Do you see that being the Con vote rising to the Lab share or the Lab share falling to the Con share. The latter scenario is much more likely in my view - so a poll with Con 36 Lab 35 LD 15 and UKIP 7 might be the first one.
Baxter that and Lab are still the largest party though the combined Con-Lib total would overtake them making a continuation of the Coalition an option.
As I understand it, the LD policy on negotiation in the event of a Hung Parliament is still to give first refusal to the party with the largest number of votes.
I don't think it was ever even clear whether Clegg meant the most votes or the most seats. And in any case it turned out all it covered would be who he spoke to first. He'll still go with whoever offers the best deal.
You'd think the tricky bit for Lib-Con would be the Euro referendum, unless the Tories are prepared to offer PR in return.
As the Tories turn right to win back the UKIPers, they also make it harder for themselves to win over LD and Labour votes. But EdM is certainly a problem for Labour. It may all come down to turnout. We know all 2010 LDs voted last time; do we know how many of the high-tide UKIP identifiers did?
Ed Miliband better be praying it doesn't happen just in time for the Labour Conference, or it would end up setting the media narrative and diverting any political agenda he had planned.
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
If I was Clegg, I'd reject that outright. All the Lib Dems efforts should now be piled in to making sure the Tories don't win the next election.
As I understand it, the LD policy on negotiation in the event of a Hung Parliament is still to give first refusal to the party with the largest number of votes.
You'd think the tricky bit for Lib-Con would be the Euro referendum, unless the Tories are prepared to offer PR in return.
Why? a Euro-referendum was in the last lib dem manifesto..
Mr. Eagles, senators are too republican a title, and you have a strange concept of a dictator.
The Lord/Lady title should be kept. It won't be, of course, but it should be. As should cross-benchers and the present hereditaries. Only the appointed party-political members should be tossed overboard and replaced by elected ones.
These threads are great, but I sometimes wonder if the electorate is more 'floaty' as a whole than is thought - ie the number of 'would only ever vote labour/tory/lib dem' and the number of 'would never vote 'labour/tory/lib dem' is smaller than estimated
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
If I was Clegg, I'd reject that outright. All the Lib Dems efforts should now be piled in to making sure the Tories don't win the next election.
Anyone would think you don't like the Tories or something...
The Lib-Dems will of course keep their options open so that they have the chance of staying in government with BOTH Lab and Con next time.
The chances of the Tories winning a majority at the next election are incredibly low. But the chances of them staying in government in some form or other are probably a bit higher than most people currently think.
Mr. Eagles, senators are too republican a title, and you have a strange concept of a dictator.
The Lord/Lady title should be kept. It won't be, of course, but it should be. As should cross-benchers and the present hereditaries. Only the appointed party-political members should be tossed overboard and replaced by elected ones.
What can I say, I'm not a fan of The Divine Rights of Kings.
Lifetime appointments to the second chambers for donors is something you'd expect from Mugabe, not from the UK.
I know Dictators very well. I fear I need to give you some more lessons in classical history
As I understand it, the LD policy on negotiation in the event of a Hung Parliament is still to give first refusal to the party with the largest number of votes.
I don't think it was ever even clear whether Clegg meant the most votes or the most seats. And in any case it turned out all it covered would be who he spoke to first. He'll still go with whoever offers the best deal.
You'd think the tricky bit for Lib-Con would be the Euro referendum, unless the Tories are prepared to offer PR in return.
STV without a referendum, in return for a Euro referendum.
As I understand it, the LD policy on negotiation in the event of a Hung Parliament is still to give first refusal to the party with the largest number of votes.
I don't think it was ever even clear whether Clegg meant the most votes or the most seats. And in any case it turned out all it covered would be who he spoke to first. He'll still go with whoever offers the best deal.
You'd think the tricky bit for Lib-Con would be the Euro referendum, unless the Tories are prepared to offer PR in return.
STV without a referendum, in return for a Euro referendum.
Now that would be funny
Perhaps we should have a referendum conducted under AV to see what we should have a referendum on
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
If I was Clegg, I'd reject that outright. All the Lib Dems efforts should now be piled in to making sure the Tories don't win the next election.
Anyone would think you don't like the Tories or something...
The Lib-Dems will of course keep their options open so that they have the chance of staying in government with BOTH Lab and Con next time.
That's politics.
The Lib Dems certainly won't be in government if the Tories win the next election!
That said I think Cameron probably wouldn't mind another coalition if it was a small majority. He'd never get it past his party of course.
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
He'd really annoy activists of all parties who have been patiently selecting candidates and would need to start all over again. I wouldn't care myself as Broxtowe is more or less the same with or without changes, but it won't happen.
@stodge Much truth in what you are saying , however the number of 2010 LD voters who have moved to Labour is much less than 40-50% . The typical figure in the polls is 25 to 30% . Today's Populus for example has 24% . As large a number are currently telling pollsters they don't know how they will vote next time ( 26% in today's Populus ). As Nick Palmer has said in Broxtowe many of these not only did not vote Labour but they voted and re elected LD councillors in May . We also should treat Populus figures with care as they consistently are unable to get a representative sample . In this poll they had 203 UK IDers and should have had 20 Consequently they reduced the 250 respondents who said they would vote UKIP to just 110 .
As I'm quoted, I'd add that a very large proportion of those voters told us they'd be supporting Labour in the GE, but they simply liked their local LD councillor - "it's not his fault what Clegg gets up to" was the general theme. I met exactly one LD who said he'd vote Tory in the GE. The LD candidate from last time isn't standing again, and they're not going to even select one until sometime in 2014.
As I understand it, the LD policy on negotiation in the event of a Hung Parliament is still to give first refusal to the party with the largest number of votes.
You'd think the tricky bit for Lib-Con would be the Euro referendum, unless the Tories are prepared to offer PR in return.
Why? a Euro-referendum was in the last lib dem manifesto..
Only because it wasn't in anyone else's so they knew they wouldn't have to deiver it. Parties are always in favour of referendums when it's not in their power to actually make them happen. They don't really want one, especially now it looks like it could easily go "out", and even less after Cameron's "renegotiation", which will muddle the "in" message and make a win for "out" more likely.
It's still not a good thing to look like they're picking sides over, but nobody will be able to prove that's why they're picking sides.
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
If I was Clegg, I'd reject that outright. All the Lib Dems efforts should now be piled in to making sure the Tories don't win the next election.
Anyone would think you don't like the Tories or something...
The Lib-Dems will of course keep their options open so that they have the chance of staying in government with BOTH Lab and Con next time.
That's politics.
The Lib Dems certainly won't be in government if the Tories win the next election!
That said I think Cameron probably wouldn't mind another coalition if it was a small majority. He'd never get it past his party of course.
I have wondered if Cameron and Clegg might set up a Uk version of Kadima in those circumstances.
Do you see that being the Con vote rising to the Lab share or the Lab share falling to the Con share. The latter scenario is much more likely in my view - so a poll with Con 36 Lab 35 LD 15 and UKIP 7 might be the first one.
Baxter that and Lab are still the largest party though the combined Con-Lib total would overtake them making a continuation of the Coalition an option.
I expect there to be occasional polls showing the Tories ahead in 2014, but January 2015 is my bet on the point when it becomes clear.
I find it hard to conceive that the two party vote in 2015 will be significantly higher than 2010's 66.7%.
The twists and turns on how we arrive there will be fun though, although basically the Labour vote will drift down to sub 35%.
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
If I was Clegg, I'd reject that outright. All the Lib Dems efforts should now be piled in to making sure the Tories don't win the next election.
Anyone would think you don't like the Tories or something...
The Lib-Dems will of course keep their options open so that they have the chance of staying in government with BOTH Lab and Con next time.
That's politics.
The Lib Dems certainly won't be in government if the Tories win the next election!
No, but a Con majority if very, very unlikely. Con largest party with a continuation of the Coalition is much more likely. Lab largest party is also likely, IMO.
What's going to happen is:
Vince will carry on playing footsie with Labour.
David Laws will carry on playing footsie with the Tories.
Clegg will stay gloriously aloof from it all.
And come election night all options will be open to them and it will depend exactly how the seats stack up once again.
Exactly Plato. If its an emergency and time is of the essence, you phone an ambulance or go directly to A&E. What you shouldn't do is phone NHS Direct or 111 where you will spend at least 20/30 mins going going through the details on a tick box list before they can then process the urgency of your need to see an out of hours GP. A good well thought out hard hitting and high profile advertisement campaign really needs to spell this out clearly.
I've only used it once when I had a suspected stroke [but I didn't want to believe it] and it was clear from the questioning that it was a computerised flowchart - and that having a trained nurse reading out didn't add bugger all.
This was back in the early 2000s and I waited for about 30 mins at 8am for the call to be answered.
I think its a good idea in principle, but the demarcation point is too blurry. There's a fuss in the Mail today about how 111 is failing critically ill patients - well you shouldn't be ringing 111 if you're that ill. FFS.
In theory, NHS Direct seems a great idea. A phone line where you can get none emergency advice. Trouble is, every time I or anyone I know has used it, the answer is "Best pop along to your local A&E, just to be sure". It either wants a complete revamp, with trained professionals giving correct, relevant advice or shutting down, and the resources spent in improving A&E.
GIN - This all started from a discussion of whether the Lib Dems should trade boudary changes fo HoL reform. My answer is no. Boundary changes would certainly increase the chances of the Tories winning next time.
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
If I was Clegg, I'd reject that outright. All the Lib Dems efforts should now be piled in to making sure the Tories don't win the next election.
Anyone would think you don't like the Tories or something...
The Lib-Dems will of course keep their options open so that they have the chance of staying in government with BOTH Lab and Con next time.
That's politics.
Indeed and as a LD member, I'm quite comfortable with that. As it turned out in 2010, the party with the most votes also had the most seats and the numbers simply didn't stack up for a deal with Labour.
2015 may not be so easy. It's perfectly possible the Conservatives will win the most votes and Labour the most seats. IF a Con-Lib coalition had a majority in terms of seats (even if a very small one), it would, I suspect, be hugely tempting to keep the Coalition going.
I think if we did that there would be no way back with Labour at all. If the LDs walked away from Coalition with either party, it would lead to a Labour minority Government and the Party would be pilloried for weakness and cowardice.
This all presupposes either the Conservatives or Labour would seek a coalition or deal with us after this Parliament. Oddly enough, I suspect the best result for the LDs would either be an overall majority for one party or the other or a situation in which the largest party eschewed all deals and formed a minority administration.
As I understand it, the LD policy on negotiation in the event of a Hung Parliament is still to give first refusal to the party with the largest number of votes.
I don't think it was ever even clear whether Clegg meant the most votes or the most seats. And in any case it turned out all it covered would be who he spoke to first. He'll still go with whoever offers the best deal.
You'd think the tricky bit for Lib-Con would be the Euro referendum, unless the Tories are prepared to offer PR in return.
STV without a referendum, in return for a Euro referendum.
Now that would be funny
I should have said a referendum on PR. It may not actually be an impossible deal to make. If the Tories got their way on AV, and also Scottish independence, they might assume they'd win a referendum on PR as well. If the alternative was a Labour government and no EU referendum it would make sense for them to roll the dice.
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
He'd really annoy activists of all parties who have been patiently selecting candidates and would need to start all over again. I wouldn't care myself as Broxtowe is more or less the same with or without changes, but it won't happen.
@stodge Much truth in what you are saying , however the number of 2010 LD voters who have moved to Labour is much less than 40-50% . The typical figure in the polls is 25 to 30% . Today's Populus for example has 24% . As large a number are currently telling pollsters they don't know how they will vote next time ( 26% in today's Populus ). As Nick Palmer has said in Broxtowe many of these not only did not vote Labour but they voted and re elected LD councillors in May . We also should treat Populus figures with care as they consistently are unable to get a representative sample . In this poll they had 203 UK IDers and should have had 20 Consequently they reduced the 250 respondents who said they would vote UKIP to just 110 .
As I'm quoted, I'd add that a very large proportion of those voters told us they'd be supporting Labour in the GE, but they simply liked their local LD councillor - "it's not his fault what Clegg gets up to" was the general theme. I met exactly one LD who said he'd vote Tory in the GE. The LD candidate from last time isn't standing again, and they're not going to even select one until sometime in 2014.
I seem to recall you saying that many of these Lib Dems also voted for you in 2010
Labour may have got the substance of the past three years right economically ...
Even that faint praise is almost certainly wrong, Ben.
Almost all OECD countries had to embark on programmes of fiscal consolidation in response to the 2007-9 meltdown. The notable exception being the US which has only belatedly started on a deficit reduction plan.
The 'bankrupt' nations (Ireland, Iceland, Portugal, Greece, Cyprus) had programmes forced upon them by external multinational lenders of last resort and, as a result, have had to implement front loaded consolidation at levels of around 7% of GDP. This has involved massive cuts in public sector headcount and in nominal wages and consequent large contractions in GDP and asset price falls, particulary in property, of over 50% in some cases.
Countries with high levels of pressure from sovereign lenders (Italy, Spain, Belgium, Poland, Hungary etc.) have had to push through consolidation at faster rates than initially planned in order to avoid being priced out of borrowing.
Even though the UK had the highest levels of deficit and debt in Europe, the early announcement of realistic consolidation plans, together, of course, with the structural advantage of having its own currency and large economy, has enabled Osborne to retain the confidence of the financial markets and opt for an even paced and relatively low impact fiscal consolidation rate of around 1% of GDP per year.
This UK rate of consolidation (which Balls dismissed to as "too far, too fast") has turned out to be optimal when compared to other EU countries. The UK has avoided the shocks of a second recession in response to draconian consolidation measures and the economy is now growing at substantially higher rates than its EU competitors without having to abandon its gradual fiscal consolidation plans ("Plan A").
Very few OECD countries have been able to avoid fiscal consolidation (Norway being the stand out example) so the judgement calls came with the choice of start date and rate.
Osborne appears to have got both judgement calls right and that is the main reason why the UK is currently surfing the waves of recovery while, in contrast, France and Italy are sinking and even Germany is being pulled under by their floundering.
With the polling trends these past few months, Dave and The Tories should say to Nick, you can have your House of Lords reform in exchange for boundary changes.
We should forgive the Lib Dem perfidy on boundary changes.
Failure to do so would be the greatest strategic error since The Emperor allowed The Rebel Alliance to know the location of the Second Death Star.
If I was Clegg, I'd reject that outright. All the Lib Dems efforts should now be piled in to making sure the Tories don't win the next election.
Anyone would think you don't like the Tories or something...
The Lib-Dems will of course keep their options open so that they have the chance of staying in government with BOTH Lab and Con next time.
That's politics.
As it turned out in 2010, the party with the most votes also had the most seats and the numbers simply didn't stack up for a deal with Labour.
Indeed, something those that rant and rave (at CIF for example) about Lib-Dem "betrayal" conveniently forget.
In 2010 there was simply no other option in the table for the Lib-Dems (Con's could have gone minority>autumn election)
2015 will be more interesting, because I suspect both Con-Lib and Lab-Lib may be viable.
That's why the Lib-Dem's certainly won't be burning their bridges with any party between now and 2015.
"Lending to small and medium-sized British firms grew at its fastest pace on record in June, while mortgage approvals for house purchases fell, Bank of England data showed on Monday."
Bubble much ?
"Mortgage approvals numbered 57,667 in June, down from 58,071 in May, falling well short of analysts' forecasts in a Reuters poll for a reading of 59,500."
Wonga nation ?
"The BoE said on Monday that consumer credit rose by a net £489m in June, compared with an increase of £781m in May. That was the smallest rise since January."
"Lending to small and medium-sized British firms grew at its fastest pace on record in June, while mortgage approvals for house purchases fell, Bank of England data showed on Monday."
Bubble much ?
"Mortgage approvals numbered 57,667 in June, down from 58,071 in May, falling well short of analysts' forecasts in a Reuters poll for a reading of 59,500."
Wonga nation ?
"The BoE said on Monday that consumer credit rose by a net £489m in June, compared with an increase of £781m in May. That was the smallest rise since January."
The PB lefties will never learn, TGOHF. They always get it wrong.
Figures from the BoE and Hometrack (property tracking website) reveal that the rate of increase in mortgage approvals and average house price rises fell in July when compared to June and May.
This probably evidences the abating of the pent-up demand released as the snows of spring melted.
New buyer registrations were up 2.5% in May, 1.6% in June and 1.0% in July, although year on year rates of increase continued to climb with July showing an annual 1.3% rise over 0.8% in June.
The small fall in the monthly rate of house price inflation is a response to the similarly small fall in demand. With annual house price inflation still running at less than half the general rate of inflation (CPI), house prices are still falling in real terms and there appears to be little sign of any form of a house price bubble building.
Mortgage approvals, house sales volume and prices though are still rising in nominal terms and the housing market as a whole is reviving but the current figures show the continued need for government stimulus to ensure market liquidity and confidence.
George's skills in tantric timing are evident for all to see.
Since it is very likely that by 2021 we will have had substantial real wage increases even then they will still be more affordable than they were under the Brown bubble. I think Tim and others have given up on 2015 and are already getting their themes ready for the 2020 election. In fairness Labour may have found a leader by then although looking at the Shadow cabinet this is still very much in the "to do" pile.
"Lending to small and medium-sized British firms grew at its fastest pace on record in June, while mortgage approvals for house purchases fell, Bank of England data showed on Monday."
Bubble much ?
"Mortgage approvals numbered 57,667 in June, down from 58,071 in May, falling well short of analysts' forecasts in a Reuters poll for a reading of 59,500."
Wonga nation ?
"The BoE said on Monday that consumer credit rose by a net £489m in June, compared with an increase of £781m in May. That was the smallest rise since January."
The PB lefties will never learn, TGOHF. They always get it wrong.
Figures from the BoE and Hometrack (property tracking website) reveal that the rate of increase in mortgage approvals and average house price rises fell in July when compared to June and May.
This probably evidences the abating of the pent-up demand released as the snows of spring melted.
New buyer registrations were up 2.5% in May, 1.6% in June and 1.0% in July, although year on year rates of increase continued to climb with July showing an annual 1.3% rise over 0.8% in June.
The small fall in the monthly rate of house price inflation is a response to the similarly small fall in demand. With annual house price inflation still running at less than half the general rate of inflation (CPI), house prices are still falling in real terms and there appears to be little sign of any form of a house price bubble building.
Mortgage approvals, house sales volume and prices though are still rising in nominal terms and the housing market as a whole is reviving but the current figures show the continued need for government stimulus to ensure market liquidity and confidence.
George's skills in tantric timing are evident for all to see.
Since it is very likely that by 2021 we will have had substantial real wage increases even then they will still be more affordable than they were under the Brown bubble. I think Tim and others have given up on 2015 and are already getting their themes ready for the 2020 election. In fairness Labour may have found a leader by then although looking at the Shadow cabinet this is still very much in the "to do" pile.
You want to compare house prices to inflation in a period of falling real incomes? TGOHF made that basic error when this story first appeared.
@Tim You seriously think that real earnings will be falling until 2021? They won't be falling by 2014 and there will then be 7 years of real growth (assuming Ed is not elected of course) before 2021.
So house prices will continue to be more affordable in real terms. Admittedly only a complete idiot would want us to get back to where we were in 2007 but you voted for the party responsbile and seem inclined to do so again. Bizarre.
PCL house prices to rise by 6% (not 0%) this year – Knight Frank
July 29, 2013 Barely a week after Savills tore up its start-of-the-year predictions, adding 6.6% to the expected increase in property prices (read all about it here), Knight Frank has followed suit, revising up its prime central London house price forecasts for the year from 0% to 6%.
And that's before Osborne has started to throw taxpayer subsidised mortgages at non new build and remortgaging.
Up to £600k a pop.
Er, tim, I know you're far way from London, so your ignorance is perhaps excusable, but let me gently point out that the clients of Knight Frank [whatever happened to Rutley?] are hardly likely to be relying on any mortgage help, let alone first-time buyer help, from George.
PCL house prices to rise by 6% (not 0%) this year – Knight Frank
July 29, 2013 Barely a week after Savills tore up its start-of-the-year predictions, adding 6.6% to the expected increase in property prices (read all about it here), Knight Frank has followed suit, revising up its prime central London house price forecasts for the year from 0% to 6%.
Since it is very likely that by 2021 we will have had substantial real wage increases even then they will still be more affordable than they were under the Brown bubble. I think Tim and others have given up on 2015 and are already getting their themes ready for the 2020 election. In fairness Labour may have found a leader by then although looking at the Shadow cabinet this is still very much in the "to do" pile.
That is a very sound article David.
House prices in the UK have fallen by around 18% in real terms but only 3% in cash terms since their peak in the third quarter of 2007, new research shows.
They are starting to recover but are only likely to see 1% growth this year followed by 2% growth in 2014, according to an analysis from PriceWaterhouseCoopers.
By 2015 they are likely to be around 7% above the peak of 2007 in cash terms but still around 15% lower in real terms after adjustments for inflation.
I have quoted a key extract so tim can print it out and stick it to his keyboard as a disincentive to blowing false bubbles.
I suggest tim tapes it to his board's number pad as these keys appear to be least used in his posts.
Are you still posting from Florida while the family are not watching?
PCL house prices to rise by 6% (not 0%) this year – Knight Frank
July 29, 2013 Barely a week after Savills tore up its start-of-the-year predictions, adding 6.6% to the expected increase in property prices (read all about it here), Knight Frank has followed suit, revising up its prime central London house price forecasts for the year from 0% to 6%.
And that's before Osborne has started to throw taxpayer subsidised mortgages at non new build and remortgaging.
Up to £600k a pop.
Er, tim, I know you're far way from London, so your ignorance is perhaps excusable, but let me gently point out that the clients of Knight Frank [whatever happened to Rutley?] are hardly likely to be relying on any mortgage help, let alone first-time buyer help, from George.
tim already knows that take-up of Help To Buy was far lower in London than any other region. He still thinks the policy is focused on London and the South East though he has never been able to explain why.
My view is simple. The Tories could not win outright against a very unpopular Brown Government. Thus, it is exceedingly unlikely that the Tories will win in 3015. The Tories need to be 7% in front of Labour to gain an overall majority. Labour only needs a lead of 1% over the Tories to gain and overall majority. I think many on here are kidding themselves. If they lived in the real economy they would reflect on their optimism. The economy in 2015 will still be between 3% and 4% smaller than it was in 2008-9. The real world is that of zero hour contracts, few employment rights, severe financial curbs on the right to take an employer to court for breaking employment laws. The real world is the world of cuts in living standards. cuts in benefits for the disabled and being slandered by Cameron and Osborne as scroungers if you lose your job. Re-elect the Tories, you have to be bloody joking.
I'd say Broxtowe is the second most likely Labour gain at the next election after Norwich South. It's number 8 on the Labour target list but apart from Norwich South the others are slightly more difficult than the majority suggests due to various demographic changes.
I'd say Broxtowe is the second most likely Labour gain at the next election after Norwich South. It's number 8 on the Labour target list but apart from Norwich South the others are slightly more difficult than the majority suggests due to various demographic changes.
There now seems to have a core, of 10%ish (of the electorate), that will vote Lib Dem whatever.
If, as current polling suggests, a few % have drifted Labour full stop and the rest are tactically anti-Tory, then Labour will at least win most seats at the next election and the Lib Dems will outperform the national swing in terms of seats.
The latter group shows no sign of returning to LibDem or considering the Tories. So, yes, Tories thinking they have an excellent chance of staying in Government are being hugely optimistic.
The Tory / UKIP dynamic is something of a sideshow which will probably, at most, determine whether Labour have a majority or merely most seats.
Or, to put it more briefly, Labour get 35% plus (as seems highly likely) then Ed is PM, possibly with a majority depending on how things play out at the margins.
Since it is very likely that by 2021 we will have had substantial real wage increases even then they will still be more affordable than they were under the Brown bubble. I think Tim and others have given up on 2015 and are already getting their themes ready for the 2020 election. In fairness Labour may have found a leader by then although looking at the Shadow cabinet this is still very much in the "to do" pile.
That is a very sound article David.
Are you still posting from Florida while the family are not watching?
No we returned to civilisation yesterday. I may not be able to face another steak for a week or two...
The latest quotation from Tim of course only relates to house prices in central London which is like a different country with completely different sources of capital. Anyone suggesting that we were facing a property bubble in Scotland, or indeed in NW England is more likely to be referred directly to the psychiatric services than 111, however good it may be.
PCL house prices to rise by 6% (not 0%) this year – Knight Frank
July 29, 2013 Barely a week after Savills tore up its start-of-the-year predictions, adding 6.6% to the expected increase in property prices (read all about it here), Knight Frank has followed suit, revising up its prime central London house price forecasts for the year from 0% to 6%.
Re Broxtowe, in case I don't "speak" to you before Saturday, best of luck with the selection, like many PBers I hope you get selected.
Same here - even tho I suspect you have the best chance of retaking the seat! ;->
Thanks both! I'll post the result here, though I dare say that andrea will somehow know before I do :-)
Nick
I have been reluctant to wish you good luck on August 3rd.
On a personal level, I wouldn't want to see you winning the selection but losing the election.
On a partisan level, I wouldn't want to see you winning both.
But I'll set aside such a dilemma of logic and wish you luck however it may turn out.
I have no such qualms but for different reasons.
I wish Nick the very best in selection as Broxtowe is my first selection for the "JackW Dozen" - 12 seats to watch for the general election.
As for winning at the election. Now that is a wee bit more tricky. I hope for a continuation of the Coalition but Nick Palmer MP would add to the gaiety to the site.
Decisions, decisions are as they say the privilege of rank and as founder, CEO and general all round top dog of ARSE I'm opting for Nick Palmer MP .... although my ARSE presently has Broxtowe as Con HOLD.
Talking of the US a strange decision from the Iowa Supreme Court:
"A U.S. court has ruled that a dentist acted lawfully when he fired an assistant because he found her “irresistible” and was worried he might have an affair.
The Iowa Supreme Court upheld an earlier ruling that bosses can dismiss employees they see as a threat to their marriage, even if the employee has not engaged in any flirtatious or other inappropriate behaviour.
The all-male court said such sackings do not count as sex discrimination because they are motivated by feelings, not gender.
The ruling upholds a judge’s decision to dismiss a discrimination lawsuit filed against Fort Dodge dentist James Knight, who fired assistant Melissa Nelson for being too attractive, despite admitting she had been a stellar employee for 10 years.
Mr Knight and his wife believed that his attraction to Ms Nelson – who was 20 years younger than the dentist – had become a threat to their marriage. Nelson, now 33, was replaced by another woman."
Apparently this is because the decision was based on feelings rather than gender. I wonder if the concept of a venn diagram was familiar to them.
PoliticsHome @politicshome Dr Peter Carter of Royal College of Nursing says 111 has seen "ambulances being dispatched for a scratch by a cat" @BBCNews
Surely it would be better if the cat was dispatched, quickly.
But 111 saved £10 on the phone call if you ignore the cost of the ambulance.
When she was a little girl, my mum got scratched on her neck by a cat and a claw caught a blood vessel. It was a serious wound, and she still has a very long scar.
So you have fallen into someone else's anecdote trap.
I'd say Broxtowe is the second most likely Labour gain at the next election after Norwich South. It's number 8 on the Labour target list but apart from Norwich South the others are slightly more difficult than the majority suggests due to various demographic changes.
@JackW - Your dilemma can be resolved by arranging to have Nick McDonald selected in Broxtowe, and Nick P offered a nice safe Labour seat elsewhere.
Oh deary me no Nabbers.
Nick Palmer in a safe seat is most unsatisfactory. Just think of poor Nick sweating over the latest "JackW Dozen" prediction for Broxtowe and the ensuing redoubled efforts of "Peter the Punter" in the seat .... but is Broxtowe ready for another round of orgiastic general election feather boas ?!?
I warned a while ago that Labour's soft poll lead was leading them into a false sense of complacency as the only main Opposition in this Parliament. It certainly backed up their assumptions in the run up to the last GE that all they had to do was move across the floor of the HoC's, and then just shout evil Tories and traitorous Libdems from the sidelines as the Coalition took the unpopular decisions needed to clear up the mess they left. They spent the last three years jumping on every vested interest bandwagon and turning themselves into a protest group.
This mindset was never more clearly in evidence during the Labour Leadership contest where the party and its Union donors afforded themselves the luxury of petty tribal point scoring in place of honest debate about why it all went wrong in Office on vital issues such as the economy, welfare and immigration. Who could forget the excitement of young socialists getting all excited about being able to resurrect old tired slogans and insults of Tory scum while wearing Maggie Thatcher masks. You get a sense that this line of attack has now run out of steam and looks tired despite the best efforts of high profile voices like Owen Jones. I do wonder if this can be traced back to around the time that Mrs Thatcher died, and just as the Conservatives got their act together and launched their GE campaign bid early this year.
Ed Miliband still shows no urgency in rolling out cohesive and credible policies to counter the Government's reforms, and more importantly the economic record they are building. Even a shrinking polling lead hasn't seen them countenance the idea they won't automatically be the largest party at the very least, and despite some in the media starting to question this. Hence the tribal fault lines now starting to publicly appear in the Shadow Cabinet, as well as with the Labour party's relationship with the Unions with the next GE now is sight. Ed Miliband doesn't coming across as a strong party Leader, never mind as a credible future PM. And the Labour party doesn't look like an alternative Government in waiting, and that is their biggest problem.
Politics seems prone to see-sawing between comfort and despair. Just as Labour supporters were unduly pessimistic in the first year of Ed's leadership, they are now unduly complacent. The mood amongst Conservative supporters has swung in a mirror image of this.
Though I would like to put a special appeal out to Roger not to call the selection or GE itself for our Nick
Special appeal nothing .... at this very moment Nick Palmer is having "Roger" bound and gagged and placed in a secure unit in Ulan Bator - all UNITE expenses paid !!
Been dipping in and out over the last few days and note the debate raging (read fixated individual won't let it go) over the 111 system.
The fact of the matter is, it's a new system and will require bedding in before people really understand its purpose.
If we bear in mind that the 999 system has been in existence since 1937 "The service was launched in London on June 30, 1937, following the deaths of five women in a fire at the home of a surgeon in the city in November 1935." and we still suffer from a huge amount of abuse and misunderstanding of its purpose its not surprising that 111 is having issues this far into its existence.
Been dipping in and out over the last few days and note the debate raging (read fixated individual won't let it go) over the 111 system.
The fact of the matter is, it's a new system and will require bedding in before people really understand its purpose.
If we bear in mind that the 999 system has been in existence since 1937 "The service was launched in London on June 30, 1937, following the deaths of five women in a fire at the home of a surgeon in the city in November 1935." and we still suffer from a huge amount of abuse and misunderstanding of its purpose its not surprising that 111 is having issues this far into its existence.
'Another stunning scoop from Westminster’s finest political editor. Fresh from his “someone was mean to me on the internet” splash a few months back this journalist of unrivalled political acumen has revealed in the Observer that leaders of rival political parties are not welcome in the secure zones of their rival’s conferences. So Farage will not be allowed to speak at Tory conference, nor presumably will Ed Miliband. This narrative smashing revelation is surely worthy of some sort of prize? Lets all give Toby Helm a big round of applause…
PoliticsHome @politicshome Dr Peter Carter of Royal College of Nursing says 111 has seen "ambulances being dispatched for a scratch by a cat" @BBCNews
Surely it would be better if the cat was dispatched, quickly.
But 111 saved £10 on the phone call if you ignore the cost of the ambulance.
When she was a little girl, my mum got scratched on her neck by a cat and a claw caught a blood vessel. It was a serious wound, and she still has a very long scar.
So you have fallen into someone else's anecdote trap.
People who die from infected scratches a week after being scratched don't require an ambulance to take them to A&E within minutes of the scratch.
Only on PB. MODERATED Addendum: this man nearly died from a cat scratch
Addendum.No he didn't he nearly died from septicaemia.
Septicaemia caused by a cat scratch, hence scratch-related. Also read the Guardian link. The woman did not die of septicaemia, but of blood loss.
Diana Dick died on Saturday after her carer was unable to staunch a cut caused by the animal.
My point (and you should know this, as you have made similar points in the past) is that a quick, throw-away line such as that tweet can hide a deeper truth.
Still, it's good to see that you are an expert in when an ambulance should be called.
Ted Nugent's "Cat Scratch Fever" is an all time classic - surely even Democrats must enjoy his music...
What a peculiar conversation this is. Cat scratches and bites are very well known to be sources of nasty infections - my MiL almost lost a finger and my GP prescribed me antibiotics to keep in the cupboard so I could treat any injuries promptly.
In just a couple of hours an infection can track up your arm rather seriously if you're unlucky.
Who are all these people flagging things, I've got one called Man on a Pallet, and one called HB2
Is HB2 not a pencil? Or a relation of HD2 perhaps?
It is very unfortunate that we lost the "like" function and kept this troll and off topic nonsense. A lot of newspapers only have a recommend function which seems much better.
Ted Nugent's "Cat Scratch Fever" is an all time classic - surely even Democrats must enjoy his music...
What a peculiar conversation this is. Cat scratches and bites are very well known to be sources of nasty infections - my MiL almost lost a finger and my GP prescribed me antibiotics to keep in the cupboard so I could treat any injuries promptly.
In just a couple of hours an infection can track up your arm rather seriously if you're unlucky.
We both know that cat scratches can be serious in some rare cases, both immediately and in the longer term. You know that. The world knows that.
Tim does not.
I'm waiting for Labour's next manifesto. "The NHS will deal with any accident at A&E, except when it is a cat scratch. Then the patient can just FOAD."
In fact, that sounds a bit like the way Stafford treated a relative of mine after a head injury: "Go home, and if you're alive in the morning we'll deal with you." ...
The NHS should act more like high street retailers in supplying state-of-the-art products to customers for less money, according to the country's top doctor.
Ted Nugent's "Cat Scratch Fever" is an all time classic - surely even Democrats must enjoy his music...
What a peculiar conversation this is. Cat scratches and bites are very well known to be sources of nasty infections - my MiL almost lost a finger and my GP prescribed me antibiotics to keep in the cupboard so I could treat any injuries promptly.
In just a couple of hours an infection can track up your arm rather seriously if you're unlucky.
Plato - I'm sure they are - but that doesn't detract from the genius of Ted Nugent.
Ted Nugent's "Cat Scratch Fever" is an all time classic - surely even Democrats must enjoy his music...
What a peculiar conversation this is. Cat scratches and bites are very well known to be sources of nasty infections - my MiL almost lost a finger and my GP prescribed me antibiotics to keep in the cupboard so I could treat any injuries promptly.
In just a couple of hours an infection can track up your arm rather seriously if you're unlucky.
We both know that cat scratches can be serious in some rare cases, both immediately and in the longer term. You know that. The world knows that.
Tim does not.
I'm waiting for Labour's next manifesto. "The NHS will deal with any accident at A&E, except when it is a cat scratch. Then the patient can just FOAD."
In fact, that sounds a bit like the way Stafford treated a relative of mine after a head injury: "Go home, and if you're alive in the morning we'll deal with you." ...
I follow some of the twitter accounts of Stafford relatives and the stuff they've endured is heart-breaking. The two nurses that have just been struck off are the tip of the iceberg if their experiences are anything to go by.
Just start viewing the Euro's and the Scottish Indy Referendum next year as being the first two Leadership debates, and with the GE campaign being the final decisive one which will decide who will form the next Government. And suddenly that view of Labour's 'solid' position looks very complacent indeed.
Does Ed Miliband and the Labour party look like they are even yet focusing on next years battles, never mind the GE? What if Labour tank in the Euro's like they did last time despite now being the main Opposition? Labour are as much at risk from UKIP seepage in the Euro's as the Conservatives. Cameron hasn't shied away from getting involved in the Indy Referendum debate, and the Conservatives have also turned their guns on UKIP in the run up to the Euro's.
Where is Ed Miliband positioned himself in that Indy Referendum campaign? Right now he seems decidedly distance and totally disconnected from the whole fray, despite individual Labour figures involvement. The SNP are in power at Holyrood, and with a Tory/Libdem Coalition at Westminster you can expect that positioning to shape the up coming battle in the campaign. Ed Miliband is left sitting on the sidelines as an impotent bystander even more as a result. Cameron by virtue of being the PM who passionately fought to keep the UK together will certainly get a bounce if the No vote wins, where is the bounce going to come from for Ed Miliband?
The only pressing issue that Ed Miliband has booked into his diary next year is an internal Labour party debate on their relationship with their Union donors after he picked a fight with UNITE. You certainly don't get any sense yet that the ground work has been laid and prepared for a bumper manifesto full of promising policies ready for a busy 22 month schedule of elections. Something tells me that the window of opportunity for Ed Miliband to try to flog a new Labour party buzzing with ideas has now closed. And that he now will struggle to get the level of individual media attention needed to sell himself and his party between now and the GE.
It's easy to see how the Tories get back voters who were supporting them before the omni-shambles, and UKIP always looked like it would get squeezed, but that's not enough: They need some new support, or for Labour to lose either Gordon Brown voters or lefty LibDems. Those two look pretty solid, so where is the extra Con support going to come from?
Ted Nugent's "Cat Scratch Fever" is an all time classic - surely even Democrats must enjoy his music...
What a peculiar conversation this is. Cat scratches and bites are very well known to be sources of nasty infections - my MiL almost lost a finger and my GP prescribed me antibiotics to keep in the cupboard so I could treat any injuries promptly.
In just a couple of hours an infection can track up your arm rather seriously if you're unlucky.
Plato - I'm sure they are - but that doesn't detract from the genius of Ted Nugent.
FFS PBTories Jessop, Plato and others, listen to yourselves!
You're arguing that ambulances are needed for cat scratches. More to the point, you're arguing about cat scratches!
Talk about getting sucked into the wormhole of blind partisanship. A point isn't necessarily invalidated just because it's made by Tim, you know.
(similarly, I'm sure the cat scratch example isn't a sign of 111's systemic failure, any more than the daft "couldn't make it up" stories you read in the Mail, Sun etc are a sign of the systemic failure of policies towards immigration, welfare etc)
I'm becoming quite a fan of Pope Francis. It's a novelty to have a religious leader who seems more interested in caring for people than telling them what to do.
This is the sort of campaign from Unite that I would hope could obtain cross party support. Apparently 90% of Sports Direct staff are on zero hours contracts. They have written to Ashley.
"We hope Mike Ashley will sit down with Unite to discuss how the treatment of workers at Sports Direct can be improved, after all they have made the business such a success. Unite is seriously concerned that a culture of low pay and poor treatment has embedded itself in at Sport Direct. Workers are coming to us to report mistreatment so we have begun to compile a dossier to present to senior management cataloguing these concerns.
The union was recently shocked to discover allegations that staff at its East Midlands warehouse are often expected to queue for up to 45 minutes to be searched, one-by-one, by the company's security staff as they leave the premises at the end of a long shift. Sports Direct is a major UK company, but success must be shared including, the basic right of workers to be treated with dignity." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/business-news-markets-live/10208216/Business-news-and-markets-live.html
It is certainly the sort of story that those who question whether unions have a purpose in the modern world need to reflect on. I have no doubt that when they mind their own knitting of looking after the weaker and vulnerable in employment they serve an essential service.
Frankly, I would think rather better of Ed Miliband if he got behind this as well. It might even give some meaning to his rather flakey "predator" nonsense. These contracts are an abuse of a dominant position and need to be stopped.
Comments
Baxter that and Lab are still the largest party though the combined Con-Lib total would overtake them making a continuation of the Coalition an option.
You'd think the tricky bit for Lib-Con would be the Euro referendum, unless the Tories are prepared to offer PR in return.
Is a stepping stone for my plan for a directly elected Dictator.
The Lord/Lady title should be kept. It won't be, of course, but it should be. As should cross-benchers and the present hereditaries. Only the appointed party-political members should be tossed overboard and replaced by elected ones.
The Lib-Dems will of course keep their options open so that they have the chance of staying in government with BOTH Lab and Con next time.
That's politics.
Lifetime appointments to the second chambers for donors is something you'd expect from Mugabe, not from the UK.
I know Dictators very well. I fear I need to give you some more lessons in classical history
Now that would be funny
That said I think Cameron probably wouldn't mind another coalition if it was a small majority. He'd never get it past his party of course.
It's still not a good thing to look like they're picking sides over, but nobody will be able to prove that's why they're picking sides.
I find it hard to conceive that the two party vote in 2015 will be significantly higher than 2010's 66.7%.
The twists and turns on how we arrive there will be fun though, although basically the Labour vote will drift down to sub 35%.
Re Broxtowe, in case I don't "speak" to you before Saturday, best of luck with the selection, like many PBers I hope you get selected.
What's going to happen is:
Vince will carry on playing footsie with Labour.
David Laws will carry on playing footsie with the Tories.
Clegg will stay gloriously aloof from it all.
And come election night all options will be open to them and it will depend exactly how the seats stack up once again.
2015 may not be so easy. It's perfectly possible the Conservatives will win the most votes and Labour the most seats. IF a Con-Lib coalition had a majority in terms of seats (even if a very small one), it would, I suspect, be hugely tempting to keep the Coalition going.
I think if we did that there would be no way back with Labour at all. If the LDs walked away from Coalition with either party, it would lead to a Labour minority Government and the Party would be pilloried for weakness and cowardice.
This all presupposes either the Conservatives or Labour would seek a coalition or deal with us after this Parliament. Oddly enough, I suspect the best result for the LDs would either be an overall majority for one party or the other or a situation in which the largest party eschewed all deals and formed a minority administration.
I want them to have the powers of Dictator, but with a popular mandate.
They could just suspend the law on elections.
Almost all OECD countries had to embark on programmes of fiscal consolidation in response to the 2007-9 meltdown. The notable exception being the US which has only belatedly started on a deficit reduction plan.
The 'bankrupt' nations (Ireland, Iceland, Portugal, Greece, Cyprus) had programmes forced upon them by external multinational lenders of last resort and, as a result, have had to implement front loaded consolidation at levels of around 7% of GDP. This has involved massive cuts in public sector headcount and in nominal wages and consequent large contractions in GDP and asset price falls, particulary in property, of over 50% in some cases.
Countries with high levels of pressure from sovereign lenders (Italy, Spain, Belgium, Poland, Hungary etc.) have had to push through consolidation at faster rates than initially planned in order to avoid being priced out of borrowing.
Even though the UK had the highest levels of deficit and debt in Europe, the early announcement of realistic consolidation plans, together, of course, with the structural advantage of having its own currency and large economy, has enabled Osborne to retain the confidence of the financial markets and opt for an even paced and relatively low impact fiscal consolidation rate of around 1% of GDP per year.
This UK rate of consolidation (which Balls dismissed to as "too far, too fast") has turned out to be optimal when compared to other EU countries. The UK has avoided the shocks of a second recession in response to draconian consolidation measures and the economy is now growing at substantially higher rates than its EU competitors without having to abandon its gradual fiscal consolidation plans ("Plan A").
Very few OECD countries have been able to avoid fiscal consolidation (Norway being the stand out example) so the judgement calls came with the choice of start date and rate.
Osborne appears to have got both judgement calls right and that is the main reason why the UK is currently surfing the waves of recovery while, in contrast, France and Italy are sinking and even Germany is being pulled under by their floundering.
In 2010 there was simply no other option in the table for the Lib-Dems (Con's could have gone minority>autumn election)
2015 will be more interesting, because I suspect both Con-Lib and Lab-Lib may be viable.
That's why the Lib-Dem's certainly won't be burning their bridges with any party between now and 2015.
Gaius Julius Caesar.
A lot of urban myths about - pity about the data.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10208672/Lending-to-small-business-grows-at-fastest-pace-on-record.html
Credit not available ?
"Lending to small and medium-sized British firms grew at its fastest pace on record in June, while mortgage approvals for house purchases fell, Bank of England data showed on Monday."
Bubble much ?
"Mortgage approvals numbered 57,667 in June, down from 58,071 in May, falling well short of analysts' forecasts in a Reuters poll for a reading of 59,500."
Wonga nation ?
"The BoE said on Monday that consumer credit rose by a net £489m in June, compared with an increase of £781m in May. That was the smallest rise since January."
Since it is very likely that by 2021 we will have had substantial real wage increases even then they will still be more affordable than they were under the Brown bubble. I think Tim and others have given up on 2015 and are already getting their themes ready for the 2020 election. In fairness Labour may have found a leader by then although looking at the Shadow cabinet this is still very much in the "to do" pile.
"Do you know how many squirrels I've seen today ?
"Nein nein nein ! "
You seriously think that real earnings will be falling until 2021? They won't be falling by 2014 and there will then be 7 years of real growth (assuming Ed is not elected of course) before 2021.
So house prices will continue to be more affordable in real terms. Admittedly only a complete idiot would want us to get back to where we were in 2007 but you voted for the party responsbile and seem inclined to do so again. Bizarre.
[Sorry, NickP - nothing personal, you understand, but all in the greater good etc..]
House prices in the UK have fallen by around 18% in real terms but only 3% in cash terms since their peak in the third quarter of 2007, new research shows.
They are starting to recover but are only likely to see 1% growth this year followed by 2% growth in 2014, according to an analysis from PriceWaterhouseCoopers.
By 2015 they are likely to be around 7% above the peak of 2007 in cash terms but still around 15% lower in real terms after adjustments for inflation.
I have quoted a key extract so tim can print it out and stick it to his keyboard as a disincentive to blowing false bubbles.
I suggest tim tapes it to his board's number pad as these keys appear to be least used in his posts.
Are you still posting from Florida while the family are not watching?
I have been reluctant to wish you good luck on August 3rd.
On a personal level, I wouldn't want to see you winning the selection but losing the election.
On a partisan level, I wouldn't want to see you winning both.
But I'll set aside such a dilemma of logic and wish you luck however it may turn out.
Show us a leg, Hortence.
Con .. 296 .. 290 .. 296
Lab .. 274 .. 280 .. 270
LibDem .. 42 .. 40 .. 40
SNP .. 11 .. 13 .. 12
PC .. 3 .. 3 .. 3
Ukip .. 2 .. 2 .. 3
NI .. All 18
Respect .. Green .. Ind .. Speaker .. All 1
There now seems to have a core, of 10%ish (of the electorate), that will vote Lib Dem whatever.
If, as current polling suggests, a few % have drifted Labour full stop and the rest are tactically anti-Tory, then Labour will at least win most seats at the next election and the Lib Dems will outperform the national swing in terms of seats.
The latter group shows no sign of returning to LibDem or considering the Tories. So, yes, Tories thinking they have an excellent chance of staying in Government are being hugely optimistic.
The Tory / UKIP dynamic is something of a sideshow which will probably, at most, determine whether Labour have a majority or merely most seats.
The latest quotation from Tim of course only relates to house prices in central London which is like a different country with completely different sources of capital. Anyone suggesting that we were facing a property bubble in Scotland, or indeed in NW England is more likely to be referred directly to the psychiatric services than 111, however good it may be.
Mr Rutley retired to a bungalow in Worthing. His former partners, Messrs. Knight and Frank promptly disowned him.
It is a lesson for us all.
http://www.broxtowelabour.com/
I wish Nick the very best in selection as Broxtowe is my first selection for the "JackW Dozen" - 12 seats to watch for the general election.
As for winning at the election. Now that is a wee bit more tricky. I hope for a continuation of the Coalition but Nick Palmer MP would add to the gaiety to the site.
Decisions, decisions are as they say the privilege of rank and as founder, CEO and general all round top dog of ARSE I'm opting for Nick Palmer MP .... although my ARSE presently has Broxtowe as Con HOLD.
"A U.S. court has ruled that a dentist acted lawfully when he fired an assistant because he found her “irresistible” and was worried he might have an affair.
The Iowa Supreme Court upheld an earlier ruling that bosses can dismiss employees they see as a threat to their marriage, even if the employee has not engaged in any flirtatious or other inappropriate behaviour.
The all-male court said such sackings do not count as sex discrimination because they are motivated by feelings, not gender.
The ruling upholds a judge’s decision to dismiss a discrimination lawsuit filed against Fort Dodge dentist James Knight, who fired assistant Melissa Nelson for being too attractive, despite admitting she had been a stellar employee for 10 years.
Mr Knight and his wife believed that his attraction to Ms Nelson – who was 20 years younger than the dentist – had become a threat to their marriage. Nelson, now 33, was replaced by another woman."
Apparently this is because the decision was based on feelings rather than gender. I wonder if the concept of a venn diagram was familiar to them.
Surely the dilemma is best solved by putting a lot of money on our Nick to win and then everyone's incentives and interests will be aligned
So you have fallen into someone else's anecdote trap.
(Addendum: this man nearly died from a cat scratch: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2073284/It-just-small-scratch-cat--days-later-heart-stopped.html , as did this woman: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-21/national/36472890_1_cat-bites-cat-scratch-disease-small-cat Or someone who sadly did die: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/jul/30/schools.highereducation and another: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1518551/Man-died-after-scratch-from-cat.html )
Great paper the Observer...
Nick Palmer in a safe seat is most unsatisfactory. Just think of poor Nick sweating over the latest "JackW Dozen" prediction for Broxtowe and the ensuing redoubled efforts of "Peter the Punter" in the seat .... but is Broxtowe ready for another round of orgiastic general election feather boas ?!?
But what I hadn't realized is that he was active in the UNITE Parliamentary Group when an MP.
So he's Len's man
This mindset was never more clearly in evidence during the Labour Leadership contest where the party and its Union donors afforded themselves the luxury of petty tribal point scoring in place of honest debate about why it all went wrong in Office on vital issues such as the economy, welfare and immigration. Who could forget the excitement of young socialists getting all excited about being able to resurrect old tired slogans and insults of Tory scum while wearing Maggie Thatcher masks. You get a sense that this line of attack has now run out of steam and looks tired despite the best efforts of high profile voices like Owen Jones. I do wonder if this can be traced back to around the time that Mrs Thatcher died, and just as the Conservatives got their act together and launched their GE campaign bid early this year.
Ed Miliband still shows no urgency in rolling out cohesive and credible policies to counter the Government's reforms, and more importantly the economic record they are building. Even a shrinking polling lead hasn't seen them countenance the idea they won't automatically be the largest party at the very least, and despite some in the media starting to question this. Hence the tribal fault lines now starting to publicly appear in the Shadow Cabinet, as well as with the Labour party's relationship with the Unions with the next GE now is sight. Ed Miliband doesn't coming across as a strong party Leader, never mind as a credible future PM. And the Labour party doesn't look like an alternative Government in waiting, and that is their biggest problem.
And very Green !!
Though I would like to put a special appeal out to Roger not to call the selection or GE itself for our Nick
A little padding and Nick could always improve on Jack W's ARSE.
The fact of the matter is, it's a new system and will require bedding in before people really understand its purpose.
If we bear in mind that the 999 system has been in existence since 1937 "The service was launched in London on June 30, 1937, following the deaths of five women in a fire at the home of a surgeon in the city in November 1935." and we still suffer from a huge amount of abuse and misunderstanding of its purpose its not surprising that 111 is having issues this far into its existence.
999 abuse
http://www.4networking.biz/Forum/ViewTopic/4646
Or, better still, move on to a new obsession, you appear to have worn this one out.
'Guido has got Rawnsley with a bow on - shame
Almost as good as Toby Helm,..
'Another stunning scoop from Westminster’s finest political editor. Fresh from his “someone was mean to me on the internet” splash a few months back this journalist of unrivalled political acumen has revealed in the Observer that leaders of rival political parties are not welcome in the secure zones of their rival’s conferences. So Farage will not be allowed to speak at Tory conference, nor presumably will Ed Miliband. This narrative smashing revelation is surely worthy of some sort of prize? Lets all give Toby Helm a big round of applause…
'Speaking of Broxtowe, have Soubry Hunt and Poulter all gone on holiday together? no Ministers visible for the 111 pile up.'
Does anyone take any notice of Andy's hysterics?
Still, it's good to see that you are an expert in when an ambulance should be called.
In just a couple of hours an infection can track up your arm rather seriously if you're unlucky.
Tories release 2009 impact assessment on 111 signed off by Labour Health Minister Mike O’Brien under Andy Burnham
It is very unfortunate that we lost the "like" function and kept this troll and off topic nonsense. A lot of newspapers only have a recommend function which seems much better.
What do voters think of the "go home" ad vans? We've asked them today, via @YouGov. Result is fascinating. Results later.
Tim does not.
I'm waiting for Labour's next manifesto. "The NHS will deal with any accident at A&E, except when it is a cat scratch. Then the patient can just FOAD."
In fact, that sounds a bit like the way Stafford treated a relative of mine after a head injury: "Go home, and if you're alive in the morning we'll deal with you." ...
'norman smith @BBCNormanS 2m
Tories release 2009 impact assessment on 111 signed off by Labour Health Minister Mike O’Brien under Andy Burnham'
Hilarious,every time there's an NHS car crash you just know its got Andy's fingerprints on it.
No wonder he's in hysterics mode trying to keep his job.
Comedy gold..
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/make-nhs-like-pc-world-says-top-doctor-8736038.html
Does Ed Miliband and the Labour party look like they are even yet focusing on next years battles, never mind the GE? What if Labour tank in the Euro's like they did last time despite now being the main Opposition? Labour are as much at risk from UKIP seepage in the Euro's as the Conservatives. Cameron hasn't shied away from getting involved in the Indy Referendum debate, and the Conservatives have also turned their guns on UKIP in the run up to the Euro's.
Where is Ed Miliband positioned himself in that Indy Referendum campaign? Right now he seems decidedly distance and totally disconnected from the whole fray, despite individual Labour figures involvement. The SNP are in power at Holyrood, and with a Tory/Libdem Coalition at Westminster you can expect that positioning to shape the up coming battle in the campaign. Ed Miliband is left sitting on the sidelines as an impotent bystander even more as a result. Cameron by virtue of being the PM who passionately fought to keep the UK together will certainly get a bounce if the No vote wins, where is the bounce going to come from for Ed Miliband?
The only pressing issue that Ed Miliband has booked into his diary next year is an internal Labour party debate on their relationship with their Union donors after he picked a fight with UNITE. You certainly don't get any sense yet that the ground work has been laid and prepared for a bumper manifesto full of promising policies ready for a busy 22 month schedule of elections. Something tells me that the window of opportunity for Ed Miliband to try to flog a new Labour party buzzing with ideas has now closed. And that he now will struggle to get the level of individual media attention needed to sell himself and his party between now and the GE.
You're arguing that ambulances are needed for cat scratches. More to the point, you're arguing about cat scratches!
Talk about getting sucked into the wormhole of blind partisanship. A point isn't necessarily invalidated just because it's made by Tim, you know.
(similarly, I'm sure the cat scratch example isn't a sign of 111's systemic failure, any more than the daft "couldn't make it up" stories you read in the Mail, Sun etc are a sign of the systemic failure of policies towards immigration, welfare etc)
"We hope Mike Ashley will sit down with Unite to discuss how the treatment of workers at Sports Direct can be improved, after all they have made the business such a success. Unite is seriously concerned that a culture of low pay and poor treatment has embedded itself in at Sport Direct. Workers are coming to us to report mistreatment so we have begun to compile a dossier to present to senior management cataloguing these concerns.
The union was recently shocked to discover allegations that staff at its East Midlands warehouse are often expected to queue for up to 45 minutes to be searched, one-by-one, by the company's security staff as they leave the premises at the end of a long shift. Sports Direct is a major UK company, but success must be shared including, the basic right of workers to be treated with dignity."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/business-news-markets-live/10208216/Business-news-and-markets-live.html
It is certainly the sort of story that those who question whether unions have a purpose in the modern world need to reflect on. I have no doubt that when they mind their own knitting of looking after the weaker and vulnerable in employment they serve an essential service.
Frankly, I would think rather better of Ed Miliband if he got behind this as well. It might even give some meaning to his rather flakey "predator" nonsense. These contracts are an abuse of a dominant position and need to be stopped.