Categories
Could this sway Tory MPs? – politicalbetting.com
Could this sway Tory MPs? – politicalbetting.com
Cleverly or Tugendhat would make best PM, poll on Tory leadership candidates shows https://t.co/4ZcQ0It7QM
0
Could this sway Tory MPs? – politicalbetting.com
Cleverly or Tugendhat would make best PM, poll on Tory leadership candidates shows https://t.co/4ZcQ0It7QM
Comments
@HYFUD highlighted it yesterday but the usual suspects who highlight every poll that is positive for Harris seem to have gone unusually quiet.
As for new towns being founded, give them a ****ing chance.
This government have, in my view, made some mistakes. But the ridiculous way some people are writing them off already, after only a few weeks, says more about the critics than the government.
I'll have a read with my boiled hegg.
Naturally enough, the differences were to the advantage of the builder and not the new homeowner.
That has not happened yet.
Yes, they do need a chance they have only been in office a couple of months, but they also need to stop just talking about stuff and get on with it,
They had not got planning permission, had not built to the spec ?
I would not buy a new build in a month of Sundays.
Trump 1.9
Kamala 2.2
The betting angle might be Betfair's market on the popular vote winner:-
Dem 1.37
Rep 3.6
And of course since that moron Rayner is in charge and she is working with big builders rather than breaking them up, and has removed any notion of beauty from the guidelines, they'll be hideous rabbit hutches that fall apart in a few years. Just in time for the Conservative reaction that puts housing policy back into the deep freeze and caves in to the NIMBYs for another generation.
Perhaps a gloomy take but having watching this issue for several decades we don't ever seem able to get it right in this country. A friend of mine in Sacramento who studies housing regulations globally for a living recently gave me a long rant about how terrible they are in California, then went on, "And the only place I've seen that's even worse is ... England".
#New General Election poll - With Leaners
Texas
🔴 Trump 51% (+3)
🔵 Harris 48%
Florida
🔴 Trump 51% (+3)
🔵 Harris 48%
Emerson #B - 815 LV - 9/5
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1832045496086528292
They will have been in the same room, such as for Trump’s State of the Union addresses when Harris was a Senator, but can it be true that they’ve never actually met?
*Scuttlebutt* is that the sizes of the rooms (and houses overall) are not as the builder promised when they were sold. I won't mention which builder, as although apparently an investigation is ongoing, the rest is local rumour.
Remember because Trump didn't do a proper handover when he lost in 2020 he never met Biden or Harris during the transition.
Edit - Also Trump didn't attend the inauguration.
I wonder how much of it can be construed as a "sales puff" and how much as a contractual commitment.
I do remember people complaining, years ago, about new build flats where the brochures had stuff like brass door handles and when they moved in they were plastic.
It could lose people an awful lot of money come November.
Both are wrong, imo. My guess is that it is far more mundane and even obvious. Charlotte is whom the notoriously idle Boris relies on to get the work done; a sort of ersatz Dominic Cummings, Munira Mirza or any number of previous aides.
I'm sceptical about the new town plans: these always take a few years at best, and even one or two parliaments, to go from proposal to development.
As an example of how slow this is, the Bourn Airfield supplementary planning document was released in 2019. Formal planning permission only occurred in July, and there has been zero spadework happen.
https://www.scambs.gov.uk/planning/local-plan-and-neighbourhood-planning/bourn-airfield-spd
Labour could really speed things up if they wanted; but it's really silly to expect them to have started building brand new (unproposed) developments in a couple of months.
Which meant I ran out of mind bleach.
Ignoring one side of the debate because you think the guy is Hitler, isn’t conducive to working out what might actually be happening on the ground, when it’s clear that damn nearly half the country actually likes the guy.
Personally I’m paying a lot of attention to anything out of Pennsylvania, as I think that state holds the key to the election. Not sure that there’s many people who wil change their mind in the next couple of months, so it’s now mostly about voter registration and then getting the vote out on the day.
Well he has cracked that one in first 60 days
Pensioners really are a set of whining tossers they had a 9% increase in April and are due a further inflation busting rise next year too.
I think the means testing of WFA is 100% correct.
On this policy I am an SKS fan although a wealth tax would have been even better
It's meant to be a lighthouse!
Remember how fuel delivery quantities in pumps that had a legal error margin of (example) +/- 0.25%, would be set to deliver (example) 0.15% below the stated amount because more accurate control (example to +/-0.05%) was possible than allowed in the regulations.
Re the support for publicly defunding the police, FYI:
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/26/politics/kfile-kamala-harris-praised-defund-the-police-movement-in-june-2020/index.html
IMO the tricky bits will be around who are SEND pupils (the large majority the claim is about do not have the certificate. Seems to be 90%+), and the exemption which will be in the legislation as stated by the Govt AIUI so it's a bit difficult to see how a Judgement can be made before the facts are established.
The Telegraph have not explained how this squares with their articles about Councils not having enough funds, and about how Council Tax must be controlled.
The letter says so-called SEND (special educational needs and disabilities) children risk being forced out of private school if their parents can no longer afford higher fees, with the state sector unable to meet their more demanding educational needs.
https://archive.ph/GwBzD
Richard Tice talking about it on the Camilla Tominey show on I think GBNews, and how it will use the Human Rights Act and the ECHR. (Which Tice wants to abolish. Cough.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU8P-MLh45s&t=163s
That’s not to say it’s not very close and could go either way. But I’d favour Harris right now.
Even better news for Starmer though, despite Labour's overall voteshare having declined since the GE he still leads them all as preferred PM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/sep/09/cleverly-or-tugendhat-would-make-best-pm-poll-on-tory-leadership-candidates-shows?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-harris
https://www.realclearpolling.com/maps/president/2024/no-toss-up/electoral-college
Otherwise you're just cheerleading for one side.
As it happens, I want Harris to win; mainly (but not just) because I want Ukraine to win. That won't happen under Trump.
Above the line I'm not sure, but the most recent posts are:
- will the debate change the betting markets? (neutral)
- could the better polling for Dem Senate candidates in swing states be good news for Harris - probably not (fairly neutral if you read the conclusion though headline is pro-Harris)
- Republicans are panicking about the fundraising gap (pro-Harris, and possibly misleading as I think the article only looked at money raised by the campaigns rather than superpacs but I'm not sure about this)
- State of the Union roundup of current polling averages and forecasts (neutral)
- Favorable polling for Harris in swing states (pro-Harris)
- Pollsters could be missing Harris surge re voter registration numbers (pro-Harris, and as I pointed out at the time was only looking at one week's data - would be interesting to see data for a longer period on this)
- Will Vance be replaced? (hmmm, not sure how to rate this but anti-Trump if anything)
- Positive polling on Harris's economic policy proposals (pro-Harris)
So I think there are more above the line posts about possible positives for Harris, though if you read through them they mostly stress that the race is very close.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-27447377
Let me see if I can dig out (yet) another article explaining to Left-inclined Brit bien pensant would-be Guardian readers why this is.
(Not a big fan of consultation periods as I think it's part of the problem here, but I suppose it's better to have a few months for the industry to tell them if something's screwed up before it goes live rather than after.)
The danger is that they become a "poll tax" - a poorly implemented policy which, had it been done after the rateable value recalculations might actually have been popular - and grow in the public consciousness beyond their immediate impact
As an aside, I find the current complaints that it "isn't fair" that single occupants will have to pay the full council tax somewhat ironic; I'm guessing there is a generation that doesn't remember the poll tax.
A court might say that in respect of individual service X to particular case Y a local authority can't withdraw funding because of the VAT imposition, but that would be about it.
The courts are not at the moment in a particularly anti-statute mood at the moment. Ask Shamima Begum, who slightly surprisingly (IMHO wrongly) lost a fairly strong case in the SC just recently.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/09/08/kamala-harris-suffers-poll-blow-eve-critical-trump-debate/
I increasingly think I am out of my WH positions on Wednesday unless trump defiles himself mid debate. I dunno what is going to happen, I am on KH at 11, cashing out will leave me a big enough cushion to finance my betting up to WH2028.
Leaders need to be flexible, not brittle (Starmer is brittle, Boris flexible, Thatcher brittle, May brittle, Truss brittle, Blair flexible). Otherwise they will find it difficult to take people, ie the country, with them.
Although as you can see, flexibility is something quite rare and possessed by Great, if Flawed, Men (although Maggie is an exception and she was great - perhaps a different age)
If they take the the discount away I in effect as a renter will pay approximately £400 more a year for my bin collection. Meanwhile the couple next door who own their own home will not pay anything extra.
You’ve seen what the reaction has been to WFA. Going for council tax discount at the same time would be - very brave, considering it often benefits the same group.
VAT on private school fees affects many more people, both directly and indirectly.
Even when redone, it was still 6" too close and 6" too high, but they got a retrospective permission for that.
Given the £1m cost, I might have offered the householders £5-50k each depending on the intrusion, and seen if the Council would play ball.
https://www.building.co.uk/news/cinema-built-in-wrong-place-twice-finally-opens/5068952.article
Streetview:
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.2291494,-0.2643617,3a,75y,92.67h,90.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snFwxJ1v7FA3pa-8DGSmLcA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?coh=205409&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MDkwNC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw==
I wonder if Labour might commit to a banding review. That would set the cat among the pigeons, but there is at least an argument that it’s been overdue for about 20 years.
I agree with the principle; encouraging efficient use of the housing stock is a good thing. But this the wrong way about it.
One further element of the Proportional Property Tax proposals (which this may be informed by), alongside abolition of SDLT, is that the LL would be responsible for the Council Tax. It is not clear whether that could be altered by a rental contract - as for example bills can be included / excluded. SDLT is the one that may be the lollipop to sell it to generation Boomer.
There's a possible bomb for student lets, in that students are exempt from Council Tax currently, but as soon as one person in a student house of 4 or 6 becomes a worker, the entire Council Tax for that house is triggered.
One loophole this could clear up is the habit of Councils of taking an HMO and, if each room has an ensuite or similar facilities, declaring them all to be Band A dwellings and a 6-bed HMO is subject to 6 lots of Council Tax. The actual determination is by the VOA (Valuation Office Agency), but it's very patchy how it works. This is a known issue for decades.
This is one reason by HMO landlords do not fit ensuites, because it can either make the rooms impossible to let at the cost imposed, or the liability can attach to the LL (there's a list of liable parties in the act, and the Council just work down it). If T does a runner they can just come after the next ones down the list. Rhetorically, anti-LL organisation may say "this is just a business risk you take", but an unnecessarily imposed business is a risk to the business, and a cost to the customer.
No 55%
Yes 45%
It’s possible but unlikely that the Conservatives could poll even worse than 2024. And it’s also possible that Labour will improve their share.
5 candidates remain. Two are nice but incompetent. Two are nasty but competent. Neither scenario is a winning formula.
The other candidate manages to be both incompetent AND nasty, and she’s the preference for the decaying corpse of tory membership.
The Conservatives will heavily lose the next General Election with any of these five. The only question is by how much?
Really, they’re not very relevant.
There's a similar thing around the START of Council Tax on a newbuild, and Councils trying to start early; if there is no water or sewerage connection they cannot start charging it. A friend had a Council Snooper breaking into his building site in high heels and power suit (on CCTV) to take photos through the windows to see if it was "occupied" so they could start charging CT, and he got so annoyed he made sure the water was physically disconnected for 4 extra months so he had a trump card in the correspondence.
Traditionally with business rates the owner would remove the roof to prove that it was unoccupied.
Yes, lack of a potable water supply definitely makes the house a non-rateable hereditament, there's case law that defines this. Not at all sure that not having the treatment plant connected would count, as there's nothing I can find about any cases where this has been used. It's tricky, as it all depends on the interpretation of the 1969 Rating Act, as updated and also clarified by case law.
Fitness for habitation is not the legal criterion used, as such, the criterion is whether or not the building can be legitimately defined as a rateable hereditament, which is different. Lack of electricity, for example, doesn't make a building ineligible for Council Tax, nor does the lack of a kitchen.
You may well have to talk directly to the VOA and see if they can advise, as they almost certainly know the law better than the council.
Link and two of the many legal cases. It's fun.
https://forum.buildhub.org.uk/topic/5827-starting-council-tax-house-not-finished/
https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/LC/2011/RA_63_2008_Dec.html
https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2125.html&query=rgm&method=boolean
Good morning, everyone.
If designed well it could return more control and discretion over tax and spending to local authorities, encourage migration to lower property tax regions (we see that constantly in the US) and give councils and residents an incentive to welcome new construction.
Reeves and Starmer would be insane to go for this .
All politics is relative. The % gap between the parties in GE 2024 was smaller than expected (Tories higher, Labour lower). In 2024 that the Tories lost it is is much more explanatory than that Labour won it.
If Labour lose it in 2028/9, then the chances that the Tories will win it or at least come first remains high. That the great British public could fall out with Labour remains quite possible.
Most importantly they need Reform to disappear and for current Reform voters to switch to them so they don't lose seats to a Labour on a split vote. This has nothing to do with Labour unpopularity and Reform voters currently dislike the Tories.
They need Labour to be more unpopular than they are. Long way to go on that.
They still have a Lib Dem problem even if the first two are sorted out. They might be able to scrape a government together without dealing with the Lib Dems, which also has nothing to do with Labour unpopularity, but it would be tight.
I think Labour winning the next election is a reasonable assumption until we see significant movement on these three problems.
Pensioners who get Pension Credit get their Council Tax paid. Pension credit applies to incomes under ~£220 per week iirc.
There's also something called the "Council Tax Reduction Scheme", which gives up to I think 100% off for people on low income.
The previous Government lost in measure several elements of their voter coalition from 2019 - which I might term Brexiteers, pro-Boris and anti-Corbyn. Or perhaps Red Wall, Blue Wall and One Nation.
These were a ride-three-horses-at-once temporary circus act by Boris playing his Buster Keaton character.
https://youtu.be/frYIj2FGmMA?t=55
How many of these can they get back? How many do they need to get back?
ALMOST, @kinabalu, ALMOST
At some point there will start to be a good deal of interest in how fragile is the position of all major parties: the Tories and SNP because they have so little left, and LD and Labour because their base is incredibly vulnerable, Reform because it can split the votes of others but can't win.
This means that the only thing we really know about 2028/9 is that it is going to be psephologically absorbing and we haven't a clue about the outcome. It would be a bonus if it is politically/policywise absorbing too.
WRT tactics, Labour's decision on WFA is puzzling. I would expect them to say 'we had hard choices about this winter and decided to invent a Hedge Fund tax, raising £2 billion from some discreet offices in Mayfair so that pensioners won't freeze to death'. Odd.