politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What the parties should be looking for in Oldham

malcolmg said:

watford30 said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

JosiasJessop said:

Pulpstar said:

@JosiasJessop Not heard the interview, but isn't it the media's job to grill the Gov't on important matters such as this ?

It reminded me of the situation during the ?Egyptian? crisis a few years ago, when the coalition got it massively in the neck from the media for not getting our people out as fast as the Germans, when in fact the work was going on in the background.

So far they have done nothing , we will see if that changes or if they are as inept as they seem.

The British planes yesterday were turned back by the Egyptian authorities, these were regular passenger planes from scheduled and charter airlines. They ended up scattered at airports all over the Southern Med. I suggested yesterday that if the Egyptians continued this blocking then the UK mil will go in and they won't be asking nicely for permission in advance. I stand by that this morning.

I know you're not the UK government's biggest fan but they Dom have rather a good record at stuff like this.

To add, there are stories this morning that a UK charter flight dodged an Egyptian missile in the area of the crash a few weeks ago. The Egyptians admitted it was theirs from a training mission and apologised. This probably has some bearing on the recent action taken.

Egypt have just killed the remnants of their tourist industry stone dead.

I agree with you on most of it , the government record not so much. They can do it when it suits but it is only for pet projects that are in their interests, otherwise you are on your own.

It's hard to see why anyone should be complaining about HMG's actions so far. If people choose to take cheap holidays in unstable places, they should expect a little 'bother'. A few days waiting in an airport to fly back safely, whilst a diplomatic solution is bartered, is hardly the end of days.

Meanwhile Malky cracks open another tinny, and directs an evacuation from his soiled armchair.

Dear Dear what an odious creature

You really don't do self awareness do you?

isam said:

MyBurningEars said:

isam said:

blackburn63 said:

Just some thoughts about the ukip ground campaign.

It is very Nigel driven, most activists will go where he is, there is a hero worship factor that people outside the party fail to appreciate. At the GE people from all over the country descended on South Thanet, chaos ensued but it was the Farage factor, kippers want to be with him. Kippers will make the effort to support the big names, people on here have mentioned travelling to help Carswell, not sure Bickley has that pull.

Geographically Oldham is a long way from much of the core support.

John Bickley is decent man, runs a business, very grounded. I'm not sure he, or indeed many inside the party believes he can win.

Don't wish to sound negative, I'm trying to be realistic, if labour lose this they are finished as a party, just can't see it happening.

I was in Clacton last year on the day of the by election, and many of the party big wigs were too... When the Heywood and Middleton result came in, I couldn't help but wonder if more of them should have been up there... It seemed rather poor, and at the time I had the feeling that if this hadn't been the first seat UKIP were likely to win, resources would have been split more evenly... I had a sense of a mistake made/chance missed on the train home Friday morning

What was most important was winning the first seat, in the hopes that the floodgates might open after that. Also successfully protecting a defection was key to encouraging others. When UKIP had yet to win their first seat, there was a danger they could slide into irrelevance if their opinion polling headed south. With a seat, they become a more serious political party. So it's not clear to me this was such a poor choice of priorities, even though in retrospect getting a Northern seat off Labour would have opened up a whole bunch of promising opportunities.

Of course, but the point was that Clacton was in the bag anyway. I guess you could say Heywood was a write off on the same basis, but to get almost half the votes in two by elections on the same day, win one by 35% and lose the other by 2% indicates something not quite right, especially when all the resources were poured into the easy win

Were UKIP really in a position where they could say something was "in the bag"? They'd failed so many times before. Did they trust their own canvassing? (And could they afford to?) If Clacton hadn't come off they'd have been a busted flush. It would have been an existential-level disaster.

Philip_Thompson said:

another_richard said:

saddened said:

blackburn63 said:

Plato_Says said:

Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI

I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.

Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.

For example Surbiton's concern about manufacturing since 2010 but lack of interest in its decade long depression before that.

On the other hand there was no shortage of PB Tories who whined incessantly about the wellbeing of military personal up until May 2010 but lost all interest afterwards. You don't often read the phrase 'military covenant' these days on PB.

Because the military covenant is being respected far better than pre 2010 now. If it wasn't you'd hear it all the time by the many critics of the government here.

I am not sure that is the case. A more likely reason is that now we have stopped fighting there are far fewer stories emerging about the way service personnel are treated. I do not believe for one moment that our service men and women are treated any better under Cameron's governments than they were under Blair and Brown.

There is at least one regular poster on this site who has personal experience of how Osborne's first attack on service pay and conditions didn't match Cameron's pre-election posturing and there is actually an article in today's Telegraph on the latest set of cuts Osborne is seeking to impose.

Interesting article on an Oldham school attempting to promote integration, showing both progress and continuing hurdles - no visible axe to grind, just a thoughtful piece:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/nov/05/integrated-school-waterford-academy-oldham?CMP=ema-1133

Just this minute read that IAG are going to pay their first ever dividend! I remember being told by someone on here that it would be a good punt back in 2012. Don't remember who, but great advice nonetheless. Bought at 160p, now 590p and paying a 7p dividend. What's not to like!

MyBurningEars said:

isam said:

MyBurningEars said:

isam said:

blackburn63 said:

Just some thoughts about the ukip ground campaign.

Geographically Oldham is a long way from much of the core support.

John Bickley is decent man, runs a business, very grounded. I'm not sure he, or indeed many inside the party believes he can win.

Don't wish to sound negative, I'm trying to be realistic, if labour lose this they are finished as a party, just can't see it happening.

I was in Clacton last year on the day of the by election, and many of the party big wigs were too... When the Heywood and Middleton result came in, I couldn't help but wonder if more of them should have been up there... It seemed rather poor, and at the time I had the feeling that if this hadn't been the first seat UKIP were likely to win, resources would have been split more evenly... I had a sense of a mistake made/chance missed on the train home Friday morning

What was most important was winning the first seat, in the hopes that the floodgates might open after that. Also successfully protecting a defection was key to encouraging others. When UKIP had yet to win their first seat, there was a danger they could slide into irrelevance if their opinion polling headed south. With a seat, they become a more serious political party. So it's not clear to me this was such a poor choice of priorities, even though in retrospect getting a Northern seat off Labour would have opened up a whole bunch of promising opportunities.

Of course, but the point was that Clacton was in the bag anyway. I guess you could say Heywood was a write off on the same basis, but to get almost half the votes in two by elections on the same day, win one by 35% and lose the other by 2% indicates something not quite right, especially when all the resources were poured into the easy win

Were UKIP really in a position where they could say something was "in the bag"? They'd failed so many times before. Did they trust their own canvassing? (And could they afford to?) If Clacton hadn't come off they'd have been a busted flush. It would have been an existential-level disaster.

Yes in Clacton they were... the polls had them between 32-44% clear. I canvassed the least UKIP friendly part of town (Frinton) and even there UKIP were slightly ahead

There was probably no need for Farage, Suzanne Evans, Carswell, O'Flynn, & Reckless to all be there on polling day to ensure victory

MaxPB said:

Just this minute read that IAG are going to pay their first ever dividend! I remember being told by someone on here that it would be a good punt back in 2012. Don't remember who, but great advice nonetheless. Bought at 160p, now 590p and paying a 7p dividend. What's not to like!

Don't go spending that 7p all at once now!

watford30 said:

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

watford30 said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

JosiasJessop said:

Pulpstar said:

@JosiasJessop Not heard the interview, but isn't it the media's job to grill the Gov't on important matters such as this ?

It reminded me of the situation during the ?Egyptian? crisis a few years ago, when the coalition got it massively in the neck from the media for not getting our people out as fast as the Germans, when in fact the work was going on in the background.

So far they have done nothing , we will see if that changes or if they are as inept as they seem.

The British planes yesterday were turned back by the Egyptian authorities, these were regular passenger planes from scheduled and charter airlines. They ended up scattered at airports all over the Southern Med. I suggested yesterday that if the Egyptians continued this blocking then the UK mil will go in and they won't be asking nicely for permission in advance. I stand by that this morning.

I know you're not the UK government's biggest fan but they Dom have rather a good record at stuff like this.

To add, there are stories this morning that a UK charter flight dodged an Egyptian missile in the area of the crash a few weeks ago. The Egyptians admitted it was theirs from a training mission and apologised. This probably has some bearing on the recent action taken.

Egypt have just killed the remnants of their tourist industry stone dead.

I agree with you on most of it , the government record not so much. They can do it when it suits but it is only for pet projects that are in their interests, otherwise you are on your own.

It's hard to see why anyone should be complaining about HMG's actions so far. If people choose to take cheap holidays in unstable places, they should expect a little 'bother'. A few days waiting in an airport to fly back safely, whilst a diplomatic solution is bartered, is hardly the end of days.

Meanwhile Malky cracks open another tinny, and directs an evacuation from his soiled armchair.

Dear Dear what an odious creature

You really don't do self awareness do you?

Another cockroach appears

Now, now, MAlky, don't let your hangover get the better of you, you big jessie.

He had a big night knocking back a few bottles of home made Turnip Whine.

LOL, The Dumber and Dumber twins.

another_richard said:

Philip_Thompson said:

another_richard said:

Sean_F said:

I think too that until UKIP contested lots of elections, they didn't know where their strongest support was. Three years ago, we all assumed UKIP would do best in places like Devon, Cornwall, Surrey, Somerset, Hampshire, and that their support was mostly ex-Conservative. It turned out, that wasn't the case at all.

All ???

I remember saying on one of your old Friday articles that Labour was far more vulnerable in working class industrial areas than was believed and the issue driving that was immigration and the economic consequences of that immigration.

Likewise the rise of UKIP in wwc Eastern England has been based on their gain of people who had previously voted Labour.

The warning signs were there from about 2007 or 2008 when a lot of WWC voters went to the BNP. This was dismissed by mainstream people (including myself) but while the BNP was overall an unacceptable face of racism, UKIP transitioned from fruitcakes, nuts and loons to the acceptable face of WWC anger.

It should also be remembered that the Conservatives also made a big wwc breakthrough at that time.

At the 2008 local elections the Conservatives were ahead of Labour in Heywood & Middleton constituency. Also ahead in Stalybridge, Morley, Don Valley, Rother Valley, Worsley, Bassetlaw and a few other such places.

With the exception of Morley & Outwood where the Conservaties had an energetic local party and national publicity (because of Ed Balls) much of the support the Conservatives gained in those areas moved onto UKIP.

I think in some but not all areas that is true. It's worth remembering that between the last two elections the Conservatives have gained net 120 seats.

That won't just be from Middle Class voters.

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Morning all,

Not sure how this would work. Wouldn't Cameron have to go into such an election with another commitment to a referendum in order to keep backbenchers from outright mutiny?

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Not allowable under the fixed term Parliament act I think.

Meanwhile in US, looks like Carson has got into a spot of bother over his back-story. Is his star about to fade out?

I've just noticed the result of the No.1 Test side in the world

India 201 & 200
South Africa 184 & 109

Now that looks like a match to have seen.

Charles said:

isam said:

blackburn63 said:

Just some thoughts about the ukip ground campaign.

It is very Nigel driven, most activists will go where he is, there is a hero worship factor that people outside the party fail to appreciate. At the GE people from all over the country descended on South Thanet, chaos ensued but it was the Farage factor, kippers want to be with him. Kippers will make the effort to support the big names, people on here have mentioned travelling to help Carswell, not sure Bickley has that pull.

Geographically Oldham is a long way from much of the core support.

John Bickley is decent man, runs a business, very grounded. I'm not sure he, or indeed many inside the party believes he can win.

Don't wish to sound negative, I'm trying to be realistic, if labour lose this they are finished as a party, just can't see it happening.

I was in Clacton last year on the day of the by election, and many of the party big wigs were too... When the Heywood and Middleton result came in, I couldn't help but wonder if more of them should have been up there... It seemed rather poor, and at the time I had the feeling that if this hadn't been the first seat UKIP were likely to win, resources would have been split more evenly... I had a sense of a mistake made/chance missed on the train home Friday morning

Someone who is allowed to write threads might consider a counterfactual on that premise re Ed Miliband losing one of labours northern strongholds?

Maybe Donald Brind? He gets a lot of stick but he isn't the worst thread writer on here

The problem with Donald's posts is he doesn't make an argument (like @DavidHerdson) or offer insight/betting tips (like the sadly missed @HenryManson). Interesting threads are more important than the party preferences of the writer

He just writes screes of Labour propaganda. If I wanted to read that I'd buy the Mirror.

May be @rcs1000 could enlighten us: given that most visitors don't go below the line, is there any difference between the number of total visitors on a Friday vs. other days an how does that compare to historical trends?

I don't get this thing about not going below the line. Comments load automatically for me when I open the page so how does anyone know whether I read them or not?

kle4 said:

I've just noticed the result of the No.1 Test side in the world

India 201 & 200
South Africa 184 & 109

Now that looks like a match to have seen.

Some highlights:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBUTeNsOhe4

Good to see that Osborne is setting his sights on IR35 companies and the tax dodgers who fester within.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/06/crackdown-on-personal-service-companies-could-raise-400m-in-tax

NickPalmer said:

Interesting article on an Oldham school attempting to promote integration, showing both progress and continuing hurdles - no visible axe to grind, just a thoughtful piece:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/nov/05/integrated-school-waterford-academy-oldham?CMP=ema-1133

Interesting, but I'd pick up two flawed arguments:

Allport believed that prejudice flowed from ignorance: people made generalisations about an entire group because they lacked information about that group. Contact with members of the other group could correct mistaken perceptions, improve empathy and diminish prejudice

It can equally reinforce perceptions, either because they are objectively valid, or because people have a tendency to see what they're looking for - hence even if there isn't truly objective evidence to validate a perception then as long as there are enough individual cases, whatever contra-indicators there may be, the prejudice will be maintained.

And while contact can improve empathy, it may do so only on an individual basis if the conclusion people come to is 'decent but different'. It's interesting that the example chosen is of two 12 year-olds, not two 17-year olds. In my experience, muslim communities are reasonably tolerant of how children play but socialising becomes more restricted as children become young adults.

The implications [of Tajfel's experiment] are profoundly unsettling. It shows how easy it is to switch on discrimination: our belonging to social groups is fundamental to our social identity and we like to see “us” as better than “them”.

That final assertion is wrong (though typical of the Guardian mindset which feels duty bound to infer a value judgement from any expression of preference). It is surely deeply embedded in our natural instincts to look after and protect our own: our family, our friends, our community. Not only is this an ingrained emotional response that dates back probably before the human race even existed, it also exists for logical reasons: there is a mutuality in implicit support for members of groups and the mere act of preference reinforces this. A group that did not act in that way is not a group in any meaningful sense, merely a collection.

And therein lies the problem for any scheme like this. People can and obviously do belong to many groups, some of which are cross-cutting, but as long as cultural behaviours prevent socialising (or at least reduce it to a 'polite' rather than 'relaxed' level), then it will not significantly reduce the sense of differentness, quite simply because there is differentness.

SquareRoot said:

malcolmg said:

watford30 said:

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

watford30 said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

JosiasJessop said:

Pulpstar said:

@JosiasJessop Not heard the interview, but isn't it the media's job to grill the Gov't on important matters such as this ?

It reminded me of the situation during the ?Egyptian? crisis a few years ago, when the coalition got it massively in the neck from the media for not getting our people out as fast as the Germans, when in fact the work was going on in the background.

So far they have done nothing , we will see if that changes or if they are as inept as they seem.

To add, there are stories this morning that a UK charter flight dodged an Egyptian missile in the area of the crash a few weeks ago. The Egyptians admitted it was theirs from a training mission and apologised. This probably has some bearing on the recent action taken.

Egypt have just killed the remnants of their tourist industry stone dead.

I agree with you on most of it , the government record not so much. They can do it when it suits but it is only for pet projects that are in their interests, otherwise you are on your own.

It's hard to see why anyone should be complaining about HMG's actions so far. If people choose to take cheap holidays in unstable places, they should expect a little 'bother'. A few days waiting in an airport to fly back safely, whilst a diplomatic solution is bartered, is hardly the end of days.

Meanwhile Malky cracks open another tinny, and directs an evacuation from his soiled armchair.

Dear Dear what an odious creature

You really don't do self awareness do you?

Another cockroach appears

Now, now, MAlky, don't let your hangover get the better of you, you big jessie.

He had a big night knocking back a few bottles of home made Turnip Whine.

LOL, The Dumber and Dumber twins.

Been looking in the mirror Malc?

cue the dumbest of the dumb appearing , jog on loser

Richard_Tyndall said:

Charles said:

isam said:

blackburn63 said:

Just some thoughts about the ukip ground campaign.

It is very Nigel driven, most activists will go where he is, there is a hero worship factor that people outside the party fail to appreciate. At the GE people from all over the country descended on South Thanet, chaos ensued but it was the Farage factor, kippers want to be with him. Kippers will make the effort to support the big names, people on here have mentioned travelling to help Carswell, not sure Bickley has that pull.

Geographically Oldham is a long way from much of the core support.

John Bickley is decent man, runs a business, very grounded. I'm not sure he, or indeed many inside the party believes he can win.

Don't wish to sound negative, I'm trying to be realistic, if labour lose this they are finished as a party, just can't see it happening.

I was in Clacton last year on the day of the by election, and many of the party big wigs were too... When the Heywood and Middleton result came in, I couldn't help but wonder if more of them should have been up there... It seemed rather poor, and at the time I had the feeling that if this hadn't been the first seat UKIP were likely to win, resources would have been split more evenly... I had a sense of a mistake made/chance missed on the train home Friday morning

Someone who is allowed to write threads might consider a counterfactual on that premise re Ed Miliband losing one of labours northern strongholds?

Maybe Donald Brind? He gets a lot of stick but he isn't the worst thread writer on here

The problem with Donald's posts is he doesn't make an argument (like @DavidHerdson) or offer insight/betting tips (like the sadly missed @HenryManson). Interesting threads are more important than the party preferences of the writer

He just writes screes of Labour propaganda. If I wanted to read that I'd buy the Mirror.

May be @rcs1000 could enlighten us: given that most visitors don't go below the line, is there any difference between the number of total visitors on a Friday vs. other days an how does that compare to historical trends?

I don't get this thing about not going below the line. Comments load automatically for me when I open the page so how does anyone know whether I read them or not?

I'm guessing it's something to do with those who visit the top page, where only the thread leaders are visible, and those who go into the individual pages?

From The Times

Iain Duncan Smith will resign if the chancellor carries out a £2 billion raid on his welfare reform to soften the impact of tax credit cuts, friends of the work and pensions secretary have said

Richard_Tyndall said:

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Not allowable under the fixed term Parliament act I think.

It is allowable but it would be suicidal politics. Cameron could force it by resigning as PM, which would ensure that no-one else could form a government. In those circumstances, after two weeks, an election automatically follows. However, to renege on the referendum pledge and throw the country into an unnecessary election would not be well-received by voters, members of his own party or just about anyone else (though politicalbetting as a site might appreciate it!).

volcanopete said:

WH is offering 8.5% a Labour win in Oldham for a month or so's investment.Anyone with a lump sum to invest ought to consider say 2.5% of capital as the bank and stake is 2.5% of total.It certainly does not get the animal spirits going but it's a far better rate for your money than other similar investments such as Premium Bonds.
It's not what I call gambling so a definite no bet race in the win market but there maybe some potential in the size of majority market.
Labour hold.

A 25% return tax free for a one day investment on the Conservatives in Brigg & Goole was certainly a nice little earner in May.

Though even I was surprised that they won so easily.

How the 9 wards that comprise OW+R voted in the local elections this year. First percentage is Labour, second is UKIP:

Chadderton Central 45.33% 25.45%
Chadderton North 45.28% 20.14%
Chadderton South 43.08% 33.69%
Hollinwood 54.35% 26.36%
Royton North 45.52% 22.87%
Royton South 46.30% 23.33%
Coldhurst 78.15% 8.51%
Medlock Vale 54.91% 22.87%
Werneth 80.66% 4.21%

Yowser. Makes me wonder which wards nationally have the highest density for each Party.

AndyJS said:

How the 9 wards that comprise OW+R voted in the local elections this year. First percentage is Labour, second is UKIP:

Chadderton Central 45.33% 25.45%
Chadderton North 45.28% 20.14%
Chadderton South 43.08% 33.69%
Hollinwood 54.35% 26.36%
Royton North 45.52% 22.87%
Royton South 46.30% 23.33%
Coldhurst 78.15% 8.51%
Medlock Vale 54.91% 22.87%
Werneth 80.66% 4.21%

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Not allowable under the fixed term Parliament act I think.

It is allowable but it would be suicidal politics. Cameron could force it by resigning as PM, which would ensure that no-one else could form a government. In those circumstances, after two weeks, an election automatically follows. However, to renege on the referendum pledge and throw the country into an unnecessary election would not be well-received by voters, members of his own party or just about anyone else (though politicalbetting as a site might appreciate it!).

David, I have a suggestion for your next thread

Labour must make an electoral reform pact to win in 2020

Nat le Roux argues that a one-off electoral reform pact between Labour and some or all of the minor parties in 2020, with a common manifesto commitment to introduce a new voting system, would likely result in a broad-left coalition government. Otherwise Labour may spend a generation in opposition.

http://bit.ly/1Qaj2iT

Tempted to do it as a 'this is a completely bonkers idea'.

another_richard said:

And with yesturday's ONS data its time to update progress on the 'March of the Makers':

Manufacturing Output
2011q2 101.8
2015q3 101.0

Well Osborne didn't specify which direction the march would be.

Meanwhile the unheralded march of the debt funded imported tat consumers continues:

Retail Sails
2011q2 99.0
2015q3 111.4

Why 2011q2?

AndyJS said:

How the 9 wards that comprise OW+R voted in the local elections this year. First percentage is Labour, second is UKIP:

Chadderton Central 45.33% 25.45%
Chadderton North 45.28% 20.14%
Chadderton South 43.08% 33.69%
Hollinwood 54.35% 26.36%
Royton North 45.52% 22.87%
Royton South 46.30% 23.33%
Coldhurst 78.15% 8.51%
Medlock Vale 54.91% 22.87%
Werneth 80.66% 4.21%

Didn't Chadderton North and South vote Conservative in the 2008 local elections ?

RobD said:

malcolmg said:

richardDodd said:

Boys..leave MG alone..it is cruel..like prodding a caged rabid dog with a sharp stick..

Now we have every fruitcake and loony onboard, the dribbling Dodd , slavers away in support of his fellow trolls.

Has the bottom fallen out of the turnip market or something?

By the look of it there is a glut by the amount of damaged ones on here today

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Not allowable under the fixed term Parliament act I think.

It is allowable but it would be suicidal politics. Cameron could force it by resigning as PM, which would ensure that no-one else could form a government. In those circumstances, after two weeks, an election automatically follows. However, to renege on the referendum pledge and throw the country into an unnecessary election would not be well-received by voters, members of his own party or just about anyone else (though politicalbetting as a site might appreciate it!).

David, I have a suggestion for your next thread

Labour must make an electoral reform pact to win in 2020

Nat le Roux argues that a one-off electoral reform pact between Labour and some or all of the minor parties in 2020, with a common manifesto commitment to introduce a new voting system, would likely result in a broad-left coalition government. Otherwise Labour may spend a generation in opposition.

http://bit.ly/1Qaj2iT

Nat Le Roux was my boss at IG after Stuart Wheeler... left in 2009 ish to go back to Uni

AndyJS said:

another_richard said:

AndyJS said:

How the 9 wards that comprise OW+R voted in the local elections this year. First percentage is Labour, second is UKIP:

Chadderton Central 45.33% 25.45%
Chadderton North 45.28% 20.14%
Chadderton South 43.08% 33.69%
Hollinwood 54.35% 26.36%
Royton North 45.52% 22.87%
Royton South 46.30% 23.33%
Coldhurst 78.15% 8.51%
Medlock Vale 54.91% 22.87%
Werneth 80.66% 4.21%

Didn't Chadderton North and South vote Conservative in the 2008 local elections ?

Central and North according to this:

http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2008/42/

Thanks

I knew that they had gained two Chadderton wards from Labour that year but couldn't remember which ones.

The Conservatives made unlikely gains all over the country that year but their defeats in the Ealing-Haringay and Brent-Harrow GLA seats were a warning which way metroland was heading.

Amusing to see that the LibDems won 11 wards in Oldham in 2008.

Has a party ever fallen so far and so fast and so permanently ?

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Not allowable under the fixed term Parliament act I think.

It is allowable but it would be suicidal politics. Cameron could force it by resigning as PM, which would ensure that no-one else could form a government. In those circumstances, after two weeks, an election automatically follows. However, to renege on the referendum pledge and throw the country into an unnecessary election would not be well-received by voters, members of his own party or just about anyone else (though politicalbetting as a site might appreciate it!).

David, I have a suggestion for your next thread

Labour must make an electoral reform pact to win in 2020

Nat le Roux argues that a one-off electoral reform pact between Labour and some or all of the minor parties in 2020, with a common manifesto commitment to introduce a new voting system, would likely result in a broad-left coalition government. Otherwise Labour may spend a generation in opposition.

http://bit.ly/1Qaj2iT

Utter rubbish, Labour did quite well in the Blair years under FPTP when they had an electable leader, now it has a poor leader the system will punish it, trying to introduce electoral reform will not help it sneak through the back door, indeed on present polling a Tory-UKIP deal would be just as likely as a Labour-LD-SNP-Green one! When it gets a credible leader and credible policies then voters may start listening again

MikeSmithson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Charles said:

isam said:

blackburn63 said:

Just some thoughts about the ukip ground campaign.

It is very Nigel driven, most activists will go where he is, there is a hero worship
Geographically Oldham is a long way from much of the core support.

John Bickley is decent man, runs a business, very grounded. I'm not sure he, or indeed many inside the party believes he can win.

Don't wish to sound negative, I'm trying to be realistic, if labour lose this they are finished as a party, just can't see it happening.

I was in Clacton last year on the day of the by election, and many of the party big wigs were too... When the Heywood and Middleton result came in, I couldn't help but wonder if more of them should have been up there... It seemed rather poor, and at the time I had the feeling that if this hadn't been the first seat UKIP were likely to win, resources would have been split more evenly... I had a sense of a mistake made/chance missed on the train home Friday morning

Someone who is allowed to write threads might consider a counterfactual on that premise re Ed Miliband losing one of labours northern strongholds?

Maybe Donald Brind? He gets a lot of stick but he isn't the worst thread writer on here

The problem with Donald's posts is he doesn't make an argument (like @DavidHerdson) or offer insight/betting tips (like the sadly missed @HenryManson). Interesting threads are more important than the party preferences of the writer

He just writes screes of Labour propaganda. If I wanted to read that I'd buy the Mirror.

May be @rcs1000 could enlighten us: given that most visitors don't go below the line, is there any difference between the number of total visitors on a Friday vs. other days an how does that compare to historical trends?

I don't get this thing about not going below the line. Comments load automatically for me when I open the page so how does anyone know whether I read them or not?

Some people just read the thread headers by only visiting www.politicalbetting.com and going no further.

Most users just come to politicalbetting.com and don't click the comments links on posts. Our traffic metrics show both the former and the latter so we know precisely how many

Including, if rumours are to be believed, a certain resident of No 10 Downing Street, when he wants to check the latest polling

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Not allowable under the fixed term Parliament act I think.

It is allowable but it would be suicidal politics. Cameron could force it by resigning as PM, which would ensure that no-one else could form a government. In those circumstances, after two weeks, an election automatically follows. However, to renege on the referendum pledge and throw the country into an unnecessary election would not be well-received by voters, members of his own party or just about anyone else (though politicalbetting as a site might appreciate it!).

David, I have a suggestion for your next thread

Labour must make an electoral reform pact to win in 2020

Nat le Roux argues that a one-off electoral reform pact between Labour and some or all of the minor parties in 2020, with a common manifesto commitment to introduce a new voting system, would likely result in a broad-left coalition government. Otherwise Labour may spend a generation in opposition.

http://bit.ly/1Qaj2iT

Utter rubbish, Labour did quite well in the Blair years under FPTP when they had an electable leader, now it has a poor leader the system will punish it, trying to introduce electoral reform will not help it sneak through the back door, indeed on present polling a Tory-UKIP deal would be just as likely as a Labour-LD-SNP-Green one! When it gets a credible leader and credible policies then voters may start listening again

You may be right about the outcome, but I don't think a one-off electoral pact to stand for a government that's only act would be to change the electoral system can be considered "through the back door". It would very clear to voters what was on offer.

Never gonna happen.

rottenborough said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Not allowable under the fixed term Parliament act I think.

It is allowable but it would be suicidal politics. Cameron could force it by resigning as PM, which would ensure that no-one else could form a government. In those circumstances, after two weeks, an election automatically follows. However, to renege on the referendum pledge and throw the country into an unnecessary election would not be well-received by voters, members of his own party or just about anyone else (though politicalbetting as a site might appreciate it!).

David, I have a suggestion for your next thread

Labour must make an electoral reform pact to win in 2020

Nat le Roux argues that a one-off electoral reform pact between Labour and some or all of the minor parties in 2020, with a common manifesto commitment to introduce a new voting system, would likely result in a broad-left coalition government. Otherwise Labour may spend a generation in opposition.

http://bit.ly/1Qaj2iT

Utter rubbish, Labour did quite well in the Blair years under FPTP when they had an electable leader, now it has a poor leader the system will punish it, trying to introduce electoral reform will not help it sneak through the back door, indeed on present polling a Tory-UKIP deal would be just as likely as a Labour-LD-SNP-Green one! When it gets a credible leader and credible policies then voters may start listening again

You may be right about the outcome, but I don't think a one-off electoral pact to stand for a government that's only act would be to change the electoral system can be considered "through the back door". It would very clear to voters what was on offer.

Never gonna happen.

Yes but voters already made clear their views on electoral reform in the defeated 2011 AV referendum

another_richard said:

Philip_Thompson said:

I think in some but not all areas that is true. It's worth remembering that between the last two elections the Conservatives have gained net 120 seats.

That won't just be from Middle Class voters.

Certainly the gains that the Conservatives have had since 2005 have depended upon wwc votes in many areas.

But I think they could have done even better and particularly better in areas that UKIP has now made itself the main challenger to Labour in.

I don't think the Conservative leadership were aware of the potential they had in previously hostile areas. They were instead comitted to an urban middle class strategy which dismally failed. If the Conservatives had made half as much effort in the likes of Don Valley or Derbyshire NE as they did in Hammersmith and Tooting they would likely have had better results.

Considering they made nearly 100 gains and gained Downing Street in Cameron's first GE and became the first party in government to gain both vote share and seats (AFAIK) post-war in the second I don't think its fair to say it "dismally failed".

Yes they could have gained more than 120 seats potentially. But compared to staying in Opposition and gaining just 33 seats from a very low base in the "are you thinking what we're thinking?" GE neither election was a dismal failure.

Pundits pondering Carson:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/insiders-carson-cant-win-215566

The current polls do suggest that Rubio and Cruz are breaking out of the "others" pack into a joint 3rd place around 11%, with Trump and Carson trading the lead in the low 20s. The question is who benefits if one of the leaders fades. Polls also show Clinton doing markedly better against Trump than anyone else.

NickPalmer said:

Pundits pondering Carson:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/insiders-carson-cant-win-215566

The current polls do suggest that Rubio and Cruz are breaking out of the "others" pack into a joint 3rd place around 11%, with Trump and Carson trading the lead in the low 20s. The question is who benefits if one of the leaders fades. Polls also show Clinton doing markedly better against Trump than anyone else.

It's looking like Rubio to me.

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MikeK said:

Good morning all. A bit late in the day and still feeling rather tired after coming home from a family 60th wedding anniversary splash in TelAviv.

However once I was in TA I had a sort of vision - you know the one where a little lamp lights up - and thought about the EU referendum. Cameron can lose the referendum even with all the MSM and their tame hacks on his side, especially if the immigrant rate keeps flowing and the tide reaches British shores.

There would be one way to avoid defeat and that is to force a new GE on Britain immediately prior to any EuroRef vote. If Cameron was defeated by an out/no vote he would be a broken man politically anyway, so not much of a gamble for Cammo personally.

Anyway, just a thought.

Not allowable under the fixed term Parliament act I think.

It is allowable but it would be suicidal politics. Cameron could force it by resigning as PM, which would ensure that no-one else could form a government. In those circumstances, after two weeks, an election automatically follows. However, to renege on the referendum pledge and throw the country into an unnecessary election would not be well-received by voters, members of his own party or just about anyone else (though politicalbetting as a site might appreciate it!).

David, I have a suggestion for your next thread

Labour must make an electoral reform pact to win in 2020

Nat le Roux argues that a one-off electoral reform pact between Labour and some or all of the minor parties in 2020, with a common manifesto commitment to introduce a new voting system, would likely result in a broad-left coalition government. Otherwise Labour may spend a generation in opposition.

http://bit.ly/1Qaj2iT

Tempted to do it as a 'this is a completely bonkers idea'.

Two can play at that game. A Labour/SNP/Plaid/Green/Lib Dem pact loses about 30 seats to a Con/UKIP pact.

Chances of seeing them appear in court? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11981438/Anonymous-protesters-who-refused-to-reveal-identities-to-the-courts-set-free.html

Despite being charged with failing to provide their names, they were released on bail to attend a trial next year - even though the authorities do not know who they are.

Magistrate Paul Brooks told them: "You have all pleaded not guilty to the offences which you have been charged with.

"The trial will take place in March next year – between then and now you have been granted unconditional bail."

Philip_Thompson said:

another_richard said:

RobD said:

another_richard said:

And with yesturday's ONS data its time to update progress on the 'March of the Makers':

Manufacturing Output
2011q2 101.8
2015q3 101.0

Well Osborne didn't specify which direction the march would be.

Meanwhile the unheralded march of the debt funded imported tat consumers continues:

Retail Sails
2011q2 99.0
2015q3 111.4

Why 2011q2?

Osborne proclaimed the 'March of the Makers' in his 2011 Budget.

I would be curious to see a decades long graph for manufacturing. As far as I'm aware manufacturing has been decreasing rapidly for decades so to see just a 0.8% decline over 4.25 years implies less than 0.2% contraction per annum. That would mean a continuing export of some manufacturing and a march forward of others to buck the long-term trend.

But I suppose you wouldn't be happy unless we were producing "cheap tat" at <$1 per hour ourselves.</p>

Manufacturing output grew very smartly under Thatcher and Major (by 43% from 1979-97). It's contracted since 2000.

another_richard said:

Plato_Says said:

Incredible numbers there.

AndyJS said:

Labour took 92% in Halewood West in Knowsley, split between two candidates:

http://councillors.knowsley.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=163&RPID=2593465&StyleType=standard&StyleSize=none

And 89% in Stockbridge:

http://councillors.knowsley.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=176&RPID=2593474&StyleType=standard&StyleSize=none

Plato_Says said:

Yowser. Makes me wonder which wards nationally have the highest density for each Party.

AndyJS said:

How the 9 wards that comprise OW+R voted in the local elections this year. First percentage is Labour, second is UKIP:

Chadderton Central 45.33% 25.45%
Chadderton North 45.28% 20.14%
Chadderton South 43.08% 33.69%
Hollinwood 54.35% 26.36%
Royton North 45.52% 22.87%
Royton South 46.30% 23.33%
Coldhurst 78.15% 8.51%
Medlock Vale 54.91% 22.87%
Werneth 80.66% 4.21%

Labour in Knowlesy 2012:

Halewood West 88.2%
Kirkby Central 85.5%
Longview 93.8%
Page Moss 93.3%
St Bartholemws 88.3%
St Michaels 92.8%
Stockbridge 92.2%
Swanside 91.0%

And what has Knowsley received from this loyalty to Labour ?

George Howarth.

another_richard said:

Philip_Thompson said:

another_richard said:

saddened said:

blackburn63 said:

Plato_Says said:

Good, let's hope the rozzers get to the bottom of this.

Four-hour police quiz for chief of scandal-hit Kids Company over child abuse allegations as detectives pursue criminal inquiry into shamed charity

Camila Batmanghelidjh visited investigators in East London on Thursday
Scotland Yard is investigating reports of illegal activity involving children
Claims include counsellor taking ecstasy with teenage boys

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3307932/Four-hour-police-quiz-Kids-Company-s-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-child-abuse-allegations-detectives-pursue-criminal-inquiry-shamed-charity.html#ixzz3qmzg1KZI

I agree entirely but I can't see a govt that spunked £millions encouraging the police to get involved.

This is another example of Cameron's poor judgement.

Did the problems only start in 2010? It does seem to be year zero for lots of people.

For example Surbiton's concern about manufacturing since 2010 but lack of interest in its decade long depression before that.

On the other hand there was no shortage of PB Tories who whined incessantly about the wellbeing of military personal up until May 2010 but lost all interest afterwards. You don't often read the phrase 'military covenant' these days on PB.

Because the military covenant is being respected far better than pre 2010 now. If it wasn't you'd hear it all the time by the many critics of the government here.

Or the wellbeing of military personal were just a stick with which to beat Labour by people who didn't actually care about the wellbeing of military personal.

With the lack of criticism of this government's defence cuts and military accounting fiddles I know which I believe.


850 million being spent on Salisbury Plain for instance to house soldiers and families.
In total on this general issue some 1.8 billion being spent.
Unlike labour's fiddles, this defence budget and more importantly its commitments are affordable.

david_herdson said:

Le Roux has UKIP down within his coalition. Presumably because it doesn't work any other way.

I am in the middle of taking his suggestion apart and, Mike permitting, hope it'll go up later this afternoon.

In that case, I will leave the egregious le Roux's detailed defenestration in your capable hands.

If he went back to university, as @isam has said, then clearly it was EITHER a very bad university OR he failed his exams. Or, at the very least, he was not doing politics.

Philip_Thompson said:

another_richard said:

RobD said:

another_richard said:

And with yesturday's ONS data its time to update progress on the 'March of the Makers':

Manufacturing Output
2011q2 101.8
2015q3 101.0

Well Osborne didn't specify which direction the march would be.

Meanwhile the unheralded march of the debt funded imported tat consumers continues:

Retail Sails
2011q2 99.0
2015q3 111.4

Why 2011q2?

Osborne proclaimed the 'March of the Makers' in his 2011 Budget.

I would be curious to see a decades long graph for manufacturing. As far as I'm aware manufacturing has been decreasing rapidly for decades so to see just a 0.8% decline over 4.25 years implies less than 0.2% contraction per annum. That would mean a continuing export of some manufacturing and a march forward of others to buck the long-term trend.

But I suppose you wouldn't be happy unless we were producing "cheap tat" at <$1 per hour ourselves.</p>

Here you are:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=K22A&dataset=diop&table-id=A1

Selected years:

1950 47.0
1960 63.8
1970 85.5
1980 82.6
1990 99.8
2000 108.0
2010 99.3

Far from 'decreasing rapidly for decades' UK manufacturing output more than doubled between 1950 and 2000. This was despite the problems it faced in the 1970s and 1980s - strikes, oil shocks, increasing world competition etc. Since 2000 it has been in depression, not helped and often handicapped by the actions of governments.

What would make me happy would be less of the high energy costs and endless rules and regulations which have been so detrimental at the business for which I work.

another_richard said:

Philip_Thompson said:

another_richard said:

RobD said:

another_richard said:

And with yesturday's ONS data its time to update progress on the 'March of the Makers':

Manufacturing Output
2011q2 101.8
2015q3 101.0

Well Osborne didn't specify which direction the march would be.

Meanwhile the unheralded march of the debt funded imported tat consumers continues:

Retail Sails
2011q2 99.0
2015q3 111.4

Why 2011q2?

Osborne proclaimed the 'March of the Makers' in his 2011 Budget.

I would be curious to see a decades long graph for manufacturing. As far as I'm aware manufacturing has been decreasing rapidly for decades so to see just a 0.8% decline over 4.25 years implies less than 0.2% contraction per annum. That would mean a continuing export of some manufacturing and a march forward of others to buck the long-term trend.

But I suppose you wouldn't be happy unless we were producing "cheap tat" at <$1 per hour ourselves.</p>

Here you are:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=K22A&dataset=diop&table-id=A1

Selected years:

1950 47.0
1960 63.8
1970 85.5
1980 82.6
1990 99.8
2000 108.0
2010 99.3

Far from 'decreasing rapidly for decades' UK manufacturing output more than doubled between 1950 and 2000. This was despite the problems it faced in the 1970s and 1980s - strikes, oil shocks, increasing world competition etc. Since 2000 it has been in depression, not helped and often handicapped by the actions of governments.

What would make me happy would be less of the high energy costs and endless rules and regulations which have been so detrimental at the business for which I work.

Manufacturing includes oil which rose rapidly and then has been in decline.
In comparison with other sectors manufacturing is a smaller part of the economy, but in terms of total output manufacturing is at least as high as the 70's if not higher.
Also its likely that some aspects of what was called manufacturing, ie transport, have been contracted out and are classed as services.
It would be interesting to see the selected year 2008 figure.

flightpath01 said:

another_richard said:

Philip_Thompson said:

another_richard said:

RobD said:

another_richard said:

And with yesturday's ONS data its time to update progress on the 'March of the Makers':

Manufacturing Output
2011q2 101.8
2015q3 101.0

Well Osborne didn't specify which direction the march would be.

Meanwhile the unheralded march of the debt funded imported tat consumers continues:

Retail Sails
2011q2 99.0
2015q3 111.4

Why 2011q2?

Osborne proclaimed the 'March of the Makers' in his 2011 Budget.

I would be curious to see a decades long graph for manufacturing. As far as I'm aware manufacturing has been decreasing rapidly for decades so to see just a 0.8% decline over 4.25 years implies less than 0.2% contraction per annum. That would mean a continuing export of some manufacturing and a march forward of others to buck the long-term trend.

But I suppose you wouldn't be happy unless we were producing "cheap tat" at <$1 per hour ourselves.</p>

Here you are:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=K22A&dataset=diop&table-id=A1

Selected years:

1950 47.0
1960 63.8
1970 85.5
1980 82.6
1990 99.8
2000 108.0
2010 99.3

Far from 'decreasing rapidly for decades' UK manufacturing output more than doubled between 1950 and 2000. This was despite the problems it faced in the 1970s and 1980s - strikes, oil shocks, increasing world competition etc. Since 2000 it has been in depression, not helped and often handicapped by the actions of governments.

What would make me happy would be less of the high energy costs and endless rules and regulations which have been so detrimental at the business for which I work.

Manufacturing includes oil which rose rapidly and then has been in decline.
In comparison with other sectors manufacturing is a smaller part of the economy, but in terms of total output manufacturing is at least as high as the 70's if not higher.
Also its likely that some aspects of what was called manufacturing, ie transport, have been contracted out and are classed as services.
It would be interesting to see the selected year 2008 figure.

Manufacturing does NOT include oil or any other energy production.

The wider industiral output data includes oil, mining etc.

Data here:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=K222&dataset=diop&table-id=A1

This shows both a sharper rise and a sharper fall than manufacturing because of the effect of North Sea Oil:

1950 42.2
1960 56.3
1970 75.0
1980 83.2
1990 102.1
2000 116.1
2010 103.4