politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s London progress could be masking a bigger trend: t

Only 6 points between Labour and SNP in this poll, the gap is closing, could be DKs or the Gordon effect. Interesting Channel 4 News tonight. People interviewed in Yorkshire were a million miles from the upbeat pizza flipping Osborne and could see very little to be optimistic in their own lives. They did not feel that there had been an upturn in their economic prospects.

MarqueeMark said:

roserees64 said:

Only 6 points between Labour and SNP in this poll, the gap is closing, could be DKs or the Gordon effect. Interesting Channel 4 News tonight. People interviewed in Yorkshire were a million miles from the upbeat pizza flipping Osborne and could see very little to be optimistic in their own lives. They did not feel that there had been an upturn in their economic prospects.

Are you REALLY that dumb?

No... just a troll. When you hear Vox pops on the radio or TV, none of them will ever side with one party , if its the BBC they'll never be pro tory vox poppers, you can be sure of that. The vox pops today made that crystal clear, it wasn't a question of being even handed, it was clear bias.
Was it ever thus, the BBC will do everything possible to avoid a Tory Govt.
That's why I loathe the BBC, there is not even a pretence of even-handedness.

roserees64 said:

Only 6 points between Labour and SNP in this poll, the gap is closing, could be DKs or the Gordon effect. Interesting Channel 4 News tonight. People interviewed in Yorkshire were a million miles from the upbeat pizza flipping Osborne and could see very little to be optimistic in their own lives. They did not feel that there had been an upturn in their economic prospects.

You must save a fortune on lawnmower blades, what with all that AstroTurf.

frpenkridge said:

Regular pbers have been spoiled over the years by the brilliant and infuriating trolls of tim, all day and every day. It is rather embarrassing when rank amateurs try to fill his shoes.

tim is losing the plot on his twitter account. not only are his comments libellous, he is back to Dave "pimping his kids".

ThomasNashe said:

Incidentally, the reason Labour will do well in London is nothing to do with the mansion tax and everything to do with housing. It's the big issue in the Capital and the coalition's record and the Tory mayor's in providing affordable housing is lamentable.

Agree with the last point. A great pity that Labour have come up with no solution to the problem. Any money raised by the mansion tax is going to fund Scottish nurses, apparently, not to help Londoners find somewhere to live.

roserees64 said:

Only 6 points between Labour and SNP in this poll, the gap is closing, could be DKs or the Gordon effect. Interesting Channel 4 News tonight. People interviewed in Yorkshire were a million miles from the upbeat pizza flipping Osborne and could see very little to be optimistic in their own lives. They did not feel that there had been an upturn in their economic prospects.

Are you Gordon Brown or Jackie Bird or Eleanor Bradford by any chance?

alex. said:

ThomasNashe said:

Incidentally, the reason Labour will do well in London is nothing to do with the mansion tax and everything to do with housing. It's the big issue in the Capital and the coalition's record and the Tory mayor's in providing affordable housing is lamentable.

Dunno, works both ways. It could be argued that this favours the Tories because it is driving Labour voters (except those in social housing) out of the area.

Labour did nothing about housing, the coalition have done too little.

If tim were here he'd say the same.

felix said:

surbiton said:

alex. said:

ShropshireLadd said:

Danny565 said:

ShropshireLadd said:

If anyone thinks labour could possibly win Battersea really are in fairyland. have they been to battersea recently? its Chelsea south of the river and very very wealthy

I know nothing about Battersea, but isn't Hampstead & Kilburn also super-wealthy? And Labour had a lead in excess of 10% when Ashcroft polled it.

Yes but Battersea is in Wandsworth a rock solid Tory council. Demographically its probably one of the most tory leaning seats in London. If Battersea ever went labour then they would have a majority in the country of about 300!!!! As for Hampstead and Kilburn watch out for the mansion tax effect when is't really pushed to the fore. I recond its closer there than the ashcroft polls suggest

Wandsworth is "rock solid" Tory because of the local council and low council tax, not necessarily because of demographics, although obviously the demographics are constantly moving against Labour. It still has a fairly significant minority Labour representation, it's hardly a Tory shire.

Wandsworth is so "rock solid" Tory that one of its MP is Sadiq Khan. In 2010, the Tories could not sum up enough swing votes to take that seat. This time his majority will be 6000+

That is the Tooting constituency which is now marginal having been rock solid Labour for many years. It is quite different from Battersea which is unlikely to go red this time.

Tooting is a very split constituency between a Conservative northern half and a Labour southern half with not many swing voters. As the Labour half is growing in population quicker than the Conservative then it will become increasingly safe Labour.

The Conservatives won there in 1955 and 1959 when it was called Wandsworth Central.

Battersea is also a very split constituency with rich Conservative areas and poor Labour ones. As the Conservative areas are growing in population faster than the Labour ones in Battersea it will be a comfortable Conservative hold.

alex. said:

ThomasNashe said:

Incidentally, the reason Labour will do well in London is nothing to do with the mansion tax and everything to do with housing. It's the big issue in the Capital and the coalition's record and the Tory mayor's in providing affordable housing is lamentable.

Dunno, works both ways. It could be argued that this favours the Tories because it is driving Labour voters (except those in social housing) out of the area.

You do realise this concerns middle-class people with good jobs who simply cannot afford anywhere decent to live?

ThomasNashe said:

Cyclefree said:

ThomasNashe said:

Incidentally, the reason Labour will do well in London is nothing to do with the mansion tax and everything to do with housing. It's the big issue in the Capital and the coalition's record and the Tory mayor's in providing affordable housing is lamentable.

Agree with the last point. A great pity that Labour have come up with no solution to the problem. Any money raised by the mansion tax is going to fund Scottish nurses, apparently, not to help Londoners find somewhere to live.

Yes, this is going to be Labour doing well by default - not because they have any solutions to offer, but simply because they are not the government.

If this wasn't going to affect me or mine, I'd be quite interested in seeing how Labour would actually cope if they were in government. They might be a pleasant surprise or, at least, not as bad as everyone fears - much in the same way that I've never thought that EdM is as bad a leader or communicator as everyone is inclined to think.

But on balance I worry that they would make things quite a lot worse in the areas I care about and for my children - and I'd rather not take the risk.

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

frpenkridge said:

Regular pbers have been spoiled over the years by the brilliant and infuriating trolls of tim, all day and every day. It is rather embarrassing when rank amateurs try to fill his shoes.

tim is losing the plot on his twitter account. not only are his comments libellous, he is back to Dave "pimping his kids".

What is his twitter account ?

Whomever it is, and one assumes it is tim he/she is barking.
If I were Dave, I would punch his lights out, whomever this is is a nauseating little shit.

https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/with_replies

Cyclefree said:

I suspect a lot of people will worry that, if a mansion tax is brought in, the threshold at which it is levied will very rapidly be reduced. I certainly think that highly likely, regardless of what Labour says now.

But the main reason I think Labour will win is the collapse in the LD vote in the constituency, as evidenced by the results in the local elections where our very strongly LD ward lost all but 1 of its councillors. Indeed, we now have the only LD councillor in Camden. Labour will likely win by default, though they have - as far as I can tell - been the laziest in terms of canvassing.

Theresa Villiers glossy leaflet in Barnet suggests Labour mansion tax may be levied on homes over £ONE million, plus also talking about new council tax bands and revaluing all properties for council tax - all next to a picture of fairly normal looking semi-detached houses with a caption something like "Do you think these are mansions?"

I am a Con supporter but I must admit it was really pushing the boat out quite a long way - attempting to scare "ordinary" homeowners as much as possible.

But it may well be very effective - and I assume the same wording is being used on Con leaflets in many London seats.

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

antifrank said:

Pong said:

antifrank said:

Cyclefree said:

isam said:

One of the main reasons I didn't stand for Ukip this time... Someone who is standing told me to prepare for my, and my families, private lives to be investigated by a firm paid by the Tories. My parents are Pensioners w high blood pressure, it didn't seem worth the risk

Alexandra Swann (@AlexandralSwann)
31/03/2015 11:17
Fascist Bullies Hounding UKIP Candidates And Supporters - Breitbart bit.ly/1MssOfh via @BreitbartNews

I think that's a real pity. And wrong that families should face this sort of intrusion.

Even if I don't always agree with what you say I find what you say interesting and a valuable addition to this site. No wonder so many MPs are young wet-behind-the-ears Spads if those with any sort of life or past feel unable to put themselves forward.

I echo all of that.

Unless you shut down the internet, the gossiping, shaming, spinning & smearing is here to stay.

We're all public figures now.

There are many reasons that I would not stand for public office, but top of the list is that I would not want to put my other half or the rest of my family through the wringer.

(Actually, that's second - top of the list is that no one in their right mind would vote for me.)

I'd vote for you.

The reason I'd never be a good MP, my sense of humour and sarcasm would get me into trouble.

(and my ability to be commendably/recklessly honest)

And your excessive modesty. That would really hold you back.

Well I have a lot to be modest about.

Oh wait, that doesn't sound right.

Only one twitter user can be found with words 'Cameron pimping his kids'. Going after student Grant.

JEO said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

JEO said:

So us Conservative supporters should have pledges to us betrayed because of the Kippers? No thank you! .

Sorry, but that makes zero sense. If there is not a majority Conservative government, then, as night follows day, it follows that things will happen which Conservative supporters won't like. That's not betrayal, it's reality.

...

When you are stuffed, you are stuffed. You have to make the best of a bad job. Ed Miliband will find much the same - indeed much worse - if he ends up in thrall to Ms Sturgeon.

Of course, all this can very easily be avoided, if the electorate so choose. It's up to them.

If we're stuffed to the point where we have to effectively break promises and fundamentally erode trust in our party, then we should certainly stand aside and let Labour try to form a government. If they make bad policy then that's on them and they can be judged for it. If we make bad policy then it's on us and we will be judged for it. When you make a coalition you need to make some compromises, but there are red lines. Dishonestly fixing elections to undo one of our few concrete promises by the back door would certainly be crossing it.

Politicians can't be allowed to choose the electorate to get the result they want. It goes against every principle of democracy. If the Liberal Democrats want to prevent a government forming on that basis, then we should let them and allow the Great British public to judge accordingly.

A tory minority govt can pursue its manifesto and if its voted down it is not breaking promises.
It can renegotiate a relationship with the EU and if satisfied it can enshrine them into law; if parliament votes it down its not the tories' fault. Before that it can try to get a referendum passed. If thats voted down its not its fault.
We do have a referendum triple lock act though which requires a referendum on treaty change. How would that go down in parliament?
Its absurd to say that if the tories are prevented from passing good policies its their fault.

ThomasNashe said:

alex. said:

ThomasNashe said:

Incidentally, the reason Labour will do well in London is nothing to do with the mansion tax and everything to do with housing. It's the big issue in the Capital and the coalition's record and the Tory mayor's in providing affordable housing is lamentable.

Dunno, works both ways. It could be argued that this favours the Tories because it is driving Labour voters (except those in social housing) out of the area.

You do realise this concerns middle-class people with good jobs who simply cannot afford anywhere decent to live?

Of course, you seem to have interpreted my comment as suggesting that the situation is anything other than lamentable. All I am saying is that if only the rich can afford to live there then there is an argument that, politically, that will benefit the party that the rich vote for. Not to mention all the people minting it in through buy-to-let and those in residence long before the it was unaffordable who are now, short of a cataclysmic housing crash, set up for life thanks to the capital appreciation in their properties.

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I suspect a lot of people will worry that, if a mansion tax is brought in, the threshold at which it is levied will very rapidly be reduced. I certainly think that highly likely, regardless of what Labour says now.

But the main reason I think Labour will win is the collapse in the LD vote in the constituency, as evidenced by the results in the local elections where our very strongly LD ward lost all but 1 of its councillors. Indeed, we now have the only LD councillor in Camden. Labour will likely win by default, though they have - as far as I can tell - been the laziest in terms of canvassing.

Theresa Villiers glossy leaflet in Barnet suggests Labour mansion tax may be levied on homes over £ONE million, plus also talking about new council tax bands and revaluing all properties for council tax - all next to a picture of fairly normal looking semi-detached houses with a caption something like "Do you think these are mansions?"

I am a Con supporter but I must admit it was really pushing the boat out quite a long way - attempting to scare "ordinary" homeowners as much as possible.

But it may well be very effective - and I assume the same wording is being used on Con leaflets in many London seats.

We've had the same.

I wonder whether such leaflets are better at reinforcing the Tory vote rather then getting many people to shift from Labour to Tory. That may be good enough, of course.

MarqueeMark said:

another_richard said:

felix said:

surbiton said:

alex. said:

Wandsworth is "rock solid" Tory because of the local council and low council tax, not necessarily because of demographics, although obviously the demographics are constantly moving against Labour. It still has a fairly significant minority Labour representation, it's hardly a Tory shire.

Wandsworth is so "rock solid" Tory that one of its MP is Sadiq Khan. In 2010, the Tories could not sum up enough swing votes to take that seat. This time his majority will be 6000+

That is the Tooting constituency which is now marginal having been rock solid Labour for many years. It is quite different from Battersea which is unlikely to go red this time.

Tooting is a very split constituency between a Conservative northern half and a Labour southern half with not many swing voters. As the Labour half is growing in population quicker than the Conservative then it will become increasingly safe Labour.

The Conservatives won there in 1955 and 1959 when it was called Wandsworth Central.

Battersea is also a very split constituency with rich Conservative areas and poor Labour ones. As the Conservative areas are growing in population faster than the Labour ones in Battersea it will be a comfortable Conservative hold.

Unless the lost hundreds of thousands of registered voters are disproportionately from the Labour areas.....

Possibly.

But Labour did better than expected in the Tooting constituency in last year's local elections.

A problem the Conservatives have though is that while gentrification initially helps them as working class Labour voters are replaced by Conservative voting 'City' types increasing enrichment replaces the Conservative voting 'City' types with even richer but non-voting foreigners.

To do well in London the Conservatives need widespread affluence but what we have are extremes of wealth. Not only does this not create Conservative voters but the image of it is damaging to the Conservative brand generally.

It should never be forgotten than the Harry Enfield 'loadsamoney' character of the late 1980s was not a banker but a plasterer.

TheWatcher said:

SquareRoot said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

frpenkridge said:

Regular pbers have been spoiled over the years by the brilliant and infuriating trolls of tim, all day and every day. It is rather embarrassing when rank amateurs try to fill his shoes.

tim is losing the plot on his twitter account. not only are his comments libellous, he is back to Dave "pimping his kids".

What is his twitter account ?

Whomever it is, and one assumes it is tim he/she is barking.
If I were Dave, I would punch his lights out, whomever this is is a nauseating little shit.

https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/with_replies

It's him. He's provably been driven mad by sunstroke.

Toiling in the fields will do that to you.....

The electionforecast prediction has the SNP down to just a 5% lead on the Lib Dems in Gordon now (was higher previously). It really wouldn't take a lot of tactical voting to keep Salmond out and that would be a serious blow to SNP momentum. If I were the Lib Dems I'd have these polling numbers going through every letterbox in the constituency:

SNP: 36%
Lib Dems: 31%
Conservatives: 17%
Labour: 14%

http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/tables/predicted_vote_by_seat.html

Cyclefree said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I suspect a lot of people will worry that, if a mansion tax is brought in, the threshold at which it is levied will very rapidly be reduced. I certainly think that highly likely, regardless of what Labour says now.

But the main reason I think Labour will win is the collapse in the LD vote in the constituency, as evidenced by the results in the local elections where our very strongly LD ward lost all but 1 of its councillors. Indeed, we now have the only LD councillor in Camden. Labour will likely win by default, though they have - as far as I can tell - been the laziest in terms of canvassing.

Theresa Villiers glossy leaflet in Barnet suggests Labour mansion tax may be levied on homes over £ONE million, plus also talking about new council tax bands and revaluing all properties for council tax - all next to a picture of fairly normal looking semi-detached houses with a caption something like "Do you think these are mansions?"

I am a Con supporter but I must admit it was really pushing the boat out quite a long way - attempting to scare "ordinary" homeowners as much as possible.

But it may well be very effective - and I assume the same wording is being used on Con leaflets in many London seats.

We've had the same.

I wonder whether such leaflets are better at reinforcing the Tory vote rather then getting many people to shift from Labour to Tory. That may be good enough, of course.

Aim is to get kippers back...

DaemonBarber said:

roserees64 said:

Only 6 points between Labour and SNP in this poll, the gap is closing, could be DKs or the Gordon effect. Interesting Channel 4 News tonight. People interviewed in Yorkshire were a million miles from the upbeat pizza flipping Osborne and could see very little to be optimistic in their own lives. They did not feel that there had been an upturn in their economic prospects.

You must save a fortune on lawnmower blades, what with all that AstroTurf.

I'm sorry but Roseree's post is 100% accurate.

For the Tories to pin 100% of their electoral hopes on the economy which at best is a neutral player is quite sad. Reminds me somewhat of Brown's hubristic boom and bust. The economy could easily be whacked off course with a Greek exit, or a major banking failure; and anyway we have to thank the influx of immigrants for keeping the economy afloat- bet the Tories don't mention this. But in the surreal world of the Tories everything economical is down to the great, Osborne, the Wizard of Toryland.

I can't for the life of me think of anything else the Tories can say- oh yes, we've brought chaos to the NHS with our bungled and costly reform ; or we've introduced an ideologically mind bogglingly reform of schools, or perhaps we helped get rid of Gaddafi and bring chaos to Libya, or they've led to badgers being butchered in vain.

Little wonder the Tories only want to speak about the economy.

antifrank said:

Cyclefree said:

isam said:

One of the main reasons I didn't stand for Ukip this time... Someone who is standing told me to prepare for my, and my families, private lives to be investigated by a firm paid by the Tories. My parents are Pensioners w high blood pressure, it didn't seem worth the risk

Alexandra Swann (@AlexandralSwann)
31/03/2015 11:17
Fascist Bullies Hounding UKIP Candidates And Supporters - Breitbart bit.ly/1MssOfh via @BreitbartNews

I think that's a real pity. And wrong that families should face this sort of intrusion.

Even if I don't always agree with what you say I find what you say interesting and a valuable addition to this site. No wonder so many MPs are young wet-behind-the-ears Spads if those with any sort of life or past feel unable to put themselves forward.

I echo all of that.

Yes - the militant left... nothing new there. How is it best to defeat the militant left then? Split the centre right vote?
And why link alleged enquiries by the Tories with the alleged 'bullies' of the militant left?

tyson said:

DaemonBarber said:

roserees64 said:

Only 6 points between Labour and SNP in this poll, the gap is closing, could be DKs or the Gordon effect. Interesting Channel 4 News tonight. People interviewed in Yorkshire were a million miles from the upbeat pizza flipping Osborne and could see very little to be optimistic in their own lives. They did not feel that there had been an upturn in their economic prospects.

You must save a fortune on lawnmower blades, what with all that AstroTurf.

I'm sorry but Roseree's post is 100% accurate.

For the Tories to pin 100% of their electoral hopes on the economy which at best is a neutral player is quite sad. Reminds me somewhat of Brown's hubristic boom and bust. The economy could easily be whacked off course with a Greek exit, or a major banking failure; and anyway we have to thank the influx of immigrants for keeping the economy afloat- bet the Tories don't mention this. But in the surreal world of the Tories everything economical is down to the great, Osborne, the Wizard of Toryland.

I can't for the life of me think of anything else the Tories can say- oh yes, we've brought chaos to the NHS with our bungled and costly reform ; or we've introduced an ideologically mind bogglingly reform of schools, or perhaps we helped get rid of Gaddafi and bring chaos to Libya, or they've led to badgers being butchered in vain.

Little wonder the Tories only want to speak about the economy.

The badgers. The Badgers. Will NO ONE think of the bloody badgers?

kle4 said:

SquareRoot said:

another_richard said:

Pong said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

frpenkridge said:

Regular pbers have been spoiled over the years by the brilliant and infuriating trolls of tim, all day and every day. It is rather embarrassing when rank amateurs try to fill his shoes.

tim is losing the plot on his twitter account. not only are his comments libellous, he is back to Dave "pimping his kids".

What is his twitter account ?

Yeah, tim is one of the shrewdest political punters out there. If he's on twitter, i'm following him. What's his account name?

tim thought you could predict Labour votes on the equation:

2015 Lab = 2010 Lab + 0.5 x 2010 LD

Hmmm...

Labour votes are based on "other taxpayers owe me a living " or rolling in it and feeling guilty about it a la Rogerdamus... OH and a huge dollop of hypocrisy thrown in for good measure .

I suspect there are at least some who support the party for more positive reasons.

never occurred to me that envy was a positive reason....

ryangauldforge said:

The electionforecast prediction has the SNP down to just a 5% lead on the Lib Dems in Gordon now (was higher previously). It really wouldn't take a lot of tactical voting to keep Salmond out and that would be a serious blow to SNP momentum. If I were the Lib Dems I'd have these polling numbers going through every letterbox in the constituency:

SNP: 36%
Lib Dems: 31%
Conservatives: 17%
Labour: 14%

http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/tables/predicted_vote_by_seat.html

On what do they base their forecasts? Lib Dems can no longer no longer rely on an anti Tory tactical vote to hold seats. I think myself that the Tory vote is too low there as well. LD vote on the exaggeratingly high side as well.

kle4 said:

SquareRoot said:

another_richard said:

Pong said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

frpenkridge said:

Regular pbers have been spoiled over the years by the brilliant and infuriating trolls of tim, all day and every day. It is rather embarrassing when rank amateurs try to fill his shoes.

tim is losing the plot on his twitter account. not only are his comments libellous, he is back to Dave "pimping his kids".

What is his twitter account ?

Yeah, tim is one of the shrewdest political punters out there. If he's on twitter, i'm following him. What's his account name?

tim thought you could predict Labour votes on the equation:

2015 Lab = 2010 Lab + 0.5 x 2010 LD

Hmmm...

Labour votes are based on "other taxpayers owe me a living " or rolling in it and feeling guilty about it a la Rogerdamus... OH and a huge dollop of hypocrisy thrown in for good measure .

I suspect there are at least some who support the party for more positive reasons.

Like who? The overwhelming impulse of Labour policy is that free money is available if you only ask for it.

david_herdson said:

Itwasrigged said:

On ComRes Scots poll; according to STV news it was 1000 votes in 40 Labour held constituencies. They did also suggest that Milliblands standing amongst the voters had improved, at that point they blew away any credibility this poll might have had for me. I haven't seen the other figures yet though. Curious as to which Labour seat they didn't harass the voters in.

Falkirk.

Ta. Were they scared of running into Joycee?

another_richard said:

Pong said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

frpenkridge said:

Regular pbers have been spoiled over the years by the brilliant and infuriating trolls of tim, all day and every day. It is rather embarrassing when rank amateurs try to fill his shoes.

tim is losing the plot on his twitter account. not only are his comments libellous, he is back to Dave "pimping his kids".

What is his twitter account ?

Yeah, tim is one of the shrewdest political punters out there. If he's on twitter, i'm following him. What's his account name?

tim thought you could predict Labour votes on the equation:

2015 Lab = 2010 Lab + 0.5 x 2010 LD

Hmmm...

Votes or seats?

MarkHopkins said:

Cyclefree said:

Unless something is done to stop or limit the numbers of non-EU people buying up property in London as an investment, we will never sort the issue. Even a housing development near me - quite a nice one but essentially no more than tarted up bedsits (for all the marble and posh kitchen equipment, the bedrooms were tiny, the storage was limited and the kitchen was in the living room) - was marketed to Indians and Chinese at eye-watering prices.

Unless something changes I'm more likely to be able to leave home than my children.

Labour get 10 out of 10 for identifying the problem and about 0 out of 10 for not coming up with a solution.

Solutions to the housing crisis:-

1. Reduce immigration by leaving the EU, and thereby reduce demand.

2. Reduce credit and crash the economy, and crash house prices down.

3. Build on Green Fields (but these aren't in the right places).

4. Scream & wave arms about it and hope it resolves over time.

Which of these do you think will happen?

5. Redevelop swathes of existing underused areas of London, compulsorily purchasing where necessary and deregulating planning n return for much greater density of dwellings. Consider much more use of the third dimension.

@JohnO- listen my old comrade, I haven't mentioned badgers for all of 2 days, or maybe 1 and a half.
Just imagine what my wife has to put up with!

MarkHopkins said:

Cyclefree said:

Unless something is done to stop or limit the numbers of non-EU people buying up property in London as an investment, we will never sort the issue. Even a housing development near me - quite a nice one but essentially no more than tarted up bedsits (for all the marble and posh kitchen equipment, the bedrooms were tiny, the storage was limited and the kitchen was in the living room) - was marketed to Indians and Chinese at eye-watering prices.

Unless something changes I'm more likely to be able to leave home than my children.

Labour get 10 out of 10 for identifying the problem and about 0 out of 10 for not coming up with a solution.

Solutions to the housing crisis:-

1. Reduce immigration by leaving the EU, and thereby reduce demand.

2. Reduce credit and crash the economy, and crash house prices down.

3. Build on Green Fields (but these aren't in the right places).

4. Scream & wave arms about it and hope it resolves over time.

Which of these do you think will happen?

use empty homes
use brownfield sites
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27822620
'Up to 50,000 London homes to be built in brownfield scheme' June 14

45 minutes to go!

Are you worried LAB?

Flightpath said:

MarkHopkins said:

Cyclefree said:

Unless something is done to stop or limit the numbers of non-EU people buying up property in London as an investment, we will never sort the issue. Even a housing development near me - quite a nice one but essentially no more than tarted up bedsits (for all the marble and posh kitchen equipment, the bedrooms were tiny, the storage was limited and the kitchen was in the living room) - was marketed to Indians and Chinese at eye-watering prices.

Unless something changes I'm more likely to be able to leave home than my children.

Labour get 10 out of 10 for identifying the problem and about 0 out of 10 for not coming up with a solution.

Solutions to the housing crisis:-

1. Reduce immigration by leaving the EU, and thereby reduce demand.

2. Reduce credit and crash the economy, and crash house prices down.

3. Build on Green Fields (but these aren't in the right places).

4. Scream & wave arms about it and hope it resolves over time.

Which of these do you think will happen?

use empty homes
use brownfield sites
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27822620
'Up to 50,000 London homes to be built in brownfield scheme' June 14

50,000 seems a bit pissy when to start matching supply and demand we probably need to be talking in seven figures. Only antifrank is being radical enough.

Will SNP be up to second?

tyson said:

DaemonBarber said:

roserees64 said:

Only 6 points between Labour and SNP in this poll, the gap is closing, could be DKs or the Gordon effect. Interesting Channel 4 News tonight. People interviewed in Yorkshire were a million miles from the upbeat pizza flipping Osborne and could see very little to be optimistic in their own lives. They did not feel that there had been an upturn in their economic prospects.

You must save a fortune on lawnmower blades, what with all that AstroTurf.

I'm sorry but Roseree's post is 100% accurate.

For the Tories to pin 100% of their electoral hopes on the economy which at best is a neutral player is quite sad. Reminds me somewhat of Brown's hubristic boom and bust. The economy could easily be whacked off course with a Greek exit, or a major banking failure; and anyway we have to thank the influx of immigrants for keeping the economy afloat- bet the Tories don't mention this. But in the surreal world of the Tories everything economical is down to the great, Osborne, the Wizard of Toryland.

I can't for the life of me think of anything else the Tories can say- oh yes, we've brought chaos to the NHS with our bungled and costly reform ; or we've introduced an ideologically mind bogglingly reform of schools, or perhaps we helped get rid of Gaddafi and bring chaos to Libya, or they've led to badgers being butchered in vain.

Little wonder the Tories only want to speak about the economy.

Stuff and nonsense.

And that reminds me of one of my least favourite attack lines. When Tories introduce policy based on right of centre thinking it is all ideologically driven etc. etc. but naturally Labour don't have any left of centre ideology based policies.

Oh wait, they don't have any policies at all. My mistake.

Cyclefree said:

But the main reason I think Labour will win [Hampstead and Kilburn] is the collapse in the LD vote in the constituency, as evidenced by the results in the local elections where our very strongly LD ward lost all but 1 of its councillors. Indeed, we now have the only LD councillor in Camden. Labour will likely win by default, though they have - as far as I can tell - been the laziest in terms of canvassing.

Agreed. You mention the one LD left and that is in a ward which the Conservatives always regarded as "lent" to the LDs. The fact that it was LAB won the other two seats there as the LDs collapsed is significant. Most of the 2010 H&K LD vote seems to have headed LAB's way despite an outstanding CON candidate who has run an excellent campaign.

I don't believe losing Glenda's personal vote will be a significant factor purely because she didn't have much of one. To be clear that was not because she wasn't a good MP: in my experience she was excellent at responding to constituent needs, but mostly because H&K is so intensely political and very few non-LAB supporters would vote LAB if the candidate was a blend of Florence Nightingale, Marie Curie and Joan of Arc.

The one thing you can say about this constituency is that it does have the ability to throw a surprise. Just maybe a superior campaign could mean a CON victory against the odds...

antifrank said:

On topic, the fact that 48% of Labour Party members supposedly live in London points to a differential swing. I expect Labour to do well in all the Core Cities. It is where their stalwarts are.

Labour are urbanites- used to everything that an urban environment throws at them, multiculturalism, most notably. I'm amazed that there are any Labour supporters at all dwelling in suburbs or the countryside.

https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/583003502089138176

tyson said:

@Nige4England

pathetic little bully boy for describing Tim seems to remind me of someone else we have on pbCOM.

On the economy, really no Govt can honestly claim too much credit these days, they just have to cross their fingers and hope it all falls well on their watch. But you can understand politicians taking credit for stuff quite beyond their control- the nature of the beast.

...

Nonsense. The measure of a government's economic competence is in creating the conditions for growth and job creation and government policy and attitude plays a massive part in that. Obviously, when international conditions are benign it's easier to manage than when they're not but do you think it was just chance that saw Greece become a casualty of the last recession rather than, say, Australia?

felix said:

Cyclefree said:

felix said:

ThomasNashe said:

alex. said:

ThomasNashe said:

Incidentally, the reason Labour will do well in London is nothing to do with the mansion tax and everything to do with housing. It's the big issue in the Capital and the coalition's record and the Tory mayor's in providing affordable housing is lamentable.

Dunno, works both ways. It could be argued that this favours the Tories because it is driving Labour voters (except those in social housing) out of the area.

You do realise this concerns middle-class people with good jobs who simply cannot afford anywhere decent to live?

No govt - local or national will bring down rents in inner London., without destroying the market completely. Every successful capital city in the world has essentially the same problem. People who can't hack it move on and out. Twas ever thus.

No it wasn't. The big increase in house prices has happened in the last decade. Before then it was possible to buy/rent in London - and even Hampstead and the areas around it were much more affordable than they have become recently.

London will die if it just becomes a city for the absent mega-wealthy or those tunnelling under their homes to build swimming pools with hot and cold running cinemas and manicure parlours or whatever nonsense those with more money than sense buy.

If you really think the big increase happened in the last 10 years you're not old enough. I've lived through huge price rises in the 80's and then the 90's. Big successful cities which help to support huge hinterlands ( such as much of southern England) inevitably generate high property prices. London isn't even the world's wealthiest city on property prices. All that's happened is the mega-pricey centre has got bigger. My point is that trying to control it with rent controls will kill the rental market completely and strangle the city. for the moment it remains the golden goose for the economy so it'd be daft to do that.

I've lived through several property booms and crashes in the 80's and 90's like you. London has been supporting a hinterland in the South East for much longer than that. I bought my home during the last crash and for the first decade after I lived there the price scarcely moved.

To me, it feels like there has been a big shift in the last decade or so caused by a variety of factors: City money, immigration, London property being openly marketed and sold as an investment.

Agree with you re rent controls - they are not the solution. There needs to be a big increase in supply and, to an extent, controls on demand. We need nurses and teachers in the capital not rich Chinese salting their wealth away from their own government.

Does anyone know what polls we're expecting this evening?

What the actual FECK

Half time

Portugal 0 - 2 Cape Verde Islands