate UKIP and turn it into another version of themselves. Some of those Bond was happily voting for were expelled from the party for their involvement in that plan.
That said, since I know you have said that you are not interested in facts, only politics, I know you will not be swayed by this argument.
Richard
I was prepared to give you the benefit of doubt when you asserted that Sked was unreliable due to his reaction to losing the leadership of the party he founded.
But Sked has now produced documentary evidence of the "non-racist" membership requirements of the party under his leadership. It is now over to Farage to explain why the current application form for UKIP no longer contains the paragraph quoted above.
Under Sked regardless of your view of his current motives for criticising Farage, the party was:
• non-racist • non-homophobic • non-sexist • opposed on principle to taking money from an organisation it sought to dissolve
Under Farage, UKIP has become:
• racist in tone and targetting • homophobic in the public statements of even its most recent elected representatives (see Councillor on Clare Balding et al and Scottish MEP on same sex marriage) • sexist • troughing on allowances
UKIP under Sked is a party I could have voted for.
The past week has seen visits from the Foreign Secretary, Prime Minister, Mayor of London, Defence Secretary and Leader of the Green Party. Not sure ho is lined up from the other parties this coming week but for UKIP there will be the Deputy Leader Paul Nutall, Nigel Farage, Patrick O'Flynn, Stewart Agnew (Eastern region MEP) and Margot Parker (East Midlands MEP).
Not seen any news about either Lib Dem or Labour visits in the local press.
The past week has seen visits from the Foreign Secretary, Prime Minister, Mayor of London, Defence Secretary and Leader of the Green Party. Not sure ho is lined up from the other parties this coming week but for UKIP there will be the Deputy Leader Paul Nutall, Nigel Farage, Patrick O'Flynn, Stewart Agnew (Eastern region MEP) and Margot Parker (East Midlands MEP).
Not seen any news about either Lib Dem or Labour visits in the local press.
Really is about time we had a Newark poll. Can't believe none of the papers have commissioned one.
I was prepared to give you the benefit of doubt when you asserted that Sked was unreliable due to his reaction to losing the leadership of the party he founded.
But Sked has now produced documentary evidence of the "non-racist" requirements of the party under his leadership. It is now over to Farage to explain why the current application form for UKIP no longer contains the paragraph quoted above.
Under Sked regardless of your view of his current motives for criticising Farage, the party was:
• non-racist • non-homophobic • non-sexist • opposed on principle to taking money from an organisation it sought to dissolve
Under Farage, UKIP has become:
• racist in tone and targetting • homophobic in even public statements of even its most recent elected representatives (see Councillor on Clare Balding et al and Scottish MEP on same sex marriage) • sexist • troughing on allowances
UKIP under Sked is a party I could have voted for.
UKIP under Farage is a party which I abhor.
Garbage. You have never given UKIP the benefit of the doubt because your own bigotry won't let you.
You would rather have fancy words and a party full of BNP members (and there were plenty of them in there under Sked) than a clear policy on banning those members.
Your posting is filled with accusations but no foundation at all.
As has been pointed out this 'sexist' party now has more female MEPs than there are female Lib Dem MPs and that homophobic Scottish MEP is himself gay.
But as you yourself said. You don't care about facts, just the politics.
Mr. Isam, I am sorry to say but you are going to have to get used to that sort of thing. As we see here everyday now there are certain posters who will not accept that UKIP is popular with a significant section of the electorate and who will continue to publish lies and smears rather than advance arguments.
So for example, a wish to reduce immigration to those who will be of benefit to the country is translated as being anti-immigrant, which them becomes a charge of racism and from there it is a short hop to comparing UKIP with the Hitler's Nazis and of thence Farage = Hitler. It's a total nonsense, but many otherwise sensible people on this site are doing just that. The leap from being against open-door immigration to being anti-immigrant is the big one. Once that lie has been pulled off everything else will follow naturally.
I also notice the demand that UKIP should now, immediately publish a costed manifesto covering every aspect of government policy, with the insinuation that as the Party haven't they are charlatans, liars, desperate to hide their true purpose/ don't have a clue what they are about and so on and so forth. That those same people are not demanding the same from the established parties is not a coincidence (what is Labour's stance on defence post 2015?).
Now, for good or ill, you have become on here a UKIP representative. So yo can expect a lot of the abuse, ill-defined and unfair attacks and all the rest of it to be directed at you. Just remember that most of those posting the abuse are actually just very frightened people. You see, deep down, they are like the wealthy burghers of the City of London in 1380 - they can see the peasants revolt coming but they can't work out how to stop it for to do so would mean opening their hearts, minds, and wallets to alternative ideas.
Excellent Nurses they are too, with skills above our native graduates.
An ageing population, a Nursing skills shortage, youth unemployment in the UK, yet we have to recruit overseas. Personnel planning in the NHS is characterised by incompetence.
Our local hospitals are now trying to recruit over 100 nurses from Portugal and Spain. Apparently they think it may be harder because there is a perception from the UKIP win that they will be less welcome in the UK. I think UKIP policy would be to allow in nurses if we left the EU but they must accept that the perception of nurses and other skilled workers may be different. Personally if being treated I could not care less from whence someone comes only that they are competent.
By the way the nurses are needed because of increasing demands from elderly people and shortage of trained UK nurses. I guess that most elderly people are from the UK. Is this recruitment programme common across the country?
Up until 1997 I [Alan Sked, then leader of UKIP] managed to keep UKIP a liberal – with a small 'l' – centre, moderate party. Our membership application form from the time – ah, here it is! [1997 application form he was looking for] – shows how much it has changed."
He hands me the form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: "It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster."
"They got rid of all that after I left," says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election.
Any comment?
Alan Sked is a Heath character who hated the fact he lost control of the party he founded because he disagreed on whether it should send MEPs to Brussels.
His opinion on UKIP is worthless as it is fed by envy and wounded pride. The ban on former BNP members has nothing to do with any carve ups and was, in part, a result of attempts by the BNP to infiltrate UKIP and turn it into another version of themselves. Some of those Bond was happily voting for were expelled from the party for their involvement in that plan.
That said, since I know you have said that you are not interested in facts, only politics, I know you will not be swayed by this argument.
Richard
I was prepared to give you the benefit of doubt when you asserted that Sked was unreliable due to his reaction to losing the leadership of the party he founded.
But Sked has now produced documentary evidence of the "non-racist" membership requirements of the party under his leadership. It is now over to Farage to explain why the current application form for UKIP no longer contains the paragraph quoted above.
Under Sked regardless of your view of his current motives for criticising Farage, the party was:
• non-racist • non-homophobic • non-sexist • opposed on principle to taking money from an organisation it sought to dissolve
Under Farage, UKIP has become:
• racist in tone and targetting • homophobic in the public statements of even its most recent elected representatives (see Councillor on Clare Balding et al and Scottish MEP on same sex marriage) • sexist • troughing on allowances
UKIP under Sked is a party I could have voted for.
that national identity remains the most potent and democratic form of political association. Screw with that, and you’ll merely have nationalism come back at you, with nostrils flaring. Europe’s elites have indeed screwed with that over the last decade or so. .
The indecent haste with which European leaders attempted to assemble the EU superstate and their willingness to play the system was always going to cause problems.
They should have learned from the example of Scotland and the Union, where even after 300 years, perceived slights are enough to cause significant distress to a portion of the population.
UKIP have a policy - unchanged - that no former BNP member can join the party.
We cannot account for who vote for the party, anymore than any other party, only who we allow in and unlike any of the other parties UKIP have a clear ban on anyone who has been a BNP member.
Bond would apparently rather vote for the ex-BNP members and the racists who were kicked out of UKIP.
Richard
The ban on former BNP members derives from a carve up between the two parties when it was agreed that BNP should fight the urban constituencies and UKIP plough their furrow in the shires. With the collapse of the BNP this no longer applies.
And Professor Sked now seems to have found a 1997 vintage membership application form for UKIP and he has shown it to Stuart Jeffries of the Guardian:
Up until 1997 I [Alan Sked, then leader of UKIP] managed to keep UKIP a liberal – with a small 'l' – centre, moderate party. Our membership application form from the time – ah, here it is! [1997 application form he was looking for] – shows how much it has changed."
He hands me the form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: "It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster."
"They got rid of all that after I left," says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election.
Any comment?
Jesus, he rebutted this nonsense the other night.
Sam
The paragraph bolded above forms part of the founding application for membership in UKIP. It is a printed contemporaneous document.
Applicants for membership in UKIP today no longer have to sign up to the values stated in the paragraph.
How ever can Farage "rebut this nonsense"? It is documentary fact.
Our local hospitals are now trying to recruit over 100 nurses from Portugal and Spain. Apparently they think it may be harder because there is a perception from the UKIP win that they will be less welcome in the UK. I think UKIP policy would be to allow in nurses if we left the EU but they must accept that the perception of nurses and other skilled workers may be different. Personally if being treated I could not care less from whence someone comes only that they are competent.
By the way the nurses are needed because of increasing demands from elderly people and shortage of trained UK nurses. I guess that most elderly people are from the UK. Is this recruitment programme common across the country?
Mr. Macs, I know this comes as a shock to many but before 1973 the it was possible for people from Europe and further afield to come and work and settle in the UK, just as it was possible for Brits go go and settle in the rest of Europe. The idea that there might be some control in either direction is not a nasty scary thing, just a return to the same sort of norms that apply just about everywhere else in the world.
UKIP have a policy - unchanged - that no former BNP member can join the party.
We cannot account for who vote for the party, anymore than any other party, only who we allow in and unlike any of the other parties UKIP have a clear ban on anyone who has been a BNP member.
Bond would apparently rather vote for the ex-BNP members and the racists who were kicked out of UKIP.
Richard
The ban on former BNP members derives from a carve up between the two parties when it was agreed that BNP should fight the urban constituencies and UKIP plough their furrow in the shires. With the collapse of the BNP this no longer applies.
And Professor Sked now seems to have found a 1997 vintage membership application form for UKIP and he has shown it to Stuart Jeffries of the Guardian:
Up until 1997 I [Alan Sked, then leader of UKIP] managed to keep UKIP a liberal – with a small 'l' – centre, moderate party. Our membership application form from the time – ah, here it is! [1997 application form he was looking for] – shows how much it has changed."
He hands me the form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: "It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster."
"They got rid of all that after I left," says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election.
Any comment?
Jesus, he rebutted this nonsense the other night.
Sam
The paragraph bolded above forms part of the founding application for membership in UKIP. It is a printed contemporaneous document.
Applicants for membership in UKIP today no longer have to sign up to the values stated in the paragraph.
How ever can Farage "rebut this nonsense"? It is documentary fact.
Richard Tyndall rebutted it when you said the same thing the other night.
People used to be able to get round the old rules so Farage changed "o prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. " to "No ex BNP members" which is the same thing.only easier to prove.
Mr. Isam, I am sorry to say but you are going to have to get used to that sort of thing. As we see here everyday now there are certain posters who will not accept that UKIP is popular with a significant section of the electorate and who will continue to publish lies and smears rather than advance arguments.
So for example, a wish to reduce immigration to those who will be of benefit to the country is translated as being anti-immigrant, which them becomes a charge of racism and from there it is a short hop to comparing UKIP with the Hitler's Nazis and of thence Farage = Hitler. It's a total nonsense, but many otherwise sensible people on this site are doing just that. The leap from being against open-door immigration to being anti-immigrant is the big one. Once that lie has been pulled off everything else will follow naturally.
I also notice the demand that UKIP should now, immediately publish a costed manifesto covering every aspect of government policy, with the insinuation that as the Party haven't they are charlatans, liars, desperate to hide their true purpose/ don't have a clue what they are about and so on and so forth. That those same people are not demanding the same from the established parties is not a coincidence (what is Labour's stance on defence post 2015?).
Now, for good or ill, you have become on here a UKIP representative. So yo can expect a lot of the abuse, ill-defined and unfair attacks and all the rest of it to be directed at you. Just remember that most of those posting the abuse are actually just very frightened people. You see, deep down, they are like the wealthy burghers of the City of London in 1380 - they can see the peasants revolt coming but they can't work out how to stop it for to do so would mean opening their hearts, minds, and wallets to alternative ideas.
Mr Llama
You are an historian. You should pay more attention to documentary evidence.
Take for example the statements of an UKIP councillor elected in Redditch last Friday:
Dave Small, who was elected to Redditch borough council on Friday, faces being kicked out of the party for referring to gay people as "perverts" and African immigrants as "scroungers".
In comments posted on Facebook, he also attacked BBC broadcaster Clare Balding and singer Elton John over their sexuality and referred to "our sworn enemies in the Muslim world".
This is an edited Guardian account of what was said. I have a copy of the original tweet but I very much doubt it would get through the site's moderation filters.
These are not smears. They are the published statements of a recently elected UKIP party representative.
Our local hospitals are now trying to recruit over 100 nurses from Portugal and Spain. Apparently they think it may be harder because there is a perception from the UKIP win that they will be less welcome in the UK. I think UKIP policy would be to allow in nurses if we left the EU but they must accept that the perception of nurses and other skilled workers may be different. Personally if being treated I could not care less from whence someone comes only that they are competent.
By the way the nurses are needed because of increasing demands from elderly people and shortage of trained UK nurses. I guess that most elderly people are from the UK. Is this recruitment programme common across the country?
Mr. Macs, I know this comes as a shock to many but before 1973 the it was possible for people from Europe and further afield to come and work and settle in the UK, just as it was possible for Brits go go and settle in the rest of Europe. The idea that there might be some control in either direction is not a nasty scary thing, just a return to the same sort of norms that apply just about everywhere else in the world.
Our local hospitals are now trying to recruit over 100 nurses from Portugal and Spain. Apparently they think it may be harder because there is a perception from the UKIP win that they will be less welcome in the UK. I think UKIP policy would be to allow in nurses if we left the EU but they must accept that the perception of nurses and other skilled workers may be different. Personally if being treated I could not care less from whence someone comes only that they are competent.
By the way the nurses are needed because of increasing demands from elderly people and shortage of trained UK nurses. I guess that most elderly people are from the UK. Is this recruitment programme common across the country?
Mr. Macs, I know this comes as a shock to many but before 1973 the it was possible for people from Europe and further afield to come and work and settle in the UK, just as it was possible for Brits go go and settle in the rest of Europe. The idea that there might be some control in either direction is not a nasty scary thing, just a return to the same sort of norms that apply just about everywhere else in the world.
Mr. Isam, I am sorry to say but you are going to have to get used to that sort of thing. As we see here everyday now there are certain posters who will not accept that UKIP is popular with a significant section of the electorate and who will continue to publish lies and smears rather than advance arguments.
So for example, a wish to reduce immigration to those who will be of benefit to the country is translated as being anti-immigrant, which them becomes a charge of racism and from there it is a short hop to comparing UKIP with the Hitler's Nazis and of thence Farage = Hitler. It's a total nonsense, but many otherwise sensible people on this site are doing just that. The leap from being against open-door immigration to being anti-immigrant is the big one. Once that lie has been pulled off everything else will follow naturally.
I also notice the demand that UKIP should now, immediately publish a costed manifesto covering every aspect of government policy, with the insinuation that as the Party haven't they are charlatans, liars, desperate to hide their true purpose/ don't have a clue what they are about and so on and so forth. That those same people are not demanding the same from the established parties is not a coincidence (what is Labour's stance on defence post 2015?).
Now, for good or ill, you have become on here a UKIP representative. So yo can expect a lot of the abuse, ill-defined and unfair attacks and all the rest of it to be directed at you. Just remember that most of those posting the abuse are actually just very frightened people. You see, deep down, they are like the wealthy burghers of the City of London in 1380 - they can see the peasants revolt coming but they can't work out how to stop it for to do so would mean opening their hearts, minds, and wallets to alternative ideas.
Would be interesting to calculate if the big increases in turnout in London and Scotland saved Labour from the award of the wooden spoon in the Euros...
The paragraph bolded above forms part of the founding application for membership in UKIP. It is a printed contemporaneous document.
Applicants for membership in UKIP today no longer have to sign up to the values stated in the paragraph.
How ever can Farage "rebut this nonsense"? It is documentary fact.
Okay, said I was going to bed but just to destroy another of Avery's facile arguments. That document was and is worthless. It was just words with no intent to enforce the principles involved. Its value (or lack thereof) was exposed by the fact that one of Sked's own students and part of his own inner circle Mark Deavin - who was a member of the UKIP National Executive along with Sked - was actually working with Nick Griffin and that numerous other members during Sked's time were former or active BNP members.
It was only after Sked left in a huff that UKIP dealt with the BNP issue and expelled anyone associated with that party. They replaced words with action and made sure that anyone found to be associated with the BNP was thrown out of the party.
Again, facts, which have shown such open disdain for.
You are an historian. You should pay more attention to documentary evidence.
Take for example the statements of an UKIP councillor elected in Redditch last Friday:
Dave Small, who was elected to Redditch borough council on Friday, faces being kicked out of the party for referring to gay people as "perverts" and African immigrants as "scroungers".
In comments posted on Facebook, he also attacked BBC broadcaster Clare Balding and singer Elton John over their sexuality and referred to "our sworn enemies in the Muslim world".
This is an edited Guardian account of what was said. I have a copy of the original tweet but I very much doubt it would get through the site's moderation filters.
These are not smears. They are the published statements of a recently elected UKIP party representative.
I think the important bit of that posting (which you are apparently too dumb to appreciate) is:
"faces being kicked out of the party "
Meanwhile homophobes and racists still sit as long serving Tory councillors with no threat to their position even after exposure and police cautions.
What a shame you support a party that harbours and rewards homophobes and racists.
Mr. Isam, I am sorry to say but you are going to have to get used to that sort of thing. As we see here everyday now there are certain posters who will not accept that UKIP is popular with a significant section of the electorate and who will continue to publish lies and smears rather than advance arguments.
So for example, a wish to reduce immigration to those who will be of benefit to the country is translated as being anti-immigrant, which them becomes a charge of racism and from there it is a short hop to comparing UKIP with the Hitler's Nazis and of thence Farage = Hitler. It's a total nonsense, but many otherwise sensible people on this site are doing just that. The leap from being against open-door immigration to being anti-immigrant is the big one. Once that lie has been pulled off everything else will follow naturally.
I also notice the demand that UKIP should now, immediately publish a costed manifesto covering every aspect of government policy, with the insinuation that as the Party haven't they are charlatans, liars, desperate to hide their true purpose/ don't have a clue what they are about and so on and so forth. That those same people are not demanding the same from the established parties is not a coincidence (what is Labour's stance on defence post 2015?).
Now, for good or ill, you have become on here a UKIP representative. So yo can expect a lot of the abuse, ill-defined and unfair attacks and all the rest of it to be directed at you. Just remember that most of those posting the abuse are actually just very frightened people. You see, deep down, they are like the wealthy burghers of the City of London in 1380 - they can see the peasants revolt coming but they can't work out how to stop it for to do so would mean opening their hearts, minds, and wallets to alternative ideas.
We need to know the details on UKIP policies and not Labour's because we know where Labour's heart is (this has never been a problem; it is their heads and divorce from the reality of modern economics that is problematic).
We do not know where UKIP's heart is. That is a problem and if I were a UKIP supporter it would be my most pressing issue.
It is legitimate to be anti EU. it is legitimate to want sensible immigration controls.
But if that is it, if all you/they bang on about is immigration and the EU then you can't be surprised if people, especially those who see echoes of the BNP/NF in the language they use, choose to interpret them as racist.
You are an historian. You should pay more attention to documentary evidence.
Take for example the statements of an UKIP councillor elected in Redditch last Friday:
Dave Small, who was elected to Redditch borough council on Friday, faces being kicked out of the party for referring to gay people as "perverts" and African immigrants as "scroungers".
In comments posted on Facebook, he also attacked BBC broadcaster Clare Balding and singer Elton John over their sexuality and referred to "our sworn enemies in the Muslim world".
This is an edited Guardian account of what was said. I have a copy of the original tweet but I very much doubt it would get through the site's moderation filters.
These are not smears. They are the published statements of a recently elected UKIP party representative.
I think the important bit of that posting (which you are apparently too dumb to appreciate) is:
"faces being kicked out of the party "
Meanwhile homophobes and racists still sit as long serving Tory councillors with no threat to their position even after exposure and police cautions.
What a shame you support a party that harbours and rewards homophobes and racists.
Would be interesting to calculate if the big increases in turnout in London and Scotland saved Labour from the award of the wooden spoon in the Euros...
Wonder if my aunty had balls she would be my uncle? Wonder what would happen iIf B came before A in the alphabet?If they stopped all blue eyed men from voting UKIP would have come last?etc etc
You are an historian. You should pay more attention to documentary evidence.
Take for example the statements of an UKIP councillor elected in Redditch last Friday:
Dave Small, who was elected to Redditch borough council on Friday, faces being kicked out of the party for referring to gay people as "perverts" and African immigrants as "scroungers".
In comments posted on Facebook, he also attacked BBC broadcaster Clare Balding and singer Elton John over their sexuality and referred to "our sworn enemies in the Muslim world".
This is an edited Guardian account of what was said. I have a copy of the original tweet but I very much doubt it would get through the site's moderation filters.
These are not smears. They are the published statements of a recently elected UKIP party representative.
I think the important bit of that posting (which you are apparently too dumb to appreciate) is:
"faces being kicked out of the party "
Meanwhile homophobes and racists still sit as long serving Tory councillors with no threat to their position even after exposure and police cautions.
What a shame you support a party that harbours and rewards homophobes and racists.
I await news of his resignation as a councillor.
I expect my wait will be in vain.
It won't be.
Who was the bloke recently kicked out of UKIP for comments he made when he was a Tory?
@TOPPING " it is their heads and divorce from the reality of modern economics that is problematic"
I would argue that it is capitalists that are divorced from modern economics.
Why should a business train people when it is cheaper to import them? Why should the same business pay a living wage when they get their labour subsidized by the state (tax payers)? The answer lies in profit, and profit is everything, above even social cohesion and rationality.
This is a sample, among dozens that are appearing more and more regularly.
More than a third of the population of England and Wales is living in an area dominated by one political party after the latest elections.
Research by the Electoral Reform Society found that after last week’s poll there are 111 councils where at least 75 per cent of councillors hail from a single party, an increase of 16.
Almost 19 million people live in “one-party” areas. The councils are roughly evenly split between Labour and the Conservatives, with three Liberal Democrat strongholds.
Would be interesting to calculate if the big increases in turnout in London and Scotland saved Labour from the award of the wooden spoon in the Euros...
Wonder if my aunty had balls she would be my uncle? Wonder what would happen iIf B came before A in the alphabet?If they stopped all blue eyed men from voting UKIP would have come last?etc etc
Ha! Indeed. If you removed the SE Region, Labour would have won - and the Tories would have run home with the princely share of 22%. Wonderful game, this.
You are an historian. You should pay more attention to documentary evidence.
Take for example the statements of an UKIP councillor elected in Redditch last Friday:
Dave Small, who was elected to Redditch borough council on Friday, faces being kicked out of the party for referring to gay people as "perverts" and African immigrants as "scroungers".
In comments posted on Facebook, he also attacked BBC broadcaster Clare Balding and singer Elton John over their sexuality and referred to "our sworn enemies in the Muslim world".
This is an edited Guardian account of what was said. I have a copy of the original tweet but I very much doubt it would get through the site's moderation filters.
These are not smears. They are the published statements of a recently elected UKIP party representative.
I think the important bit of that posting (which you are apparently too dumb to appreciate) is:
"faces being kicked out of the party "
Meanwhile homophobes and racists still sit as long serving Tory councillors with no threat to their position even after exposure and police cautions.
What a shame you support a party that harbours and rewards homophobes and racists.
I await news of his resignation as a councillor.
I expect my wait will be in vain.
The party cannot force him to resign as a councillor. What they can do is throw him out.
Something the Tory party has singularly failed to do in too many cases.
Again. Facts. And again as you stated recently, you don't care about them.
Good job you are not producing any of those yellow boxes at the moment. We might have to question their accuracy given your disdain for the truth.
Now, for good or ill, you have become on here a UKIP representative. So yo can expect a lot of the abuse, ill-defined and unfair attacks and all the rest of it to be directed at you. Just remember that most of those posting the abuse are actually just very frightened people. You see, deep down, they are like the wealthy burghers of the City of London in 1380 - they can see the peasants revolt coming but they can't work out how to stop it for to do so would mean opening their hearts, minds, and wallets to alternative ideas.
We need to know the details on UKIP policies and not Labour's because we know where Labour's heart is (this has never been a problem; it is their heads and divorce from the reality of modern economics that is problematic).
We do not know where UKIP's heart is. That is a problem and if I were a UKIP supporter it would be my most pressing issue. It is legitimate to be anti EU. it is legitimate to want sensible immigration controls.
But if that is it, if all you/they bang on about is immigration and the EU then you can't be surprised if people, especially those who see echoes of the BNP/NF in the language they use, choose to interpret them as racist.
No joke, I have probably replied over a dozen times on here to this question...
No tax on min wage 40% Threshold raised 3 or 4 grand Grammar schools Assisted places for bright poor kids at Private schools A cut in foregn aid A big cut to public sector management jobs NHS free at point of use Less intervention in foreign wars Leave the EU A points system to control immigration
I am sure these will be UKIP policies / direction of travel, but when I reply in good heart, all I ever get is "but how will you pay for them" etc etc
The manifesto will be out in September
It is exasparating
I voted for Tony Blair. I was young and naive. He took us into an unjust war that killed thousands of people and ruined millions of Iraqi lives, yet I am supposed to be aghast that some no mark councillor uses the N word or calls a homosexual a poof?
drink with a generally centre-lefty photographer friend in his 40s, tonight. First time I've seen him in a year.
He told me, in no uncertain terms, that he voted UKIP last week, that he was proud to vote UKIP, and he will vote UKIP in the General Election, and the more this frightens the mainstream politicians the happier he will be.
I was quite surprised, I always had him for a fairly apolitical, soft lefty before. Of course he is ageing, and going right, but then - aren't we all?
The point is, if he is representative of the general Kipper vote then it is very unlikely UKIP will return to 3% at the GE, they will hit 10-15%. Which changes everything, for everyone.
Interestingly, he was fiercely critical of Miliband and mildly tolerant of Cameron ("posh but competent").
On this slender basis I am moving my settled prognosis from Likely Miliband Plurality to I Literally Have No Fecking Idea.
The Greens are missing a NOTA trick.
If I were Green Supremo (they probably have a non-favoured collective) I would be pushing the NOTA angle like Billy-o.
I do wish you would make your mind up, Mr. Tyndall. I wrote, off-line, a response to one of your earlier posts the saw you were off to bed so I deleted it. Now to find you didn't go to bed after all. Well, Grrrr.
@SeanT - The big question, to which we can't really know the answer, is whether the support for UKIP by Labour-defectors or left-leaning voters like your friend will remain stickier in GE2015 than that of former Tory voters. It seems to be that they might be, but who knows?
@TOPPING " it is their heads and divorce from the reality of modern economics that is problematic"
I would argue that it is capitalists that are divorced from modern economics.
Why should a business train people when it is cheaper to import them? Why should the same business pay a living wage when they get their labour subsidized by the state (tax payers)? The answer lies in profit, and profit is everything, above even social cohesion and rationality.
This is a sample, among dozens that are appearing more and more regularly.
George Osborne's cat chauffeur-driven home after getting lost in London
The Chancellor's cat Freya was chauffeur driven back to its Downing Street home after being found roaming the streets of Vauxhall
Vauxhall? Wow, top No.11 staff really are reaching out beyond the Westminster bubble.
You can get into a lot more trouble in Vauxhall than Westminster. I'm so relieved it comes before, rather than after, Hersham on JohnO's train journey home.
Our local hospitals are now trying to recruit over 100 nurses from Portugal and Spain. Apparently they think it may be harder because there is a perception from the UKIP win that they will be less welcome in the UK. I think UKIP policy would be to allow in nurses if we left the EU but they must accept that the perception of nurses and other skilled workers may be different. Personally if being treated I could not care less from whence someone comes only that they are competent.
By the way the nurses are needed because of increasing demands from elderly people and shortage of trained UK nurses. I guess that most elderly people are from the UK. Is this recruitment programme common across the country?
Mr. Macs, I know this comes as a shock to many but before 1973 the it was possible for people from Europe and further afield to come and work and settle in the UK, just as it was possible for Brits go go and settle in the rest of Europe. The idea that there might be some control in either direction is not a nasty scary thing, just a return to the same sort of norms that apply just about everywhere else in the world.
True, my parents arrived here from Italy in the 1960's, well before the UK joined the EEC.
Gideon, chauffeur driven cars and a Pussy - Ejaculation time for lefties... Wonder if this might even tempt Tim back (assuming he ever left of course ) ?
I do wish you would make your mind up, Mr. Tyndall. I wrote, off-line, a response to one of your earlier posts the saw you were off to bed so I deleted it. Now to find you didn't go to bed after all. Well, Grrrr.
Sorry. PB is just too much fun. Will go now. Honestly. :-)
Would be interesting to calculate if the big increases in turnout in London and Scotland saved Labour from the award of the wooden spoon in the Euros...
Wonder if my aunty had balls she would be my uncle? Wonder what would happen iIf B came before A in the alphabet?If they stopped all blue eyed men from voting UKIP would have come last?etc etc
Blimey, a year out and you are already getting childish.
drink with a generally centre-lefty photographer friend in his 40s, tonight. First time I've seen him in a year.
He told me, in no uncertain terms, that he voted UKIP last week, that he was proud to vote UKIP, and he will vote UKIP in the General Election, and the more this frightens the mainstream politicians the happier he will be.
I was quite surprised, I always had him for a fairly apolitical, soft lefty before. Of course he is ageing, and going right, but then - aren't we all?
The point is, if he is representative of the general Kipper vote then it is very unlikely UKIP will return to 3% at the GE, they will hit 10-15%. Which changes everything, for everyone.
Interestingly, he was fiercely critical of Miliband and mildly tolerant of Cameron ("posh but competent").
On this slender basis I am moving my settled prognosis from Likely Miliband Plurality to I Literally Have No Fecking Idea.
Shedloads of old lefties will run away from the metropolitan, adenoidal trust-fund kid...
The Farage/Nuttall dynamic duo speaks their language better.
Technical question: does your model update itself with weekly polling and, if so, how? For example, if there was a shift back to Labour or towards the Tories would it then change its prediction?
Up until 1997 I [Alan Sked, then leader of UKIP] managed to keep UKIP a liberal – with a small 'l' – centre, moderate party. Our membership application form from the time – ah, here it is! [1997 application form he was looking for] – shows how much it has changed."
He hands me the form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: "It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster."
"They got rid of all that after I left," says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election.
Any comment?
Alan Sked is a Heath character who hated the fact he lost control of the party he founded because he disagreed on whether it should send MEPs to Brussels.
His opinion on UKIP is worthless as it is fed by envy and wounded pride. The ban on former BNP members has nothing to do with any carve ups and was, in part, a result of attempts by the BNP to infiltrate UKIP and turn it into another version of themselves. Some of those Bond was happily voting for were expelled from the party for their involvement in that plan.
That said, since I know you have said that you are not interested in facts, only politics, I know you will not be swayed by this argument.
Richard
I was prepared to give you the benefit of doubt when you asserted that Sked was unreliable due to his reaction to losing the leadership of the party he founded.
But Sked has now produced documentary evidence of the "non-racist" membership requirements of the party under his leadership. It is now over to Farage to explain why the current application form for UKIP no longer contains the paragraph quoted above.
Under Sked regardless of your view of his current motives for criticising Farage, the party was:
• non-racist • non-homophobic • non-sexist • opposed on principle to taking money from an organisation it sought to dissolve
Under Farage, UKIP has become:
• racist in tone and targetting • homophobic in the public statements of even its most recent elected representatives (see Councillor on Clare Balding et al and Scottish MEP on same sex marriage) • sexist • troughing on allowances
UKIP under Sked is a party I could have voted for.
Would be interesting to calculate if the big increases in turnout in London and Scotland saved Labour from the award of the wooden spoon in the Euros...
You can get into a lot more trouble in Vauxhall than Westminster. I'm so relieved it comes before, rather than after, Hersham on JohnO's train journey home.
I am sure you have more experience than I do in these matters, so I'll take your word for it, although MPs seem to be able to manage enough trouble without venturing out of Westminster.
I worked in Vauxhall in the 1980s, when it was even more unfashionable than it is now. I had an office with a wonderful view over the river - I'd watch the cormorants fishing in the river, and sometimes a dredger called the Bowbelle would come and do the nautical equivalent of a skid-turn in the Thames right outside my office. That was the boat which in 1989 collided with the Marchioness.
@AveryLP what do you make of the increase in borrowing announced by the OBR a couple of days ago? I haven't seen much spoken about it
It was a phasing issue, Rob.
On the morning the figures were released I pointed out to MaxB that underlying government revenue was increasing and expenditure reducing. The main offset was the fall in PAYE and NI receipts compared to April 2013. April 2014 receipts were £0.8 bn below the same month in the previous year due to the introduction of the 45% income tax rate in April 2013 with its consequent deferral of tax liabilities from the 2012-13 FY to 2013-14.
The balance of the difference was not clear at the time I posted but my suspicion that it related to the phasing of local government financing was confirmed by the OBR commentary released at noon.
Herewith OBR commentary:
Public sector net borrowing (PSNB) was £7.4 billion in April, £2.6 billion higher than market expectations and £1.7 billion higher than a year ago. On an underlying basis, excluding APF transfers, borrowing was £1.9 billion higher than last year at £11.5 billion. Central government expenditure was £0.2 billion lower than last April and central government receipts (excluding APF transfers) were £0.4 billion lower. Local authority borrowing was £1.6 billion higher. Much of the fall in receipts in April can be attributed to lower receipts from income tax and NICs, which reflect timing issues related to income shifted into the early part of 2013-14, when the additional rate of income tax was reduced to 45p.
And on local government financing:
Central government current expenditure fell by 1.0 per cent in April, compared with our March EFO forecast of a 1.9 per cent full year increase. The £1.4 billion year-on-year fall in other current spending in April largely reflects lower central government grants to local authorities, which relates to changes in the timing profile for these grants. The reduction in current spending in April is partly offset by a £0.4 billion increase in capital spending, which again reflects changes in grants to local authorities. Together these changes in grants have reduced central government spending by £1 billion, compared to a year ago, and increased local authority borrowing by a broadly similar amount.
Insofar as any first month of the fiscal year can be taken as indicative of progress towards an annual target, the April figures were consistent with borrowing heading below OBR's March EFO forecast in spite of the rise in April. The early days warning though should be repeated.
We need to know the details on UKIP policies and not Labour's because we know where Labour's heart is (this has never been a problem; it is their heads and divorce from the reality of modern economics that is problematic).
We do not know where UKIP's heart is. That is a problem and if I were a UKIP supporter it would be my most pressing issue.
It is legitimate to be anti EU. it is legitimate to want sensible immigration controls.
But if that is it, if all you/they bang on about is immigration and the EU then you can't be surprised if people, especially those who see echoes of the BNP/NF in the language they use, choose to interpret them as racist.
No Mr Topping, I don't accept that as a valid argument. If you want to see UKIP as racist that is your choice. Do you see Labour or the Conservatives or the Greens as racist because they haven't published detailed costed manifestos for next years GE? If you want to know where UKIPs heart is I suspect that all the information for that enquiry is available on their web site.
Would be interesting to calculate if the big increases in turnout in London and Scotland saved Labour from the award of the wooden spoon in the Euros...
Wonder if my aunty had balls she would be my uncle? Wonder what would happen iIf B came before A in the alphabet?If they stopped all blue eyed men from voting UKIP would have come last?etc etc
Blimey, a year out and you are already getting childish.
Not been banned on here recently Nige old bean.....good for you.
@SeanT - The big question, to which we can't really know the answer, is whether the support for UKIP by Labour-defectors or left-leaning voters like your friend will remain stickier in GE2015 than that of former Tory voters. It seems to be that they might be, but who knows?
Quite. But the important truth, as you imply, is that the rise of UKIP - and their possible resilience - makes this next election almost impossible to predict. Quite a unique election.
In that light, there might be money to be made, because the bookies are maybe presuming that Labour's advantage under FPTP will persist unharmed.
But UKIP threaten all of that.
I gave an explanation the other night as to why ex-Tory UKIP supporters are much more likely to return home than ex-Labour ones.
QED? You are comfortable with 87 people owning more than half the population of the world?
Here is a clue. When many of the top economists are telling you something is "unsustainable" it might be time to unplug your ears and listen.
Smarmeron you yes you earn more than $2/day, right? Do you know how many people earn less than you? Do you feel comfortable about it? What are you going to do about it? Or is it different?
George Osborne's cat chauffeur-driven home after getting lost in London
The Chancellor's cat Freya was chauffeur driven back to its Downing Street home after being found roaming the streets of Vauxhall
Vauxhall? Wow, top No.11 staff really are reaching out beyond the Westminster bubble.
You can get into a lot more trouble in Vauxhall than Westminster. I'm so relieved it comes before, rather than after, Hersham on JohnO's train journey home.
30 years ago there were three routes to nurse training: degree courses in a few places, SRN training (3 year course requiring 5 O levels) and SEN training (2 years and with lower academic requirements). Both SRN and SEN training were largely practical and new starters were on the wards after six weeks, then had regular sessions in the classroom each block. My wife was in the SRN system and at the age of 22 had enough practical experience and knowledge to take charge of a Chest Surgery ward on a fairly regular basis. Student nurses were paid by the hospital and got subsidized accommodation.
SEN training ended about twenty years ago, with existing SENs getting conversion courses to SRN. Both are now replaced by graduate nurses. Subsidized accommodation was sold off.
Now there is no route for nurse training short of a degree and A levels. These will get people into other courses, and there is also a loss of the camaraderie and community as well as the cheap accommodation of Nurses Homes. Nursing is now seen as something to be learned in a classroom rather than the bedside, but the same criticism can be made of medical schools.
There are simply too few Universities offering nurse training, and an ageing population, hence the need for imported nurses. Recruitment from Asia, Africa and India is now difficult because of restrictions on work permits, so EU Nurses are in demand.
The nursing shortage is entirely predictable, unless you are a Civil Servant or Academic Nurse Tutor!
Would be interesting to calculate if the big increases in turnout in London and Scotland saved Labour from the award of the wooden spoon in the Euros...
Wonder if my aunty had balls she would be my uncle? Wonder what would happen iIf B came before A in the alphabet?If they stopped all blue eyed men from voting UKIP would have come last?etc etc
Blimey, a year out and you are already getting childish.
Not been banned on here recently Nige old bean.....good for you.
No, because I have been ignoring your inane drivel.
More than a third of the population of England and Wales is living in an area dominated by one political party after the latest elections.
Research by the Electoral Reform Society found that after last week’s poll there are 111 councils where at least 75 per cent of councillors hail from a single party, an increase of 16.
Almost 19 million people live in “one-party” areas. The councils are roughly evenly split between Labour and the Conservatives, with three Liberal Democrat strongholds.
A dreadful statistic, showcasing how divided entire regions can become from one another, but that is what people seem to be happy with for some reason. It is very much to be regretted that entire small areas and even large areas are completely off limits for some parties (and sometimes all but one), when sheer randomness would suggest there should be significant pockets of dissension even in the stronghold of a particular party.
If for no other reason, we can only hope UKIP can sustain and expand their emergence in many Tory and Labour heartlands and bring some genuine challenge back to some of these areas, but that may be too much to ask for.
God Bless Sked. Just when you thought he couldnt top the apostrophe nonsense along came his letter to the FT pointing out that he and he alone (and not a group of academics) had founded UKIP. He seemed strangely proud that John Major thought he was a d*ck.
More than a third of the population of England and Wales is living in an area dominated by one political party after the latest elections.
Research by the Electoral Reform Society found that after last week’s poll there are 111 councils where at least 75 per cent of councillors hail from a single party, an increase of 16.
Almost 19 million people live in “one-party” areas. The councils are roughly evenly split between Labour and the Conservatives, with three Liberal Democrat strongholds.
If Westminster FPTP is a scandal, local FPTP is a disgrace, especially the antediluvian bloc vote.
The greatest strategic error the LDs made was overlooking this and going for the AV referendum.
If they'd said "OK, we'll leave Westminster reform for another day, but give us STV now for the locals (just like Scotland and NI)" the Tories would probably just have shrugged and said "Where would you like us to sign?"
God Bless Sked. Just when you thought he couldnt top the apostrophe nonsense along came his letter to the FT pointing out that he and he alone (and not a group of academics) had founded UKIP. He seemed strangely proud that John Major thought he was a d*ck.
He's giving a talk at Manchester University soon, I might go.
So D.Cameron has the problem all sorted out now? Or are we going to soldier on importing nurses while the young stack shelves in pound shops for benefit money?
Technical question: does your model update itself with weekly polling and, if so, how? For example, if there was a shift back to Labour or towards the Tories would it then change its prediction?
No, it's closed now, since it was based on local elections, and we've just had the last one.
Although if R&T refine their NEVs (I seem to recall them doing this before) the -8.4% forecast will of course change a bit.
More than a third of the population of England and Wales is living in an area dominated by one political party after the latest elections.
Research by the Electoral Reform Society found that after last week’s poll there are 111 councils where at least 75 per cent of councillors hail from a single party, an increase of 16.
Almost 19 million people live in “one-party” areas. The councils are roughly evenly split between Labour and the Conservatives, with three Liberal Democrat strongholds.
If Westminster FPTP is a scandal, local FPTP is a disgrace, especially the antediluvian bloc vote.
The greatest strategic error the LDs made was overlooking this and going for the AV referendum.
If they'd said "OK, we'll leave Westminster reform for another day, but give us STV now for the locals (just like Scotland and NI)" the Tories would probably just have shrugged and said "Where would you like us to sign?"
In the unlikely event of another coalition situation in 2015, hopefully they will take note of that suggestion.
What odds some electoral reform in the event of another hung parliament, in your estimation? LDs would probably find it hard to be taken seriously as the faces of any electoral reform proposal as it would patently be to their own benefit (true or not before, with a more significant number of MPs and without having suddenly lost possibly half their number, it was easier to appear merely principles on the subject), so Labour or the Tories would have to be genuinely enthusiastic for it.
The Tories I cannot see being enthusiastic for any change - they were so stridently for FPTP that switching over would look like nothing more than doing so for naked political advantage, and as for Labour, I doubt they'd want to open a can of worms like this, though would perhaps be more amenable. And depending on the suggestion, they could get UKIP on side, which would be helpful.
I remember the Marchioness I was on it a couple of times. It was a great party boat, and a real treat boozing it up while watching eighties London go by the windows.
There was only a small door to the deck, while everyone was drunk and dancing downstairs. In retrospect it was a deathtrap waiting to happen.
You can get into a lot more trouble in Vauxhall than Westminster. I'm so relieved it comes before, rather than after, Hersham on JohnO's train journey home.
I am sure you have more experience than I do in these matters, so I'll take your word for it, although MPs seem to be able to manage enough trouble without venturing out of Westminster.
I worked in Vauxhall in the 1980s, when it was even more unfashionable than it is now. I had an office with a wonderful view over the river - I'd watch the cormorants fishing in the river, and sometimes a dredger called the Bowbelle would come and do the nautical equivalent of a skid-turn in the Thames right outside my office. That was the boat which in 1989 collided with the Marchioness.
Comments
I see Hodges has urged Miliband not to tack to right on immigration although he has wanted him to tack to the right on everything else.
I am sure it is nothing to do with Hodges being involved in the Migration Matters outfit along with the vile, Barbara Roche.
If I was wanting to sell an idea or product, they would be the last people I would think of to do it for me.
Winter of Discontent. - are you expecting, mountains of rubbish and unburied bodies next year?
http://www.businessinsider.com/thatcher-and-the-winter-of-discontent-2013-4
The ban on former BNP members derives from a carve up between the two parties when it was agreed that BNP should fight the urban constituencies and UKIP plough their furrow in the shires. With the collapse of the BNP this no longer applies.
And Professor Sked now seems to have found a 1997 vintage membership application form for UKIP and he has shown it to Stuart Jeffries of the Guardian:
Up until 1997 I [Alan Sked, then leader of UKIP] managed to keep UKIP a liberal – with a small 'l' – centre, moderate party. Our membership application form from the time – ah, here it is! [1997 application form he was looking for] – shows how much it has changed."
He hands me the form. It makes for fascinating reading. In 1993, along with backing British withdrawal from the EU, prospective members had to be sympathetic to the following: "It is a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. It does not recognise the legitimacy of the European parliament and will send representatives only to the British parliament in Westminster."
"They got rid of all that after I left," says Sked, who resigned the leadership shortly after the 1997 general election.
Any comment?
Jesus, he rebutted this nonsense the other night.
That quote was never made by Monnet. It was made by the British Conservative academic Adrian Hilton who was ascribing those sentiments to Monnet.
I may disagree with the whole concept of a united Europe and much of what Monnet wanted but he was always utterly honest about his intentions and vision. At no time did he ever suggest that people should be tricked into union. That particular trait seems to be reserved mostly for British politicians who know how unpopular the concept of ever closer union is and so do their best to hide the true nature of the EU. European politicians have, on the whole, beeen far more honest about it.
Seems a tad unfair on British Politicians in that they aren't they only ones in the frame. France, the Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland have all had referendums where the idea of ever closer union has been rejected. The wishes of the electorate has in each case been circumvented either by being made to vote again or by their vote being ignored and the measure introduced anyway. Against that UK politicians have been the gold standard of honesty - they didn't even bother to give us a choice.
His opinion on UKIP is worthless as it is fed by envy and wounded pride. The ban on former BNP members has nothing to do with any carve ups and was, in part, a result of attempts by the BNP to infiltrate UKIP and turn it into another version of themselves. Some of those Bond was happily voting for were expelled from the party for their involvement in that plan.
That said, since I know you have said that you are not interested in facts, only politics, I know you will not be swayed by this argument.
Has ever a polling company so accurately provided the basis upon which an entire election campaign will be run?
I am not sure if they ever made use of that leaked BNP membership list from a few years ago. I have no idea of what the legal status of that would be.
By the way the nurses are needed because of increasing demands from elderly people and shortage of trained UK nurses. I guess that most elderly people are from the UK. Is this recruitment programme common across the country?
I just find my betting balance rises when the market is emotionless, impersonal, liquid and capable of accepting large stakes...
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/05/27/europes-red-and-blue-conflict/
The task of a conservative in this moment, it seems to me, is not to resolve this struggle for either side – an impossibility anyway. It is to attempt to keep these two tendencies from going to war with each other in politics and culture. It is to retain a sense of national coherence and continuity in the midst of large-scale social change. That may prove impossible, but it can be done (look at the London Olympics opening and closing ceremonies). And it’s what David Cameron is now apparently trying to do. And about time. Over the next few years, Cameron and his successor will be confronting not only the possibility of Britain’s withdrawal from the EU but also the possibility of an end to the United Kingdom, if Scotland votes for independence. Both moves, it seems to me, are signs of an attempt by the English and Scottish to reassert control of their own destinies and to preserve their own cultural identities – which is why it would be foolish not to take both possibilities seriously. They remind me at least of a vital truth: that national identity remains the most potent and democratic form of political association. Screw with that, and you’ll merely have nationalism come back at you, with nostrils flaring. Europe’s elites have indeed screwed with that over the last decade or so. We have to hope the backlash does not destroy more than it builds.
Failed to see the calling-UKIP-racist ploy had failed miserably and blamed the BBC!
UKIP's 1st elected representative in Scotland! Result of the
nightmorning?Not sure about Ireland bit in France, Holland and Denmark the pro-EU politicians have generally been very clear about the benefits as they see them of a federal Europe and the JEF and other EU -federalist organisations are well supported and campaign openly. People in those countries are - or at least until recently were - clear about what 'ever closer union' ,meant. It seems to be uniquely in Britain that our politicians try to pretend we can have an EU on our own terms and hide what the - perfectly honourable - intentions of the founding fathers were.
I was prepared to give you the benefit of doubt when you asserted that Sked was unreliable due to his reaction to losing the leadership of the party he founded.
But Sked has now produced documentary evidence of the "non-racist" membership requirements of the party under his leadership. It is now over to Farage to explain why the current application form for UKIP no longer contains the paragraph quoted above.
Under Sked regardless of your view of his current motives for criticising Farage, the party was:
• non-racist
• non-homophobic
• non-sexist
• opposed on principle to taking money from an organisation it sought to dissolve
Under Farage, UKIP has become:
• racist in tone and targetting
• homophobic in the public statements of even its most recent elected representatives (see Councillor on Clare Balding et al and Scottish MEP on same sex marriage)
• sexist
• troughing on allowances
UKIP under Sked is a party I could have voted for.
UKIP under Farage is a party which I abhor.
The past week has seen visits from the Foreign Secretary, Prime Minister, Mayor of London, Defence Secretary and Leader of the Green Party. Not sure ho is lined up from the other parties this coming week but for UKIP there will be the Deputy Leader Paul Nutall, Nigel Farage, Patrick O'Flynn, Stewart Agnew (Eastern region MEP) and Margot Parker (East Midlands MEP).
Not seen any news about either Lib Dem or Labour visits in the local press.
I don't think we've even had an ARSE have we?
You would rather have fancy words and a party full of BNP members (and there were plenty of them in there under Sked) than a clear policy on banning those members.
Your posting is filled with accusations but no foundation at all.
As has been pointed out this 'sexist' party now has more female MEPs than there are female Lib Dem MPs and that homophobic Scottish MEP is himself gay.
But as you yourself said. You don't care about facts, just the politics.
So for example, a wish to reduce immigration to those who will be of benefit to the country is translated as being anti-immigrant, which them becomes a charge of racism and from there it is a short hop to comparing UKIP with the Hitler's Nazis and of thence Farage = Hitler. It's a total nonsense, but many otherwise sensible people on this site are doing just that. The leap from being against open-door immigration to being anti-immigrant is the big one. Once that lie has been pulled off everything else will follow naturally.
I also notice the demand that UKIP should now, immediately publish a costed manifesto covering every aspect of government policy, with the insinuation that as the Party haven't they are charlatans, liars, desperate to hide their true purpose/ don't have a clue what they are about and so on and so forth. That those same people are not demanding the same from the established parties is not a coincidence (what is Labour's stance on defence post 2015?).
Now, for good or ill, you have become on here a UKIP representative. So yo can expect a lot of the abuse, ill-defined and unfair attacks and all the rest of it to be directed at you. Just remember that most of those posting the abuse are actually just very frightened people. You see, deep down, they are like the wealthy burghers of the City of London in 1380 - they can see the peasants revolt coming but they can't work out how to stop it for to do so would mean opening their hearts, minds, and wallets to alternative ideas.
I do not see this ending well.
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/nurses-recruited-Europe-join-staff-Leicester-s/story-20476622-detail/story.html
Excellent Nurses they are too, with skills above our native graduates.
An ageing population, a Nursing skills shortage, youth unemployment in the UK, yet we have to recruit overseas. Personnel planning in the NHS is characterised by incompetence.
They should have learned from the example of Scotland and the Union, where even after 300 years, perceived slights are enough to cause significant distress to a portion of the population.
I'm sure the humble-pies will be roundly proffered next May.
Who controls the funding for nurse training?
Sam
The paragraph bolded above forms part of the founding application for membership in UKIP. It is a printed contemporaneous document.
Applicants for membership in UKIP today no longer have to sign up to the values stated in the paragraph.
How ever can Farage "rebut this nonsense"? It is documentary fact.
The paragraph bolded above forms part of the founding application for membership in UKIP. It is a printed contemporaneous document.
Applicants for membership in UKIP today no longer have to sign up to the values stated in the paragraph.
How ever can Farage "rebut this nonsense"? It is documentary fact.
Richard Tyndall rebutted it when you said the same thing the other night.
People used to be able to get round the old rules so Farage changed "o prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind. " to "No ex BNP members" which is the same thing.only easier to prove.
You are an historian. You should pay more attention to documentary evidence.
Take for example the statements of an UKIP councillor elected in Redditch last Friday:
Dave Small, who was elected to Redditch borough council on Friday, faces being kicked out of the party for referring to gay people as "perverts" and African immigrants as "scroungers".
In comments posted on Facebook, he also attacked BBC broadcaster Clare Balding and singer Elton John over their sexuality and referred to "our sworn enemies in the Muslim world".
This is an edited Guardian account of what was said. I have a copy of the original tweet but I very much doubt it would get through the site's moderation filters.
These are not smears. They are the published statements of a recently elected UKIP party representative.
It was only after Sked left in a huff that UKIP dealt with the BNP issue and expelled anyone associated with that party. They replaced words with action and made sure that anyone found to be associated with the BNP was thrown out of the party.
Again, facts, which have shown such open disdain for.
"faces being kicked out of the party "
Meanwhile homophobes and racists still sit as long serving Tory councillors with no threat to their position even after exposure and police cautions.
What a shame you support a party that harbours and rewards homophobes and racists.
We do not know where UKIP's heart is. That is a problem and if I were a UKIP supporter it would be my most pressing issue.
It is legitimate to be anti EU. it is legitimate to want sensible immigration controls.
But if that is it, if all you/they bang on about is immigration and the EU then you can't be surprised if people, especially those who see echoes of the BNP/NF in the language they use, choose to interpret them as racist.
George Osborne's cat chauffeur-driven home after getting lost in London
The Chancellor's cat Freya was chauffeur driven back to its Downing Street home after being found roaming the streets of Vauxhall
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/10859016/George-Osbornes-cat-chauffeur-driven-home-after-getting-lost-in-London.html
I expect my wait will be in vain.
"I wanted to work for the SIS, but then I remembered they're based in Vauxhall, so said no, as I didn't fancy commuting to Vauxhall"
Who was the bloke recently kicked out of UKIP for comments he made when he was a Tory?
" it is their heads and divorce from the reality of modern economics that is problematic"
I would argue that it is capitalists that are divorced from modern economics.
Why should a business train people when it is cheaper to import them? Why should the same business pay a living wage when they get their labour subsidized by the state (tax payers)?
The answer lies in profit, and profit is everything, above even social cohesion and rationality.
This is a sample, among dozens that are appearing more and more regularly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27595151
Research by the Electoral Reform Society found that after last week’s poll there are 111 councils where at least 75 per cent of councillors hail from a single party, an increase of 16.
Almost 19 million people live in “one-party” areas.
The councils are roughly evenly split between Labour and the Conservatives, with three Liberal Democrat strongholds.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4101784.ece
Something the Tory party has singularly failed to do in too many cases.
Again. Facts. And again as you stated recently, you don't care about them.
Good job you are not producing any of those yellow boxes at the moment. We might have to question their accuracy given your disdain for the truth.
No joke, I have probably replied over a dozen times on here to this question...
No tax on min wage
40% Threshold raised 3 or 4 grand
Grammar schools
Assisted places for bright poor kids at Private schools
A cut in foregn aid
A big cut to public sector management jobs
NHS free at point of use
Less intervention in foreign wars
Leave the EU
A points system to control immigration
I am sure these will be UKIP policies / direction of travel, but when I reply in good heart, all I ever get is "but how will you pay for them" etc etc
The manifesto will be out in September
It is exasparating
I voted for Tony Blair. I was young and naive. He took us into an unjust war that killed thousands of people and ruined millions of Iraqi lives, yet I am supposed to be aghast that some no mark councillor uses the N word or calls a homosexual a poof?
If I were Green Supremo (they probably have a non-favoured collective) I would be pushing the NOTA angle like Billy-o.
I do wish you would make your mind up, Mr. Tyndall. I wrote, off-line, a response to one of your earlier posts the saw you were off to bed so I deleted it. Now to find you didn't go to bed after all. Well, Grrrr.
The Farage/Nuttall dynamic duo speaks their language better.
Technical question: does your model update itself with weekly polling and, if so, how? For example, if there was a shift back to Labour or towards the Tories would it then change its prediction?
Do you think Nick Clegg should remain as Leader of the Liberal Democrats?
All Voters: Yes 30%, No 42%, DK 28%
Current Lib Dem voters: Yes 72%, No 15%, DK 13%
2010 Lib Dem voters: Yes 40%, No 38% DK 22%
At a GE Lib Dems would poll 8% with Clegg as Leader, with Cable as Leader, the Lib Dems would poll, erm 8%
QED? You are comfortable with 87 people owning more than half the population of the world?
Here is a clue. When many of the top economists are telling you something is "unsustainable" it might be time to unplug your ears and listen.
I worked in Vauxhall in the 1980s, when it was even more unfashionable than it is now. I had an office with a wonderful view over the river - I'd watch the cormorants fishing in the river, and sometimes a dredger called the Bowbelle would come and do the nautical equivalent of a skid-turn in the Thames right outside my office. That was the boat which in 1989 collided with the Marchioness.
On the morning the figures were released I pointed out to MaxB that underlying government revenue was increasing and expenditure reducing. The main offset was the fall in PAYE and NI receipts compared to April 2013. April 2014 receipts were £0.8 bn below the same month in the previous year due to the introduction of the 45% income tax rate in April 2013 with its consequent deferral of tax liabilities from the 2012-13 FY to 2013-14.
The balance of the difference was not clear at the time I posted but my suspicion that it related to the phasing of local government financing was confirmed by the OBR commentary released at noon.
Herewith OBR commentary:
Public sector net borrowing (PSNB) was £7.4 billion in April, £2.6 billion higher than market expectations and £1.7 billion higher than a year ago. On an underlying basis, excluding APF transfers, borrowing was £1.9 billion higher than last year at £11.5 billion. Central government expenditure was £0.2 billion lower than last April and central government receipts (excluding APF transfers) were £0.4 billion lower. Local authority borrowing was £1.6 billion higher. Much of the fall in receipts in April can be attributed to lower receipts from income tax and NICs, which reflect timing issues related to income shifted into the early part of 2013-14, when the additional rate of income tax was reduced to 45p.
And on local government financing:
Central government current expenditure fell by 1.0 per cent in April, compared with our March EFO forecast of a 1.9 per cent full year increase. The £1.4 billion year-on-year fall in other current spending in April largely reflects lower central government grants to local authorities, which relates to changes in the timing profile for these grants. The reduction in current spending in April is partly offset by a £0.4 billion increase in capital spending, which again reflects changes in grants to local authorities. Together these changes in grants have reduced central government spending by £1 billion, compared to a year ago, and increased local authority borrowing by a broadly similar amount.
Insofar as any first month of the fiscal year can be taken as indicative of progress towards an annual target, the April figures were consistent with borrowing heading below OBR's March EFO forecast in spite of the rise in April. The early days warning though should be repeated.
I think they should ask for their money back.
Freya’s rescuers, one of whom workers for a homeless charity, returned his pet with a note pointing out that while the Chancellor’s much loved cat has been rehoused many people sleeping rough are not so fortunate.
It read: “Found – on the streets in Vauxhall. Not everyone is as lucky as Freya. George please stop cutting homeless services.”.....
“I did find it slightly ironic that I had been up at 5am trying to help 24 people who had been sleeping rough in Newham and we couldn’t find anywhere to send them, then this cat gets chauffeur driven home.
“But the Downing Street people were very nice.”
The revolution starts here, right?
SEN training ended about twenty years ago, with existing SENs getting conversion courses to SRN. Both are now replaced by graduate nurses. Subsidized accommodation was sold off.
Now there is no route for nurse training short of a degree and A levels. These will get people into other courses, and there is also a loss of the camaraderie and community as well as the cheap accommodation of Nurses Homes. Nursing is now seen as something to be learned in a classroom rather than the bedside, but the same criticism can be made of medical schools.
There are simply too few Universities offering nurse training, and an ageing population, hence the need for imported nurses. Recruitment from Asia, Africa and India is now difficult because of restrictions on work permits, so EU Nurses are in demand.
The nursing shortage is entirely predictable, unless you are a Civil Servant or Academic Nurse Tutor!
No idea, But people who should naturally be on your "side" are making "err uhm" noises.
Apart from tonight, obviously.
If for no other reason, we can only hope UKIP can sustain and expand their emergence in many Tory and Labour heartlands and bring some genuine challenge back to some of these areas, but that may be too much to ask for.
The greatest strategic error the LDs made was overlooking this and going for the AV referendum.
If they'd said "OK, we'll leave Westminster reform for another day, but give us STV now for the locals (just like Scotland and NI)" the Tories would probably just have shrugged and said "Where would you like us to sign?"
So D.Cameron has the problem all sorted out now? Or are we going to soldier on importing nurses while the young stack shelves in pound shops for benefit money?
Although if R&T refine their NEVs (I seem to recall them doing this before) the -8.4% forecast will of course change a bit.
Last week The Sun was bashing Farage at every opportunity. This week it's apparently decided UKIP is largely right
http://twitpic.com/e4v7x4
What odds some electoral reform in the event of another hung parliament, in your estimation? LDs would probably find it hard to be taken seriously as the faces of any electoral reform proposal as it would patently be to their own benefit (true or not before, with a more significant number of MPs and without having suddenly lost possibly half their number, it was easier to appear merely principles on the subject), so Labour or the Tories would have to be genuinely enthusiastic for it.
The Tories I cannot see being enthusiastic for any change - they were so stridently for FPTP that switching over would look like nothing more than doing so for naked political advantage, and as for Labour, I doubt they'd want to open a can of worms like this, though would perhaps be more amenable. And depending on the suggestion, they could get UKIP on side, which would be helpful.
There was only a small door to the deck, while everyone was drunk and dancing downstairs. In retrospect it was a deathtrap waiting to happen.