Time was it would have been the other way round - UKIP up in an opinion poll but failing to make headway in a real election. A better night for UKIP than the Conservatives then.
"In an article for Progress, the New Labour pressure group, the YouGov president, Peter Kellner, describes the polling as "profoundly troubling" for Labour, saying that despite the unpopularity of the government, Labour has uncomfortably small leads and has been unable to generate wide public enthusiasm."
It seems that 2015 has 2 main outcomes - A Tory or current coalition govt continues in some form OR - Ed Milliband is Prime Minister
It seems that 2015 has 2 main outcomes - A Tory or current coalition govt continues in some form OR - Ed Milliband is Prime Minister
Both are impossible, but one must happen.
It is 2015. The Conservatives and Lib Dems have both lost seats and votes, but Labour are short of an overall majority, only twenty seats ahead of the Conservatives and behind the Conservatives in vote share. The Lib Dems retain enough seats to form a government with either party.
You are Nick Clegg. The most unpopular of the party leaders. What do you do?
Hospitals leader: NHS reorganisation 'coming home to roost' in A&E failure
The organisation representing English hospitals has said the government’s NHS reorganisation is in part to blame for the failure to maintain low accident and emergency waiting times.
Hospitals leader: NHS reorganisation 'coming home to roost' in A&E failure
The growth in attendance at A&E predates the NHS reforms and has been linked to the decline in GP out of hours service - thanks to the contracts negotiated by the previous government. This wasn't the first time Labour "stuffed their mouths with gold"
If its Cameron's fault - why have waiting times in Scotland trebled?
The number of patients left "languishing" in hospital A&E units has more than trebled in some parts of Scotland, according to Labour.
Hospitals leader: NHS reorganisation 'coming home to roost' in A&E failure
The organisation representing English hospitals has said the government’s NHS reorganisation is in part to blame for the failure to maintain low accident and emergency waiting times.
The liar who used his family to make personal promises, and broke them as soon as he could
And yet Labour has not pledged to undo any of the changes. Why is that?
It is rather simplistic to blame the increase in waiting times in A and E departments on a reorganisation that came into effect a month ago.
For example: One reason that it is very hard to recruit doctors to A and E departments, so they are understaffed or run by expensive locums, is the disastrous reorganisation of medical training that took place under Patrica Hewitt. When this combined with the near similtaneous ban on visas for Doctors from India the writing was on the wall.
There are many other factors some new and some going back decades. Remember that a dysfunctional A and E dept featured heavily in the investigation of Labours Stafford scandal.
"DAVID Cameron is ready to vote against his OWN Queen’s Speech over the issue of an EU referendum. Downing Street figures last night revealed the PM will join Tory Euro rebels in a planned protest vote next week.
It certainy can't be f***ing real or Cammie just made John Major look like a political colossus in dealing with tory splits and Cammie is going to be a complete laughing stock.
The contract from 2004 has led to a million rise suddenly last year?
Primarily the rise is old people presenting at A&E due to stripping away of council support services. Everyone knew this would happen, it's the classic "saving that increases spending"
Politicallly of course Cameron promised on his family not to reorganise, he will never be trusted again on the NHS. Politically,he decided to break it, he owns it.
Tim, you have not answered my question. Has Labour planned to change any of the Lansley bill?
You are already shifting ground to cuts in council services. Is Labour planning to reverse these? If so how is this funded?
"They are: “Rising numbers of patients presenting to emergency departments. Reasons for this include particular pressures due to inadequate social care beds, a frail elderly population with multiple co-morbidities and challenges with out of hours services.
Why have Scottish A&E wait times trebled? Health is devolved - so nowt to do with Cameron.
Good morning. I'd like to point out that the average of the three elections last night - where Ukip was standing - was a hefty 26.34%. One win and two seconds, a sign of UKIP's progress is the keeping up of momentum.
"On the broader issues, it is all very well for independence supporters to dismiss Better Together attacks as “scaremongering”. But some answers are required beyond the bland assertions that may satisfy the converted, but do nothing to convince the undecided who want to cast a vote based on something other than blind faith........
In a way, the SNP has become a victim of its own success in that the unlikely majority achieved in 2011 made a vote, for which they are not quite ready for, inevitable. As Scotland careers towards its most important date in 300 years, there is a feeling that the Yes campaign has failed to do its homework."
wow - one insignificant YG poll, according to tim, and he and pork posting again like a pair of demented ferrets - any casual neutral observer might think they wuz rattled!
One of the things I try to crack down on when writing is repetition of uncommon words or phrases. (Originally Journey to Altmortis had brows 'furrowing' far too often, for example). It's tedious, suggests a limited vocabulary/imagination and more varied use of language offers the opportunity for differing and interesting writing.
I understand why politicians don't do this. Any slight divergence in language could be considered splitting from the party line (even if this isn't the case, the media seem more interested in splits and manufacturing them than anything else). In addition, the public pay very little attention. Getting a line and then hammering it home at every opportunity is one way to make it sink in (tractor stats from Brown worked, to an extent).
But that does mean we end up with a very narrow sort of political 'debate', which is a shame.
Good morning. I'd like to point out that the average of the three elections last night - where Ukip was standing - was a hefty 26.34%. One win and two seconds, a sign of UKIP's progress is the keeping up of momentum.
Polly has picked up Kellner 's referendum paradox and spells it out clearly:
"Here's the dangerous paradox: if Labour bends under pressure and agrees to a 2017 in/out referendum, Britain will leave the EU. After losing an election, the Tories under a Europhobe leader will fight for "out" with all the might of their stampeding press: a mid-term Labour government advocating "in" would be at its weakest. The irony is that if Cameron won the next election, he might be strong enough to pull off a "yes" vote. That's why, for the sake of the country as well as for its own reputation, Labour sticks to its "no referendum" policy. Ed Miliband does not want to be the prime minister to take Britain out of Europe into the wilderness."
Her advice for Ed is to say "If you want an EU referendum - vote Tory"
So Andy Burnham is in favour of motherhood, apple pie and community services. He will have no top down organisation but will repeal the HSC bill of last year.
Lansleys reorganisation does put both community services and commissioning of hospital services together in the CCGs and did move public health to county hall. Yet it seems to need repeal? Makes no sense at all.
I am oft to hear Burnham speak (amongst many others) at the national commissioning meeting in London in June. It will be interesting to hear if his ideas are less vacuous by then. As a former Health Minister he should not be so clueless, though the evidence of Stafford points in the other direction.
Jackson must believe he has fairly good grounds against IPSA. Perhaps he does, perhaps he's just an ass trying to tough it out. We don't know, and the court case should show.
Remember, IPSA doesn't exactly have a good track record. A mistake might have been made, or it might have been a case of when valuations were made.
"Here's the dangerous paradox: if Labour bends under pressure and agrees to a 2017 in/out referendum, Britain will leave the EU"
Poor old Polly. As clueless about what Cammie's Cast Iron pledge actually involves as the inept PBtory spinners.
Cammie has only pledged an IN/OUT referendum after renegotiation on a treaty that just isn't going to happen. It's as conditional a cast iron pledge as Lisbon was. Cammie made it crystal clear that an IN/OUT referendum without renegotiation and a new deal was a "false choice".
That's why he's lining up the absurd referendum on a referendum or "mandate referendum" as the fall back for when he has to bottle his pledge. He would say in 2017 that no treaty means no renegotiations and no "false choice" of IN/OUT if he won. To keep his backbenchers onside he then says he needs the mandate referendum to send a message to Europe. That way gullible tory Eurosceptics still get a referendum on the EU even if it is meaningless.
For those who appear to have missed the obvious (as usual) the dawning realisation that they've been taken for chumps by Cammie yet again is why the tory party is currently reliving the Jonh Major years of unity over Europe.
That was fun! A nice twitter flame war to start the morning off really blows the cobwebs away.
The latest YouGov shows that no one should get carried away with daily movements (although record peaks and troughs are of passing interest). It's the trend that matters and overall comparison to other surveys.
This tells us that Labour's lead is smaller than it was last year, that Ukip have added support in the last few weeks and that both Tory and Labour shares are down because of this. Oh, and the Lib Dems are screwed.
"Here's the dangerous paradox: if Labour bends under pressure and agrees to a 2017 in/out referendum, Britain will leave the EU"
Poor old Polly. As clueless about what Cammie's Cast Iron pledge actually involves as the inept PBtory spinners.
Cammie has only pledged an IN/OUT referendum after renegotiation on a treaty that just isn't going to happen. It's as conditional a cast iron pledge as Lisbon was. Cammie made it crystal clear that an IN/OUT referendum without renegotiation and a new deal was a "false choice".
That's why he's lining up the absurd referendum on a referendum or "mandate referendum" as the fall back for when he has to bottle his pledge. He would say in 2017 that no treaty means no renegotiations and no "false choice" of IN/OUT if he won. To keep his backbenchers onside he then says he needs the mandate referendum to send a message to Europe. That way gullible tory Eurosceptics still get a referendum on the EU even if it is meaningless.
For those who appear to have missed the obvious (as usual) the dawning realisation that they've been taken for chumps by Cammie yet again is why the tory party is currently reliving the Jonh Major years of unity over Europe.
do you think there should be an IN/OUT referendum on Europe?
I think little Ed doesn't have that much to lose by matching Cammie's IN/OUT pledge since it's essentially harmless and very easily strung out indefinitely. He keeps the focus on UKIP and tory splits if he does so but he'll never sound remotely convincing posturing on the issue. He would of course also take a hit when it transpired that no renegotiations and thus IN/OUT referendum were forthcoming but the calculation by him and Cammie is that by then UKIP will have burnt out enough to take the heat out of it. Cammie doesn't have the luxury of completely ignoring UKIP and his backbenches which is why the mandate referendum is being talked about as a back up.
I have an actual referendum to fight thanks. It is of more consequence than tory splits.
do you think there should be an IN/OUT referendum on Europe?
I think little Ed doesn't have that much to lose by matching Cammie's IN/OUT pledge since it's essentially harmless and very easily strung out indefinitely. He keeps the focus on UKIP and tory splits if he does so but he'll never sound remotely convincing posturing on the issue. He would of course also take a hit when it transpired that no renegotiations and thus IN/OUT referendum were forthcoming but the calculation by him and Cammie is that by then UKIP will have burnt out enough to take the heat out of it. Cammie doesn't have the luxury of completely ignoring UKIP and his backbenches which is why the mandate referendum is being talked about as a back up.
I have an actual referendum to fight thanks. It is of more consequence than tory splits.
yeah yeah I get that but personally - you - for the UK (whatever it constitutes at that time) - are you in favour of an IN/OUT referendum on the EU?
Yes, it really is. It's real and it's of huge consequence. Tory splits are neither new or very surprising given their obvious panic over the kippers.
Cammie can string along gullible Eurosceptic MPs with yet more empty posturing because he knows they just don't have the balls to remove him. It still won't stop them banging on about it though.
More than half of Scots think the Trident nuclear deterrent should be replaced rather than scrapped, according to a new poll which seriously undermines claims that Scotland is staunchly anti-nuclear.
The research also confounds repeated claims by Scottish politicians, including Alex Salmond, the First Minister, that voters are overwhelmingly against basing the deterrent in Scottish waters, with 43 per cent of voters maintaining it should not be moved.
The First Minister has said that an independent Scotland would enshrine a ban on nuclear weapons in Scotland in a written constitution but the opinion poll, published today, shows that the most popular option is for them to be kept in Scotland.
So Tory backbenchers are (with apparent acquiescence from Conservative ministers) by-passing the Queen's Speech and introducing an EU referendum bill. 2 fingers up to Clegg? Or does Cameron have any choice in the matter?
More than half of Scots think the Trident nuclear deterrent should be replaced rather than scrapped, according to a new poll which seriously undermines claims that Scotland is staunchly anti-nuclear.
The research also confounds repeated claims by Scottish politicians, including Alex Salmond, the First Minister, that voters are overwhelmingly against basing the deterrent in Scottish waters, with 43 per cent of voters maintaining it should not be moved.
The First Minister has said that an independent Scotland would enshrine a ban on nuclear weapons in Scotland in a written constitution but the opinion poll, published today, shows that the most popular option is for them to be kept in Scotland.
That is because, despite some noisy elements, the Scottish public are mostly sensible.
You mean calamity Clegg? Huhne got that one right at least.
Last nights informative locals article contained this about the effects of last weeks local elections.
" the Liberal Democrats see thirty three years of local election advances wiped out (14% national projected vote share, only 1% higher than their tally in 1980)"
It helps explain why Clegg suddenly decided to get uppity over childcare reforms because his base cannot have failed to notice that the spin about last weeks locals from Clegg (about how he was "back in the saddle") was somewhat at variance with the reality.
You mean calamity Clegg? Huhne got that one right at least.
Last nights informative locals article contained this about the effects of last weeks local elections.
" the Liberal Democrats see thirty three years of local election advances wiped out (14% national projected vote share, only 1% higher than their tally in 1980)"
It helps explain why Clegg suddenly decided to get uppity over childcare reforms because his base cannot have failed to notice that the spin about last weeks locals from Clegg (about how he was "back in the saddle") was somewhat at variance with the reality.
Huhne clearly saw Clegg as a big threat, hence the nickname. But in hindsight he should probably have focussed his attention closer to home. Perhaps investing in a mirror.
So Tory backbenchers are (with apparent acquiescence from Conservative ministers) by-passing the Queen's Speech and introducing an EU referendum bill. 2 fingers up to Clegg? Or does Cameron have any choice in the matter?
It is a bit bizarre, but it sounds like that with a free vote for Tories you would think there would be enough pro-EU Tories to vote with the Lib Dems and most of Labour to defeat the amendment.
Cameron therefore gets to reassure his backbenchers that he is with them, but it's just because he is in Coalition that they can't have what they want. Thus if they want a referendum they need to redouble their efforts to win a Tory majority.
I actually prefer having these disagreements out in the open, and tested with votes in Parliament, rather than hidden behind party discipline.
@SamCoatesTimes: Co-op bank in trouble - Moody's downgrades heavily, suggests it might need taxpayer support. Its troubles stem from Britannia takeover
London Mayor Boris Johnson today defended his proposal for a new hub airport in the Thames Estuary east of London, after an influential House of Commons committee said the idea should be ditched in favour of a third runway at Heathrow.
In a report published today, the Commons Transport Committee said that the "Boris Island" option would be hugely expensive, could harm estuary wildlife and would also mean the closure of Heathrow.
Instead, the MPs said that an extra runway at Heathrow was necessary and also suggested that a fourth might have merit if the two new runways were located to the west of the current site. The current two-runway airport was "not adequate for the needs of the UK" and expansion of Heathrow was "long overdue", they said
Boris really should stop making a fool of himself over this. Let Dave the Ditherer take the blame for the delay.
He isn't making a fool of himself; he's right.
It seems from radio interviews, that one of the problems mentioned by the MPs was the cost of getting the transport infrastructure to the site.
I'd be interested to know if they factored in the £16 billion we are spending on Crossrail, part of whose aim is to improve transport to Heathrow. No-one blinks an eye at that.
We can do an island airport. It solves many problems, and we have the technology and know-how. British firms largely built Hong Kong International Airport, and the new London Gateway port, just a short distance from several of the proposed island site, is reclaiming a vast area from the estuary.
A third or even fourth runway at Heathrow have their own problems, and will be massively costly as well. Whichever approach we take, we are talking of many, many billions.
The latest YouGov shows that no one should get carried away with daily movements (although record peaks and troughs are of passing interest). It's the trend that matters and overall comparison to other surveys.
This tells us that Labour's lead is smaller than it was last year, that Ukip have added support in the last few weeks and that both Tory and Labour shares are down because of this. Oh, and the Lib Dems are screwed.
Exactly.
Even yesterday's YouGov of 17 was only just (0.07%) outside an MOE central position of 12 - everything else is still within MOE - though the trends you have noted do appear to be entrenching. Where we are a month from now - who knows? Let alone a year - or at the GE, in two.
Huhne clearly saw Clegg as a big threat, hence the nickname.
Here's a curious fact. Huhne actually won the leadership but for the intervention of someone who's name might ring a bell.
"It was he who manoeuvred young Nick Clegg into the safe seat of Sheffield Hallam and, as returning officer in 2007, determined that a batch of late postal votes, that would have handed the leadership to his rival Chris Huhne, were not accepted."
Cleary they were rivals. Equally clearly Huhne was the author of his own spectacular downfall. That doesn't stop Huhne being right about Clegg however. The lib dems are in deep, deep trouble. Clegg having a nice ministerial car hardly abdicates him from the responsibilty for it.
More than half of Scots think the Trident nuclear deterrent should be replaced rather than scrapped, according to a new poll which seriously undermines claims that Scotland is staunchly anti-nuclear.
The research also confounds repeated claims by Scottish politicians, including Alex Salmond, the First Minister, that voters are overwhelmingly against basing the deterrent in Scottish waters, with 43 per cent of voters maintaining it should not be moved.
The First Minister has said that an independent Scotland would enshrine a ban on nuclear weapons in Scotland in a written constitution but the opinion poll, published today, shows that the most popular option is for them to be kept in Scotland.
Same poll:
'While a majority approves Trident’s replacement, 48 percent of respondents said they are in principle opposed to the U.K. having nuclear weapons, with 37 percent in support.'
Scottish Tories, converting eggs into hypothetical chickens since time immemorial.
Definitely worth a thread. The Tories appointment of Lynton Crosby to run a "Boost-UKIP" strategy looks stranger by the day.
It is possible to run more than one strategy across different areas but that data does point out the futility of trying to run more than one in the same area.
The research also confounds repeated claims by Scottish politicians, including Alex Salmond, the First Minister, that voters are overwhelmingly against basing the deterrent in Scottish waters, with 43 per cent of voters maintaining it should not be moved.
Count-down to the next mega U-turn....
How long before Salmond is laying into the UK government for depriving Scotland of its birthright by not bringing Trident on stream faster?
Boris Island will never happen,was never going to happen, and the expansion of Heathrow is inevitable.
Maybe Boris should start telling Londoners what happens to their jobs when he closes Heathrow.
It's more likely that Gatwick (or possibly Stansted) will close, and Heathrow takes over that role as a reduced-size airport. And in the unlikely event it does close, thousands of acres of prime brownfield land will be available for development.
If we get a fourth runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow, how long before that too is full? 15 years? 20 years? We'll just be having the same arguments continually for the next hundred years.
@SamCoatesTimes: Co-op bank in trouble - Moody's downgrades heavily, suggests it might need taxpayer support. Its troubles stem from Britannia takeover
I wonder if that was another more plausible reason why the Lloyds branches takeover didn't happen at the last minute...
And which impartial organisation responded to the poll?
Arthur West, chairman of Scottish CND, said: “It certainly flies in the face of polls, and also the public work, that we do, where we are picking up a clear message of opposition to Trident replacement.
Actually the SNP go one better. On what basis do the SNP claim there is no support for nuclear weapons in Scotland?
An SNP spokeswoman said: “We are extremely confident that a majority of people in Scotland want to get rid of Trident nuclear weapons — in line with the recent overwhelming vote in the Scottish Parliament.
Back from DC (where I was royally hosted by TimT) - noticed Mike's post on the last thread about his polling day picture. I think this one is even better:
@SkyNewsBreak: Radical cleric Abu Qatada says he will voluntarily return to Jordan if Jordan ratifies a treaty with UK guaranteeing he will not be tortured
Back from DC (where I was royally hosted by TimT) - noticed Mike's post on the last thread about his polling day picture. I think this one is even better:
Boris Island will never happen,was never going to happen, and the expansion of Heathrow is inevitable.
Maybe Boris should start telling Londoners what happens to their jobs when he closes Heathrow.
They're replaced by other jobs in a booming city?
You're one of the first people to say we need more housing in London. The closure of Heathrow would create a huge area where we could meet the capital's housing needs.
So how have we managed to fund that rise in consumption ?
Government debt
March 1988 £167.4bn (and falling) March 2013 £1,185.8bn (and rising)
So over a trillion quid more on the state debt and add on another trillion quid more in houshold debt.
And the Cameron fan club think a bit of growth will sort out our problems.
To be fair, the Tories have been willing to sacrifice growth (although it is almost ok - about 1.3% p.a. - if you strip out oil & gas) to reduce the deficit. Perhaps they could have been bolder, but they have managed to bring down the deficit without plunging the economy into recession.
It's the two Eds who want to increase growth by borrowing more. They're the guy you should be gunning for.
Dave should vote against the Queens Speech on the EU Referendum and then vote for and against the Gay Marriage Bill.
All he needs do is then proclaim 'we can't just leave the EU' while labeling those who think so pessimists (step up from fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists admittedly) and we have another fop triumph on our hands.
An EU split triumph of John Major like proportions.
Lord Ashcroft on polling on nuclear weapons in Scotland:
"As I never tire of pointing out, it is always worth looking twice at any survey that seems to show that the public support the agenda of whoever commissioned it. Perhaps not at all surprisingly, a recent poll about nuclear weapons conducted in Scotland for CND is a case in point......
As we know from their attempt to rig the referendum question, the SNP has form on this sort of thing. Trying to show that people think what you want them to think is not the same thing as trying to find out what they really do think. I am more interested in the latter – so last week I asked what people in Scotland really do think about Trident. Here is what I found."
And which impartial organisation responded to the poll?
Arthur West, chairman of Scottish CND, said: “It certainly flies in the face of polls, and also the public work, that we do, where we are picking up a clear message of opposition to Trident replacement.
Actually the SNP go one better. On what basis do the SNP claim there is no support for nuclear weapons in Scotland?
An SNP spokeswoman said: “We are extremely confident that a majority of people in Scotland want to get rid of Trident nuclear weapons — in line with the recent overwhelming vote in the Scottish Parliament.
We voted for it. The people must want it.
The SNP, making it up as they go along...
The SNP's tragedy is in believing that it alone represents the essense of Scotland while in truth it merely represents a shower of third-rate politicians , chancers and malcontents.
Edit. Sorry the link doesn't seem to work. It's the Sun's story about Stuart Jackson trying to make some dosh out of his second home.
I haven't read this story specifically, but the whole situation does seem very odd.
AFAIK, there was a clear agreement: you could continue to receive mortgage interest payments for a transitional period and in return you agreed to give up a percentage of the increase in the value of the property for that period.
Stuart Jackson is (a) disagreeing with the valuation of the property in 2010 [baseline] and 2012 [end of transitional period] and (b) complaining that he is having to pay more in the cap gains share that he received in interest contributions.
(b) is tough luck: you made an investment, it didn't work out. (a) I can see why there might be a dispute, but why couldn't it have been resolved? Seems very odd it needs to go to law.
I suspect that Mr. Jackson is a greedy little sod trying to rip off the public
Lord Ashcroft on polling on nuclear weapons in Scotland:
As we know from their attempt to rig the referendum question, the SNP has form on this sort of thing.
Unspoofable and strangely clueless about what SLAB and Lamont's postion on trident is since the tory spinner treats almost all scottish labour's press releases and witterings as fact.
Actually the SNP go one better. On what basis do the SNP claim there is no support for nuclear weapons in Scotland?
An SNP spokeswoman said: “We are extremely confident that a majority of people in Scotland want to get rid of Trident nuclear weapons — in line with the recent overwhelming vote in the Scottish Parliament.
This basis?
'While a majority approves Trident’s replacement, 48 percent of respondents said they are in principle opposed to the U.K. having nuclear weapons, with 37 percent in support.'
I know in Torynincompoopworld 37% represents an overwhelming (and unattainable) electoral mandate, but 48% trumps it.
The SNP's tragedy is in believing that it alone represents the essense of Scotland while in truth it merely represents a shower of third-rate politicians , chancers and malcontents.
UKIP's tragedy is in believing that it alone represents the essense (sic) of Britain (sic) while in truth it merely represents a shower of third-rate politicians, chancers and malcontents.
@Socrates.Boris Island is on the wrong side of London, full stop.
Depends on what you mean by the "wrong"side.
If one of your objectives is to reduce noise pollution it is on the "right side" ~ 70% of approaches into Heathrow are westerly - over the city of London. Moving the airport to East of London would have these approaches over the sea.
(b) is tough luck: you made an investment, it didn't work out.
Except that it isn't how it works. The MPs get to take any losses and IPSA gets any gains, even paper gains which are not realised.
It's a completely absurd system. They should start again and design something sensible.
This was a transitional arrangement for only 2 years: they didn't have to opt in. They could have chosen to stop receiving interest payments at all - this was set up for those people who whinged.
I suspect that Mr. Jackson is a greedy little sod trying to rip off the public
I suspect IPSA was essentialy toothless public relations from the start and this is yet more attempts to cosh them into complete submission.
Possibly. It shouldn't be beyond the wit of man to develop a simple system for expenses - give them all a credit card that is paid centrally which they need to use for expenses for a start and then you have complete visibility. Housing costs: just pay the cost of a reasonable hotel in central London ever night they need to be there. (It may make more sense for the parliamentary estate to commission a hotel company to develop & run a block for them).
This is a nice find for those who think still inexplicably think that a Cast Iron Referendum Pledge cannot be spun and postured on from the start then renaged on when convenient.
Boris Island is on the wrong side of London, full stop.
What a carefully thought-out and insightful contribution. Shame it's rubbish.
Currently, to get to Heathrow from the west (e.g. Bath) by rail, you need to go into the centre of London, and then come out west again, either using the uber-expensive Heathrow express or the slow and languorous tube.
This will improve when the uber-expensive Crossrail is built, but not much.
Heathrow Express takes 21 minutes from Paddington to LHR, at vast expense. You should be able to get from the centre of London to a new Boris island in not much more than that.
The SNP's tragedy is in believing that it alone represents the essense of Scotland while in truth it merely represents a shower of third-rate politicians , chancers and malcontents.
UKIP's tragedy is in believing that it alone represents the essense (sic) of Britain (sic) while in truth it merely represents a shower of third-rate politicians, chancers and malcontents.
ThEUniondivvie doesn't like UKIP because he doesn't like the UK and independence , he prefers the EU and dependency on the whims of the Germans. Just like the founders of the SNP. Plus ça change plus c'est la même chose .
Possibly. It shouldn't be beyond the wit of man to develop a simple system for expenses
MPs aren't angry at IPSA because of complexity. They are angry at the imposition it represents. They want it complex and impenetrable. The less transparent the better. There have been fairly reasonable solutions including some of the ones you highlight made before and they were scoffed at.
I say let IDS devise some form of universal benefit system for MPs and put them on the same hugely complex IT system being proposed for that. That'll teach them.
@SamCoatesTimes: Co-op bank in trouble - Moody's downgrades heavily, suggests it might need taxpayer support. Its troubles stem from Britannia takeover
I wonder if that was another more plausible reason why the Lloyds branches takeover didn't happen at the last minute...
Isn't the Co-op the bankers to the Labour Party? Are they worried they won't get their money back?
ThEUniondivvie doesn't like UKIP because he doesn't like the UK and independence , he prefers the EU and dependency on the whims of the Germans. Just like the founders of the SNP.
You've run out of original barbs pretty early today. You're getting past it, Monica.
Did you see the Yougov polling on Wednesday night? Amusingly on the Scottish cross breaks UKIP got 0%, so it appears I am at one with my country in my opinion of UKIP.
@SamCoatesTimes: Co-op bank in trouble - Moody's downgrades heavily, suggests it might need taxpayer support. Its troubles stem from Britannia takeover
I wonder if that was another more plausible reason why the Lloyds branches takeover didn't happen at the last minute...
Isn't the Co-op the bankers to the Labour Party? Are they worried they won't get their money back?
Do they have any money? Perhaps the Labour party have an overdraft?
@SamCoatesTimes: Co-op bank in trouble - Moody's downgrades heavily, suggests it might need taxpayer support. Its troubles stem from Britannia takeover
I wonder if that was another more plausible reason why the Lloyds branches takeover didn't happen at the last minute...
Isn't the Co-op the bankers to the Labour Party? Are they worried they won't get their money back?
Do they have any money? Perhaps the Labour party have an overdraft?
Hopefully the Co-Op will be broken up into a good and bad bank and the bad bit zombied off and the good bit sold.
Can't see Labour getting that sort of overdraft from another bank at the same terms - looks like the Union subs will be going up comrades - happy days.
ThEUniondivvie doesn't like UKIP because he doesn't like the UK and independence , he prefers the EU and dependency on the whims of the Germans. Just like the founders of the SNP.
You've run out of original barbs pretty early today. You're getting past it, Monica.
Did you see the Yougov polling on Wednesday night? Amusingly on the Scottish cross breaks UKIP got 0%, so it appears I am at one with my country in my opinion of UKIP.
It'll be interesting to see how UKIP do in Donside.
Comments
Perhaps this too
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/09/labour-election-victory-2015-distant-prospect
"In an article for Progress, the New Labour pressure group, the YouGov president, Peter Kellner, describes the polling as "profoundly troubling" for Labour, saying that despite the unpopularity of the government, Labour has uncomfortably small leads and has been unable to generate wide public enthusiasm."
It seems that 2015 has 2 main outcomes
- A Tory or current coalition govt continues in some form
OR
- Ed Milliband is Prime Minister
Both are impossible, but one must happen.
You are Nick Clegg. The most unpopular of the party leaders. What do you do?
Does the article say what the other parts are?
If its Cameron's fault - why have waiting times in Scotland trebled?
The number of patients left "languishing" in hospital A&E units has more than trebled in some parts of Scotland, according to Labour.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-22472386
It is rather simplistic to blame the increase in waiting times in A and E departments on a reorganisation that came into effect a month ago.
For example: One reason that it is very hard to recruit doctors to A and E departments, so they are understaffed or run by expensive locums, is the disastrous reorganisation of medical training that took place under Patrica Hewitt. When this combined with the near similtaneous ban on visas for Doctors from India the writing was on the wall.
There are many other factors some new and some going back decades. Remember that a dysfunctional A and E dept featured heavily in the investigation of Labours Stafford scandal.
Very droll. Is that a Daily Mash satire or what?
It certainy can't be f***ing real or Cammie just made John Major look like a political colossus in dealing with tory splits and Cammie is going to be a complete laughing stock.
You are already shifting ground to cuts in council services. Is Labour planning to reverse these? If so how is this funded?
"They are: “Rising numbers of patients presenting to emergency departments. Reasons for this include particular pressures due to inadequate social care beds, a frail elderly population with multiple co-morbidities and challenges with out of hours services.
Why have Scottish A&E wait times trebled? Health is devolved - so nowt to do with Cameron.
I'd like to point out that the average of the three elections last night - where Ukip was standing - was a hefty 26.34%. One win and two seconds, a sign of UKIP's progress is the keeping up of momentum.
First practice is in just over an hour and 20 minutes. Whilst I won't be able to watch all of it I do hope to catch a bit.
In a way, the SNP has become a victim of its own success in that the unlikely majority achieved in 2011 made a vote, for which they are not quite ready for, inevitable. As Scotland careers towards its most important date in 300 years, there is a feeling that the Yes campaign has failed to do its homework."
http://www.scotsman.com/news/tom-peterkin-snp-may-be-victims-of-own-success-1-2925541
They do make a nice comparison to a generation ago:
Industial production (2009 = 100)
March 1988 98.6
March 2013 98.5
Not much change there but here's something which has changed:
Retail sales (2009 = 100)
March 1988 56.5
March 2013 103.0
So how have we managed to fund that rise in consumption ?
Government debt
March 1988 £167.4bn (and falling)
March 2013 £1,185.8bn (and rising)
So over a trillion quid more on the state debt and add on another trillion quid more in houshold debt.
And the Cameron fan club think a bit of growth will sort out our problems.
no, this is a dailymash satire
thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/labourers-descend-on-manchester-2012100143016
If this is real Cammie just took John Major's underpants of power and put them on his head. But lest you think Cammie is a panicking idiot utterly clueless about how to tackle tory splits If all that doesn't stop the tories banging on about Europe, then what will?
*tears of laughter etc.*
I understand why politicians don't do this. Any slight divergence in language could be considered splitting from the party line (even if this isn't the case, the media seem more interested in splits and manufacturing them than anything else). In addition, the public pay very little attention. Getting a line and then hammering it home at every opportunity is one way to make it sink in (tractor stats from Brown worked, to an extent).
But that does mean we end up with a very narrow sort of political 'debate', which is a shame.
@pollytoynbee: RT @commentisfree: Labour must stand firm: no to a referendum on Europe | Polly Toynbee http://gu.com/p/3fm4x/tf (@pollytoynbee)
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4921619/MP-sued-by-watchdog-for-54000-home-profit.htmi
Edit. Sorry the link doesn't seem to work. It's the Sun's story about Stuart Jackson trying to make some dosh out of his second home.
"Here's the dangerous paradox: if Labour bends under pressure and agrees to a 2017 in/out referendum, Britain will leave the EU. After losing an election, the Tories under a Europhobe leader will fight for "out" with all the might of their stampeding press: a mid-term Labour government advocating "in" would be at its weakest. The irony is that if Cameron won the next election, he might be strong enough to pull off a "yes" vote. That's why, for the sake of the country as well as for its own reputation, Labour sticks to its "no referendum" policy. Ed Miliband does not want to be the prime minister to take Britain out of Europe into the wilderness."
Her advice for Ed is to say "If you want an EU referendum - vote Tory"
Not sure I see Ed running with that one....
I love the way our prosecco socialist diva from Tuscany wants to deny democratic choice to the plebs
Lansleys reorganisation does put both community services and commissioning of hospital services together in the CCGs and did move public health to county hall. Yet it seems to need repeal? Makes no sense at all.
I am oft to hear Burnham speak (amongst many others) at the national commissioning meeting in London in June. It will be interesting to hear if his ideas are less vacuous by then. As a former Health Minister he should not be so clueless, though the evidence of Stafford points in the other direction.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4921619/MP-sued-by-watchdog-for-54000-home-profit.html
Jackson must believe he has fairly good grounds against IPSA. Perhaps he does, perhaps he's just an ass trying to tough it out. We don't know, and the court case should show.
Remember, IPSA doesn't exactly have a good track record. A mistake might have been made, or it might have been a case of when valuations were made.
Poor old Polly. As clueless about what Cammie's Cast Iron pledge actually involves as the inept PBtory spinners.
Cammie has only pledged an IN/OUT referendum after renegotiation on a treaty that just isn't going to happen. It's as conditional a cast iron pledge as Lisbon was. Cammie made it crystal clear that an IN/OUT referendum without renegotiation and a new deal was a "false choice".
That's why he's lining up the absurd referendum on a referendum or "mandate referendum" as the fall back for when he has to bottle his pledge. He would say in 2017 that no treaty means no renegotiations and no "false choice" of IN/OUT if he won. To keep his backbenchers onside he then says he needs the mandate referendum to send a message to Europe. That way gullible tory Eurosceptics still get a referendum on the EU even if it is meaningless.
For those who appear to have missed the obvious (as usual) the dawning realisation that they've been taken for chumps by Cammie yet again is why the tory party is currently reliving the Jonh Major years of unity over Europe. The irony is of course that Kipper voters will never believe Cammie anyway and are voting on more than just Europe.
The latest YouGov shows that no one should get carried away with daily movements (although record peaks and troughs are of passing interest). It's the trend that matters and overall comparison to other surveys.
This tells us that Labour's lead is smaller than it was last year, that Ukip have added support in the last few weeks and that both Tory and Labour shares are down because of this. Oh, and the Lib Dems are screwed.
Mick
do you think there should be an IN/OUT referendum on Europe?
He couldn't even get Labour MPs and Party members to vote for him.
Kinnock with hair.
I have an actual referendum to fight thanks. It is of more consequence than tory splits.
Tory splits are neither new or very surprising given their obvious panic over the kippers.
Cammie can string along gullible Eurosceptic MPs with yet more empty posturing because he knows they just don't have the balls to remove him. It still won't stop them banging on about it though.
Are leaders' nicknames proportional to how much they get under the skin of their opponents? So far today we have...
Wee Eck
Little Ed, drag on the ticket or rED
Call me Dave, Cammie, the Fop, Cameron@EtonOldBoys
and
Nick Clegg.
Last nights informative locals article contained this about the effects of last weeks local elections.
" the Liberal Democrats see thirty three years of local election advances wiped out (14% national projected vote share, only 1% higher than their tally in 1980)"
It helps explain why Clegg suddenly decided to get uppity over childcare reforms because his base cannot have failed to notice that the spin about last weeks locals from Clegg (about how he was "back in the saddle") was somewhat at variance with the reality.
Cameron therefore gets to reassure his backbenchers that he is with them, but it's just because he is in Coalition that they can't have what they want. Thus if they want a referendum they need to redouble their efforts to win a Tory majority.
I actually prefer having these disagreements out in the open, and tested with votes in Parliament, rather than hidden behind party discipline.
Or indeed all the the other polling that contradicts it.
*chuckles*
Do you know what SLAB and Lamont's position on Trident is?
When you find out ask yourself why that is?
@SamCoatesTimes: Co-op bank in trouble - Moody's downgrades heavily, suggests it might need taxpayer support. Its troubles stem from Britannia takeover
It seems from radio interviews, that one of the problems mentioned by the MPs was the cost of getting the transport infrastructure to the site.
I'd be interested to know if they factored in the £16 billion we are spending on Crossrail, part of whose aim is to improve transport to Heathrow. No-one blinks an eye at that.
We can do an island airport. It solves many problems, and we have the technology and know-how. British firms largely built Hong Kong International Airport, and the new London Gateway port, just a short distance from several of the proposed island site, is reclaiming a vast area from the estuary.
http://www.londongateway.com/
A third or even fourth runway at Heathrow have their own problems, and will be massively costly as well. Whichever approach we take, we are talking of many, many billions.
Even yesterday's YouGov of 17 was only just (0.07%) outside an MOE central position of 12 - everything else is still within MOE - though the trends you have noted do appear to be entrenching. Where we are a month from now - who knows? Let alone a year - or at the GE, in two.
It's a strange viewpoint for the SNP to take.
;-)
"It was he who manoeuvred young Nick Clegg into the safe seat of Sheffield Hallam and, as returning officer in 2007, determined that a batch of late postal votes, that would have handed the leadership to his rival Chris Huhne, were not accepted."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/lord-rennard-a-prominent-and-powerful-rasputin-figure-who-ruled-the-lib-dem-machine-8508671.html
Cleary they were rivals. Equally clearly Huhne was the author of his own spectacular downfall.
That doesn't stop Huhne being right about Clegg however. The lib dems are in deep, deep trouble. Clegg having a nice ministerial car hardly abdicates him from the responsibilty for it.
'While a majority approves Trident’s replacement, 48 percent of respondents said they are in principle opposed to the U.K. having nuclear weapons, with 37 percent in support.'
Scottish Tories, converting eggs into hypothetical chickens since time immemorial.
How long before Salmond is laying into the UK government for depriving Scotland of its birthright by not bringing Trident on stream faster?
If we get a fourth runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow, how long before that too is full? 15 years? 20 years? We'll just be having the same arguments continually for the next hundred years.
A Thames airport may not happen. But it should.
And which impartial organisation responded to the poll? Actually the SNP go one better. On what basis do the SNP claim there is no support for nuclear weapons in Scotland? We voted for it. The people must want it.
The SNP, making it up as they go along...
http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/
(you may need to let the picture scroll round to it).
You're one of the first people to say we need more housing in London. The closure of Heathrow would create a huge area where we could meet the capital's housing needs.
Unlucky
It's the two Eds who want to increase growth by borrowing more. They're the guy you should be gunning for.
An EU split triumph of John Major like proportions.
"As I never tire of pointing out, it is always worth looking twice at any survey that seems to show that the public support the agenda of whoever commissioned it. Perhaps not at all surprisingly, a recent poll about nuclear weapons conducted in Scotland for CND is a case in point......
As we know from their attempt to rig the referendum question, the SNP has form on this sort of thing. Trying to show that people think what you want them to think is not the same thing as trying to find out what they really do think. I am more interested in the latter – so last week I asked what people in Scotland really do think about Trident. Here is what I found."
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2013/05/from-lordashcroft-embargoed-until-friday-10th-may.html
The SNP, making it up as they go along...
The SNP's tragedy is in believing that it alone represents the essense of Scotland while in truth it merely represents a shower of third-rate politicians , chancers and malcontents.
AFAIK, there was a clear agreement: you could continue to receive mortgage interest payments for a transitional period and in return you agreed to give up a percentage of the increase in the value of the property for that period.
Stuart Jackson is (a) disagreeing with the valuation of the property in 2010 [baseline] and 2012 [end of transitional period] and (b) complaining that he is having to pay more in the cap gains share that he received in interest contributions.
(b) is tough luck: you made an investment, it didn't work out. (a) I can see why there might be a dispute, but why couldn't it have been resolved? Seems very odd it needs to go to law.
I suspect that Mr. Jackson is a greedy little sod trying to rip off the public
This basis?
'While a majority approves Trident’s replacement, 48 percent of respondents said they are in principle opposed to the U.K. having nuclear weapons, with 37 percent in support.'
I know in Torynincompoopworld 37% represents an overwhelming (and unattainable) electoral mandate, but 48% trumps it.
It's a completely absurd system. They should start again and design something sensible.
Perhaps they should call in some of their debts ??
If one of your objectives is to reduce noise pollution it is on the "right side" ~ 70% of approaches into Heathrow are westerly - over the city of London. Moving the airport to East of London would have these approaches over the sea.
I wonder how Hague feels about Portillo and chums coming out for OUT. Bit of sympathy perhaps?
Currently, to get to Heathrow from the west (e.g. Bath) by rail, you need to go into the centre of London, and then come out west again, either using the uber-expensive Heathrow express or the slow and languorous tube.
This will improve when the uber-expensive Crossrail is built, but not much.
Heathrow Express takes 21 minutes from Paddington to LHR, at vast expense. You should be able to get from the centre of London to a new Boris island in not much more than that.
ThEUniondivvie doesn't like UKIP because he doesn't like the UK and independence , he prefers the EU and dependency on the whims of the Germans. Just like the founders of the SNP. Plus ça change plus c'est la même chose .
I say let IDS devise some form of universal benefit system for MPs and put them on the same hugely complex IT system being proposed for that. That'll teach them.
They don't actually have any MPs. Even Galloway managed to turn a protest vote into that.
Did you see the Yougov polling on Wednesday night? Amusingly on the Scottish cross breaks UKIP got 0%, so it appears I am at one with my country in my opinion of UKIP.
http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/home/2013/05/revealed-2525-council-staff-earning-100000.html
Can't see Labour getting that sort of overdraft from another bank at the same terms - looks like the Union subs will be going up comrades - happy days.
It'll be interesting to see how UKIP do in Donside.