Funny, you seemed to think 99% people from Moss Side, Tunbridge Wells and Whitechapel see climate change in exactly the same way. I suppose, for reasons that escape me, that's different though.
PUNCTUATION!!!
:thumps-head-utter-despiration:
Has someone disabled the bold-font (within the Quote sections)...?
An SNP landslide in Scotland is the safest call of 2016. The second safest is that at no stage during 2016 will Labour have an opinion poll lead. The third is that Labour will be battered in the English elections. The fourth is that none of this will harm Jeremy Corbyn.
I think I agree with just about all of Alastair's predictions. A tighter referendum result though.
For what it's worth, here are my offerings...
Greens to gain seats at Holyrood. Kippers to win more seats than LibDems in Wales Durham to have the lowest turnout in the PCC elections. The Toon and the Mackems to both go down, Smoggies to go up. No Labour leadership challenge. No cabinet reshuffle.
My understanding is that if you do sufficiently well at constituency level, in any given region, you don't qualify for any top-up seats...Even with just 8% of the vote in 2011, the Lib Dems won 4 list seats. UKIP will do better than that, IMHO.
Not quite.
You get an overall number of seats theoretically proportionate to your vote. Therefore, if you do well in constituencies, it is less likely you will get a list seat - Nick Bourne lost his seat when the conservatives captured another proper constituency, for instance.
However, it is not just decided on list votes. If you lose a seat, your votes are added to the list votes and the proportions calculated from that. Therefore, a strong performance in the constituencies - including lots of good second places - is still very important.
Let's assume, for argument's sake, that the figures overall are Labour 35%, Conservatives 22%, Plaid 20%, UKIP 14%, Liberal Democrats 8%, others 1%. We'll ignore north and mid, because as I've said, UKIP will not win anything there. In the south, therefore, the problem is the number of second places Plaid will get in the Valleys and the Conservatives will get around Cardiff. These votes will transfer to their list candidates and all but guarantee them the seats they currently hold. Unless therefore UKIP depress the Plaid/Tory vote down to their own level or take sufficient votes from Labour to cost them constituency seats on an unimagined scale, they might take one seat in each region, but they're going to struggle to make a large scale breakthrough.
And of course, if Labour do lose a seat in the Valleys the way their list vote breaks more or less guarantees them a list seat to compensate. So UKIP face a fairly formidable hurdle to get representation.
Having said I won't make a prediction, I will make one about these elections. Yes, Labour will lose their narrow majority (of 1) in the Assembly. But they will still be in government, probably with Plaid Cymru. Because the way the votes spread and the way they are handed around it is very hard to see them getting less than 25 seats, the Conservatives getting more than 15 and less than 13 (higher end more likely) and Plaid anything other than 12-14 (lower end likely). That leaves the Liberal Democrats and UKIP fighting for the rest - in a best case scenario, about 10 seats, more likely 6-8. I will be astonished if the Liberal Democrats fail to take 3-4. Therefore, the likelihood is that UKIP will also get around 3-4 at best. And therefore, only a Plaid/Labour deal could command a majority.
Incidentally, I think this is an appalling electoral system and a damning indictment of Jenkins' stupidity, dogmatism and arrogance. But it's the one we're stuck with.
Hence the repeated Cons "well we have cut down non-EU immigration" becomes more powerful.
I'm not sure he is 100% correct (who is?!) but that would be the nub of the issue for many waverers. If they can be persuaded to adopt the mindset of "they don't want to change us/outlaw morris dancing/force us to worship Polish sausage" then that would be a strong boost for Remain.
Equally, if Angela Merke's 1m currently estimated non-EU immigrants become potential EU immigrants...then that would be Leave's best shot.
I know plenty of Eastern Europeans that have no intention of leaving the UK, why on earth would they. And the majority of them don't want to change society, so your friend is half right. What concerns people is the sheer volume of immigration of people from completely different cultures, Warsaw and Prague really aren't that different from our cities.
I'd guess your friend won't want to address that.
I think once you get onto the territory of no one wanting to change anything then people will be both reassured and insulated from the more extreme claims of extreme Leavers.
It's a bit like all those, ahem, polls, which ask how you feel about an issue in general (v fussed) vs how it affects you personally (not fussed at all).
If 20% of people on the tube carriage are foreign and stand up for the elderly woman, who really cares that they are Polish?
As for sheer volume, well the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux.
"the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux."
Hmm. The biggest peacetime flow of new people into Britian in Known History, already changing our culture, and you pass it off like that?
You can argue whether it is a good or a bad thing, but to try and gloss over it is not credible.
I was specifically not glossing it over...
It is a big influx but I don't see how our culture has changed. There are more people from the EU but does it affect me? OK perhaps I'm not a plumber or barista but the fact that there are a lot of EU immigrants in the UK doesn't affect me.
How has it affected you personally?
It hasn't affected me personally but wages have been compressed at the bottom, that can't be a good thing. Public services are stretched due to unprecedented population growth.
"Our culture" hasn't changed, you're correct, we still play the same sports, drink and fight too much, but a visit to Luton or Bradford will show that in some places the culture has changed enormously. Now you can argue whether that's good or bad but to say it hasn't changed is silly.
It is a big influx but I don't see how our culture has changed. There are more people from the EU but does it affect me? OK perhaps I'm not a plumber or barista but the fact that there are a lot of EU immigrants in the UK doesn't affect me.
How has it affected you personally?
I have personally only benefited from immigration, but I'm not selfish and am capable of seeing how it affects others.
The whole areas of non-integration, the high housing prices from increasing population, the undermining of certain workers incomes, etc.
I'm in favour of sensible immigration - but that isn't the case at the moment.
Had lunch with a fervent Remain person this weekend; he put it well, when quizzed on (what I had thought) the key issue of EU immigration.
His belief was that no one for a minute thinks that all the Poles, Romanians, etc actually want to settle here - they are just taking the opportunity of earning some money. They don't want to change our society but to integrate and work.
Hence the repeated Cons "well we have cut down non-EU immigration" becomes more powerful.
I'm not sure he is 100% correct (who is?!) but that would be the nub of the issue for many waverers. If they can be persuaded to adopt the mindset of "they don't want to change us/outlaw morris dancing/force us to worship Polish sausage" then that would be a strong boost for Remain.
Equally, if Angela Merke's 1m currently estimated non-EU immigrants become potential EU immigrants...then that would be Leave's best shot.
I know plenty of Eastern Europeans that have no intention of leaving the UK, why on earth would they. And the majority of them don't want to change society, so your friend is half right. What concerns people is the sheer volume of immigration of people from completely different cultures, Warsaw and Prague really aren't that different from our cities.
I'd guess your friend won't want to address that.
I think once you get onto the territory of no one wanting to change anything then people will be both reassured and insulated from the more extreme claims of extreme Leavers.
It's a bit like all those, ahem, polls, which ask how you feel about an issue in general (v fussed) vs how it affects you personally (not fussed at all).
If 20% of people on the tube carriage are foreign and stand up for the elderly woman, who really cares that they are Polish?
As for sheer volume, well the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux.
I'm really not sure of your point, I don't see or hear anybody complaining about Poles. And of course society is continually in a state of flux, plenty of people are concerned about the level of flux as well as the speed. To deny that is silly.
My point is that many many people are complaining of Poles. It's almost all that Nigel does. Poles form the rump of the Leavers' position. EU immigration, which we can't do anything about while we are in the EU.
It is what in all likelihood, and unless people suddenly take an interest in the nuances of MiFID II, will form the crux of the argument between Leave and Remain.
Mohammad Amir was very young when he fell from grace. He deserves a second chance.
International cricket really needs to clobber fixers if it is remain a credible sport. Fixing is utterly corrosive of the audience's enjoyment as they come to suspect any unusual result or turn of play is faked.
Seconded. Amir was a young man but still an adult. I don't usually call for an example to be made of people, but anything bar a life ban gives the wrong message to the youngsters growing up with the same pressures around them.
A diplomatic Home Office would give a polite nudge to the Pakistani embassy now, that Amir isn't welcome in the UK. Better than having the issue escalate nearer the time of the tour.
Had lunch with a fervent Remain person this weekend; he put it well, when quizzed on (what I had thought) the key issue of EU immigration.
I'm not sure he is 100% correct (who is?!) but that would be the nub of the issue for many waverers. If they can be persuaded to adopt the mindset of "they don't want to change us/outlaw morris dancing/force us to worship Polish sausage" then that would be a strong boost for Remain.
Equally, if Angela Merke's 1m currently estimated non-EU immigrants become potential EU immigrants...then that would be Leave's best shot.
I know plenty of Eastern Europeans that have no intention of leaving the UK, why on earth would they. And the majority of them don't want to change society, so your friend is half right. What concerns people is the sheer volume of immigration of people from completely different cultures, Warsaw and Prague really aren't that different from our cities.
I'm not sure I understand your point. Plenty of Poles have settled and integrated very happily, I had several interesting conversations with them while campaigning pre GE, culturally they are very similar to us. The recurring theme and one shared by Romanian friends of mine is that most problems are caused by the Roma, who are reviled over there. Look at the crime figures in London involving them.
This is where arguments from pro immigration people fall down, they state categorically that immigration is good without bothering to analyse which bits are and which aren't. Let's not be naive enough to believe that immigration is one big rump that must be treated as a single issue, it's far more nuanced. Of course to suggest that the Roma community are involved in crime is to invite howls of raaaaaccccisssst from the usual suspects.
A few years ago, there was a lot of uncomfortable shifting in seats from the liberal metro elites when CH4 collected data in terms of unemployment, educational attainment etc etc etc grouped by immigrant group. There were stark differences.
Everybody gets uncomfortable when their prejudices are exposed.
Do you? "There's one born every day, the biggest mugs are those who think we can do anything about the climate. Google China."
It is a big influx but I don't see how our culture has changed. There are more people from the EU but does it affect me? OK perhaps I'm not a plumber or barista but the fact that there are a lot of EU immigrants in the UK doesn't affect me.
How has it affected you personally?
I have personally only benefited from immigration, but I'm not selfish and am capable of seeing how it affects others.
The whole areas of non-integration, the high housing prices from increasing population, the undermining of certain workers incomes, etc.
I'm in favour of sensible immigration - but that isn't the case at the moment.
My point is that many many people are complaining of Poles. It's almost all that Nigel does. Poles form the rump of the Leavers' position. EU immigration, which we can't do anything about while we are in the EU.
It is what in all likelihood, and unless people suddenly take an interest in the nuances of MiFID II, will form the crux of the argument between Leave and Remain.
Nonsense, Mr Topping, he doesn't spend all his time complaining about Poles. Think of all those rude remarks he makes about Romanians and Bulgarians.
Mr Topping, you say that almost all Nigel does is complain about Poles, I think I'll leave this conversation now, best wishes.
see ya.
The other thing, which as I'm being allowed all the last words, I'll add and take your silence as agreement, is that I very much think there is a difference between EU immigration (Poles fixing your boiler) and non-EU immigration, the likes of which can be seen in Luton, Bradford, etc.
Immigration is high because of the (relative) success of the UK economy vis a vis peers Inflation would in fact be higher, not lower, if you remove the lower-wage component of the labour market The non-economic case is different altogether and is more about aesthetic preference; I think PB skews more Tory and don't-like-Muslims than the UK as a whole
The traditional working class is way way smaller than it was in 1980 let alone 1950 When unemployment is five per cent, it's pretty clear that what would happen if you sent the EU workers home is a major negative economic shock
''Other EU nations could quite easily leave [economically]. The EU throwing us sweeties will encourage other sceptic parties to promise votes to leave, knowing they'll get goodies thrown their way.''
I appreciate your point Mr Morris, but I think the EU nations mostly have a big reason to be in the EU that does not really apply to Britain. For Germany its domination, for France its Germany, and for the rest, its money or protection.
My view for some time has been that our exit would benefit both us and the EU. Frankly, the Eurozone - if it is to survive - needs to evolve into something that looks much more like a country. If we are involved in the EU, I don't think the Eurozone will be able to make the changes it needs to make, and therefore its best hope of survival is for us to leave. I also suspect the shock of our departure will force a rethink about the lack of democratic accountability inside the EU, and will probably lead to reforms there too.
OMG!! You are coming around to my way of thinking. The dark autocratic/semi fascist oligarchy ruling from Brussels must make all decent people vote OUT.
Mr Topping, you say that almost all Nigel does is complain about Poles, I think I'll leave this conversation now, best wishes.
see ya.
The other thing, which as I'm being allowed all the last words, I'll add and take your silence as agreement, is that I very much think there is a difference between EU immigration (Poles fixing your boiler) and non-EU immigration, the likes of which can be seen in Luton, Bradford, etc.
OK I'll give you the last word - is all EU immigration good for the UK?
Thanks to Sandpit for his meticulous assessment from Dubai - much better than the casual journalism that we're getting from the MSM, and the sort of thing that makes PB so useful.
Thanks Nick, and Happy New Year to you
It's scary watching especially the TV news media report on a story you have some knowledge about, especially technical subjects. It makes one wonder about the accuracy of all the stories, on which we rely on those same media to keep us informed!
The traditional working class is way way smaller than it was in 1980 let alone 1950 When unemployment is five per cent, it's pretty clear that what would happen if you sent the EU workers home is a major negative economic shock
I must have missed that bit, you know the bit where EU workers were being sent home - who plans that?
Thanks to Sandpit for his meticulous assessment from Dubai - much better than the casual journalism that we're getting from the MSM, and the sort of thing that makes PB so useful.
Thanks Nick, and Happy New Year to you
It's scary watching especially the TV news media report on a story you have some knowledge about, especially technical subjects. It makes one wonder about the accuracy of all the stories, on which we rely on those same media to keep us informed!
It is probably the main reason I read / interact PB...It is a community where the MSM BS doesn't wash and filled full of people who are extremely knowledge about a whole range of different sectors, not just politics.
Not that I expect Kippers to bother learning anything about foreign aid ...
Oh my......... Jessop can't get the sour spite out of his mouth quick enough in 2016
Perhaps you can stop the sour spite of posting inflammatory and questionably racist posts about immigration.. Everyone knows what you think, so you can give it a rest eh..
WTF? I haven't mentioned immigration at all in 2016. Ooooops!
Mr Topping, you say that almost all Nigel does is complain about Poles, I think I'll leave this conversation now, best wishes.
see ya.
The other thing, which as I'm being allowed all the last words, I'll add and take your silence as agreement, is that I very much think there is a difference between EU immigration (Poles fixing your boiler) and non-EU immigration, the likes of which can be seen in Luton, Bradford, etc.
OK I'll give you the last word - is all EU immigration good for the UK?
And is all non EU immigration bad?
yep it's a binary issue.
First of all I can't remember what we were saying or which point we were making or disputing. One of mine was that if people can be persuaded to get over the fear factor of EU immigration, that will be a boost for Remain. I then think I said that there is nothing particularly scary about Polish people mending your boiler.
To answer your questions, though: no and no.
Does that move the discussion forward (not that you're going to reply)?
Thanks to Sandpit for his meticulous assessment from Dubai - much better than the casual journalism that we're getting from the MSM, and the sort of thing that makes PB so useful.
Thanks Nick, and Happy New Year to you
It's scary watching especially the TV news media report on a story you have some knowledge about, especially technical subjects. It makes one wonder about the accuracy of all the stories, on which we rely on those same media to keep us informed!
It is probably the main reason I read / interact PB...It is a community where the MSM BS doesn't wash and filled full of people who are extremely knowledge about a whole range of different sectors, not just politics.
Mr Topping, you say that almost all Nigel does is complain about Poles, I think I'll leave this conversation now, best wishes.
see ya.
The other thing, which as I'm being allowed all the last words, I'll add and take your silence as agreement, is that I very much think there is a difference between EU immigration (Poles fixing your boiler) and non-EU immigration, the likes of which can be seen in Luton, Bradford, etc.
OK I'll give you the last word - is all EU immigration good for the UK?
And is all non EU immigration bad?
yep it's a binary issue.
First of all I can't remember what we were saying or which point we were making or disputing. One of mine was that if people can be persuaded to get over the fear factor of EU immigration, that will be a boost for Remain. I then think I said that there is nothing particularly scary about Polish people mending your boiler.
To answer your questions, though: no and no.
Does that move the discussion forward (not that you're going to reply)?
I'm very happy to move the conversation forward, my point being that to say Nigel talks about nothing but Poles is a flimsy place to start from.
But yes we've made progress, we've agreed that our immigration policy is discriminatory and ridiculous.
Mr Topping, you say that almost all Nigel does is complain about Poles, I think I'll leave this conversation now, best wishes.
see ya.
The other thing, which as I'm being allowed all the last words, I'll add and take your silence as agreement, is that I very much think there is a difference between EU immigration (Poles fixing your boiler) and non-EU immigration, the likes of which can be seen in Luton, Bradford, etc.
OK I'll give you the last word - is all EU immigration good for the UK?
And is all non EU immigration bad?
yep it's a binary issue.
First of all I can't remember what we were saying or which point we were making or disputing. One of mine was that if people can be persuaded to get over the fear factor of EU immigration, that will be a boost for Remain. I then think I said that there is nothing particularly scary about Polish people mending your boiler.
To answer your questions, though: no and no.
Does that move the discussion forward (not that you're going to reply)?
I'm very happy to move the conversation forward, my point being that to say Nigel talks about nothing but Poles is a flimsy place to start from.
But yes we've made progress, we've agreed that our immigration policy is discriminatory and ridiculous.
All immigration policies are discriminatory. No country in the entire world - not even Australia or Canada - solely has a points based system.
We would, for example, continue to offer working holidays to people from New Zealand and Australia in a "new world", I would imagine. If so, we would now be discriminating against people from France who wanted to come on a working holiday.
''Other EU nations could quite easily leave [economically]. The EU throwing us sweeties will encourage other sceptic parties to promise votes to leave, knowing they'll get goodies thrown their way.''
I appreciate your point Mr Morris, but I think the EU nations mostly have a big reason to be in the EU that does not really apply to Britain. For Germany its domination, for France its Germany, and for the rest, its money or protection.
My view for some time has been that our exit would benefit both us and the EU. Frankly, the Eurozone - if it is to survive - needs to evolve into something that looks much more like a country. If we are involved in the EU, I don't think the Eurozone will be able to make the changes it needs to make, and therefore its best hope of survival is for us to leave. I also suspect the shock of our departure will force a rethink about the lack of democratic accountability inside the EU, and will probably lead to reforms there too.
OMG!! You are coming around to my way of thinking. The dark autocratic/semi fascist oligarchy ruling from Brussels must make all decent people vote OUT.
I've been a supporter of EFTA/EEA on this board for a very long time. My view that Brexit will be good for the EU as well as for Britain is a more recent revelation.
There are some other interesting stories on China and climate change.
1. Honda has said that by 2025, there will be non hybrid, non-electric cars sold in China. 2. China is currently closing down a massive number of coal fired power stations, and moving to solar, wind and natural gas.
Re Alastair's predictions for the local elections , he is incorrect , the majority of seats up in 2016 are in fact in Labour's metropolitan strongholds .the met boroughs and other city unitary councils . Although I agree that Labour will lose seats as 2012 was a good year for them it will be rather fewer than he thinks
Had lunch with a fervent Remain person this weekend; he put it well, when quizzed on (what I had thought) the key issue of EU immigration.
His belief was that no one for a minute thinks that all the Poles, Romanians, etc actually want to settle here - they are just taking the opportunity of earning some money. They don't want to change our society but to integrate and work.
Hence the repeated Cons "well we have cut down non-EU immigration" becomes more powerful.
I'm not sure he is 100% correct (who is?!) but that would be the nub of the issue for many waverers. If they can be persuaded to adopt the mindset of "they don't want to change us/outlaw morris dancing/force us to worship Polish sausage" then that would be a strong boost for Remain.
Equally, if Angela Merke's 1m currently estimated non-EU immigrants become potential EU immigrants...then that would be Leave's best shot.
I know plenty of Eastern Europeans that have no intention of leaving the UK, why on earth would they. And the majority of them don't want to change society, so your friend is half right. What concerns people is the sheer volume of immigration of people from completely different cultures, Warsaw and Prague really aren't that different from our cities.
I'm not sure I understand your point. Plenty of Poles have settled and integrated very happily, I had several interesting conversations with them while campaigning pre GE, culturally they are very similar to us. The recurring theme and one shared by Romanian friends of mine is that most problems are caused by the Roma, who are reviled over there. Look at the crime figures in London involving them.
This is where arguments from pro immigration people fall down, they state categorically that immigration is good without bothering to analyse which bits are and which aren't. Let's not be naive enough to believe that immigration is one big rump that must be treated as a single issue, it's far more nuanced. Of course to suggest that the Roma community are involved in crime is to invite howls of raaaaaccccisssst from the usual suspects.
I agree completely but, in relation to immigration, how do you enact "Romanians are fine but definitely not Roma". With most of the PC brigade, expression of "truth" doesn't often rank highly and I think this rankles with Joe Public to new old Labour's disadvantage.
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Shadsy has bands up for remain and I think the 60-65% band at 8/1 is good value.
The odds seem weighted to it being close, but the polls are pretty poor and infested with cyber-kippers and do not deserve much weight. I think that there is value at both extremes of Shadsys bands.
The consensus at the GE was for a hung parliament, and the money to be made was at the extreme positions. I bet heavily on the Lab 226-250 band on the basis of Jacks ARSE. I got slightly twitchy as the night wore on that they wouldnt make 226!
Shadsy also has Remain/Leave by home nation. He clearly expects a strong remain vote everywhere but much tighter in England. England for Leave; the rest for Remain would make for a constitutional crisis, but I think England will dodge that by going for Remain too.
I think if you're confident of a strong Remain vote then I say go for it. As you say, there's a tendency to expect these votes to be close.
On the different countries, I don't think there would be a crisis if England votes to leave and the others don't. Ultimately they are just regions of the UK and my vote in England is worth the same as vote by someone in Dundee. I actually expect there to be little difference between England and Wales.
The tendency is indeed to expect these votes to be close. The Sindyref being a classical example. The fanaticism of the Leavers/Yes is one aspect, but the media of all sorts likes to depict a close race. I vaguely recall that even the AV one was billed that way.
No expert but I believe it will be big majority for REMAIN. However it appears most of the angst is in England and I hav eno idea what people think there apart from opinions here. My guess is most ordinary people will vote to stay.
Who are ordinary people?
Non political geeks , ie not representative of the audience on here.
Had lunch with a fervent Remain person this weekend; he put it well, when quizzed on (what I had thought) the key issue of EU immigration.
His belief was that no one for a minute thinks that all the Poles, Romanians, etc actually want to settle here - they are just taking the opportunity of earning some money. They don't want to change our society but to integrate and work.
Hence the repeated Cons "well we have cut down non-EU immigration" becomes more powerful.
I'm not sure he is 100% correct (who is?!) but that would be the nub of the issue for many waverers. If they can be persuaded to adopt the mindset of "they don't want to change us/outlaw morris dancing/force us to worship Polish sausage" then that would be a strong boost for Remain.
Equally, if Angela Merke's 1m currently estimated non-EU immigrants become potential EU immigrants...then that would be Leave's best shot.
I know plenty of Eastern Europeans that have no intention of leaving the UK, why on earth would they. And the majority of them don't want to change society, so your friend is half right. What concerns people is the sheer volume of immigration of people from completely different cultures, Warsaw and Prague really aren't that different from our cities.
I'd guess your friend won't want to address that.
I think once you get onto the territory of no one wanting to change anything then people will be both reassured and insulated from the more extreme claims of extreme Leavers.
It's a bit like all those, ahem, polls, which ask how you feel about an issue in general (v fussed) vs how it affects you personally (not fussed at all).
If 20% of people on the tube carriage are foreign and stand up for the elderly woman, who really cares that they are Polish?
As for sheer volume, well the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux.
"the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux."
Hmm. The biggest peacetime flow of new people into Britian in Known History, already changing our culture, and you pass it off like that?
You can argue whether it is a good or a bad thing, but to try and gloss over it is not credible.
I was specifically not glossing it over...
It is a big influx but I don't see how our culture has changed. There are more people from the EU but does it affect me? OK perhaps I'm not a plumber or barista but the fact that there are a lot of EU immigrants in the UK doesn't affect me.
How has it affected you personally?
The impact varies hugely depending upon where you live and various sub sectors like age, having children, wealth etc etc.
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
5 surely depends on where the by-election fell. If it were in Richmond Park, I think I'd take 1-100 on the LibDems keeping their deposit.
There are some other interesting stories on China and climate change.
1. Honda has said that by 2025, there will be non hybrid, non-electric cars sold in China. 2. China is currently closing down a massive number of coal fired power stations, and moving to solar, wind and natural gas.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
There are some other interesting stories on China and climate change.
1. Honda has said that by 2025, there will be non hybrid, non-electric cars sold in China. 2. China is currently closing down a massive number of coal fired power stations, and moving to solar, wind and natural gas.
Point 1 doesn't make sense!
That'll be because I missed a "no": it should read "there will be no non-hybrid, non-electric"!
(Actually, it's a bit more complex even than that. See the story here, and you'll see they will also be able to sell CNG and hydrogen cars.)
Had lunch with a fervent Remain person this weekend; he put it well, when quizzed on (what I had thought) the key issue of EU immigration.
His belief was that no one for a minute thinks that all the Poles, Romanians, etc actually want to settle here - they are just taking the opportunity of earning some money. They don't want to change our society but to integrate and work.
Hence the repeated Cons "well we have cut down non-EU immigration" becomes more powerful.
I'm not sure he is 100% correct (who is?!) but that would be the nub of
Equally, if Angela Merke's 1m currently estimated non-EU immigrants become potential EU immigrants...then that would be Leave's best shot.
I know plenty of Eastern Europeans that have no intention of leaving the UK, why on earth would they. And the majority of them don't want to change society, so your friend is half right. What concerns people is the sheer volume of immigration of people from completely different cultures, Warsaw and Prague really aren't that different from our cities.
I'd guess your friend won't want to address that.
I think once you get onto the territory of no one wanting to change anything then people will be both reassured and insulated from the more extreme claims of extreme Leavers.
It's a bit like all those, ahem, polls, which ask how you feel about an issue in general (v fussed) vs how it affects you personally (not fussed at all).
If 20% of people on the tube carriage are foreign and stand up for the elderly woman, who really cares that they are Polish?
As for sheer volume, well the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux.
"the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux."
Hmm. The biggest peacetime flow of new people into Britian in Known History, already changing our culture, and you pass it off like that?
You can argue whether it is a good or a bad thing, but to try and gloss over it is not credible.
I was specifically not glossing it over...
It is a big influx but I don't see how our culture has changed. There are more people from the EU but does it affect me? OK perhaps I'm not a plumber or barista but the fact that there are a lot of EU immigrants in the UK doesn't affect me.
How has it affected you personally?
The impact varies hugely depending upon where you live and various sub sectors like age, having children, wealth etc etc.
Yes yes I'm sure it does but these are broad sweep theories.
I would just like to conduct a mini-PB poll in the matter.
Shadsy has bands up for remain and I think the 60-65% band at 8/1 is good value.
The odds seem weighted to it being close, but the polls are pretty poor and infested with cyber-kippers and do not deserve much weight. I think that there is value at both extremes of Shadsys bands.
The consensus at the GE was for a hung parliament, and the money to be made was at the extreme positions. I bet heavily on the Lab 226-250 band on the basis of Jacks ARSE. I got slightly twitchy as the night wore on that they wouldnt make 226!
Shadsy also has Remain/Leave by home nation. He clearly expects a strong remain vote everywhere but much tighter in England. England for Leave; the rest for Remain would make for a constitutional crisis, but I think England will dodge that by going for Remain too.
I think if you're confident of a strong Remain vote then I say go for it. As you say, there's a tendency to expect these votes to be close.
On the different countries, I don't think there would be a crisis if England votes to leave and the others don't. Ultimately they are just regions of the UK and my vote in England is worth the same as vote by someone in Dundee. I actually expect there to be little difference between England and Wales.
The tendency is indeed to expect these votes to be close. The Sindyref being a classical example. The fanaticism of the Leavers/Yes is one aspect, but the media of all sorts likes to depict a close race. I vaguely recall that even the AV one was billed that way.
No expert but I believe it will be big majority for REMAIN. However it appears most of the angst is in England and I hav eno idea what people think there apart from opinions here. My guess is most ordinary people will vote to stay.
Who are ordinary people?
To him...? Scottish.
Bigoted little Englanders just cannot help themselves. Get your inferiority complex treated, I was of course meaning that most people are not interested in politics or In/Out of Europe. We do know Scotland will be for IN and my guess is England , which as ever will decide the UK position due to population size, will vote to Remain.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Because even if privatisation was originally motivated by theories about markets, it soon turned into selling assets to raise money -- hence the complaints from the right about "selling the family silver".
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Wages are rising faster, though, no?
This year. We've had fare rises worth 23% since 2010, wages have not increased by anywhere near as much. Still doesn't answer the question, why is the German state able to profit from British railway users and the British state cannot? Seems like a stupid double standard to me, the DRO on the ECML was rated highly by users and returned profits to the state and that is the most recent example of railway nationalisation.
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
The chances of the Conservatives overtaking Labour's share of the votes in Scottish elections is close to zero . There have been a good number of Scottish council by elections since May and though the Conservative vote share has increased it has only gone from 10.3% to 13.6% and remains half the Labour share at 25.8$
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
5 surely depends on where the by-election fell. If it were in Richmond Park, I think I'd take 1-100 on the LibDems keeping their deposit.
Good point; they'd likely save their deposit in RP. But I stand by my first sentence.
They wouldn't win, and I'd be surprised if they increase their share of the vote there either. Choosing Farron, who is an exception even within the rather amorphous LD party, did little for their chances in Southern marginals.
In the event of a by-election. I think there would be a Tory who is against Heathrow R3 selected, and he would win, and that would be that.
And this prediction comes from 10 years experience canvassing in a previously LD held marginal which now has a 10k Tory majority....
The LDs are finished as a national party. With the Cameroonian pivot to the centre-ground in mind, they might as well become independents.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
What profits?
Franchise owner profits. They operate at a 3-4% margin.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
The answer is because of the state ownership of Network Rail.
There is a very long drawn out answer to why the EU rules are as they are, but basically to encourage competition on cross-border routes in the EU (i.e. someone operating a service between towns in Belgium and France), they said you can't have the same company operating the route and owning the service, because then (say) the French track and train owner would discriminate against the Belgian train only operator. The theory is that proper competition required separation of ownership. When we renationalised Network Rail, it limited the ability of the British government to take over failing franchises.
The stupid bit is that as there are essentially no cross border routes in the UK (except for Eurotunnel, which is covered by totally separate legislation), there is absolutely no need for the EU rules to apply to us.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
I am fairly sure that someone on here the other day pointed out that the train operating companies paid a net £802m into the treasury last year. The franchises are thus already doing what you want. The nationalised bit is the part of the rail system that sucks taxpayers money.
Now, if you want to talk about foreign-owned privatised monopolies exploiting their captive customers then let us talk about the water companies. We could start with Thames Water.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
The answer is because of the state ownership of Network Rail.
There is a very long drawn out answer to why the EU rules are as they are, but basically to encourage competition on cross-border routes in the EU (i.e. someone operating a service between towns in Belgium and France), they said you can't have the same company operating the route and owning the service, because then (say) the French track and train owner would discriminate against the Belgian train only operator. The theory is that proper competition required separation of ownership. When we renationalised Network Rail, it limited the ability of the British government to take over failing franchises.
The stupid bit is that as there are essentially no cross border routes in the UK (except for Eurotunnel, which is covered by totally separate legislation), there is absolutely no need for the EU rules to apply to us.
That may be true, but Deutsch Bahn own both the railway infrastructure and the trains, so does SNCF in France! Why are we playing by these rules when others don't, it always seems to be one rule for them and another for everyone else.
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
5 surely depends on where the by-election fell. If it were in Richmond Park, I think I'd take 1-100 on the LibDems keeping their deposit.
Good point; they'd likely save their deposit in RP. But I stand by my first sentence.
They wouldn't win, and I'd be surprised if they increase their share of the vote there either. Choosing Farron, who is an exception even within the rather amorphous LD party, did little for their chances in Southern marginals.
In the event of a by-election. I think there would be a Tory who is against Heathrow R3 selected, and he would win, and that would be that.
And this prediction comes from 10 years experience canvassing in a previously LD held marginal which now has a 10k Tory majority....
The LDs are finished as a national party. With the Cameroonian pivot to the centre-ground in mind, they might as well become independents.
David Cameron moved the Conservative Party into the centre and therefore removed the space in which the LibDems had operated. He jettisoned a lot of the right of his party into UKIP, and therefore created a new election winning coalition.
The success or failure of the LibDems depends on the space they have in which to play. So long as David Cameron allows the Conservatives to fill the centre of the political spectrum, they will struggle.
But I am wary of all certain forecasts. If the next leader of the Conservative Party is Theresa May, and she moves the party rightwards to recapture votes lost to UKIP then there will be a space again - irrespective of who is the leader of the LibDems.
If you want a bet at evens (£25), I'd bet on the LibDems increasing their vote share at a parliamentary by-election (should one happen) in 2016.
I'd reckon I'd lose that one in Tooting, and win it in Richmond Park.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Wages are rising faster, though, no?
This year. We've had fare rises worth 23% since 2010, wages have not increased by anywhere near as much. Still doesn't answer the question, why is the German state able to profit from British railway users and the British state cannot? Seems like a stupid double standard to me, the DRO on the ECML was rated highly by users and returned profits to the state and that is the most recent example of railway nationalisation.
The regulations are almost irrelevant; the attitudes of publicly run services are not in tune with the notion of making a profit. Renationalising the railways would be bad news because:
- they're finally in a good state after privatisation. Nationalisation of the TOC would not improve matters. VEC is much better than the old East Coast; at least, first class is. I'll report back on standard next week. - inefficiencies inherent in nationalised industries would, likely, simply mean the non-train using public further subsiding the train using public.
I spend thousands a year on the rail travel - they're a bargain compared to everything but a 12-14hr a day car service. I wish people would stop moaning about them.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
The answer is because of the state ownership of Network Rail.
There is a very long drawn out answer to why the EU rules are as they are, but basically to encourage competition on cross-border routes in the EU (i.e. someone operating a service between towns in Belgium and France), they said you can't have the same company operating the route and owning the service, because then (say) the French track and train owner would discriminate against the Belgian train only operator. The theory is that proper competition required separation of ownership. When we renationalised Network Rail, it limited the ability of the British government to take over failing franchises.
The stupid bit is that as there are essentially no cross border routes in the UK (except for Eurotunnel, which is covered by totally separate legislation), there is absolutely no need for the EU rules to apply to us.
That may be true, but Deutsch Bahn own both the railway infrastructure and the trains, so does SNCF in France! Why are we playing by these rules when others don't, it always seems to be one rule for them and another for everyone else.
They do operate by the rules. The EU legislation basically says "after you privatise..."
Shadsy has bands up for remain and I think the 60-65% band at 8/1 is good value.
The odds seem weighted to it being close, but the polls are pretty poor and infested with cyber-kippers and do not deserve much weight. I think that there is value at both extremes of Shadsys bands.
The consensus at the GE was for a hung parliament, and the money to be made was at the extreme positions. I bet heavily on the Lab 226-250 band on the basis of Jacks ARSE. I got slightly twitchy as the night wore on that they wouldnt make 226!
Shadsy also has Remain/Leave by home nation. He clearly expects a strong remain vote everywhere but much tighter in England. England for Leave; the rest for Remain would make for a constitutional crisis, but I think England will dodge that by going for Remain too.
I think if you're confident of a strong Remain vote then I say go for it. As you say, there's a tendency to expect these votes to be close.
On the different countries, I don't think there would be a crisis if England votes to leave and the others don't. Ultimately they are just regions of the UK and my vote in England is worth the same as vote by someone in Dundee. I actually expect there to be little difference between England and Wales.
The tendency is indeed to expect these votes to be close. The Sindyref being a classical example. The fanaticism of the Leavers/Yes is one aspect, but the media of all sorts likes to depict a close race. I vaguely recall that even the AV one was billed that way.
No expert but I believe it will be big majority for REMAIN. However it appears most of the angst is in England and I hav eno idea what people think there apart from opinions here. My guess is most ordinary people will vote to stay.
Who are ordinary people?
To him...? Scottish.
Bigoted little Englanders just cannot help themselves. Get your inferiority complex treated, I was of course meaning that most people are not interested in politics or In/Out of Europe. We do know Scotland will be for IN and my guess is England , which as ever will decide the UK position due to population size, will vote to Remain.
I agree that you know nothing about the English. It's your lack of feel for Scottish matters that's surprising, normally the second generation is more in touch with its new home.
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
6 is interesting. How do you think it would occur? Might be difficult for him to get selected for a winnable by-election?
On 3, are you thinking he retires after losing in Tooting?
Where we are now, except you'd be asking about what had happened if the second vote had also gone the other way (where we are now but the third vote ...)
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Operating the railways now returns money to the taxpayer, but this only partially pays for the upgrades in progress. I'd call such a system a success, especially when the majority of the problems are coming from the nationalised parts of the system ...
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
The answer is because of the state ownership of Network Rail.
There is a very long drawn out answer to why the EU rules are as they are, but basically to encourage competition on cross-border routes in the EU (i.e. someone operating a service between towns in Belgium and France), they said you can't have the same company operating the route and owning the service, because then (say) the French track and train owner would discriminate against the Belgian train only operator. The theory is that proper competition required separation of ownership. When we renationalised Network Rail, it limited the ability of the British government to take over failing franchises.
The stupid bit is that as there are essentially no cross border routes in the UK (except for Eurotunnel, which is covered by totally separate legislation), there is absolutely no need for the EU rules to apply to us.
That may be true, but Deutsch Bahn own both the railway infrastructure and the trains, so does SNCF in France! Why are we playing by these rules when others don't, it always seems to be one rule for them and another for everyone else.
Mr. Max, you talk as if there was one monolithic BR type railway operator in Germany. There isn't. There are lots of companies delivering rail services in Germany some of them (whisper this) are even owned by British Companies.
My understanding is that if you do sufficiently well at constituency level, in any given region, you don't qualify for any top-up seats...Even with just 8% of the on 4 list seats. UKIP will do better than that, IMHO.
Not quite.
You get an overall number of seats theoretically proportionate to your vote. Therefore, if you do well in constituencies, it is less likely you will get a list seat - Nick Bourne lost his seat when the conservatives captured another proper constituency, for instance.
However, it is not just decided on list votes. If you lose a seat, your votes are added to the list votes and the proportions calculated from that. Therefore, a strong performance in the constituencies - including lots of good second places - is still very important.
Let's assume, for argument's sake, that the figures overall are Labour 35%, Conservatives 22%, Plaid 20%, UKIP 14%, Liberal Democrats 8%, others 1%. We'll ignore north and mid, because as I've said, UKIP will not win anything there. In the south, therefore, the problem is the number of second places Plaid will get in the Valleys and the Conservatives will get around Cardiff. These votes will transfer to their list candidates and all but guarantee them the seats they currently hold. Unless therefore UKIP depress the Plaid/Tory vote down to their own level or take sufficient votes from Labour to cost them constituency seats on an unimagined scale, they might take one seat in each region, but they're going to struggle to make a large scale breakthrough.
And of course, if Labour do lose a seat in the Valleys the way their list vote breaks more or less guarantees them a list seat to compensate. So UKIP face a fairly formidable hurdle to get representation.
Having said I won't make a prediction, I will make one about these elections. Yes, Labour will lose their narrow majority (of 1) in the Assembly. But they will still be in government, probably with Plaid Cymru. Because the way the votes spread and the way they are handed around it is very hard to see them getting less than 25 seats, the Conservatives getting more than 15 and less than 13 (higher end more likely) and Plaid anything other than 12-14 (lower end likely). That leaves the Liberal Democrats and UKIP fighting for the rest - in a best case scenario, about 10 seats, more likely 6-8. I will be astonished if the Liberal Democrats fail to take 3-4. Therefore, the likelihood is that UKIP will also get around 3-4 at best. And therefore, only a Plaid/Labour deal could command a majority.
Incidentally, I think this is an appalling electoral system and a damning indictment of Jenkins' stupidity, dogmatism and arrogance. But it's the one we're stuck with.
I think that if UKIP finish on 14% and the Lib Dems on 8% then the Lib Dems could be down to 1 or 2 seats (I don't expect them to hold Brecon & Radnor).
The idea his style was needed seemed predicated on Cameron failing. I think his time has come and gone personally, but he's proven a lot of people wrong before.
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
6 is interesting. How do you think it would occur? Might be difficult for him to get selected for a winnable by-election?
On 3, are you thinking he retires after losing in Tooting?
6 - I'm imagining a by-election somewhere Labour that hasn't succumbed to Trot madness. Or perhaps in a by-election brought about by scandal/retirement where the incumbent was another opposition party, where the only chance of Labour winning would be selecting someone high profile and non-Trot. As McMahon's selection indicated, I'm also not convinced Corbynites have their sway over MP selection as much as their leader would like to think.
3 - I don't think he'd win Tooting, (though I'm leaning towards a Goldsmith win, so imagine that would be a moot point) but I think there is also a high likelihood that he'll make some monumental cock-up elsewhere that even Corbyn loses patience with him.
The idea his style was needed seemed predicated on Cameron failing. I think his time has come and gone personally, but he's proven a lot of people wrong before.
Imo, if Osborne's unpopularity is highly significant then so is Boris's popularity.
The idea his style was needed seemed predicated on Cameron failing. I think his time has come and gone personally, but he's proven a lot of people wrong before.
I have said the same thing on here many times before. Boris is dead in the water because Cameron won. His return to parliament, where lets us not forget he had a less than sparkling career the first time around, was about stepping into the vacancy caused by Cameron failing to win.
Also among yesterday's people at the next Conservative Leadership election are Theresa May and George Osborne. I'd bet that the next Conservative Leader will come from the younger generation. It might be one of Osborne's proteges but it will not be Osborne himself.
The idea his style was needed seemed predicated on Cameron failing. I think his time has come and gone personally, but he's proven a lot of people wrong before.
Imo, if Osborne's unpopularity is highly significant then so is Boris's popularity.
It's significant, but I think it's effect is waning - he's endured as reasonably popular for a long time, for a politician, but my gut says lasting even more years, on top of all the people in the party to get on side, may be a step too far. But as I say, people said similar things about him not being able to be mayor, or win again. Those who goes up against will indeed be significant.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Wages are rising faster, though, no?
This year. We've had fare rises worth 23% since 2010, wages have not increased by anywhere near as much. Still doesn't answer the question, why is the German state able to profit from British railway users and the British state cannot? Seems like a stupid double standard to me, the DRO on the ECML was rated highly by users and returned profits to the state and that is the most recent example of railway nationalisation.
The regulations are almost irrelevant; the attitudes of publicly run services are not in tune with the notion of making a profit. Renationalising the railways would be bad news because:
- they're finally in a good state after privatisation. Nationalisation of the TOC would not improve matters. VEC is much better than the old East Coast; at least, first class is. I'll report back on standard next week. - inefficiencies inherent in nationalised industries would, likely, simply mean the non-train using public further subsiding the train using public.
I spend thousands a year on the rail travel - they're a bargain compared to everything but a 12-14hr a day car service. I wish people would stop moaning about them.
Sorry VEC is rubbish (at least in Standard - don;t know about First). Travel often with them regularly to York and Newcastle. The nationalised East Coat was also not great but significantly better than VEC. Sheer lunacy to take East Coast back into private hands - shows how political ideology trumps common sense.
1. Referendum gets pushed into 2017 (when, fwiw, Leave will win).
2. Labour will lead the Conservatives narrowly in at least one BPC-member poll. Something like Lab 32, Con 31.
3. 2 will be against the run of play and the high-point of Jeremy Corbyn's year. Otherwise his personal ratings will fall further and his party will struggle to be heard at all.
4. US Presidential election will be Clinton/Cruz and Clinton will win. There will be huge speculation about Trump running as an independent but ultimately he won't (because he'd know he'd lose).
5. Labour will lose council seats in May but beat extremely low expectations.
6. Sadiq 4 London
7. Ken won't be the candidate in Tooting, Labour will hold the seat
8. Holyrood: SNP > SLab > SCon. SCon will make ground but it will be snail-like.
9. Douglas Carswell will leave UKIP.
10. Cameron, Corbyn, Farron and Farage will all be the same job at the year's end.
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
6 is interesting. How do you think it would occur? Might be difficult for him to get selected for a winnable by-election?
On 3, are you thinking he retires after losing in Tooting?
6 - I'm imagining a by-election somewhere Labour that hasn't succumbed to Trot madness. Or perhaps in a by-election brought about by scandal/retirement where the incumbent was another opposition party, where the only chance of Labour winning would be selecting someone high profile and non-Trot. As McMahon's selection indicated, I'm also not convinced Corbynites have their sway over MP selection as much as their leader would like to think.
3 - I don't think he'd win Tooting, (though I'm leaning towards a Goldsmith win, so imagine that would be a moot point) but I think there is also a high likelihood that he'll make some monumental cock-up elsewhere that even Corbyn loses patience with him.
Interesting. I think a Balls return would be very significant.
Re Ken, I like the idea that there's some level of crapness that Corbyn wouldn't tolerate.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway ...
Wages are rising faster, though, no?
This year. We've had fare rises worth 23% since 2010, wages have not increased by anywhere near as much. Still doesn't answer the question, why is the German state able to profit from British railway users and the British state cannot? Seems like a stupid double standard to me, the DRO on the ECML was rated highly by users and returned profits to the state and that is the most recent example of railway nationalisation.
The regulations are almost irrelevant; the attitudes of publicly run services are not in tune with the notion of making a profit. Renationalising the railways would be bad news because:
- they're finally in a good state after privatisation. Nationalisation of the TOC would not improve matters. VEC is much better than the old East Coast; at least, first class is. I'll report back on standard next week. - inefficiencies inherent in nationalised industries would, likely, simply mean the non-train using public further subsiding the train using public.
I spend thousands a year on the rail travel - they're a bargain compared to everything but a 12-14hr a day car service. I wish people would stop moaning about them.
Sorry VEC is rubbish (at least in Standard - don;t know about First). Travel often with them regularly to York and Newcastle. The nationalised East Coat was also not great but significantly better than VEC. Sheer lunacy to take East Coast back into private hands - shows how political ideology trumps common sense.
What is rubbish about them? The only complaints I've heard is removing the hilariously overgenerous rewards points scheme that East Coast had.
My arguments for it being better in private hands is:
- All the food options are available under VEC. In my experience under EC there used to be about 5 portions of the popular option, and everyone else got their second or third choice. - More motivated and engaged staff. They were not awful before, but two staff were, for example, most indignant that I wanted to be served at the buffet counter 25 minutes after a saturday morning departure. - More emphasis on customer service and less on revenue enforcement - I saw a lot of the latter in the EC days, whereas now the guards seem more concerned with customer impressions than checking every single person's railcard....
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
6 is interesting. How do you think it would occur? Might be difficult for him to get selected for a winnable by-election?
On 3, are you thinking he retires after losing in Tooting?
6 - I'm imagining a by-election somewhere Labour that hasn't succumbed to Trot madness. Or perhaps in a by-election brought about by scandal/retirement where the incumbent was another opposition party, where the only chance of Labour winning would be selecting someone high profile and non-Trot. As McMahon's selection indicated, I'm also not convinced Corbynites have their sway over MP selection as much as their leader would like to think.
3 - I don't think he'd win Tooting, (though I'm leaning towards a Goldsmith win, so imagine that would be a moot point) but I think there is also a high likelihood that he'll make some monumental cock-up elsewhere that even Corbyn loses patience with him.
Interesting. I think a Balls return would be very significant.
Re Ken, I like the idea that there's some level of crapness that Corbyn wouldn't tolerate.
Haha - the second point might be wishful thinking....
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
No. 4 is interesting. I've always thought that if Cameron's preferred successor and best friend doesn't look like giving a guaranteed result against new old Labour (or if, God forbid, he's not the party's choice), then he'll suggest that he might, just might and for the benefit of the nation, be willing to stand again. Hurrah, hosanna, we are saved!
Labour to do much better in the council elections than expected but still lose 25% of the gains they made in 2012.
Labour will start improving in the polls (not because of Corbyn but because of Tory issues) - expect polls to be neck and neck by the end of the year.
UKIP continue to disintegrate - LDs will be polling higher than them at the end of the year.
Economy grows at a sluggish 1.8%-2%. GBP will be approaching USD 1.40 at the end of the year.
That all seems pretty plausible to me. Many people predicted Labour would lead at some point under even Corbyn, so I don't rule it out entirely, but suspect the Tories will retain a small lead throughout unless they implode in spectacular fashion. The only change would be I don't think UKIP will disintegrate and be lower than the LDs, though I expect both to be pretty low to what they would like to be.
The idea his style was needed seemed predicated on Cameron failing. I think his time has come and gone personally, but he's proven a lot of people wrong before.
I have said the same thing on here many times before. Boris is dead in the water because Cameron won. His return to parliament, where lets us not forget he had a less than sparkling career the first time around, was about stepping into the vacancy caused by Cameron failing to win.
Also among yesterday's people at the next Conservative Leadership election are Theresa May and George Osborne. I'd bet that the next Conservative Leader will come from the younger generation. It might be one of Osborne's proteges but it will not be Osborne himself.
Based on the selection of its leaders when in power the next Tory leader will almost certainly be Osborne or Hammond
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
No. 4 is interesting. I've always thought that if Cameron's preferred successor and best friend doesn't look like giving a guaranteed result against new old Labour (or if, God forbid, he's not the party's choice), then he'll suggest that he might, just might and for the benefit of the nation, be willing to stand again. Hurrah, hosanna, we are saved!
Indeed - I think the first step will be indicating that he could be persuaded...which will probably happen this year.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Nationalised BR, profit, now there must be fairies involved somewhere
The idea his style was needed seemed predicated on Cameron failing. I think his time has come and gone personally, but he's proven a lot of people wrong before.
I have said the same thing on here many times before. Boris is dead in the water because Cameron won. His return to parliament, where lets us not forget he had a less than sparkling career the first time around, was about stepping into the vacancy caused by Cameron failing to win.
Also among yesterday's people at the next Conservative Leadership election are Theresa May and George Osborne. I'd bet that the next Conservative Leader will come from the younger generation. It might be one of Osborne's proteges but it will not be Osborne himself.
Based on the selection of its leaders when in power the next Tory leader will almost certainly be Osborne or Hammond
The latter was 55 on Betfair the other day (haven't looked today).
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
The answer is because of the state ownership of Network Rail.
There is a very long drawn out answer to why the EU rules are as they are, but basically to encourage competition on cross-border routes in the EU (i.e. someone operating a service between towns in Belgium and France), they said you can't have the same company operating the route and owning the service, because then (say) the French track and train owner would discriminate against the Belgian train only operator. The theory is that proper competition required separation of ownership. When we renationalised Network Rail, it limited the ability of the British government to take over failing franchises.
The stupid bit is that as there are essentially no cross border routes in the UK (except for Eurotunnel, which is covered by totally separate legislation), there is absolutely no need for the EU rules to apply to us.
That may be true, but Deutsch Bahn own both the railway infrastructure and the trains, so does SNCF in France! Why are we playing by these rules when others don't, it always seems to be one rule for them and another for everyone else.
They do operate by the rules. The EU legislation basically says "after you privatise..."
Agree with most of Alistair's predictions and that Sadiq Khan will win in London allowing Corbyn to claim some sort of win in the May elections despite bad results elsewhere. I do though think EU ref will have to wait until 2017 with negotiations ongoing until then
You should never make predictions that are more than 3 months away.
If weathermen struggle to accurately predict the weather more than 4 days ahead with all their supercomputers, why should anyone be more accurate with general predictions so far out.
So I will only make predictions for the next 3 months: 1. Labout will still be behind in the polls by the same margin as the GE. 2. More small Tory scandals. 3. More SNP scandals. 4. Corbyn to continue gradually sidelining his enemies within with a lot of noise from the Benn-Kendall faction. 5. It will snow. 6. Trump vs Cruz in the primaries. 7. Everything else more or less the same.
Broadly in agreement with Alastair, but for Zac and Leave, where I think it is too close to call on both.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections 2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline 3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics 4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election 5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election 6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics 7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline 8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500. 9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
No. 4 is interesting. I've always thought that if Cameron's preferred successor and best friend doesn't look like giving a guaranteed result against new old Labour (or if, God forbid, he's not the party's choice), then he'll suggest that he might, just might and for the benefit of the nation, be willing to stand again. Hurrah, hosanna, we are saved!
Indeed - I think the first step will be indicating that he could be persuaded...which will probably happen this year.
He did double-down on going in his conference speech? Or do you think that left some intentional wiggle-room (intends to stay for whole of this Parliament, so...)
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
The answer is because of the state ownership of Network Rail.
There is a very long drawn out answer to why the EU rules are as they are, but basically to encourage competition on cross-border routes in the EU (i.e. someone operating a service between towns in Belgium and France), they said you can't have the same company operating the route and owning the service, because then (say) the French track and train owner would discriminate against the Belgian train only operator. The theory is that proper competition required separation of ownership. When we renationalised Network Rail, it limited the ability of the British government to take over failing franchises.
The stupid bit is that as there are essentially no cross border routes in the UK (except for Eurotunnel, which is covered by totally separate legislation), there is absolutely no need for the EU rules to apply to us.
That may be true, but Deutsch Bahn own both the railway infrastructure and the trains, so does SNCF in France! Why are we playing by these rules when others don't, it always seems to be one rule for them and another for everyone else.
Mr. Max, you talk as if there was one monolithic BR type railway operator in Germany. There isn't. There are lots of companies delivering rail services in Germany some of them (whisper this) are even owned by British Companies.
I know Arriva Trains runs some of their suburban lines, but that is just DB under another name.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Nationalised BR, profit, now there must be fairies involved somewhere
DRO ECML made a profit, I don't see why the legacy of BR bloat would be reintroduced to companies which are already profit focussed.
The idea his style was needed seemed predicated on Cameron failing. I think his time has come and gone personally, but he's proven a lot of people wrong before.
I have said the same thing on here many times before. Boris is dead in the water because Cameron won. His return to parliament, where lets us not forget he had a less than sparkling career the first time around, was about stepping into the vacancy caused by Cameron failing to win.
Also among yesterday's people at the next Conservative Leadership election are Theresa May and George Osborne. I'd bet that the next Conservative Leader will come from the younger generation. It might be one of Osborne's proteges but it will not be Osborne himself.
Based on the selection of its leaders when in power the next Tory leader will almost certainly be Osborne or Hammond
The latter was 55 on Betfair the other day (haven't looked today).
@Speedy I expect most of our predictions (mine especially) are about as much use as a long-range weather forecast.
I'm very confident about my snow in the next 3 months prediction, though I should have wrote "it will get colder in the winter" to be absolutely 100% accurate.
Comments
:thumps-head-utter-despiration:
Has someone disabled the bold-font (within the Quote sections)...?
For what it's worth, here are my offerings...
Greens to gain seats at Holyrood.
Kippers to win more seats than LibDems in Wales
Durham to have the lowest turnout in the PCC elections.
The Toon and the Mackems to both go down, Smoggies to go up.
No Labour leadership challenge.
No cabinet reshuffle.
You get an overall number of seats theoretically proportionate to your vote. Therefore, if you do well in constituencies, it is less likely you will get a list seat - Nick Bourne lost his seat when the conservatives captured another proper constituency, for instance.
However, it is not just decided on list votes. If you lose a seat, your votes are added to the list votes and the proportions calculated from that. Therefore, a strong performance in the constituencies - including lots of good second places - is still very important.
Let's assume, for argument's sake, that the figures overall are Labour 35%, Conservatives 22%, Plaid 20%, UKIP 14%, Liberal Democrats 8%, others 1%. We'll ignore north and mid, because as I've said, UKIP will not win anything there. In the south, therefore, the problem is the number of second places Plaid will get in the Valleys and the Conservatives will get around Cardiff. These votes will transfer to their list candidates and all but guarantee them the seats they currently hold. Unless therefore UKIP depress the Plaid/Tory vote down to their own level or take sufficient votes from Labour to cost them constituency seats on an unimagined scale, they might take one seat in each region, but they're going to struggle to make a large scale breakthrough.
And of course, if Labour do lose a seat in the Valleys the way their list vote breaks more or less guarantees them a list seat to compensate. So UKIP face a fairly formidable hurdle to get representation.
Having said I won't make a prediction, I will make one about these elections. Yes, Labour will lose their narrow majority (of 1) in the Assembly. But they will still be in government, probably with Plaid Cymru. Because the way the votes spread and the way they are handed around it is very hard to see them getting less than 25 seats, the Conservatives getting more than 15 and less than 13 (higher end more likely) and Plaid anything other than 12-14 (lower end likely). That leaves the Liberal Democrats and UKIP fighting for the rest - in a best case scenario, about 10 seats, more likely 6-8. I will be astonished if the Liberal Democrats fail to take 3-4. Therefore, the likelihood is that UKIP will also get around 3-4 at best. And therefore, only a Plaid/Labour deal could command a majority.
Incidentally, I think this is an appalling electoral system and a damning indictment of Jenkins' stupidity, dogmatism and arrogance. But it's the one we're stuck with.
Hence the repeated Cons "well we have cut down non-EU immigration" becomes more powerful.
I'm not sure he is 100% correct (who is?!) but that would be the nub of the issue for many waverers. If they can be persuaded to adopt the mindset of "they don't want to change us/outlaw morris dancing/force us to worship Polish sausage" then that would be a strong boost for Remain.
Equally, if Angela Merke's 1m currently estimated non-EU immigrants become potential EU immigrants...then that would be Leave's best shot.
I know plenty of Eastern Europeans that have no intention of leaving the UK, why on earth would they. And the majority of them don't want to change society, so your friend is half right. What concerns people is the sheer volume of immigration of people from completely different cultures, Warsaw and Prague really aren't that different from our cities.
I'd guess your friend won't want to address that.
I think once you get onto the territory of no one wanting to change anything then people will be both reassured and insulated from the more extreme claims of extreme Leavers.
It's a bit like all those, ahem, polls, which ask how you feel about an issue in general (v fussed) vs how it affects you personally (not fussed at all).
If 20% of people on the tube carriage are foreign and stand up for the elderly woman, who really cares that they are Polish?
As for sheer volume, well the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux.
"the UK has always been a population in at least some kind of flux."
Hmm. The biggest peacetime flow of new people into Britian in Known History, already changing our culture, and you pass it off like that?
You can argue whether it is a good or a bad thing, but to try and gloss over it is not credible.
I was specifically not glossing it over...
It is a big influx but I don't see how our culture has changed. There are more people from the EU but does it affect me? OK perhaps I'm not a plumber or barista but the fact that there are a lot of EU immigrants in the UK doesn't affect me.
How has it affected you personally?
It hasn't affected me personally but wages have been compressed at the bottom, that can't be a good thing. Public services are stretched due to unprecedented population growth.
"Our culture" hasn't changed, you're correct, we still play the same sports, drink and fight too much, but a visit to Luton or Bradford will show that in some places the culture has changed enormously. Now you can argue whether that's good or bad but to say it hasn't changed is silly.
I have personally only benefited from immigration, but I'm not selfish and am capable of seeing how it affects others.
The whole areas of non-integration, the high housing prices from increasing population, the undermining of certain workers incomes, etc.
I'm in favour of sensible immigration - but that isn't the case at the moment.
It is what in all likelihood, and unless people suddenly take an interest in the nuances of MiFID II, will form the crux of the argument between Leave and Remain.
A diplomatic Home Office would give a polite nudge to the Pakistani embassy now, that Amir isn't welcome in the UK. Better than having the issue escalate nearer the time of the tour.
"There's one born every day, the biggest mugs are those who think we can do anything about the climate. Google China."
http://time.com/4050702/china-shows-its-getting-serious-about-climate-change/
http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/china-confronting-climate-change.html?cid=PS_01_48_07_00_01_15_01
The other thing, which as I'm being allowed all the last words, I'll add and take your silence as agreement, is that I very much think there is a difference between EU immigration (Poles fixing your boiler) and non-EU immigration, the likes of which can be seen in Luton, Bradford, etc.
Inflation would in fact be higher, not lower, if you remove the lower-wage component of the labour market
The non-economic case is different altogether and is more about aesthetic preference; I think PB skews more Tory and don't-like-Muslims than the UK as a whole
I'll follow actions not words thanks.
When unemployment is five per cent, it's pretty clear that what would happen if you sent the EU workers home is a major negative economic shock
And is all non EU immigration bad?
It's scary watching especially the TV news media report on a story you have some knowledge about, especially technical subjects. It makes one wonder about the accuracy of all the stories, on which we rely on those same media to keep us informed!
First of all I can't remember what we were saying or which point we were making or disputing. One of mine was that if people can be persuaded to get over the fear factor of EU immigration, that will be a boost for Remain. I then think I said that there is nothing particularly scary about Polish people mending your boiler.
To answer your questions, though: no and no.
Does that move the discussion forward (not that you're going to reply)?
But yes we've made progress, we've agreed that our immigration policy is discriminatory and ridiculous.
Anyway, I have to go now, maybe some other time.
NO, WE HAVEN'T AGREED THAT.
until later, then...
All immigration policies are discriminatory. No country in the entire world - not even Australia or Canada - solely has a points based system.
We would, for example, continue to offer working holidays to people from New Zealand and Australia in a "new world", I would imagine. If so, we would now be discriminating against people from France who wanted to come on a working holiday.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/682901747220791296
1. Honda has said that by 2025, there will be non hybrid, non-electric cars sold in China.
2. China is currently closing down a massive number of coal fired power stations, and moving to solar, wind and natural gas.
My predictions:
1) Tories will overtake Labour's share of the vote in Scottish elections
2) Corbyn's poll ratings will continue to decline
3) Ken Livingstone will be leave frontline politics
4) Cameron will indicate that he might remain as leader till after 2020 election
5) Lib Dems will continue to make no progress in any parly by-election. Unless there is a Lib Dem incumbent BE, I see them failing to keep their deposit in any 2016 by election
6) Ed Balls will return to frontline politics
7) UKIP poll numbers will continue to decline
8) 2016 Budget will speed up introduction of universal credit, getting the pain out of the way by April 2017. It will also increase threshold for 40% tax rate by £2500.
9) Labour will not poll higher than the Tories in any BPC approved poll this year.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for the German and Dutch state to own railway franchises in this country but it isn't okay for the British state to own the franchises? TFL is state owned and it is probably the best run mass transit system in Europe. Could a new BR not follow a similar path and slowly take over the franchises and begin returning profits to the taxpayer for rail investment rather than to overseas shareholders and governments?
Homicide deaths per 100,000 people in developed countries.
(UNODC, CDC) https://t.co/Nq0MUCvhY4
(Actually, it's a bit more complex even than that. See the story here, and you'll see they will also be able to sell CNG and hydrogen cars.)
I would just like to conduct a mini-PB poll in the matter.
How has immigration affected you personally?
They wouldn't win, and I'd be surprised if they increase their share of the vote there either. Choosing Farron, who is an exception even within the rather amorphous LD party, did little for their chances in Southern marginals.
In the event of a by-election. I think there would be a Tory who is against Heathrow R3 selected, and he would win, and that would be that.
And this prediction comes from 10 years experience canvassing in a previously LD held marginal which now has a 10k Tory majority....
The LDs are finished as a national party. With the Cameroonian pivot to the centre-ground in mind, they might as well become independents.
There is a very long drawn out answer to why the EU rules are as they are, but basically to encourage competition on cross-border routes in the EU (i.e. someone operating a service between towns in Belgium and France), they said you can't have the same company operating the route and owning the service, because then (say) the French track and train owner would discriminate against the Belgian train only operator. The theory is that proper competition required separation of ownership. When we renationalised Network Rail, it limited the ability of the British government to take over failing franchises.
The stupid bit is that as there are essentially no cross border routes in the UK (except for Eurotunnel, which is covered by totally separate legislation), there is absolutely no need for the EU rules to apply to us.
Now, if you want to talk about foreign-owned privatised monopolies exploiting their captive customers then let us talk about the water companies. We could start with Thames Water.
The success or failure of the LibDems depends on the space they have in which to play. So long as David Cameron allows the Conservatives to fill the centre of the political spectrum, they will struggle.
But I am wary of all certain forecasts. If the next leader of the Conservative Party is Theresa May, and she moves the party rightwards to recapture votes lost to UKIP then there will be a space again - irrespective of who is the leader of the LibDems.
If you want a bet at evens (£25), I'd bet on the LibDems increasing their vote share at a parliamentary by-election (should one happen) in 2016.
I'd reckon I'd lose that one in Tooting, and win it in Richmond Park.
- they're finally in a good state after privatisation. Nationalisation of the TOC would not improve matters. VEC is much better than the old East Coast; at least, first class is. I'll report back on standard next week.
- inefficiencies inherent in nationalised industries would, likely, simply mean the non-train using public further subsiding the train using public.
I spend thousands a year on the rail travel - they're a bargain compared to everything but a 12-14hr a day car service. I wish people would stop moaning about them.
https://twitter.com/BBCArchive/status/682901607982456832
On 3, are you thinking he retires after losing in Tooting?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson/12077292/2016-will-be-the-year-of-Boris-Johnson.html
http://labourhame.com/why-we-should-mothball-the-forth-replacement-crossing/
It's not that much, and much less than £802m TOCs return to government (figures for the next year):
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/18842/rail-finance-statistical-release-2014-15.pdf
Operating the railways now returns money to the taxpayer, but this only partially pays for the upgrades in progress. I'd call such a system a success, especially when the majority of the problems are coming from the nationalised parts of the system ...
1. In 2015 it became a national news story that David Cameron was alleged to have once put his penis in the mouth of a dead pig.
2. In 2015 David Cameron had probably the best year, politically speaking, that any modern Prime Minister has ever had.
2016 has a lot to live up to.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3381095/New-Year-s-Eve-turns-carnage-Philippines-locals-use-firecrackers-ward-evil-spirits-leaving-hundreds-horrific-injuries-1-000-homes-burnt-ground.html
3 - I don't think he'd win Tooting, (though I'm leaning towards a Goldsmith win, so imagine that would be a moot point) but I think there is also a high likelihood that he'll make some monumental cock-up elsewhere that even Corbyn loses patience with him.
Also among yesterday's people at the next Conservative Leadership election are Theresa May and George Osborne. I'd bet that the next Conservative Leader will come from the younger generation. It might be one of Osborne's proteges but it will not be Osborne himself.
1. Referendum gets pushed into 2017 (when, fwiw, Leave will win).
2. Labour will lead the Conservatives narrowly in at least one BPC-member poll. Something like Lab 32, Con 31.
3. 2 will be against the run of play and the high-point of Jeremy Corbyn's year. Otherwise his personal ratings will fall further and his party will struggle to be heard at all.
4. US Presidential election will be Clinton/Cruz and Clinton will win. There will be huge speculation about Trump running as an independent but ultimately he won't (because he'd know he'd lose).
5. Labour will lose council seats in May but beat extremely low expectations.
6. Sadiq 4 London
7. Ken won't be the candidate in Tooting, Labour will hold the seat
8. Holyrood: SNP > SLab > SCon. SCon will make ground but it will be snail-like.
9. Douglas Carswell will leave UKIP.
10. Cameron, Corbyn, Farron and Farage will all be the same job at the year's end.
Re Ken, I like the idea that there's some level of crapness that Corbyn wouldn't tolerate.
Sadiq will be next London mayor.
Labour retains Tooting.
Labour to do much better in the council elections than expected but still lose 25% of the gains they made in 2012.
Labour will start improving in the polls (not because of Corbyn but because of Tory issues) - expect polls to be neck and neck by the end of the year.
UKIP continue to disintegrate - LDs will be polling higher than them at the end of the year.
Economy grows at a sluggish 1.8%-2%. GBP will be approaching USD 1.40 at the end of the year.
My arguments for it being better in private hands is:
- All the food options are available under VEC. In my experience under EC there used to be about 5 portions of the popular option, and everyone else got their second or third choice.
- More motivated and engaged staff. They were not awful before, but two staff were, for example, most indignant that I wanted to be served at the buffet counter 25 minutes after a saturday morning departure.
- More emphasis on customer service and less on revenue enforcement - I saw a lot of the latter in the EC days, whereas now the guards seem more concerned with customer impressions than checking every single person's railcard....
Incidentally, what is sluggish about 1.8-2% growth?!
Edit: That's next PM, not just leader.
If weathermen struggle to accurately predict the weather more than 4 days ahead with all their supercomputers, why should anyone be more accurate with general predictions so far out.
So I will only make predictions for the next 3 months:
1. Labout will still be behind in the polls by the same margin as the GE.
2. More small Tory scandals.
3. More SNP scandals.
4. Corbyn to continue gradually sidelining his enemies within with a lot of noise from the Benn-Kendall faction.
5. It will snow.
6. Trump vs Cruz in the primaries.
7. Everything else more or less the same.