politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ed’s big day – But is the big news of the day just outside
Comments
-
And yet it doesn't work. The Indian government didn't order planes from us. A bit like going to war with the Americans in Iraq and then they award the re-building contracts to Dutch firms instead of British ones. Britain is the piggy bank of the world. It's time it stopped.Smarmeron said:@isam
The "aid" budget, is not about spending money where it will help the poor, it is a political lever.
It's a kind of reverse blackmail.
edit: usually known as a bribe
0 -
That balls "promise" looks like just a warmed over version of Brown's 1997 "Borrow to invest" policy. We know how that turned out.Socrates said:"By contrast, Ed Balls has pledged that at some point by 2020, the budget - excluding capital projects (housebuilding, infrastructure spending and so on) - would be in balance."
I thought it was Labour policy to balance the overall budget. That's what Rachel Reeves said the other day wasn't it?
If balls is going to put the current account into balance where is he going to find the savings or extra taxes from?0 -
I'm thinking about going to my flat and printing off my charts and thread showing Ed's ratings are worse than Kinnock, Hague and IDS.Richard_Nabavi said:
Tell them how much you're looking forward to David Miliband's speechTheScreamingEagles said:Help.
I'm surrounded by Labour activists.
I feel like Leonidas at Thermopylae.
0 -
80 minute speech planned by Miliband... Jesus.0
-
The ONS have produced a great visualisation of commuting patterns, in particular the London magnet which is unfortunately hard to link to because it is "interactive".Which is even more of a reason that we don't split London off to become an island on its own any longer. It needs to be embedded back into the region and nation of which it is part.
There's certainly some justification for considering a super-London region that encompasses much of the Home Counties as well as the existing Greater London area, so that people who commute into London can vote on London's governance.0 -
Hague needs to come back and recommend it, and Cameron needs to put it to the vote immediately. Get the Lib Dems to pick a side, and just do it.Bob__Sykes said:
I could have written that piece myself.CarlottaVance said:I think an English Mansion tax voted in by Scottish MPs might steal his thunder....
Here's Iain Martin on how EVEL could work:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100287360/english-votes-for-english-laws-can-work-heres-how/
Exactly how I see it working, and how I want it to work. Simple, straightforward, effective - and more importantly, you could implement it next month if the will was there.0 -
@Luckyguy1983
"Britain is the piggy bank of the world. It's time it stopped"
Try to look on it less as a "piggy bank" and more of an "oil can"?0 -
Leonidas at Thermopylae What happened to him.
Was he well enough to attend an evening meeting with fellow PBers?0 -
I much prefer it when the Tories are in town, with all the well-heeled posh Tory totty on display. I've just come back from lunch after tripping over one bearded leftie after another - and that's just the women!TheScreamingEagles said:Help.
I'm surrounded by Labour activists.
I feel like Leonidas at Thermopylae.
:-)
0 -
That's longer than a university seminar.Casino_Royale said:80 minute speech planned by Miliband... Jesus.
0 -
80 mins is a awful long time for a blank piece of paper...0
-
I'll be there.bigjohnowls said:Leonidas at Thermopylae What happened to him.
Was he well enough to attend an evening meeting with fellow PBers?
0 -
Didn't I see a report recently that the mansion tax would/couls be applied to £500,000 properties in the North. I believe it was a Labour spokesman.0
-
But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.Bob__Sykes said:
I could have written that piece myself.CarlottaVance said:I think an English Mansion tax voted in by Scottish MPs might steal his thunder....
Here's Iain Martin on how EVEL could work:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100287360/english-votes-for-english-laws-can-work-heres-how/
Exactly how I see it working, and how I want it to work. Simple, straightforward, effective - and more importantly, you could implement it next month if the will was there.0 -
Can we Blame Ed for the stock market falling? Yes we Cam!0
-
It's surely only a matter of time before a party wins that is behind on both leadership and the economy. Given the declining share of the vote going to Labour and the Conservatives FPTP is increasingly likely to produce such a counter-intuitive result.rottenborough said:
No doubt true, but this isn't like any election in recent history IMHO. It's going to be about who loses least badly and can scrape together a slim coalition or a minority government.CarlottaVance said:Kellner on R4: "No party has ever won when it is behind on both leadership and the economy- Miliband needs to get ahead on at least one of them, preferably both."
0 -
On topic, I can't see UKIP coming anywhere near in H&M, the seat next door to where I live.
And I don't trust any of the rubbish I read in the MEN. I don't suppose it's inconceivable that some young whippersnapper of a journo asked some local Labourite at the conference: "Is it possible that UKIP could win in Heywood & Middleton?" to which the reply came: "Er, well I guess they technically COULD win there".
Funny that nobody else seems to be reporting this. Safe Labour hold.0 -
The answer is that, whilst it's not perfect, it's better than any of the alternatives, or at least the politically-attainable alternatives.Socrates said:But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.
0 -
How do I get to that London magnet?OblitusSumMe said:
The ONS have produced a great visualisation of commuting patterns, in particular the London magnet which is unfortunately hard to link to because it is "interactive".Which is even more of a reason that we don't split London off to become an island on its own any longer. It needs to be embedded back into the region and nation of which it is part.
There's certainly some justification for considering a super-London region that encompasses much of the Home Counties as well as the existing Greater London area, so that people who commute into London can vote on London's governance.
Yes, there is absolutely no good reason at all to separate the home counties from London, other than Labour gerrymandering.
0 -
Socrates said:
But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.Bob__Sykes said:
I could have written that piece myself.CarlottaVance said:I think an English Mansion tax voted in by Scottish MPs might steal his thunder....
Here's Iain Martin on how EVEL could work:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100287360/english-votes-for-english-laws-can-work-heres-how/
Exactly how I see it working, and how I want it to work. Simple, straightforward, effective - and more importantly, you could implement it next month if the will was there.
Education or Health ministers behaving in ways that the majority of English MPs find objectionable could be held accountable by beefed up votes of confidence.
0 -
Something I've always wondered: why do bookies never cancel odds of 100/30 down to 10/3? Tradition?isam said:
Take one off the big number and that's the "to one" oddsHurstLlama said:
Mr Isam, or indeed anyone, could you explain or point to a resource that explains decimal odds and how to convert them back to old money. Old codgers like me just don't understand the like of "1.26". Thanks.isam said:Well labour just traded at 1.26 in Heywood and Middleton... Only £8 mind
So 1.26 is 0.26/1 which if you can do fractions, which I'm sure you can, is roughly 1/4 as the others on here said
1.33=0.33/1 ie 1/3
3.75=2.75/1 ie 11/4 etc0 -
Votes of confidence in the single minister, or in the government as a whole?JonathanD said:Socrates said:
But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.Bob__Sykes said:
I could have written that piece myself.CarlottaVance said:I think an English Mansion tax voted in by Scottish MPs might steal his thunder....
Here's Iain Martin on how EVEL could work:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100287360/english-votes-for-english-laws-can-work-heres-how/
Exactly how I see it working, and how I want it to work. Simple, straightforward, effective - and more importantly, you could implement it next month if the will was there.
Education or Health ministers behaving in ways that the majority of English MPs find objectionable could be held accountable by beefed up votes of confidence.0 -
And its better than the current status quo.Richard_Nabavi said:
The answer is that, whilst it's not perfect, it's better than any of the alternatives, or at least the politically-attainable alternatives.Socrates said:But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.
0 -
These are Scotsmen, are they not?Alistair said:
True, but the default amount is £36, you'd have to actively switch to £1 a month.MattW said:
It's £12 per year minimum, and 25k new members.Alistair said:Wish there had been a "Post referendum SNP membership market" they've just gone past 50,000 members.
Even though most of these new members are just people lashing out looking for a release that's still almost £1,000,000 pounds in subs taken just before an election and if even just 10% turn out to be useful operatives then that's still a lot of new active members.
Oooops !
0 -
What a shame that a great Victorian structure like Manchester Central is being debased by tawdry party politics. Derby engineering at its best, being threatened by a few Gigawatts of hot air ...
Sir John Fowler will be spinning in his grave.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Central_railway_station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_John_Fowler,_1st_Baronet
:-)0 -
The single minister.Socrates said:
Votes of confidence in the single minister, or in the government as a whole?JonathanD said:Socrates said:
But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.Bob__Sykes said:
I could have written that piece myself.CarlottaVance said:I think an English Mansion tax voted in by Scottish MPs might steal his thunder....
Here's Iain Martin on how EVEL could work:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100287360/english-votes-for-english-laws-can-work-heres-how/
Exactly how I see it working, and how I want it to work. Simple, straightforward, effective - and more importantly, you could implement it next month if the will was there.
Education or Health ministers behaving in ways that the majority of English MPs find objectionable could be held accountable by beefed up votes of confidence.
0 -
@not_on_fire
" why do bookies never cancel odds of 100/30 down to 10/3? "
I remember listening to a detailed explanation why on the radio once.
It was so thrilling, that it escapes me unfortunately.0 -
It's clearly not the optimum ideal solution, I accept it's a fudge, but past GE results show it is such a rare state of affairs that it's something of an anomaly rather than the norm, and I think it is better than what we've got. It goes some way to addressing the issue. We can't have a "government within a government", with competing interests in the handful of occasions when that would result.Socrates said:
But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.Bob__Sykes said:
I could have written that piece myself.CarlottaVance said:I think an English Mansion tax voted in by Scottish MPs might steal his thunder....
Here's Iain Martin on how EVEL could work:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100287360/english-votes-for-english-laws-can-work-heres-how/
Exactly how I see it working, and how I want it to work. Simple, straightforward, effective - and more importantly, you could implement it next month if the will was there.
But the biggest problem that any solution has to cope with is that England makes up 85/90% of the UK's population/wealth etc. That's why your federal proposal doesn't work.
Short of divvying England up into its regions, to match the size of Scotland and Wales, which I don't think anyone REALLY wants, you're left with making the status quo work or full break up of the home nations.0 -
Ex-BBC DJ Dave Lee Travis convicted of one count of indecent assault but cleared of a second0
-
Here we go. I'm not sure I can be arsed.rottenborough said:
That's longer than a university seminar.Casino_Royale said:80 minute speech planned by Miliband... Jesus.
0 -
So what you're basically saying is "the English will have to lump it"? That sounds rather similar to your position on most of the crap the EU does.Richard_Nabavi said:
The answer is that, whilst it's not perfect, it's better than any of the alternatives, or at least the politically-attainable alternatives.Socrates said:But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.
Is it completely unacceptable that ministers who will only be responsible for English departments get into their jobs on the backing of Scots and Welsh MPs. If a party does not have a majority in England, they should not be able to regulate English schools, the English NHS or the English system in anything else the Scots get devolved.0 -
I don't know, sorrynot_on_fire said:
Something I've always wondered: why do bookies never cancel odds of 100/30 down to 10/3? Tradition?isam said:
Take one off the big number and that's the "to one" oddsHurstLlama said:
Mr Isam, or indeed anyone, could you explain or point to a resource that explains decimal odds and how to convert them back to old money. Old codgers like me just don't understand the like of "1.26". Thanks.isam said:Well labour just traded at 1.26 in Heywood and Middleton... Only £8 mind
So 1.26 is 0.26/1 which if you can do fractions, which I'm sure you can, is roughly 1/4 as the others on here said
1.33=0.33/1 ie 1/3
3.75=2.75/1 ie 11/4 etc0 -
80 minutes? Don't forget Ed once said his favourite sporting moment was Geoffrey Boycott's century against Australia at Headingley in 1977 - personally witnessed by Ed himself.
Doing a bit of reserch on cricinfo, Boycott's 191 runs came off 471 balls in 629 minutes. Or 10 and 1/2 hours. He lives by a different time frame.0 -
Similarly - why is it always 6/4 rather than 3/2?not_on_fire said:
Something I've always wondered: why do bookies never cancel odds of 100/30 down to 10/3? Tradition?isam said:
Take one off the big number and that's the "to one" oddsHurstLlama said:
Mr Isam, or indeed anyone, could you explain or point to a resource that explains decimal odds and how to convert them back to old money. Old codgers like me just don't understand the like of "1.26". Thanks.isam said:Well labour just traded at 1.26 in Heywood and Middleton... Only £8 mind
So 1.26 is 0.26/1 which if you can do fractions, which I'm sure you can, is roughly 1/4 as the others on here said
1.33=0.33/1 ie 1/3
3.75=2.75/1 ie 11/4 etc0 -
According to the ComRes poll at the weekend (http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/Sunday_Politics_PPC_survey_results_Labour_September2014.pdf ), Labour PPCs are 81:10 in favour of nationalising the railways - and the unions are heavily in favour too. Might not be anything quite as overt as direct nationalisation, could be just a commitment not to issue any franchises to private companies.Casino_Royale said:If Ed Miliband pledges to renationalise the railways i will end my agnosticism and actively campaign for the Conservatives next year.
Look forward to how many times he can spend the mansion tax - it will barely dent the £110bn NHS budget, but it's also meant to be reducing the deficit (Rachel Reeves, yesterday) and paying for the 10p income tax band (Miliband last year).0 -
Good afternoon.TheScreamingEagles said:
Is only available on Betfair at the moment. Hills have pulled their market.peter_from_putney said:What are the best odds against UKIP winning H&M please? ..... I can't find this market on Oddschecker.
Perhaps Hills knows something or can feel the wind turning.0 -
An English parliament would cost less than 0.1% of UK public spending. It would be covered many times over by getting rid of the Scotland subsidy.0
-
He seems very rehearsed. The '4 years older' joke a bit cringe.0
-
If we've got something that long, we're told to make sure there are some interactive bits in it and group activities.rottenborough said:
That's longer than a university seminar.Casino_Royale said:80 minute speech planned by Miliband... Jesus.
Come on, Ed, make it so.0 -
Someone please tell him to stop smiling. It is freaking me out. I hate fake smiles.
Oh now we are getting fake anecdotes. Again.0 -
I'm not saying anything of the sort. There are snags with all the other options as well, and, as TGOHF points out, it's a lot better than the status quo.Socrates said:So what you're basically saying is "the English will have to lump it"? That sounds rather similar to your position on most of the crap the EU does.
Is it completely unacceptable that ministers who will only be responsible for English departments get into their jobs on the backing of Scots and Welsh MPs. If a party does not have a majority in England, they should not be able to regulate English schools, the English NHS or the English system in anything else the Scots get devolved.0 -
I can think of a couple of permutations that are accurate, but I'd like to stress again that the Barnett formula was never designed with the purpose of giving Scotland more money per capita than England, for whatever reason you might make up for why that would be a good idea once it has happened by accident*. For example:Anorak said:
How about this:Socrates said:
No, it wasn't. There is no measure of geographic input that factors into the Barnett formula.TGOHF said:Barnett was supposed to cover the costs of the bigger geography of Scotland - not give free tuition fees and prescriptions to Scottish millionaires.
"Barnett was supposed to [insert whatever you like here] not give free tuition fees and prescriptions to Scottish millionaires."
1. The Barnett formula was only ever intended to be a stop-gap measure, so we're at least three decades overdue replacing it.
2. The Barnett formula and inflation would have [almost] equalised the level of per-capita spending between the different nations of the UK, but it failed because the population of England grew more quickly than the other parts of the UK, so we should change it.
* It's possible to work out by how much Scotland's population would need to increase over a particular time frame for the Barnett formula to then give England a higher per capita level of spending, but I can't be bothered.0 -
I don't know that either!Lennon said:
Similarly - why is it always 6/4 rather than 3/2?not_on_fire said:
Something I've always wondered: why do bookies never cancel odds of 100/30 down to 10/3? Tradition?isam said:
Take one off the big number and that's the "to one" oddsHurstLlama said:
Mr Isam, or indeed anyone, could you explain or point to a resource that explains decimal odds and how to convert them back to old money. Old codgers like me just don't understand the like of "1.26". Thanks.isam said:Well labour just traded at 1.26 in Heywood and Middleton... Only £8 mind
So 1.26 is 0.26/1 which if you can do fractions, which I'm sure you can, is roughly 1/4 as the others on here said
1.33=0.33/1 ie 1/3
3.75=2.75/1 ie 11/4 etc
0 -
tim used to get terribly excitable when Dave tossed a few of those into a speech.oxfordsimon said:Someone please tell him to stop smiling. It is freaking me out. I hate fake smiles.
Oh now we are getting fake anecdotes. Again.
0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
Ah ha, Miliband has commenced his speech. Might listen to it. Or I might get some work done...
Edited extra bit: is a 10 year plan a Double Stalin?0 -
God knows why, I really want Ed to do well! I'm nervous, how ridiculous0
-
England makes up 85% of the UK's population. So what? Why does that mean a federal proposal doesn't work? Having an English parliament for devolved matters won't mean English MPs dominate Scots/Welsh MPs on non-devolved matters any more. In fact, the English dominance will be worse in the EV4EL situation because the UK government could face instability and collapse on devolved bills being rejected by the English majority.Bob__Sykes said:
It's clearly not the optimum ideal solution, I accept it's a fudge, but past GE results show it is such a rare state of affairs that it's something of an anomaly rather than the norm, and I think it is better than what we've got. It goes some way to addressing the issue. We can't have a "government within a government", with competing interests in the handful of occasions when that would result.Socrates said:
But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.Bob__Sykes said:
I could have written that piece myself.CarlottaVance said:I think an English Mansion tax voted in by Scottish MPs might steal his thunder....
Here's Iain Martin on how EVEL could work:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100287360/english-votes-for-english-laws-can-work-heres-how/
Exactly how I see it working, and how I want it to work. Simple, straightforward, effective - and more importantly, you could implement it next month if the will was there.
But the biggest problem that any solution has to cope with is that England makes up 85/90% of the UK's population/wealth etc. That's why your federal proposal doesn't work.
Short of divvying England up into its regions, to match the size of Scotland and Wales, which I don't think anyone REALLY wants, you're left with making the status quo work or full break up of the home nations.0 -
Perhaps it's for marketing/psychological reasons - the higher 'big' number might make the odds look more attractive to the arithmetically challenged...isam said:
I don't know that either!Lennon said:
Similarly - why is it always 6/4 rather than 3/2?not_on_fire said:
Something I've always wondered: why do bookies never cancel odds of 100/30 down to 10/3? Tradition?isam said:
Take one off the big number and that's the "to one" oddsHurstLlama said:
Mr Isam, or indeed anyone, could you explain or point to a resource that explains decimal odds and how to convert them back to old money. Old codgers like me just don't understand the like of "1.26". Thanks.isam said:Well labour just traded at 1.26 in Heywood and Middleton... Only £8 mind
So 1.26 is 0.26/1 which if you can do fractions, which I'm sure you can, is roughly 1/4 as the others on here said
1.33=0.33/1 ie 1/3
3.75=2.75/1 ie 11/4 etc0 -
@not_on_fire @isam
I seem to recall it was to do with the way the odds shifted and had to be quickly chalked on the board. It meant you only had to erase and rechalk one side of the odds.
0 -
Miliband has worked out the arrow of time. This could be handy.0
-
Ziamara.
I take it all back0 -
I'm not arguing it's worse than the status quo. I'm arguing that it's a lot worse than an English parliament. The question is what you value more: less than 0.1% of government spending, or the English being allowed to govern themselves on devolved matters.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'm not saying anything of the sort. There are snags with all the other options as well, and, as TGOHF points out, it's a lot better than the status quo.Socrates said:So what you're basically saying is "the English will have to lump it"? That sounds rather similar to your position on most of the crap the EU does.
Is it completely unacceptable that ministers who will only be responsible for English departments get into their jobs on the backing of Scots and Welsh MPs. If a party does not have a majority in England, they should not be able to regulate English schools, the English NHS or the English system in anything else the Scots get devolved.0 -
Does Ed only meet women? What a strange world he lives in.0
-
so are we going to see an SNP-Tory coalition in 2015 premised on the principle each agrees to leave the other alone?0
-
Christ, 80 minutes of anecdote. Woman in his local pub, girls in the local park where he wrote his speech...
Good luck to anyone in the conference centre.0 -
FattyBolger said:
"No taxation without representation" .has some historical resonance. The English who are subject to such a tax did not have the chance to elect, and cannot sack these Scottish MPs.
Welcome, [edit] mutatis mutandis, to Scotland for much of the period before 1999 (and, in some respects, even today: Alastair Carmichael, for instance). But being the other way around doesn't make it any better for the situation you posit.Socrates said:
So what you're basically saying is "the English will have to lump it"? That sounds rather similar to your position on most of the crap the EU does.Richard_Nabavi said:
The answer is that, whilst it's not perfect, it's better than any of the alternatives, or at least the politically-attainable alternatives.Socrates said:But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.
Is it completely unacceptable that ministers who will only be responsible for English departments get into their jobs on the backing of Scots and Welsh MPs. If a party does not have a majority in England, they should not be able to regulate English schools, the English NHS or the English system in anything else the Scots get devolved.
0 -
He's also met 'Gareth' (aka Bobajob), wife, young family, cannot afford a house.oxfordsimon said:Does Ed only meet women? What a strange world he lives in.
0 -
The lack of real enthusiasm is so obvious. It is painful.TheWatcher said:Christ, 80 minutes of anecdote. Woman in his local pub, girls in the local park where he wrote his speech...
Good luck to anyone in the conference centre.0 -
drone drone blah blah moan moan anecdote anecdote policy free policy free
0 -
I know you are the Watcher but why are you even watching?TheWatcher said:Christ, 80 minutes of anecdote. Woman in his local pub, girls in the local park where he wrote his speech...
Good luck to anyone in the conference centre.0 -
Why not base it on square footage? This would ensure that someone who is colossally overhoused in the north pays more than someone packed into a 2-bedroom terrace in the south.PAW said:Didn't I see a report recently that the mansion tax would/couls be applied to £500,000 properties in the North. I believe it was a Labour spokesman.
25 years late Labour could thereby acknowledge the inherent fairness of the Community Charge.
0 -
@MichaelPDeacon: I've seen Ed Miliband meeting people. They swore at him, called him a liar, and trapped him up against the window of Claire's Accessories0
-
GROUPTEXT "clap now"TheWatcher said:Christ, 80 minutes of anecdote. Woman in his local pub, girls in the local park where he wrote his speech...
Good luck to anyone in the conference centre.0 -
Isn't that just blatant English nationalism?Socrates said:
So what you're basically saying is "the English will have to lump it"? That sounds rather similar to your position on most of the crap the EU does.Richard_Nabavi said:
The answer is that, whilst it's not perfect, it's better than any of the alternatives, or at least the politically-attainable alternatives.Socrates said:But it doesn't address any of the obvious complaints. Why is it acceptable for an Education Minister to change the English education system through non-legislative moves when they don't have an English majority? If the English majority desired a law opposed by the UK government, how would it get passed? In both situations, EV4EL gives the English substantially less voice than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Nobody on your side of the argument has provided an answer to either question.
Is it completely unacceptable that ministers who will only be responsible for English departments get into their jobs on the backing of Scots and Welsh MPs. If a party does not have a majority in England, they should not be able to regulate English schools, the English NHS or the English system in anything else the Scots get devolved.
I want to keep Scotland and Wales in the UK, they are an integral part of what we have created, but they are tiny compared to England's might and dominance. The price England has to pay for that is to let them punch above their weight. There is going to have to be some sort of fudge or compromise because the one thing you can't change is the fact there are over 50m people in England, and only 10m in the other 3 nations put together.0 -
15 minutes in and not a single policy reference at all.
All you need to know about the empty shell that is the modern Labour Party0 -
I've given up now. There's a mildy entertaining play on Radio 4, and Obama's out and about from 3.bigjohnowls said:
I know you are the Watcher but why are you even watching?TheWatcher said:Christ, 80 minutes of anecdote. Woman in his local pub, girls in the local park where he wrote his speech...
Good luck to anyone in the conference centre.0 -
Yes you are right and when you look at the numbers who have been killed in wars in Africa - to the supreme indifference of people like isam (personally I think I know why) you see what a shocking place it is and has been and how much aid is needed. Betweem 2.5 and 5.5 million died in the Second Congo War. The war in Sudan about 2 million at least.Socrates said:
Most of our aid has gone to Africa, where the level of wars has fallen precipitously. It's hardly the aid community's fault that the Middle East is a tinder box.isam said:
"For decades we have been told overseas aid makes the world a safer place, but ask anyone on the streets of Britain whether they think the world feels safer and you'll struggle to get any positive answers.”taffys said:Its not been mentioned on here I don;t thik, but Breitbart have an interesting story about UKIP and overseas aid (a 90% cut).
Say what you like, but that may well prove rather popular.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/23/UKIP-Propose-45bn-Overseas-Aid-Cut
0 -
'Together' - inclusive, positive, bland, forgettable. So broad as to be meaningless. Danger his foes will paint their own picture on the blank canvas.
Might as well be 'goodness'.
Edited extra bit: apparently this is quite a big idea. So far, he's given us a vague word. Where's the beef?0 -
watcher
I own a four bedroom house in London you moose0 -
This feels really like a Kinnock 1986 or 1991 speech to me. He's focusing on the young, the poor and the cost of living - "the working people" vs. the wealthy. Undoubtedly the cost of living, commuting and renting are very important issues but i can't see how he can win over enough floating Middle class voters to win through that alone.
I'm not sure the people whose stories he tells in his anecdotes will vote in large numbers either.0 -
@catherine_mayer: If you say "Together We Can" you are not ripping off #Obama2008. No You Aren't #Lab140
-
Tim Shipman@ShippersUnbound·57 secs
I find myself yearning for a Gordon Brown speech....0 -
Lefties loving this...
David Aaronovitch@DAaronovitch·13 mins
That ISIS preface to Ed Milband's speech felt utterly perfunctory to me. A real argument against memorised texts.
Owen Jones@OwenJones84·4 mins
Ed Miliband has met someone called Together who sounds like a great motivational speaker #lab140 -
@hugorifkind:
Imagine Ed Miliband coming over in a park. Imagine it.
"He's coming over."
"He's not."
"He is, too."
"He'll put us in his speech."
"Shit."0 -
Oh aren't you the greatest you fucking idiotFlightpath said:
Yes you are right and when you look at the numbers who have been killed in wars in Africa - to the supreme indifference of people like isam (personally I think I know why) you see what a shocking place it is and has been and how much aid is needed. Betweem 2.5 and 5.5 million died in the Second Congo War. The war in Sudan about 2 million at least.Socrates said:
Most of our aid has gone to Africa, where the level of wars has fallen precipitously. It's hardly the aid community's fault that the Middle East is a tinder box.isam said:
"For decades we have been told overseas aid makes the world a safer place, but ask anyone on the streets of Britain whether they think the world feels safer and you'll struggle to get any positive answers.”taffys said:Its not been mentioned on here I don;t thik, but Breitbart have an interesting story about UKIP and overseas aid (a 90% cut).
Say what you like, but that may well prove rather popular.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/23/UKIP-Propose-45bn-Overseas-Aid-Cut0 -
Whoops. Had to cue the audience to cheer 'our brilliant national health service' there.0
-
repeated "brillian NHS" as first mention didn't applaud the first time...0
-
The price England has to pay for that is to let them punch above their weight.
Judging by your posts, you would pay any price.0 -
Miliband was in A&E at 9pm. Unconfirmed as to whether this was after his visit to Scotland.0
-
Follow link -> 2011 Census Commuting patterns flow map -> click the forward arrow on the introduction four times should get to it.Socrates said:
How do I get to that London magnet?OblitusSumMe said:
The ONS have produced a great visualisation of commuting patterns, in particular the London magnet which is unfortunately hard to link to because it is "interactive".Which is even more of a reason that we don't split London off to become an island on its own any longer. It needs to be embedded back into the region and nation of which it is part.
There's certainly some justification for considering a super-London region that encompasses much of the Home Counties as well as the existing Greater London area, so that people who commute into London can vote on London's governance.
Yes, there is absolutely no good reason at all to separate the home counties from London, other than Labour gerrymandering.
The thing with something like devolution is that if a right-wing or centre-right party does not do it at all then a left-wing or centre-left party will do it in a way that they think is sensible [or favours them], rather than a way which would be thought sensible by [or favour] a right-wing or centre-right party.
Even as a lefty I can see that governance of London is a bit insane. For example the commuters coming in to London from outside the Greater London Area are paying a large fraction of the fares and taxes that pay for transport in London, but they have no participation in the democratic oversight of the spending decisions.
Similarly, if a Mayor of London wanted to pay for particular transport improvements by increasing council tax, a lot of the improvements would accrue to commuters who would not have paid for them.0 -
I suspect that's an example of being sloppy and the general public not knowing the difference between the current budget balance (Labour's target) and the coalition's fiscal mandate. The IFS goes into the detail of published commitments here : http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/7373Socrates said:"By contrast, Ed Balls has pledged that at some point by 2020, the budget - excluding capital projects (housebuilding, infrastructure spending and so on) - would be in balance."
I thought it was Labour policy to balance the overall budget. That's what Rachel Reeves said the other day wasn't it?
But yes, both Labour and LibDems have pledged to balance the current budget but they can still buy a Ferrari on the side. Main difference is that LibDems target the cyclically-adjusted version, Labour are happy to let general recovery do most of the work.0 -
It's pretty obvious now why Brown was sent out last week. Miliband would have bored 'No' voters into voting 'Yes' to be rid of him.Scrapheap_as_was said:Tim Shipman@ShippersUnbound·57 secs
I find myself yearning for a Gordon Brown speech....
'Walking on Arthurs Seat last week, whilst writing my speech, I met 2 young men in kilts, Mick and James, accompanying their wheelchair bound grandfather Malcolm... '0 -
Two quick points on Ed's speech:
1) I've worked in a few software factories in my time, and I've never worked in one where everybody said the same thing. Software engineers tend to be contrary creatures. Ahem. I'd love to know which one it was.
2) When he talks about high-tech companies and entrepreneurs, he's obviously never heard of Apple ...0 -
OMG, even the audience are going to sleep...0
-
I have just finished painting a ceiling.
Hopefully it will be ready for the second coat after 80 minutes of hot air.0 -
Odds on H&W are back on Ladbrokes:
Lab 1.22
UKIP 40 -
Just listened to the interview with the punter who had 900,000 on No in the referendum, having missed the thread completely.
Don't know about anybody else, but he didn't pass the smell test as far as I was concerned. He took 1/4 about an outcome that was as big as 2/5 for a while; he used a Bookie, rather than Betfair, where there was ample liquidity available; he didn't sound or talk like a punter; and he got on for a mega-amount with a firm that regularly knocks back fifty pound punters.
We sure this wasn't just a Hills PR stunt?0 -
'You're on your own'.......Freud would have a field day......0
-
What professional company would hire Ed Milliband as their Company representative? He is at best a back room ops person that should not be put in front of customers. To think that he is heading to be the PM and representative of the UK, is one of those scarcely believable facts.0
-
Shit. He just had to do it again. Prompt his own conference on The Tories! "Are THE TORIES the answer?!"... *applause* "That's better!"
The conference delegates are obviously deeply moved by him. They probably aren't sure he's the answer.0 -
Miliband wants to give away financial regulation to Brussels, judging by that attack on Osborne for actually standing up for British regulation of a key British industry.
Edited extra bit: more unprompted applause, though, when attacking the Conservatives. Popular in the hall and with (I would guess) core support elsewhere.
Edited extra bit 2: apparently this government is one of the worst ever.
Also, Miliband's claim of the longest decline in living standards since (I think) 1870 may be a bad one to make, as living standards declined for several years prior to 2010.0 -
25 minutes in.
No policy.
0 -
Am I right in thinking that Dan Hodges is not going to be terribly impressed?0
-
Michael Deacon@MichaelPDeacon·4 minsScrapheap_as_was said:repeated "brillian NHS" as first mention didn't applaud the first time...
Wouldn't want to suggest the audience isn't listening, but a Labour leader has just had to say "our brilliant NHS" twice before they clapped0 -
It's like one of those horse races where the form suggests that none of them are good enough to win, but somebody has to.TCPoliticalBetting said:What professional company would hire Ed Milliband as their Company representative? He is at best a back room ops person that should not be put in front of customers. To think that he is heading to be the PM and representative of the UK, is one of those scarcely believable facts.
Or, as Sherlock Holmes might have said, 'When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth".
Ed Is Crap is PM, however improbable that may appear.
0 -
Probably, although you would be amazed at how many big punters take worse odds than betfairPeter_the_Punter said:Just listened to the interview with the punter who had 900,000 on No in the referendum, having missed the thread completely.
Don't know about anybody else, but he didn't pass the smell test as far as I was concerned. He took 1/4 about an outcome that was as big as 2/5 for a while; he used a Bookie, rather than Betfair, where there was ample liquidity available; he didn't sound or talk like a punter; and he got on for a mega-amount with a firm that regularly knocks back fifty pound punters.
We sure this wasn't just a Hills PR stunt?
Why would anyone, ever take bookie odds when betfair was better?? Mystifying0 -
No Dan is a professional contrarian. If it's bad then he'll probably say it was good and surprise everyone.Richard_Nabavi said:Am I right in thinking that Dan Hodges is not going to be terribly impressed?
0 -
@ollybarratt: RT @TheSunNewspaper: Did you meet Ed Miliband in a park this week? If so, get in touch...0
-
Can anyone on here please provide a link or list all the countries around the world outside of the UK that have copied 'our brilliant national health service'?Casino_Royale said:Whoops. Had to cue the audience to cheer 'our brilliant national health service' there.
0 -
This reminds me of the IDS speech to Conference in 2003. And we know how that ended.0
