Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Antifrank: How the Conservatives will lose their hegemony

124»

Comments

  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    "It's all someone else's fault".

    Why on earth is Batman-Twanky still involved with KC 'clients'?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Ms Batman – odd use of the word ‘conceptualised’ – I think she means pocketed?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    On topic: As always antifrank makes a good argument, but as others have pointed out it's not the whole story; there are countervailing reasons for thinking that the Conservative position is pretty good overall. On balance, as things stand at the moment, a Conservative-led or Conservative majority government in 2020 looks very likely.

    On the other side of the coin, I think antifrank has forgotten one very nasty minefield which the government has to get through in the next few months: the likely approval of the third runway at Heathrow.

    What price do you make NOM?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Moore's Monocle ‏@NoMoreEds 53s53 seconds ago

    'Whole session has been littered with name-dropping of ministers names.'

    Batman 'I haven't name-dropped anyone'

    Seriously? #kidscompany
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,872
    Sean_F said:

    I agree with David Herdson that Corbyn's toxicity (to the majority of voters) probably ensures a win for the Conservatives in 2020, regardless.

    The Conservatives will obviously suffer from mid-term unpopularity, as almost all governments do. They could be polling in the low 30s or high 20s. But, I imagine that most of those disillusioned voters will go over to UKIP, not Labour, as they did in the period 2013-15.

    Here's the thing: both parties are dominated by the urban middle-classes at the moment, and I sense the Tories tacking (slowly) in that direction too. That leads them to think that they need to be much more progressive on pet peeves of those groups - like feminism, diversity, inoffensive speech and gender equality.

    But the Tories real problem is being seen as a friend of vested interests, and the wealthy. The closure of the steelworks at Redcar is a good example: rather than just saying "pah, it's the free market", why not strontly emphathise with the tragedy of it and set a minister on as task to do everything possible to bring new private investment and good jobs to the area?

    It's not just policy - and I'm not for a second suggesting subsidy - but this was the problem in the 80s. There's a motives and values argument the Tories need to win if they are to ever break out of the sub-40% box, and that starts with empathy, mood music and being seen to care and take action.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    This is the quote for that sums her up.


    Katherine Rushton Verified account
    @kerushton

    Chairman shouts 'Order' to stop Camila's constant interruptions.
    CB: 'I don't know that shouting is going to get me to behave any better.'
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    Pulpstar said:

    antifrank said:
    Crikey - has any other (Neccessary) public service been hit that hard ?

    That does look like an overdone level of cut. I'd have thought other stuff should take a hit before this.
    How much of that is based on fact and how much is based on worst-case scenario posturing in order to make a point?

    I have very little faith in the integrity of senior police figures these days. It saddens me to say to but they engage too much in political activity and not on doing their jobs.

    Unless and until ACPO is gone, I will have no trust in what they and their members have to say.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    ....Now, I hope David Cameron's conference speech focus on social reform is real, but it looks like their only actual plan is to devolve the mess above to higher profile scapegoat mayors in the (often Labour) cities. Effectively their plan for cuts is simply that which is already starting to bear fruit in the Tory advance in Wales. That the effects of cuts could actually be used to strengthen the Tory position is one referenced by Don Brind quoting Jim McMahon in his most recent thread and, even in my advocating that the Labour centre take up the devolution challenge with relish, I noted that it could not be more a trap if it had Acme written on it.

    There seem to be several strands to GO's general strategy. I particularly like the one which seeks, where possible, to place the burden of raising money on those who spend the money. I think this has legs in many places and is already causing some twitching in the SNP and some local councils.
    I didn't think English councils were asking for FFA? Is the plan then to re-cast or dump funding formulae totally? I note in slight contradiction to my previous line on this thread that plenty of Tory areas are lining up for devolution (e.g. Cheshire, non-metro Surrey/Sussex), but such a fundamental re-org is a chance to look again at funding.

    The basic problem with apothecation is that it is [total rubbish]. All that 'we will raise xxx from mansion tax to fund yyy ridiculously specific thing' leaves me totally cold. Getting the sources of tax to exactly match the destinations of tax is so brain dead, either as a straw man for additional spending or for cuts, that I can't fathom the popularity it has.
    At the risk of showing my ignorance, what does "apothecation" mean. I cannot find a definition. Whatever it means, your post is apropos FA. My point is it's a political strategy attempting to instil some fiscal responsibility on those unlikely otherwise to show any.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited October 2015
    isam said:

    On topic: As always antifrank makes a good argument, but as others have pointed out it's not the whole story; there are countervailing reasons for thinking that the Conservative position is pretty good overall. On balance, as things stand at the moment, a Conservative-led or Conservative majority government in 2020 looks very likely.

    On the other side of the coin, I think antifrank has forgotten one very nasty minefield which the government has to get through in the next few months: the likely approval of the third runway at Heathrow.

    What price do you make NOM?
    Off the top of my head, I'd go something like:

    Con Maj 5/6
    NOM 6/4
    Lab Maj 20/1 (or longer)

    As you pointed out earlier, Con Maj vs NOM is essentially about whether the Conservatives will lose seats (ignoring the boundary changes effect). On balance, given Corbyn and the Labour civil war, I think it's more likely that the Tories will gain seats, but of course there are substantial countervailing arguments such as those antifrank puts forward, and the question of who Cameron's successor is going to be. Lots of uncertainties obviously.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    malcolmg said:

    Scott_P said:

    You sometimes think the SNP needs to be saved from itself. It certainly needs to be saved from the vociferous Nationalist partisans on social media who regard any criticism of the Scottish Government as biblical heresy. The problem is that many members seem to believe that the independence movement belongs to the SNP, and that Yes supporters should automatically support the party leadership.

    There's been a lively debate recently in the wider independence movement about the SNP's privatisation policies. The independence supporting video blogger, Stephen Paton, has pointed out that the SNP hasn’t exactly been bending over backwards to keep water services out of private hands. But even to mention his his name is to invite a storm of criticism from the guardians of Nationalist rectitude
    http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/13847833.As_SNP_moves_into_an_imperial_phase__it_needs_critical_friends_more_than_ever/
    Ha Ha Ha , SNP have made themselves popular with the public by implementing good policies, deliberately and keep getting voted back in , Tories say it is a crime and SNP=BAD.

    It all comes back to George Foulkes : -

    Foulkes: The SNP are on a dangerous tack at the moment. What they are doing is trying to build up a situation in Scotland where the services are manifestly better than south of the border in a number of areas.

    Colin MacKay : Is this such a bad thing?

    Lord Foulkes: No, but they are doing it deliberately.


    When even Foulkes can do nothing other than praise the SNP, then it is no wonder frothing zoomers like Tomkins can do no better than playground insults.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    The grammar school debate on daily politics is everything that is wrong with political debate... Enough to drive you mad
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,239

    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    ....Now, I hope David Cameron's conference speech focus on social reform is real, but it looks like their only actual plan is to devolve the mess above to higher profile scapegoat mayors in the (often Labour) cities. Effectively their plan for cuts is simply that which is already starting to bear fruit in the Tory advance in Wales. That the effects of cuts could actually be used to strengthen the Tory position is one referenced by Don Brind quoting Jim McMahon in his most recent thread and, even in my advocating that the Labour centre take up the devolution challenge with relish, I noted that it could not be more a trap if it had Acme written on it.

    There seem to be several strands to GO's general strategy. I particularly like the one which seeks, where possible, to place the burden of raising money on those who spend the money. I think this has legs in many places and is already causing some twitching in the SNP and some local councils.
    I didn't think English councils were asking for FFA? Is the plan then to re-cast or dump funding formulae totally? I note in slight contradiction to my previous line on this thread that plenty of Tory areas are lining up for devolution (e.g. Cheshire, non-metro Surrey/Sussex), but such a fundamental re-org is a chance to look again at funding.

    The basic problem with hypothecation is that it is [total rubbish]. All that 'we will raise xxx from mansion tax to fund yyy ridiculously specific thing' leaves me totally cold. Getting the sources of tax to exactly match the destinations of tax is so brain dead, either as a straw man for additional spending or for cuts, that I can't fathom the popularity it has.
    At the risk of showing my ignorance, what does "apothecation" mean. I cannot find a definition. Whatever it means, your post is apropos FA. My point is it's a political strategy attempting to instil some fiscal responsibility on those unlikely otherwise to show any.
    Corrected - was obviously thinking of something else.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    More name dropping from Yentob.

    It's clear he's taking over from Batman-Twanky to ensure that her rank amateurism doesn't drop him further into the doo doo.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    On topic: As always antifrank makes a good argument, but as others have pointed out it's not the whole story; there are countervailing reasons for thinking that the Conservative position is pretty good overall. On balance, as things stand at the moment, a Conservative-led or Conservative majority government in 2020 looks very likely.

    On the other side of the coin, I think antifrank has forgotten one very nasty minefield which the government has to get through in the next few months: the likely approval of the third runway at Heathrow.

    What price do you make NOM?
    To jump in here, I think you're right to be looking at this. The next few years look likely to be unusually volatile, with inherent instability in Labour and with the EU faultline in the Conservatives undergoing the ultimate stress-test. The line-up of serious political parties contesting the next election is less certain than normal at the outset of a Parliament, never mind predicting what the outcome is going to be. I'm not yet betting on NOM, but I am keeping a watching brief.

    My concern is whether it is worth it yet once you factor the time delay in collecting into the calculation. Unscientifically, I make it an evens shot, which means that it would still be worth it (if you can back it at 7/4 and it's really an even money shot, in my way of thinking that means you're converting £100 now into a value of £137.50 in May 2020, just under an 8% return tax free), but building in a margin for prudence allowing for my ability to fall in love with a bet, I'm leaving alone for now. I'd be very interested in other views.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,656

    Two senior staff signed NDAs on leaving - that smacks of something not right straight away.

    Williamz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If I ws a 14 yr old kid in Hackney or wherever Kids Company operated from, I'd be down Kids Company every week. So far as I can tell they were just giving away free cash ! Who wouldn't take it.

    which is exactly what their own financial controller accused them of a month or so ago. I think she was based in west country and couldn't believe they just handed out £20 notes to anyone who turned up.
    NDAs, in a charity. What law firm drafted them?
    Not binding in a legal or parliamentary inquiry I'd have thought, though? (Advice from lawyers appreciated here).
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    malcolmg said:

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    Tories are always easily fooled by big gobbed egoistic self seeking individuals like this. They assume the bovine manure is competence, just look at their MP's.
    Doesn't that make you a Tory?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    On topic: As always antifrank makes a good argument, but as others have pointed out it's not the whole story; there are countervailing reasons for thinking that the Conservative position is pretty good overall. On balance, as things stand at the moment, a Conservative-led or Conservative majority government in 2020 looks very likely.

    On the other side of the coin, I think antifrank has forgotten one very nasty minefield which the government has to get through in the next few months: the likely approval of the third runway at Heathrow.

    What price do you make NOM?
    Off the top of my head, I'd go something like:

    Con Maj 5/6
    NOM 6/4
    Lab Maj 20/1 (or longer)

    As you pointed out earlier, Con Maj vs NOM is essentially about whether the Conservatives will lose seats (ignoring the boundary changes effect). On balance, given Corbyn and the Labour civil war, I think it's more likely that the Tories will gain seats, but of course there are substantial countervailing arguments such as those antifrank puts forward, and the question of who Cameron's successor is going to be. Lots of uncertainties obviously.
    Cheers

    I started getting all excited about backing a CON-LD coalition if I could find a nice price until I remembered Clegg is no longer in charge there
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    watford30 said:

    malcolmg said:

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    Tories are always easily fooled by big gobbed egoistic self seeking individuals like this. They assume the bovine manure is competence, just look at their MP's.
    Is that why the SNP lead Scottish Government handed cash to it's 'cronies' at T in the Park?
    It paid £150k to a private company to persuade the company to assist Government policy instead of basing their decision on a purely commercial basis. This is normal, it happens in all governments in all countries.

    The thing is, people generally understand this. It was also a policy started by SLAB when they paid DF to move the festival from Strathclyde Park to Balado in the first place.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Camilla "Some civil servants have been malicious" !
  • Two senior staff signed NDAs on leaving - that smacks of something not right straight away.

    Williamz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If I ws a 14 yr old kid in Hackney or wherever Kids Company operated from, I'd be down Kids Company every week. So far as I can tell they were just giving away free cash ! Who wouldn't take it.

    which is exactly what their own financial controller accused them of a month or so ago. I think she was based in west country and couldn't believe they just handed out £20 notes to anyone who turned up.
    NDAs, in a charity. What law firm drafted them?
    Not binding in a legal or parliamentary inquiry I'd have thought, though? (Advice from lawyers appreciated here).
    You can't contract to break the law, but you could contract to decline any voluntary information (or at least, I know of no reason you couldn't).
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited October 2015
    Batman now alleging conspiracy from civil servants in Cabinet Office to smear charity - she's sounding like a fantasist.

    Dan Thompson ‏@artistsmakers
    Camila now makes allegations against Civil Servants - than says 'I don't like to make accusations without evidence'. #kidscompany

    Richard Blandford ‏@rblandford
    Yentob desperately trying to stop CB from saying something very libellous. #kidscompany
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,656

    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    ....Now, I hope David Cameron's conference speech focus on social reform is real, but it looks like their only actual plan is to devolve the mess above to higher profile scapegoat mayors in the (often Labour) cities. Effectively their plan for cuts is simply that which is already starting to bear fruit in the Tory advance in Wales. That the effects of cuts could actually be used to strengthen the Tory position is one referenced by Don Brind quoting Jim McMahon in his most recent thread and, even in my advocating that the Labour centre take up the devolution challenge with relish, I noted that it could not be more a trap if it had Acme written on it.

    There seem to be several strands to GO's general strategy. I particularly like the one which seeks, where possible, to place the burden of raising money on those who spend the money. I think this has legs in many places and is already causing some twitching in the SNP and some local councils.
    I didn't think English councils were asking for FFA? Is the plan then to re-cast or dump funding formulae totally? I note in slight contradiction to my previous line on this thread that plenty of Tory areas are lining up for devolution (e.g. Cheshire, non-metro Surrey/Sussex), but such a fundamental re-org is a chance to look again at funding.

    The basic problem with apothecation is that it is [total rubbish]. All that 'we will raise xxx from mansion tax to fund yyy ridiculously specific thing' leaves me totally cold. Getting the sources of tax to exactly match the destinations of tax is so brain dead, either as a straw man for additional spending or for cuts, that I can't fathom the popularity it has.
    At the risk of showing my ignorance, what does "apothecation" mean. I cannot find a definition. Whatever it means, your post is apropos FA. My point is it's a political strategy attempting to instil some fiscal responsibility on those unlikely otherwise to show any.
    I think "hypothecation" is the word intended.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    malcolmg said:

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    Tories are always easily fooled by big gobbed egoistic self seeking individuals like this. They assume the bovine manure is competence, just look at their MP's.
    Doesn't that make you a Tory?
    Insecticide, you would love to be able top articulate your thoughts even partially as good as I do. Clue is to get educated and think before thumping your sausages off the keyboard.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @janinegibson: Camila Batmanghelidjh making accusations I don’t think we could even type, and Yentob running round behind her trying to mop up.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    watford30 said:

    malcolmg said:

    watford30 said:

    malcolmg said:

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    Tories are always easily fooled by big gobbed egoistic self seeking individuals like this. They assume the bovine manure is competence, just look at their MP's.
    Is that why the SNP lead Scottish Government handed cash to it's 'cronies' at T in the Park?
    You pathetic excuse for a human being , they gave money to a company that was holding a major music event. Dribble somewhere else please.
    It's all here Malky. Drool away.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/611267/Fiona-Hyslop-T-in-The-Park-promoters-paid-over-1M-for-party

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/park-boss-geoff-ellis-hits-6612763
    Hahahaha.

    It gets even more comical as the straws are grasped. The Ryder Cup event had nothing to do with the Referendum or the SNP. It was an event organised by VisitScotland a Quango which has successfully grown the Scottish Tourism Industry beyond all expectations.

    It is run by a man with no party affiliation who joined from a management role at Diageo.

    What the lunatic frothers on here are willing to swallow makes Sasha Grey movies look tame.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,068

    Sean_F said:

    I agree with David Herdson that Corbyn's toxicity (to the majority of voters) probably ensures a win for the Conservatives in 2020, regardless.

    The Conservatives will obviously suffer from mid-term unpopularity, as almost all governments do. They could be polling in the low 30s or high 20s. But, I imagine that most of those disillusioned voters will go over to UKIP, not Labour, as they did in the period 2013-15.

    Here's the thing: both parties are dominated by the urban middle-classes at the moment, and I sense the Tories tacking (slowly) in that direction too. That leads them to think that they need to be much more progressive on pet peeves of those groups - like feminism, diversity, inoffensive speech and gender equality.

    But the Tories real problem is being seen as a friend of vested interests, and the wealthy. The closure of the steelworks at Redcar is a good example: rather than just saying "pah, it's the free market", why not strontly emphathise with the tragedy of it and set a minister on as task to do everything possible to bring new private investment and good jobs to the area?

    It's not just policy - and I'm not for a second suggesting subsidy - but this was the problem in the 80s. There's a motives and values argument the Tories need to win if they are to ever break out of the sub-40% box, and that starts with empathy, mood music and being seen to care and take action.
    Adopting such pet peeves can even reinforce the view that one is the friend of vested interests.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    :lol:

    PRWeek UK ‏@prweekuknews

    Ms Batmanghelidjh appears to have shunned PR advice based on her performance #kidscompany http://www.prweek.com/article/1368179/britains-most-colourful-charity-boss-tone-down-westminster-hearing-prs-advise
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    On topic: As always antifrank makes a good argument, but as others have pointed out it's not the whole story; there are countervailing reasons for thinking that the Conservative position is pretty good overall. On balance, as things stand at the moment, a Conservative-led or Conservative majority government in 2020 looks very likely.

    On the other side of the coin, I think antifrank has forgotten one very nasty minefield which the government has to get through in the next few months: the likely approval of the third runway at Heathrow.

    What price do you make NOM?
    To jump in here, I think you're right to be looking at this. The next few years look likely to be unusually volatile, with inherent instability in Labour and with the EU faultline in the Conservatives undergoing the ultimate stress-test. The line-up of serious political parties contesting the next election is less certain than normal at the outset of a Parliament, never mind predicting what the outcome is going to be. I'm not yet betting on NOM, but I am keeping a watching brief.

    My concern is whether it is worth it yet once you factor the time delay in collecting into the calculation. Unscientifically, I make it an evens shot, which means that it would still be worth it (if you can back it at 7/4 and it's really an even money shot, in my way of thinking that means you're converting £100 now into a value of £137.50 in May 2020, just under an 8% return tax free), but building in a margin for prudence allowing for my ability to fall in love with a bet, I'm leaving alone for now. I'd be very interested in other views.
    Cheers, yeah it looks like a bet to me but I can't really be arsed to tie money up for that long for that return either.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,656
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    Tories are always easily fooled by big gobbed egoistic self seeking individuals like this. They assume the bovine manure is competence, just look at their MP's.
    Doesn't that make you a Tory?
    Insecticide, you would love to be able top articulate your thoughts even partially as good as I do. Clue is to get educated and think before thumping your sausages off the keyboard.
    Lol.

    Lvmol.

    Lhatucuioi.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,494
    malcolmg said:

    Insecticide, you would love to be able top articulate your thoughts even partially as good as I do. Clue is to get educated and think before thumping your sausages off the keyboard.

    "Articulate even partially as good as I do", eh? You're right, there's nothing like a good education...
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    Batman now alleging conspiracy from civil servants in Cabinet Office to smear charity - she's sounding like a fantasist.

    Her claim also contradicts the Guardian article in August that stated the allegations came from two ex-employees of Kid.Co. – Ms Batman has deployed flack counter measures and is now reduced to chucking everything at the fan hoping to divert attention imho.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,494
    We discussed Homeland's very American assumptions the other day - I see they've been hacked:

    http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2015/oct/15/homeland-is-racist-artists-subversive-graffiti-tv-show

    Particularly funny that the original graffiti in the refugee camp were pro-Assad and that Hezbollah (Shia) and Al Qaida (Sunni) are shown as buddies. Still a good show, though!
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Yentob is reason enough to scrap the TV licence, he is the epitome of smug, liberal, venal, taxpayer's waste of money. This man has made a fortune out of us all, he's a disgrace.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,872
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    On topic: As always antifrank makes a good argument, but as others have pointed out it's not the whole story; there are countervailing reasons for thinking that the Conservative position is pretty good overall. On balance, as things stand at the moment, a Conservative-led or Conservative majority government in 2020 looks very likely.

    On the other side of the coin, I think antifrank has forgotten one very nasty minefield which the government has to get through in the next few months: the likely approval of the third runway at Heathrow.

    What price do you make NOM?
    To jump in here, I think you're right to be looking at this. The next few years look likely to be unusually volatile, with inherent instability in Labour and with the EU faultline in the Conservatives undergoing the ultimate stress-test. The line-up of serious political parties contesting the next election is less certain than normal at the outset of a Parliament, never mind predicting what the outcome is going to be. I'm not yet betting on NOM, but I am keeping a watching brief.

    My concern is whether it is worth it yet once you factor the time delay in collecting into the calculation. Unscientifically, I make it an evens shot, which means that it would still be worth it (if you can back it at 7/4 and it's really an even money shot, in my way of thinking that means you're converting £100 now into a value of £137.50 in May 2020, just under an 8% return tax free), but building in a margin for prudence allowing for my ability to fall in love with a bet, I'm leaving alone for now. I'd be very interested in other views.
    I'm not placing bets until early 2018.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Batmans delivery and mannerisms remind me of Abbott
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Allan ‏@aesurg

    Does the Govt have any bad news they want to release unnoticed? Today would be a good day #kidscompany #PAC
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Allan ‏@aesurg

    Does the Govt have any bad news they want to release unnoticed? Today would be a good day #kidscompany #PAC

    1.7bn EU Bill?
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    ....Now, I hope David Cameron's conference speech focus on social reform is real, but it looks like their only actual plan is to devolve the mess above to higher profile scapegoat mayors in the (often Labour) cities. Effectively their plan for cuts is simply that which is already starting to bear fruit in the Tory advance in Wales. That the effects of cuts could actually be used to strengthen the Tory position is one referenced by Don Brind quoting Jim McMahon in his most recent thread and, even in my advocating that the Labour centre take up the devolution challenge with relish, I noted that it could not be more a trap if it had Acme written on it.

    There seem to be several strands to GO's general strategy. I particularly like the one which seeks, where possible, to place the burden of raising money on those who spend the money. I think this has legs in many places and is already causing some twitching in the SNP and some local councils.
    I didn't think English councils were asking for FFA? Is the plan then to re-cast or dump funding formulae totally? I note in slight contradiction to my previous line on this thread that plenty of Tory areas are lining up for devolution (e.g. Cheshire, non-metro Surrey/Sussex), but such a fundamental re-org is a chance to look again at funding.

    The basic problem with apothecation is that it is [total rubbish]. All that 'we will raise xxx from mansion tax to fund yyy ridiculously specific thing' leaves me totally cold. Getting the sources of tax to exactly match the destinations of tax is so brain dead, either as a straw man for additional spending or for cuts, that I can't fathom the popularity it has.
    At the risk of showing my ignorance, what does "apothecation" mean. I cannot find a definition. Whatever it means, your post is apropos FA. My point is it's a political strategy attempting to instil some fiscal responsibility on those unlikely otherwise to show any.
    I think "hypothecation" is the word intended.
    I agree. I wouldn't have bothered other than to make the point in my last sentence.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Batmans delivery and mannerisms remind me of Abbott

    I'm not convinced they're different people, Batman looks like Abbott in fancy dress

  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    Tories are always easily fooled by big gobbed egoistic self seeking individuals like this. They assume the bovine manure is competence, just look at their MP's.
    Doesn't that make you a Tory?
    Insecticide, you would love to be able top articulate your thoughts even partially as good as I do. Clue is to get educated and think before thumping your sausages off the keyboard.
    The Buckie's getting a hold
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,494



    Here's the thing: both parties are dominated by the urban middle-classes at the moment, and I sense the Tories tacking (slowly) in that direction too. That leads them to think that they need to be much more progressive on pet peeves of those groups - like feminism, diversity, inoffensive speech and gender equality.

    But the Tories real problem is being seen as a friend of vested interests, and the wealthy. The closure of the steelworks at Redcar is a good example: rather than just saying "pah, it's the free market", why not strontly emphathise with the tragedy of it and set a minister on as task to do everything possible to bring new private investment and good jobs to the area?

    It's not just policy - and I'm not for a second suggesting subsidy - but this was the problem in the 80s. There's a motives and values argument the Tories need to win if they are to ever break out of the sub-40% box, and that starts with empathy, mood music and being seen to care and take action.

    Thoughtful post, and a reason why Osborne may not be their best bet - fairly or not, his demeanor encourages the view that things are pretty great and hence if you have a problem it's probably not the Government's concern. May is, curiously, better, not because she's more liberal (she isn't) but because she looks more serious and less smug.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,872
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    I agree with David Herdson that Corbyn's toxicity (to the majority of voters) probably ensures a win for the Conservatives in 2020, regardless.

    The Conservatives will obviously suffer from mid-term unpopularity, as almost all governments do. They could be polling in the low 30s or high 20s. But, I imagine that most of those disillusioned voters will go over to UKIP, not Labour, as they did in the period 2013-15.

    Here's the thing: both parties are dominated by the urban middle-classes at the moment, and I sense the Tories tacking (slowly) in that direction too. That leads them to think that they need to be much more progressive on pet peeves of those groups - like feminism, diversity, inoffensive speech and gender equality.

    But the Tories real problem is being seen as a friend of vested interests, and the wealthy. The closure of the steelworks at Redcar is a good example: rather than just saying "pah, it's the free market", why not strontly emphathise with the tragedy of it and set a minister on as task to do everything possible to bring new private investment and good jobs to the area?

    It's not just policy - and I'm not for a second suggesting subsidy - but this was the problem in the 80s. There's a motives and values argument the Tories need to win if they are to ever break out of the sub-40% box, and that starts with empathy, mood music and being seen to care and take action.
    Adopting such pet peeves can even reinforce the view that one is the friend of vested interests.
    Yes, these are the sorts of things successful and/or ambitious professional people will be constantly whispering into the ears of Cameron and Osborne at their donor parties, and more casually at social events, in London.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    She is very similar in manner to Abbott. I notice that since Camilla launched into her libelling - Yentob has all of sudden become respectful to the panel and a lot more contrite.

    Batmans delivery and mannerisms remind me of Abbott

    I'm not convinced they're different people, Batman looks like Abbott in fancy dress

  • malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    Tories are always easily fooled by big gobbed egoistic self seeking individuals like this. They assume the bovine manure is competence, just look at their MP's.
    Doesn't that make you a Tory?
    Insecticide, you would love to be able top articulate your thoughts even partially as good as I do. Clue is to get educated and think before thumping your sausages off the keyboard.
    Malcolm must be younger than I am. I was educated in Scotland and was taught grammar.
    It all went downhill after I left:-)

    (I was also taught to be polite: )
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    Two senior staff signed NDAs on leaving - that smacks of something not right straight away.

    Williamz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If I ws a 14 yr old kid in Hackney or wherever Kids Company operated from, I'd be down Kids Company every week. So far as I can tell they were just giving away free cash ! Who wouldn't take it.

    which is exactly what their own financial controller accused them of a month or so ago. I think she was based in west country and couldn't believe they just handed out £20 notes to anyone who turned up.
    NDAs, in a charity. What law firm drafted them?
    Not binding in a legal or parliamentary inquiry I'd have thought, though? (Advice from lawyers appreciated here).
    A court order or other legally binding requirement would override an NDA, even if the NDA does not contain an explicit provision to this effect.

  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,767
    Press Association ‏@PA 2 mins2 minutes ago

    Sun journalists Chris Pharo and Jamie Pyatt cleared in 'cash-for-stories' probe http://bit.ly/1G7l5RE

    Another great day for Tom Watson...
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    currystar said:

    I am somewhat surprised at the negatvity towards the economy, with people thinking that a recession will occur next year. Infaltion is zero, record employment, very low oil price, very high confidence, restaurants booming, government spending falling. You could see the last recession 4 years before it happened. I just dont see one happening next year.

    I'm not sure that people are positive there will be a recession. But there are some very large systemic issues out there (emerging market debt, China's various inflexion points in re workforce, deleveraging and so on) that potentially dwarf our local good news.

    For reference, the UK economy is c. $3 trillion out of a global $78 trillion (so around 4%).
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,239
    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    ....Now, I hope David Cameron's conference speech focus on social reform is real, but it looks like their only actual plan is to devolve the mess above to higher profile scapegoat mayors in the (often Labour) cities. Effectively their plan for cuts is simply that which is already starting to bear fruit in the Tory advance in Wales. That the effects of cuts could actually be used to strengthen the Tory position is one referenced by Don Brind quoting Jim McMahon in his most recent thread and, even in my advocating that the Labour centre take up the devolution challenge with relish, I noted that it could not be more a trap if it had Acme written on it.

    There seem to be several strands to GO's general strategy. I particularly like the one which seeks, where possible, to place the burden of raising money on those who spend the money. I think this has legs in many places and is already causing some twitching in the SNP and some local councils.
    I didn't think English councils were asking for FFA? Is the plan then to re-cast or dump funding formulae totally? I note in slight contradiction to my previous line on this thread that plenty of Tory areas are lining up for devolution (e.g. Cheshire, non-metro Surrey/Sussex), but such a fundamental re-org is a chance to look again at funding.

    The basic problem with hypothecation is that it is [total rubbish]. All that 'we will raise xxx from mansion tax to fund yyy ridiculously specific thing' leaves me totally cold. Getting the sources of tax to exactly match the destinations of tax is so brain dead, either as a straw man for additional spending or for cuts, that I can't fathom the popularity it has.
    At the risk of showing my ignorance, what does "apothecation" mean. I cannot find a definition. Whatever it means, your post is apropos FA. My point is it's a political strategy attempting to instil some fiscal responsibility on those unlikely otherwise to show any.
    Corrected - was obviously thinking of something else.
    It would probably not generally be called hypothecation in this context, but you do seem to be advocating or pointing out a much more total hypothecation of local tax to local spending than has previously been the case. But by re-casting your point as new governance structures driving new funding formulas (or even abolition of funding formulas), I am pointing out the inevitable that this will create winners and losers and that will as always make things deeply party political, and that could be real nature of Osborne's 'devolution of cuts' trap that I mentioned upstream. Time will tell.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,169

    Batman now alleging conspiracy from civil servants in Cabinet Office to smear charity - she's sounding like a fantasist.

    Dan Thompson ‏@artistsmakers
    Camila now makes allegations against Civil Servants - than says 'I don't like to make accusations without evidence'. #kidscompany

    Richard Blandford ‏@rblandford
    Yentob desperately trying to stop CB from saying something very libellous. #kidscompany

    Okay. Finally gives up trying to avoid it, and tunes in to "Car Crash Live TV"
    http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/5e1ce27a-7279-4ba3-9f3f-ed9998fbae7e
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    malcolmg said:


    Insecticide, you would love to be able top articulate your thoughts even partially as good as I do. Clue is to get educated and think before thumping your sausages off the keyboard.

    Malcolm must be younger than I am. I was educated in Scotland and was taught grammar.
    It all went downhill after I left:-)

    (I was also taught to be polite: )
    Unless you are over 55 or under 30, then it is pretty much impossible that you were taught grammar at a school in Scotland (or England or Wales for that matter).
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @Coral: Boris Johnson now 10/1 for Sports Personality of the Year #SPOTY http://t.co/JVI95ERjdL
  • James Kelly on the Corbyn effect in Scotland ...

    Devastatingly for Labour, it appears that 21% of their rump vote from May does not plan to remain loyal to the party next May. Intriguingly, the lost support appears to be moving disproportionately towards the Tories - 11% of Labour voters say they will vote Tory next year, and only 4% say they will vote SNP. This lends weight to the theory that if Labour are slipping further, Corbyn could be to blame - "moderate" unionist voters may be deserting Labour for a more natural home, and left-wing voters are failing to offset that effect by "coming home" from the SNP. In absolute terms, the number of SNP voters that have switched to Labour since the general election looks almost identical to the number of Labour voters who have moved in the opposite direction.

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/crucial-yougov-poll-suggests-corbyn-and.html

    It's not a huge surprise, is it?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Sandpit said:

    Any charity law experts here care to ponder the hypothetical question of whether a millionaire charity trustee could be held personally financially responsible for the abuse of charitable donations?

    I'm not a charity law expert but the short answer is yes
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Callum Tyler ‏@cal_tyler

    "Abusive limericks." #kidscompany gets more and more surreal. Like an episode of the Thick of It.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,162
    For US bets. Interesting article on Biden and the various deadlines he now faces. Even possible he could place his name on ballots but not actually be official declaring as a candidate.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/10/how-late-can-joe-biden-enter-the-race.html
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    If I actually paid the license fee then it would be worth every penny just for the Batman Yentob show...brilliant..
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598
    MikeK said:

    http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/centralising-illiberal-catastrophic-the-snps-one-party-state/

    How the SNP, National Socialists in all but name and demeanour, are clamping tight a one party state.

    Centralising, illiberal, catastrophic: the SNP’s one-party state
    For years, the Scottish government has used the independence argument to avoid proper scrutiny. That has to stop

    I'll do you the respect of presuming you post that ironically, but this may be of interest - as might the fact that the SNP's lead over every other party has grown over the last few years.

    http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/our-one-party-state.html

    Back to topic: many thanks again to Antifrank for another interesting piece. One difference re indyref 2 - the other elements he adduces will also play a part (not least because much of this was promised to the Scots if they left).
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,162

    James Kelly on the Corbyn effect in Scotland ...

    Devastatingly for Labour, it appears that 21% of their rump vote from May does not plan to remain loyal to the party next May. Intriguingly, the lost support appears to be moving disproportionately towards the Tories - 11% of Labour voters say they will vote Tory next year, and only 4% say they will vote SNP. This lends weight to the theory that if Labour are slipping further, Corbyn could be to blame - "moderate" unionist voters may be deserting Labour for a more natural home, and left-wing voters are failing to offset that effect by "coming home" from the SNP. In absolute terms, the number of SNP voters that have switched to Labour since the general election looks almost identical to the number of Labour voters who have moved in the opposite direction.

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/crucial-yougov-poll-suggests-corbyn-and.html

    It's not a huge surprise, is it?

    Time for Cons to rebrand a little and emphasise the 'Unionist' bit?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    It truly is a rare occasion when many people will find themselves rooting for a Select Committee against a 'charity' representative. I can scarcely believe such odiousness was allowed to go unchecked for far too long.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    We turned them down for funding several times.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    James Kelly on the Corbyn effect in Scotland ...

    Devastatingly for Labour, it appears that 21% of their rump vote from May does not plan to remain loyal to the party next May. Intriguingly, the lost support appears to be moving disproportionately towards the Tories - 11% of Labour voters say they will vote Tory next year, and only 4% say they will vote SNP. This lends weight to the theory that if Labour are slipping further, Corbyn could be to blame - "moderate" unionist voters may be deserting Labour for a more natural home, and left-wing voters are failing to offset that effect by "coming home" from the SNP. In absolute terms, the number of SNP voters that have switched to Labour since the general election looks almost identical to the number of Labour voters who have moved in the opposite direction.

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/crucial-yougov-poll-suggests-corbyn-and.html

    It's not a huge surprise, is it?

    Poor HYUFD his last straw is being clutched away from him.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,068

    James Kelly on the Corbyn effect in Scotland ...

    Devastatingly for Labour, it appears that 21% of their rump vote from May does not plan to remain loyal to the party next May. Intriguingly, the lost support appears to be moving disproportionately towards the Tories - 11% of Labour voters say they will vote Tory next year, and only 4% say they will vote SNP. This lends weight to the theory that if Labour are slipping further, Corbyn could be to blame - "moderate" unionist voters may be deserting Labour for a more natural home, and left-wing voters are failing to offset that effect by "coming home" from the SNP. In absolute terms, the number of SNP voters that have switched to Labour since the general election looks almost identical to the number of Labour voters who have moved in the opposite direction.

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/crucial-yougov-poll-suggests-corbyn-and.html

    It's not a huge surprise, is it?

    There might come a point at which Unionist voters in places like Eastwood, or Edinburgh would find that Labour had moved so far to the Left, that the Conservatives would be a better Unionist alternative.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,872



    Here's the thing: both parties are dominated by the urban middle-classes at the moment, and I sense the Tories tacking (slowly) in that direction too. That leads them to think that they need to be much more progressive on pet peeves of those groups - like feminism, diversity, inoffensive speech and gender equality.

    But the Tories real problem is being seen as a friend of vested interests, and the wealthy. The closure of the steelworks at Redcar is a good example: rather than just saying "pah, it's the free market", why not strontly emphathise with the tragedy of it and set a minister on as task to do everything possible to bring new private investment and good jobs to the area?

    It's not just policy - and I'm not for a second suggesting subsidy - but this was the problem in the 80s. There's a motives and values argument the Tories need to win if they are to ever break out of the sub-40% box, and that starts with empathy, mood music and being seen to care and take action.

    Thoughtful post, and a reason why Osborne may not be their best bet - fairly or not, his demeanor encourages the view that things are pretty great and hence if you have a problem it's probably not the Government's concern. May is, curiously, better, not because she's more liberal (she isn't) but because she looks more serious and less smug.
    Thanks Nick. Yes, I agree - I'm starting to back May, and going off Osborne.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,162
    Dair said:

    malcolmg said:


    Insecticide, you would love to be able top articulate your thoughts even partially as good as I do. Clue is to get educated and think before thumping your sausages off the keyboard.

    Malcolm must be younger than I am. I was educated in Scotland and was taught grammar.
    It all went downhill after I left:-)

    (I was also taught to be polite: )
    Unless you are over 55 or under 30, then it is pretty much impossible that you were taught grammar at a school in Scotland (or England or Wales for that matter).
    I'm 51 and there was little grammar taught at school other than a few absolute basics like apostrophe.

    This situation drove the French department mad, as they had to spend time educating us about the mechanics of grammar before trying to do the french bits e.g. past participles.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,162
    Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 12m12 minutes ago
    Kids Company select committee session is off the charts.

    Something has finally got him off Corbyn and the Labour meltdown!
  • other than a few absolute basics like apostrophe.

    Apostrophe's? You were lucky..
  • Sean_F said:

    James Kelly on the Corbyn effect in Scotland ...

    Devastatingly for Labour, it appears that 21% of their rump vote from May does not plan to remain loyal to the party next May. Intriguingly, the lost support appears to be moving disproportionately towards the Tories - 11% of Labour voters say they will vote Tory next year, and only 4% say they will vote SNP. This lends weight to the theory that if Labour are slipping further, Corbyn could be to blame - "moderate" unionist voters may be deserting Labour for a more natural home, and left-wing voters are failing to offset that effect by "coming home" from the SNP. In absolute terms, the number of SNP voters that have switched to Labour since the general election looks almost identical to the number of Labour voters who have moved in the opposite direction.

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/crucial-yougov-poll-suggests-corbyn-and.html

    It's not a huge surprise, is it?

    There might come a point at which Unionist voters in places like Eastwood, or Edinburgh would find that Labour had moved so far to the Left, that the Conservatives would be a better Unionist alternative.

    Corbyn has placed great store by his ability to turn Labour round in Scotland. If he actually takes Labour backwards there and London votes for Goldsmith in normal times the pressure on him would be impossible to resist. But these are not normal times. Corbyn has his mandate. And he is going to wave it. That it guarantees Tory governments is neither here nor there. 250,000 Labour members get to feel very good about themselves. That's all that matters.

  • New Thread New Thread

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Labour in Scotland do risk finding themselves in a sour spot: too unionist for those Scots for whom national identity is a core component of their voting choice and too leftwing for many unionist Scots who have previously stayed loyal to the red team.

    The solution, I would have thought, would be to become more pluralist on whether Scotland should become independent to the point of fostering a Labour independence movement. It is probably too late for this approach in this round of elections.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    It was really quite remarkable - and #1 trending all morning. Superb TV for all the wrong reasons.
    kle4 said:

    It truly is a rare occasion when many people will find themselves rooting for a Select Committee against a 'charity' representative. I can scarcely believe such odiousness was allowed to go unchecked for far too long.

  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    kle4 said:

    It truly is a rare occasion when many people will find themselves rooting for a Select Committee against a 'charity' representative. I can scarcely believe such odiousness was allowed to go unchecked for far too long.

    Why are you surprised? We are £1.5trillion in debt because for decades idiots have been chucking money around like confetti.

  • phil38phil38 Posts: 2
    I would say no on leaving EU as a smart bet
    , and scots will probably say no to another ref, I dont get these whole referendums leave it to the politicians who have studied the effects there whole lives and are professionals in the matter not the random population who really have no idea about politics in comparison.

  • Yes, these are the sorts of things successful and/or ambitious professional people will be constantly whispering into the ears of Cameron and Osborne at their donor parties, and more casually at social events, in London.

    They won't. They really won't, believe me.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576

    kle4 said:

    It truly is a rare occasion when many people will find themselves rooting for a Select Committee against a 'charity' representative. I can scarcely believe such odiousness was allowed to go unchecked for far too long.

    Why are you surprised? We are £1.5trillion in debt because for decades idiots have been chucking money around like confetti.

    Granted - I suppose I am surprised by the shamelessness of the KC reps, both of them, despite what seems irrefutable evidence of at the least incompetence.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    phil38 said:

    I would say no on leaving EU as a smart bet
    , and scots will probably say no to another ref, I dont get these whole referendums leave it to the politicians who have studied the effects there whole lives and are professionals in the matter not the random population who really have no idea about politics in comparison.

    Yes why trust idiots like the electorate when you have a handful of people who know what's best for the rest of us.

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Thiis show is so funny..this woman lives on Batshit planet..Yentob must be wishing he was a Palestinian peasant..
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    antifrank said:

    Pulpstar said:

    antifrank said:
    Crikey - has any other (Neccessary) public service been hit that hard ?

    That does look like an overdone level of cut. I'd have thought other stuff should take a hit before this.
    It's a curious intervention because my understanding is that the police budgets haven't yet been set for the coming years. The Chief Constable may be laying down a marker to make sure he gets what he wants.
    If there's a 52% reduction in workforce, that sounds like being hit a lot harder than other services.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited October 2015
    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/mr8k4ikbr3/TimesResults_October15_ScotlandVI,tax,parties_w.pdf

    Tories to finish second in Scotland looking like a reasonable punt?

    Ahead of Labour on ABC1 and among 60+

    Nearly first with what's left of 2015 Lib Dem vote as well.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    Never trust a subsample. So Im told.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    ....Now, I hope David Cameron's conference speech focus on social reform is real, but it looks like their only actual plan is to devolve the mess above to higher profile scapegoat mayors in the (often Labour) cities. Effectively their plan for cuts is simply that which is already starting to bear fruit in the Tory advance in Wales. That the effects of cuts could actually be used to strengthen the Tory position is one referenced by Don Brind quoting Jim McMahon in his most recent thread and, even in my advocating that the Labour centre take up the devolution challenge with relish, I noted that it could not be more a trap if it had Acme written on it.

    There seem to be several strands to GO's general strategy. I particularly like the one which seeks, where possible, to place the burden of raising money on those who spend the money. I think this has legs in many places and is already causing some twitching in the SNP and some local councils.
    I didn't think English councils were asking for FFA? Is the plan then to re-cast or dump funding formulae totally? I note in slight contradiction to my previous line on this thread that plenty of Tory areas are lining up for devolution (e.g. Cheshire, non-metro Surrey/Sussex), but such a fundamental re-org is a chance to look again at funding.

    The basic problem with apothecation is that it is [total rubbish]. All that 'we will raise xxx from mansion tax to fund yyy ridiculously specific thing' leaves me totally cold. Getting the sources of tax to exactly match the destinations of tax is so brain dead, either as a straw man for additional spending or for cuts, that I can't fathom the popularity it has.
    At the risk of showing my ignorance, what does "apothecation" mean. I cannot find a definition. Whatever it means, your post is apropos FA. My point is it's a political strategy attempting to instil some fiscal responsibility on those unlikely otherwise to show any.
    I assume he means hypothecation: allocating funding from a specific tax to a specific programme rather than mixing it all up in one big pot
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited October 2015
    .
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197
    Dair said:

    watford30 said:

    malcolmg said:

    watford30 said:

    malcolmg said:

    John_M said:

    watford30 said:

    Stop the Widow Batman-Twanky talking nonsense, and ask her where all the money was spunked away.

    If there was any justice, the Met Police would be waiting outside to arrest these people.

    I agree. Why she's not been charged with fraud escapes me. I don't know what Yentob is for, other than embodying all that's repulsive about the so-called metropolitan elite.
    Is Yentob as responsible as Batmanwhatsit for what seems to have been the fraudulent goings on? Without him and his ilk lending her their ear bending influence, she would have struggled for the influence she had to perpetrate her "idiosyncrasies". Shouty charities are to be abhorred.
    Turns out we mistook her loud clothes, and even louder voice, as charisma and competence.

    Shame, because back in the day I was convinced Kids Company was A Good Thing.

    Just goes to show that none of us ever knows what's really going on, until everyone knows.
    Tories are always easily fooled by big gobbed egoistic self seeking individuals like this. They assume the bovine manure is competence, just look at their MP's.
    Is that why the SNP lead Scottish Government handed cash to it's 'cronies' at T in the Park?
    You pathetic excuse for a human being , they gave money to a company that was holding a major music event. Dribble somewhere else please.
    It's all here Malky. Drool away.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/611267/Fiona-Hyslop-T-in-The-Park-promoters-paid-over-1M-for-party

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/park-boss-geoff-ellis-hits-6612763
    Hahahaha.

    It gets even more comical as the straws are grasped. The Ryder Cup event had nothing to do with the Referendum or the SNP. It was an event organised by VisitScotland a Quango which has successfully grown the Scottish Tourism Industry beyond all expectations.

    It is run by a man with no party affiliation who joined from a management role at Diageo.

    What the lunatic frothers on here are willing to swallow makes Sasha Grey movies look tame.
    It is a total fruitcake.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    A thoughtful article Mr (-)Frank.

    I wonder though if something else is going on under the bonnet. I was a big fan of folk music in the early eighties, but I got on board at a time when folk music was declining considerably in popularity. A lot of the clubs were closing down and there was a big debate about how to make the music more appealing. There were lots of good ideas, and some of them did get a few more bodies through the door. But the basic fact was the music was out of fashion and nobody wanted to listen to it anymore.

    At about the same time the Labour Party had similar problems. To the participants and the commentators it seemed that the internal bickering and poor presentation were the big turn off. Sort those out and things could only get better. But away from politics the plain fact was that the electorate was moving to the right. No amount of fancy suits and impressive videos could overcome that. In the end, the only way Labour could win an election was to ditch just about everything from their left wing past and even contrive to be seen to be fighting against it.

    But I get the distinct feeling that the pendulum is beginning to swing the other way. It could be that in 5 years time there will be nothing that the Tories can do. Public opinion might simply be moving away from their core beliefs and will latch onto Labour, now newly reconnected with its left wing history.

Sign In or Register to comment.