Scott_P said:

ydoethur said:

the tuition fees imbalance that rewards (or at any rate, for many years rewarded - not sure if it's still in place) Scottish students for going to Scottish universities, rather than ones in England.

The tuition fee imbalance is still in place. Scottish students go free (in theory) while English students pay, which is why Scottish Universities are restricting the number of places for freeloaders home grown talent in favour of paying customers

Of course, if Scotland became independent they would EITHER have to remove that perk for Scottish students OR pay for English students on the same terms (which does of course assume, probably incorrectly, that they remain in the EU). One would be politically disastrous, one extremely expensive.

And of course, it might make Scottish universities less attractive to English students, especially with Continental universities now starting to offer more and more degrees via the medium of English.

Have any studies been done on that aspect of independence?

Mr. Eagles, you know who else was white?

Caesar.

TheScreamingEagles said:

When your own private polling has you behind you're like a young lady in a porno with 20 guys. Fucked every which way and then some

The Tories private polling was more accurate than Yougov at the GE though !

Will the Andy Burnham private polling be more like the Lib Dem polling though ?

TheScreamingEagles said:

When your own private polling has you behind you're like a young lady in a porno with 20 guys. Fucked every which way and then some

Certainly if your private polling has you 4 points behind and that is by far the best news you've had in a month you are.

ydoethur said:

Have any studies been done on that aspect of independence?

IIRC the University heads are well aware of the funding crisis, now and in the event of separation.

The zoomers will be along presently to claim otherwise...

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Betting post: Lay Jowell, back Khan

@georgeeaton: Ken Livingstone tells me that big influx of Corbyn supporters will help Sadiq Khan win mayoral nomination. 90% crossover in phonebanking.

Back Zak for the mayoralty then - Khan can no more win than an Irishman could during the 80s - YG polling agrees.

I'm laying Jowell and backing Zac. WIth regards the latter, I think he is overpriced at 3.25/3.3 no matter who the Labour candidate - I have no doubt he will be the Tory candidate.

Bonus if Labour elect Corbyn; bonus if they elect Khan or Abbott.

Polls have shown Corbyn does well in London and Scotland relative to his national poll rating but poorly in the South and Midlands

Scott_P said:

ydoethur said:

Have any studies been done on that aspect of independence?

IIRC the University heads are well aware of the funding crisis, now and in the event of separation.

The zoomers will be along presently to claim otherwise...

Scotland's got some genuinely brilliant universities. It would be a bad thing if they were to suffer for any reason - bad for Scotland and bad just because destroying something good, worthwhile and useful is simply wrong. They deserve to be considered more than they are.

(They will also bring in quite a lot of money to some fairly sensitive places - e.g. Dundee, Stirling, Paisley...)

justin124 said:

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

A weaker pound would bloody help. If it heads up much more, I could be in the realms of posting negative contribution on a 10 million Euro job !

But if interest rates go up - which surely they will fairly soon - won't the pound rise further?

That also depends on what happens to interest rates elsewhere .If that happens on a global basis there is no reason to expect much impact on exchange rates unless UK interest rates rise more than in other economies.

Fair point, I hadn't thought of that. But it's hard to see them going up in the Eurozone until the ECB are certain Spain and Italy won't go the way of Greece if they do.

HYUFD said:

Like Umunna Francis Maude set up Policy Exchange as a focus of opposition to IDS

Maude got an easy ride for a serial destabiliser of Tory leaders.

Pulpstar said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Betting post: Lay Jowell, back Khan

@georgeeaton: Ken Livingstone tells me that big influx of Corbyn supporters will help Sadiq Khan win mayoral nomination. 90% crossover in phonebanking.

Back Zak for the mayoralty then - Khan can no more win than an Irishman could during the 80s - YG polling agrees.

I'm laying Jowell and backing Zac. WIth regards the latter, I think he is overpriced at 3.25/3.3 no matter who the Labour candidate - I have no doubt he will be the Tory candidate.

Bonus if Labour elect Corbyn; bonus if they elect Khan or Abbott.

Do you think Lammy is out the race now ?

(I mean he was barely in it, but I have a nice green number next to his name on Betfair right now )

Funny thing is, some pundits have rated Lammy the most impressive at the hustings.

Slackbladder said:

Scott_P said:

Splitters !!!!!!

A moderate Labour pressure group dubbed “the Resistance” is being formed by two top shadow cabinet members as Jeremy Corbyn pulls ahead in the leadership race, the Evening Standard can reveal.

Chuka Umunna and Tristram Hunt have written privately to Labour MPs calling on them to meet four days before the leadership result is announced. It is being seen by MPs as a rival to Mr Corbyn’s Left-wing platform and the start of guerrilla warfare for Labour’s soul.

Mr Corbyn today issued plans to give more say over policy to party members, who are typically more Left-leaning than its MPs.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/shadow-cabinet-mps-form-the-resistance-group-in-anticipation-of-corbyn-win-a2633476.html

Resistance is futile!!




The group will be "Labour for the Common Good" - v close to Green Party's current strapline!

Steven Smith appointed the new Australian captain, with Warner as his vice captain having shaken off some of his vices:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/909443.html

Michael Clarke will lead at the Oval.

In other news, England Women 16-2 after 10 overs. I know more rain is the last thing Kent needs today, but anyone in Canterbury, please do a rain dance!

Afternoon all

It seems the Conservatives on here are almost salivating (or worse) at the prospect of a Corbyn-led Labour Party.

My only thought on this is that sometimes if you're in a party, there's no point swallowing 90% of your opponent's agenda simply to get into power even if you can. Whether some see Osbornomics as the new Butskellism or not, the Kendalls, Burnhams and Coopers of the world seem to have little more to offer than "we'll manage austerity better".

Clearly, there is a significant minority who want a policy alternative to austerity. Now, that policy doesn't have to be credible but it's a platform they can go out to try and sell with conviction and if they can persuade enough people...

It's the absence of the alternative that was one of the many failings of the Ed M/Ed B period. At no point from 2010-15 was there a crafted policy alternative - there were bits here and bits there but nothing in its entirety that suggested a policy on which they could unite and campaign.

Corbyn may well have the bones of such a policy and his thinkers both inside and outside Labour may well seek to develop a new policy. Fine, present it, argue it and let the electorate pass judgement but to simply say "we agree with everything the other lot says" is no basis for campaigning and no activist will want to knock on doors if the alternative is simply more of the same.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Doethur, I haven't seen the remake, but I also don't see the point of copying, and undoubtedly making worse, arguably the best Star Trek film.

Hollywood is bloody derivative these days.

It was a good movie - the cleverest thing they did was reboot the characters with clear differences of background and setting, so similar things could occur playing off the originals, while being their own thing. (Though the fact I do not see what is so great about Montalban as Khan may colour my view - I'm sorry, that 'he tasks me' bit people quote is just silly. He was good, but it wasn't world beating in terms of performance)

Hollywood has always been derivative, extremely so. It might be a bit more so now, but it's only really an issue now it's easier to see what something is a remarke/adaptation of.

While, as the good Mr Stodge says, the Conservatives are salivating over th eprospect of a Corbyn -led Labour Party, perhaps the old adage about being careful about what one wishes for could apply.

As Nick Clegg found out when he got a share of Government!

JEO said:

We need more ministers like Eric Pickles:

‘What appears to have happened in Tower Hamlets is similar to what happened in Rotherham, in the sense that as with sexual exploitation, people just turned a blind eye because they were worried about community cohesion and the same seems to have happened in Tower Hamlets’.

To clarify, I ask does he believe that politicians and officials were too concerned about multiculturalism and ignored the years of warning signs from Tower Hamlets? ‘Yes, of course’.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/sebastian-payne/2015/08/eric-pickles-interview-multiculturalism-is-to-blame-for-tower-hamlets-electoral-fraud/

I can't help but think his straight-talking is because he's one of the few powerful politicians who are from outside the SPAD/London professional set.

He's pretty much quoting from the judge's view on Tower Hamlets and Rotherham, re fear of causing offence leading to the problems, to the extent it took private citizens to expose it

There are two new threads to choose from...

stodge said:

Afternoon all

It seems the Conservatives on here are almost salivating (or worse) at the prospect of a Corbyn-led Labour Party.

My only thought on this is that sometimes if you're in a party, there's no point swallowing 90% of your opponent's agenda simply to get into power even if you can. Whether some see Osbornomics as the new Butskellism or not, the Kendalls, Burnhams and Coopers of the world seem to have little more to offer than "we'll manage austerity better".

Clearly, there is a significant minority who want a policy alternative to austerity. Now, that policy doesn't have to be credible but it's a platform they can go out to try and sell with conviction and if they can persuade enough people...

It's the absence of the alternative that was one of the many failings of the Ed M/Ed B period. At no point from 2010-15 was there a crafted policy alternative - there were bits here and bits there but nothing in its entirety that suggested a policy on which they could unite and campaign.

Corbyn may well have the bones of such a policy and his thinkers both inside and outside Labour may well seek to develop a new policy. Fine, present it, argue it and let the electorate pass judgement but to simply say "we agree with everything the other lot says" is no basis for campaigning and no activist will want to knock on doors if the alternative is simply more of the same.

If you have a defence,foreign and immigration policy which is so anathema to the majority of voters in large parts of England and Wales at least will you ever be allowed to talk to voters on economic policy on the doorstep though?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Jeremy Corbyn is today revealed as the first choice of ordinary Londoners to lead the Labour Party — defying claims that his appeal is limited to Left-wingers and trade unionists.

An exclusive YouGov poll for the Evening Standard reveals he has more support among the London public than his nearest rivals, Andy Burnham and Yvette Cooper, put together.

Moreover, he is more popular with the better-off ABC1 social classes, among both younger and older people, and those who voted Ukip or Liberal Democrat at the general election.

Shadow health secretary Mr Burnham came second on 21 and Ms Cooper, the shadow home secretary, third on 20 per cent. Liz Kendall, the Blairite candidate, trailed at 12 per cent.

Among people who voted Labour at the May election, Mr Corbyn enjoys a clear majority with 52 per cent.

http://bit.ly/1INlciS

The annoying thing with this article is the lack of detail about the question. Presumably the question was something like "who should lead the Labour party?" If you consider there are people who don't like the Labour party, then many of them may have put Corbyn. A better question would be: If the Labour party was led by X, how would it affect your likelihood to vote Labour at the next election - substantially more likely, slightly more likely, no difference, slightly less likely, substantially less likely.

justin124 said:

Any chance of the PLP deciding to appoint its own leader? I am not sure whether this would require simply a change in Standing Orders or effectively outright UDI but it might appeal to circa 200 members of the PLP who would continue to provide the Leader of the Opposition.

You will find that if elected Cornyn will ensure that the £3 patriots will be enrolled as full members and he will get whatever he wants in terms of Labour Party rules. And why shouldn't he? The Labour Party can do what it likes - but it should not expect the rest of us to be fooled its democratic or that everyone else will vote for them.