Is this the best team for Labour in opposition?
February 4th, 2010
Has a PM Dave most to fear from the Gord-Ed duo?
For me the big news of the week was the report that Brown would not step aside from the leadership even if, as expected, Labour loses the election.
For everything we know about Brown is that he loves power and he is not going to give up easily the job he strove after for so long - even though, after May, the chances of him remaining at Number 10 are limited. Whether he’ll stick to the reported plan to stay on several years I don’t know but he’ll want to play a key part in deciding his successor.
Also I’m not convinced that an election defeat will do much to weaken Brown Central’s stranglehold on the party. You can hear them making the argument that it’s best to digest the defeat and wait before embarking on a contest that could expose the fault lines within the movement.
So I was very taken by the following from Simon Carr in today’s Independent:
“…… let’s cast forward to a Tory majority of 30 seats with Cameron leading the Tories. Who will best stand up at Labour’s despatch box to oppose him? ..The fact is that no one has the weight, the intensity, the loathing, the insane certainty, the fat-tank, bomb-proof forward momentum that Gordon Brown has. Released from the cares of high office, Brown and Balls together are the Opposition combination Tories would be wise to fear..”
He’s right. Brown’s best period in politics was in the ‘92-’97 period when he inflicted blow after blow on the weakened Major government and he’ll be a tough cookie for Cameron & co to deal with.
So I’ve been taking the limited betting opportunities there are on Brown still being there on January 1 2011. I think that this is a great bet.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
1st
Disagree. Brown wrecked the country and Balls is loathsome.
Brown will go, if he loses the GE, end of story.
Hmmm Labour have bothered putting up a candidate in Tandridge!
Whyteleafe Ward, Tandridge.
Lib Dem 444 (57%. +3% on 2008.)
Conservative 236 (30.3%. -11% on 2008.)
UKIP 99 (13% +13% on 2008)
Labour didn’t stand (-4.6% on 2008.)
Lib Dem hold
Go back to your con…..etc.etc. could be!
Brown will stay.
And he will destroy the Labour Party properly when in opposition…
Brown wasn’t damaged goods 92-97, he is now. Balls is a buffoon, arrogant, nasty and comes across in interviews as either an intolerant idiot or just obnoxious.
4. Well if there is one thing the labour party has shown us over the past 2 years is that they are a bunch of cowards. Brown could die and theyd still be to scared to remove him as leader. Unless brown resigns, then the labour party will continue to decay.
No, Browns creditablity is shot and Balls will need to win a by-election as he’ll be toast come the GE
Brown clinging to leadership similar to s*** to a blanket
The Diaryists/Lobby obviously discussed that point after PMQs as more than one commentator (Michael White for example) comment that Gordon is more suited to opposition than Government.
It depends on state of Labour after election - the Brownites will proclaim a hung Parliament as a win for Gordon, a small majority will probably be claimed as too dangerous to change leaders but don’t think that will fly, a big loss he’ll be gone (and hopefully Ed Balls will have already got his cards).
6
With Labour losing lots of seats in England, the Scottish Labour MPs will become more dominant. So Brown will stay..
Brown’s best period in politics was in the ‘92-’97 period when he inflicted blow after blow on the weakened Major government
But that was then, and this is now. What is more, all the blows would backfire because Cameron would have the perfect riposte to every one of them: ‘It was you lot, and you personally Mr Brown, who got us into this mess’. That’s very different from attacking Major after 15 or more years of Conservative rule.
Also - surely the key point is not what Brown wants, but what his the party want? By all accounts he is utterly despised by his senior colleagues. By any normal standards of UK politics it is quite extraordinary that on at least three occasions there have been attempts, in public, to get rid of him when he was still PM with a good majority and an election looming. I simply cannot believe that all of that pent-up frustration won’t explode after a GE. Once a challenge started, it would surely snow-ball (not like last time!)
Labour are surely not mad enough to saddle themselves with him for any longer than they absolutely have to - which is a few more months.
No - ridiculous idea. Having these two discredited scumbags leading Labour in opposition would be wonderful for the Tories.
He is one of the longest serving front rank politicans of the television age. One of the reasons he’s been a disaster as Prime Minister is that he was a change candidate that hasn’t seemed like a change. He’s like a burnt out sparkler on Bonfire Night. You put it in the sandbucket not try and relight it.
The 30 seat Tory Majority senario is interesting because all of a sudden the job is worth having. No need to go for a tribal hater to keep the flame alive a la Harman or Balls.
You could straight to a potential PM al a Milliband or the Dark Lord.
That said Mike is right to suggest it could be a terrific bet. If he says he’s going to do a slightly elongated “Howard” and stay for one year to allow a full digestion of the defeat *if* things go tits up financially very quickly he could argue that he should stay on.
No time for a Novice ?
Surely Brown’s effectiveness will be dulled by being a discredited PM?
That, and the mentalist stuff that is sure to come out after the election as underlings vent their fury.
Unless labour lose by a really small margin (i.e. hung parliament, or a tiny conservative majority of 10-20 or something like that (which I do not rule out) I don’t see it.
If Brown tried to stay on in those circumstances I think all hell will break loose in the Labour party and their will be a civil war on a much greater scale than in any other scenario. I think a lot of people who have been unwilling to knife Brown or get (publicly) involved in plots up to now would be after his blood big time if he tried to stay on (or annoint Balls as successor) post GE if they lose (as opposed to a result which can be presented as a “draw”; and I don’t think anything above Tory maj of 20 would be seen as counting as that).
Brown’s self-certainty would unquestionably help him be an effective opposition leader - IF he has the heart for it after what would, in the circumstances you cite, be a very heavy defeat.
However, his performance in 1992-1997 is hardly a useful guide to the future. Then barracking a tired, unpopular and increasingly divided Government, with no track record of his own to be scrutinised, supported by talented, energetic colleagues; in the circumstances you mention he will be barracking a fresh, popular Government, with heavy baggage of his own, leading a demoralised party.
Make no mistake, I am not saying Brown will go immediately. He may even survive a year or two. But he would be limping along, less leading the fightback than waiting for the inevitable coup. For the likes of Harman and Miliband, the only questions will be of timing and whether they have the stomach to lead the rebuiding from the first brick (in Miliband’s case I am not convinced).
Balls is no real threat to the Tories. His comic aggression will strike too partisan a note for Labour’s early years in opposition; not sufficiently contrite, not sufficiently constructive. His style is almost entirely wrong for the decline and rebuild phase Labour is entering.
He’s right. Brown’s best period in politics was in the ‘92-’97 period when he inflicted blow after blow on the weakened Major government and he’ll be a tough cookie for Cameron & co to deal with.
Mike I’m not sure about that. A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then and Brown has no doubt many many skeletons in the cupboard now which have yet to be disclosed.
Basically he’s tainted and whilst he maybe able to embarrass a Conservative Government on occasion I’m sure there are plenty of embarrassing details yet to be exposed that will further undermined Brown’s battered credibility (like any flankers he pulled in the Treasury).
As Balls was his chief henchman the same applies.
For months (years?) Cameron can say “Oh ho look what we’ve discovered and it was Brown/ Balls (delete as appropriate) who was at the bottom of it”. Cameron will be able to do to Balls what Brown tried to do to Cameron over Black Wednesday and constantly remind the country who was at the bottom of our economic crisis.
Thing is that with Brown and Balls it is a relevant contemporary attack against them not something from a bygone age. So I really can’t see the Laurel and Hardy of Labour (hat-tip Peter Mandelson) providing a more effective attack force on the Conservatives than any other.
I mean just look at the photo - that is enough to put the British electorate off!
Now I’m not saying Brown will not attempt and perhaps even succeed to hold on to the Leadership and make Balls his chief henchman again but it will be an absolute gift for the Conservatives.
92-97 is nigh on 15 years ago, when Brown was an unknown guy with no baggage…
Now, he looks old, jaded and ill.
13. Mandelson would be worse, watch Clarke vs Mandelson from c4 news a week or two ago. Mandelson was awful throughout.
Funny how in that photo, even when Brown is smiling it looks like a frown.
I wonder what frightfully amusing joke Balls has just come out with?
On topic, surely even the Labour Party would remove Brown if they lost the election. Wouldn’t they?
Brown might have been effective pre-97 attacking a severely injured and dying animal that was the Major government, while having little baggage of his own (and a media really behind a change of government).
Post GE, can you imagine Gordo criticising Cameron say about cuts…Then all Cameron does is wheel out the stats and quotes of Gordo’s time in office. It would be a game of bash the Gordo every week. Blair did that post 97, in fact Labour still try it now, but it doesn’t work now due to pretty much all the personnel being different.
If Brown and Balls are the answer – then it was a bl0ddy stupid question.
The pair are repugnant to look at and loathsome listen to.
FPT, re that hilarious New Statesman article:
Wasn’t there a Con PPB like that in 97? It smacked of utter desparation when the Tories tried it then, and it smacks of utter desparation when Labour try it now.
I seem to remember back in ‘92 all of the political commentators
(Andrew Neill in particular) saying that losing the election, would ensure that Labour would tear itself to shreds and never win again. Five years later Labour won a GE with a majority of 170.
22. Yes the physical ghastliness of both Brown and Balls can’t be underestimated.
19. The AV referendum gives the Lords another reason to sink the Constitutional Reform Bill so I’m fairly confident that the Dark Lord won’t be eligable. I mentioned him because I think Mandelson has a sense of fun, is utterly shameless and knows the theatrics which oppositions need.
Opposing a government doing what the next one will have to do withonly a Majority of 30 could be quite entertaining.
A Brown-Balls led opposition is certainly the opposition the Tories would find most irritating. Look at them. Just look.
But probably not the opposition the Tories fear most electorally. There must be a dozen fairly high profile Labour MPs who could make life more uncomfortable for the Tories (Cruddas, for a start). They’d just do so without making whoever was sitting opposite them want to march over and slap them.
As I have been saying for months with the monotonousness of a tolling bell, Gordon Brown is unlikely to step down immediately after an election. Even now, you can still lay a Q2 departure on Betfair at 1.99. It seems to me that the odds for Q2 and Q3 are exactly back to front.
20 - it looks more like a sneer than a smile to me.
This is satire, right?
28 Quite right, antifrank. Sorry to hear you missed the 12-1!
Shell, Britain’s second-biggest oil company, will cut a further 1,000 jobs this year as it reported a bigger than expected 69 per cent fall in full-year profits and cautioned over an “uncertain” outlook for 2010.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article7014601.ece
13 Yellow Submarine - do you really think David Miliband is a “potential PM”? He has clearly impressed (although latterly annoyed) many in the Labour ranks but his public profle is surprisingly weak for a foreign secretary and man-who-would-be-king. Moreover, he has shown in his numerous flirtations with a leadership challenge both a lack of courage and a lack of judgement.
I just don’t know where Labour goes from here. As an outsider Ed Miliband seems to me to be the best long-term rebuilder and Harman a possible caretaker leader while the party finds itself.
Does losing an election not immediately trigger a leadership vote ?
Browns chances of winning probably depend upon if the ballot is secret or not.
Is that a hearse behind them ?
FPT 383 - Military service still isn’t entirely voluntary.
It is voluntary to join the armed forces. But once there, you can’t just say you’re resigning to take a job as an accountant or pursue your dream of collecting stamps as soon as the order comes in to ship out to Afghanistan! That makes it quite unlike a “normal” job where you essentially can (there may be notice periods but it’s very unusual to be held to them if push really comes to shove in the vast majority of cases).
One solution is to allow people to leave at will - but you would get a serious problem of people joining to enjoy the peaceful years and leaving the moment they are in personal danger. Another is to say “you signed up so we can tell you must obey ANY orders no matter how repugnant to your conscience” - which seems rather extreme in my view. The compromise is to allow conscientious objection and have a mechanism to deal with disputes over what’s genuine or not. I think that’s quite sensible.
The Advisory Committee was set up long after conscription ended, by the way.
Brown’s enemies in the Cabinet were crushed and humiliated after the Hoon/Hewitt attempted coup and now Gordon’s hold on the Labour Party is absolute. If Gordon wishes he might well stay on as leader, but my guess is that he’ll use the awesome political machinery at his disposal to install Ed Balls as leader. Gordon will then become the Emperor to Ed’s Darth Vader.
31 - Has the 12/1 gone then?
27 - Cookie - I think you’ve hit the nail on the head :
“A Brown-Balls led opposition is certainly the opposition the Tories would find most irritating … but … not the opposition the Tories fear most electorally.”
Labour would set themselves up for a 2014 annihilation with this duo, especially after the future boundary changes.
31 - I’ll get over it. The winnings from my £9.10 at 11/2 might buy me a halfway decent bottle of non-vintage champagne.
I am deep red for a Gordon Brown departure in Q2 2010 and deep green for every other time period anyway. It is worth noting that the Paddy Power and William Hill markets are based on when Gordon Brown announces that he is stepping down as party leader while the Betfair market is based on when he actually steps down. This is a subtle but important difference.
It doesn’t matter one damn what the tories think on here about whether brown shoudl saty on or not, its a decision for LAbour Party members, I haven’t been the greatest fan of brown as Labour leader, but even I think that it would be a disaster for the party if he was to leave straight away after a defeat, far better for him to steady the ship, and then give over to a new leader after Camerons honeymoon period is over.
Are there any Labour supporters who actually disagree with this?
Mike is onto a winner here.
FPT
382. NigelJ
I very much do believe in parliament
Clearly you don’t because you openly state that you want to undermine it by making the executive the focus.
My own preference is for a system that creates greater seperation between legislature and executive, with a directly elected PM, and possibly a cabinet who are not just made up of constituency MPs.
So having castrated Parliament and without having done anything about Brussels you might as well abolish our Parliament (assuming that the EP is not abolished) for all the mandate it will have and the fact it will have become an impotent duplicate secodary talking shop.
To me what you suggest is political centralism and that is this countries greatest political problem.
The Labour opposition, won’t be Cameron’s real problem, that’ll come from within his own party, (the bastards)they are always the ‘real’ problem.
To quote David Davis, ‘Who ever wins, I’ll be in opposition’
36 - As a P.S. the Advisory Committee is not one of the more expensive quangos in that four members get a modest £200 day rate, and the chair and vice chair get £350… but they only get paid when required to meet and that’s been about 20 times in their 40 year history.
33. I think D Milliband is the most over rated politican in Britain. However I’m atypical and an anarcho liberal.
I’ve learned the hard way that looking pleasent and being inoffensive will get you a long way in politics. Look at the extraordinary effect Blair has had on British politics begeting carbonish copies in Cameron and Clegg. Milliband D fits into what has become an archetype.
Regarding Balls - will he actually receive enough support in the Shadow Cabinet elections to keep his seat on the front bench???
37 I just don’t think that’s true. If the Conservatives do win an overall majority (I know, Rod, I know) Brown’s authority within the party would be badly damaged and the incriminations would be rapid. Don’t forget it has been 30 years since Labour last lost power - virtually no one in the parliamentary party will remember what it felt like.
The tepid unity that will hold until the election will fracture quickly if Labour loses.
FWIW, I wouldn’t fancy being David Cameron if he doesn’t achieve at least a convincing win on the popular vote.
31 tim - Now 3/1
FPT - Regarding rumors about Sarko/Merkel support for Brown
Short answer: False, stupid and not even remotely credible.
44. these trends don’t last forever, of course, YS
40 - I’ll offer you odds on this guy occupying high office
http://tinyurl.com/Abovehiscollar-only-sky
44 I’ve posted about this before - our political culture has gone badly awry in that it values political skills - teflon coated, friend to all, see both points of view, just doing the best I can, ordinary kinda guy identikit politicians over radical characters. Parties fear causing offence and guard against it with a vigour bordering on obsession. The humour and passion has gone along with the dogma, replaced by nothing but nuance.
Boris is the antidote - but boy, what side-effects.
45 - An interesting question. It’s easy to forget about shadow cabinet elections, and would be interesting to know how the Tory and Lib Dem front benches would look if they existed.
On topic, much depends on the make-up of the next Parliament. If the Tories are the largest party in a hung Parliament, Gordon Brown will probably stay in the job because it would be undesirable for Labour to turn in on itself when there could be a second general election at any time. In those circumstances, Gordon Brown would probably press home his advantage and ruthlessly promote his preferred choices.
If the Tories win outright but not by a landslide, as Yellow Submarine notes, the leadership is a prize worth having. In those circumstances, Gordon Brown would have lost creditably and his voice would be listened to. He would be unlikely to stay on indefinitely - he would be challenged if he didn’t stand down - but he could have a decisive role in helping to select the next leader. Ed Balls would certainly hope for his support. The vote would probably be at or shortly after the 2010 Labour party conference, with hustings taking place then, rather as the Tories used their conference in 2005.
If the Tories win by a landslide, the job of opposition leader will be as popular as toxic waste. David Miliband will get it and will be stupid enough to be pleased to have done so.
No.
49. Yes and I fully accept that Cameron is a proper Tory in a way that Blair was in Labour but never of it. But just look at the similarities between the NuLabor project and Project Cameron. But look at Gordons complete failure to make the whole ” Not Flash, Just Gordon” ” Fat Pope, Thin Pope” thing get traction after Tony.
Speaking of Grayling I watched the last episode of the Wire last night - gutted there will be no more
45 - Another interesting little nugget is that, in the last shadow cabinet elections in 1996, Gordon came 14th behind such luminaries as Frank Dobson and Michael Meacher (this is a bit misleading as he was seen as a shoo-in due to good earlier results and because the rules on voting for a certain number of women meant their votes were artificially high).
tim is right, it’s ludicrous: if Cameron wins an outright majority Brown would go, in short order.
If he tried to cling on, the bloodletting would otherwise be tremendous - all the people holding back now (Miliband etc) would feel no obligation to self-restraint, given that the next GE would be five years hence.
Also, it would be better to get a damaging leadership election out of the way asap. So it would be in the interest of Miliband, Darling, Johnson, Harman, Mandelson, etc etc, to move quickly. They all hate him, they’d tell him to go, he would go.
Brown would be out on his ear in weeks, if he tried to resist they’d call a secret ballot and kick him out that way.
The interesting possibility is a hung parliament, in that situation I can see Brown trying to stay on: but would the rest of Labour tolerate this? Who knows.
56 - They are, however, broadcasting new episodes of Midsomer Murders.
Brown will believe he’d be an effective opposition leader, as he was in 92-97. He won’t be, but it wouldn’t be the first time he’s overestimated his abilities.
If there’s a Tory landslide, he’s out, but with anything less, he’ll probably stay until the following general election, convinced he’s doing a good job. Given the way they’ve acted this parliament, the chances of Labour MPs successfully deposing him any time in the next are pretty low.
48- I don’t know… Sarkozy and Merkel might support Brown as part of their effort to solidify Franco-German domination of the EU.
Google tells me that Brown joined the Shadow Cabinet in 1987 and became Shadow Chancellor in 1992. So he has done 18 or 23 unbroken years in front line politics in a television age. If he really wanted to continue as Leader of the Opposition and fight another gneral Election after 2010 then not only should he be stopped but he should be sectioned.
I wouldn’t take much notice of the report about Brown saying he wouldn’t resign. It’s in his interests to say that now whether or not it’s true, because:
1) By squishing the expectation that a Labour loss would mean a new leader, he keeps his options open if there’s a hung parliament or a small majority that might fall apart.
2) It helps him maintain his authority in the period up to the election. If everyone in the Labour Party thinks he’s going to be gone in 3 months anyhow, why would anyone bother doing what he says now?
56 - If you need more Wire-esque fix, “The Shield” is a decent substitute. Southland is another in a similar mold.
Mike get me out this SPAM trap!
Gordo was effective in opposition in large part because someone in the Treasury was leaking to him. This time round all the Treasury documents will point out his f*ck ups for the last 13 years.
Brown “is brilliant at opposition”
Indeed he is and we can’t argue because Michael White says so:
By contrast Brown is brilliant at opposition, dodgy stats and all. He spent his first 14 years as an MP opposing Thatcher and Major, the next decade opposing Tony Blair. It is being PM that he finds difficult. Yet nothing cheers him up like disaster. Sewage coming through the taps at No 10 would bring out that old Presbyterian resilience: “Pass the bucket, Sarah.
Just one small one problem. Brown wouldn’t be at No 10 if he was leading the opposition, but we get the point. Whether Labour MPs do is another matter.
http://howarddenton.blogspot.com/2010/02/brown-is-brilliant-at-opposition.html
58. Sean I absolutely agree if Labour have their wits about them then it would be as you suggest but have they? There have been so many demonstrations of rank stupidity, incompetence, weakness and pure cowardice (from Miliband to name but one) over the last 2 years throughout their party how can we be sure that that will not follow them into opposition?
Brown may be a wounded beast but its not clear if he is being tolerated or it is he who is doing the tolerating. Its not clear who will be left in the PLP post GE except that most (if not all) of the Scots Labour MPs who chose to will remain (based on the current polling). How many of them owe allegiance to Brown? Does that give Brown the kernel of a power base to build on?
A lot of Blairites are standing down or face defeat. Who will replace them? Its quite possible Brown could have seeded the PPC pool particularly in safe seats with supporters (anyone have any idea?).
At this point, I think anything is possible…..
43: Sir Norfolk Passmore @ 14:03
“… when required to meet and that’s been about 20 times in their 40 year history.”
I was going to say more, but I think I’ll rest my case at that.
48. FPT - Regarding rumors about Sarko/Merkel support for Brown
Short answer: False, stupid and not even remotely credible.
by Chris(from Bethesda) February 4th, 2010 at 2:06 pm
http://howarddenton.blogspot.com/2010/02/brown-looks-to-europe-to-kick-start.html
Before you can decide who will lead Labour in the likely post-defeat period, you need to consider the make-up of the PLP. It is likely to be very urban, very Northern, Scottish and Valleys based. That will affect the type of MP and what their concerns are. How many “New” Labour MPs will be left I wonder? Bearing in mind, that Labour rebuilt from its base in Scotland, then who has power of the SLP now. If the Scottish party wants a new leader it will get one.
For Brown, if he can’t be PM and is likely to loose his Labour leadership role, then he will want to ensure that a (hated) Blairite does not become leader. That will be, his final victory. My feeling is he would try and stay on for the cuts budgets coming, leading the charge. The voters won’t respond well as the drip-feed from the Treasury of what-went-wrong will be sufficient to remind people of the mistakes that Labour made in office. Then you replace him, using the ultimate lighting-rod, reboot the Party and try to build for a victory again.
Secondly, I think Balls will do well in the elections for the Shadow Cabinet. A demoralised and defeated party will want somebody to carry the fight. He certainly does that.
OGH - In answer to your question, no! May I remind you that William Hague was very good at opposing Tony Blair - often making a bit of a fool of him at PMQs. And what was the result in 2001? It didn’t make a blind bit of difference. Even if Brown and Balls are the best attack dogs available (debatable) Labour would be far better to choose a leader who represents CHANGE and can win back support from the Tories. That is what would really put Cameron under pressure.
Don’t over-estimate PMQs.
62
You now know why a US president can only run for two terms, eight years. Eight years is probably the maximum any politician can survive at the top of the greasy poll.
When someone gets around to actually producing a political party you could have any confidence in, the party leader should only get an eight year (max) contract.
@64: Police Cops!
Clearly the next thing for you to watch after The Wire is Battlestar Galactica.
70. Frank Booth - Would people want change immediately after they’ve voted for change. How do they know what change they want?I’m not sure ‘changing change’ works somehow…….
[58] - Also, it would be better to get a damaging leadership election out of the way asap.
If Cameron has a comfortable majority there’s not going to be another general election for four years at a minimum. Labour may as well take a year or so washing their laundry in public so that they can get it out of their system and move on afterwards.
Installing a whoever as leader in double-quick time would be pointless. They wouldn’t have the clear mandate that would [hopefully] follow from a longer process of argument before leadership election.
58 Sean T
Dean you are trying to look at this logically, which isn’t how Brown will look at it. It will be heart over head if he goes in to opposition abnd he will get his clique to close ranks. His issues I would guess will be:
1. hang on as top dog for as long as possible
2. do what he can to protect his legacy within Labour and the country
3. if writing is unavoidably on the wall reward his cronies and put his chosen successor in place. That way he retains a kind of eminence grise influence on the future of Labour
The fun will be how he squares up to Mandy trying to do the same thing from a different angle. As other posts have noted GB is likely to have the heavy bataalions on his side ( PLP and unions ).
Given Brown has done nothing else in life but the Labour party, I can’t see him walking away quietly.
70. Could Brown handle PMQs where he didn’t get to make the last answer ?
The ferrets in a sack post-defeat will be great to watch. Don’t see any reason they will suddenly be able to depose their Noble Leader. A bit of reform to union funding and/or party funding and Charlie Whelan may no longer be able to bankroll the party. Then things will get interesting. The members are currently paying for labour to lose an election when there might just be other priorities.
LOL
David Cameron hosted freemasons event at Westminster
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/feb/04/david-cameron-freemasons-westminster
Brown and Balls?
Ha ha ha ha, no really
Please let Labour try that combination.
70
The one point is that Blair inherited a benign economic situation while a Conservative government would inherit a choice piece of midden.
It depends if Brown can stand up and say “I was right and you are wrong” at the dispatch box (bearing in mind that he would also be saying to the electorate “you were wrong to sack me”).
The Conservative party leader, David Cameron, used House of Commons facilities to host an event for the freemasons, documents released today reveal.
The documents cover dining facilities in the Palace of Westminster that were hired by members of parliament to host events for outside organisations.
Cameron hosted a tea event for the West Oxfordshire Lady Freemasons on 28 October, 2008. The records show that the event was held in dining room C and 14 people were expected.
The documents released today cover the period from 1 April 2004 to 30 September 2009, and run to 255 pages.
The Conservative leader also appears to have an interest in oral health. Cameron hosted three events for the British Dental Health Foundation, one for Mouth Cancer Week, and twice he hosted the launch of National Smile Month. The last was in May 2009, when his opinion poll lead looked solid.
Neither the prime minister, Gordon Brown, nor the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, are recorded as having hosted events in the Palace of Westminster.
The rules bar the use of the facilities for directly raising money.
Many MPs used the facilities to host events for charities or non-profit organisations.
Some used facilities for their local parties, with some being used for lobbying firms.
National Smile Month? nope! never noticed that one.
Surely not?
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/02/could-gordon-lose-av-vote-on-tuesday.html
55. YS - I can’t help feeling Brown’s failure to project himself as the steady and reliable man of substance has more to do with his manifold personal failings and blatantly partisan manner, rather than our politicial culture per se.
82 - What bribes will be required this time I wonder?
“The Conservative leader also appears to have an interest in oral health. Cameron hosted three events for the British Dental Health Foundation, one for Mouth Cancer Week, and twice he hosted the launch of National Smile Month. The last was in May 2009, when his opinion poll lead looked solid.”
I’m trying to work out the link between oral health and opinion poll leads.
“Neither the prime minister, Gordon Brown, nor the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, are recorded as having hosted events in the Palace of Westminster.”
Aww, poor old Gordy and Nicky No-mates…..
jsfl - If Labour think they can score a hit on cameron by mentioning Black Wednesday, how much ammunition will Cameron have against Brown and Balls - the debt, the housing bubble, boom and bust, the tri-partite system - take your pick. With Labour where it now is in the public reckoning, the idea they can rebuild under the same man who’s been there for 13 years is absurd! They need a fresh start.
Re 81. [YAWN] I wondered what that annoying buzzing sound was and I’ve just realised it was Coldstone.
81. Nothing wrong with the masons old chap.
Mike, sorry, Brown and Balls standing there attacking and criticising Cameron and Osborne for having the temerity to clear up their economic mess and incompetence? They have not got a leg to stand on, and more importantly, every time they utter a word in the media the public will be reminded of this.
And is Brown going to suddenly develop a thirst for tough media interviews which will undoubtedly scrutinise his time in Office and the decisions he took back then? There would be no debate about the direction of the Labour party or how it rebuilds itself either. This is no longer about party politics in the democratic sense, but more about Brown and Balls attempting to run their own career vehicle using Labour to do it. And it could really break the party in two if it is allowed to continue and fester without the cathartic leadership contest they so desperately need.
“Neither the prime minister, Gordon Brown, nor the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, are recorded as having hosted events in the Palace of Westminster.”
If I remember correctly, Gordo just allowed that dodgy think tank free use of areas of #10 and #11 instead.
Here we go,
The Smith Institute also hosted more than 150 events at 11 Downing Street.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6321375.stm
88. First the Orange Men, now the Masons.
Has Cammo got something against left footers perhaps?
82 if he does is this as close to a vote of no confidence we are going to get ?
Slightly on tpoic as it does relate to today’s Indy. Hari in the Cameron interview all too predictably for him allows his hatred of the Tories distort the truth.In fact only 12 of the 31 shadow cabinet members voted against equalisation of the age of consent at second reading in 1999.
86. I agree it is absurd (I said the very same things in my post at 17) but since when have Labour been collectively thinking clearly and in particular when has Brown down the right thing (my post at 66)?
However, that said, I don’t think enforced ‘change’ (because they had been rejected at the ballot box) is any sort of selling point.
What is important in the first couple of years should they be defeated is they have a period where their credibility is not further crushed and there are signs they are stable and developing a new narrative.
If ‘change’ causes them to go through a period of internecine warfare and causes them to get the reputation that they are divided and riven with in-fighting then it might well not matter who is leading them after that because the reputation will stay with them (assisted by the other parties sniping).
He’s identified the £18M to be spent on Cardinal Ratz visit later in the year as an easy saving.
Expenses is boring now. Not even on the BBC top 10 most read list despite headlining.
83. It’s one of the great counterfactuals of modern British politics. Was the whole Blair thing really necessery with all that came with it or would John Smith have won clearly anyway? My instinct is it would have been a very different time line.
OT the other factor is wether the Unions could be stalled on their collection of Labours soul. In a devastating defeat then they’ll collect their due and move Labour well to the left of Gordon Brown and seek solice in purity for 10 years. OGH senario posits a Con Majority of only 30. Could they be persuaded to forstall foreclosure if an imminent return to power was a possibility?
67 - They are certainly very unusual cases. But since members of the committee only get paid when they do in fact meet, and since it sometimes is necessary, I’m not sure there are any savings to be made as your original post suggested.
92 - How long are we going to have to wait before the conspiracy theories get up and running? Perhaps the body of Chris Grayling will be found the National Gallery with his trouser leg rolled up, an umbrella at his side and with a pentacle made from his entrails in in front of the Haywain, which has been turned upside down.
Re 95. down = done
Mike two aspects missing from your scenario. The first is the rush of kiss-and-tell memoirs that will start as soon as Brown is no longer PM. If they are like Rawnsley’s book, a Brown-led labour opposition will find it difficult to maintain any credibility. The second is the string of FoIs that will be submitted to disclose unfavorable information on his time in office.
I suspect that he will try to stay on. The question is whether anyone in the Labour party has the guts to turf him out.
98. I’m not against trade unions but the idea we should have a leading political party that belongs to them is absurd. People should remember that Labour was formed at a time when such people didn’t have the right to vote.
89
Brown doing interviews?
Good point.
100 A plot for SeanT, surely?
61- S and S
Brown has annoyed France and Germany for years, especially during his “triumphant Chancellor” period - the arrogance of the British Treasury in negotiations at the time was quite incredible.
A newbie like Cameron, especially a relatively isolated one on the EU scene, is a much better situation.
By the way the Franco-German “domination” has been dead for a few years now for several reasons:
- weak personal links between leaders from Chirac/Kohl onwards;
- the need to build larger coalitions in the Council post enlargement to 25;
- as incredible as it may seem for our British friends, the UK (and its allies like Netherlands or Austria) had actually the upper hand in shaping the EU financial/single market policies during most of the last 10 years;
- both Sarko and Merkel are less integrationists than their predecessors and want to preserve a clearly independent voice (especially in Foreign affairs for France and the Economy for Germany)
Finally, as I said many times during the PB discussions before the choice of Van Rompuy/Ashton, the institutional balance of power in the EU has shifted decisevely: the EU Parliament has now a much greater role. The best example is that the choices of Pdt/FM were pre-determined by the deal between EPP and ESP group leaders: EPP would get the Presidency, FM would go to a socialist.
Thus, in some ways the EU has become more party political: it is important to have more governments (and more MEPs) from your side.
The right-wing parties currently dominating most of EU members certainly don’t want to have the last big left-wing government in Europe stay in power.
If Labour falls, then the socialists will only remain in power in 8 out of 27 EU countries:
Austria (heading a grand coalition with conservatives)
Cyprus
Greece
Hungary (until April elections- they are more than 30% behind in the polls)
Portugal
Slovakia (in coalition with ultra-nationalists)
Slovenia
Spain
(they are also junior partners in a coalition in Luxembourg, Netherlands and minr partners in a coalition: Belgium)
100 antifrank - Probably not long, although I can’t help feeling that tea for 14 West Oxfordshire Lady Freemasons is not quite enough to get a really top-notch conspiracy theory going.
The idea of Balls and Brown being the alternative to a PM Cameron & a Chancellor Osbourne will have most tories saying bring it on. The Labour party would be mad to have these highly unattractive men fronting the opposition. The only thing missing perhaps is a baldie, or a celt or someone with a frog in his throat - in short it won’t happen.
Labour will not try to reinvent the wheel, when Labour lose the next election to a smooth talking nice middle/upper class boy, having won under a nice middle/upper class boy, they will see the lesson is to select David Milliband.
98: Very different. I predict that we would have had a Tory government in before this one. David Davies or William Hague could have made PM after all.
03, If he manages to get a couple of polls showing his revival continuing over this forthcoming weekend, could he use defeat on the AV vote as a good reason to call an immediate GE and attempt to make electoral reform the major issue of the election, as opposed to the Economy?
110. Sorry.. that was to 93
110. Yes, perhaps Brown will view a defeat as vindication for his argument that we need electoral reform.
What are the maths on a defeat? If the Lib Dems have said they are are going to vote for it it’ll need to be a very big rebellion. What is the SNP/Plaid position? The 3 SDLP members are well used to preferential systems etc etc
On topic, not had time to read the thread but no, it’s not the best team for Labour. Apart from anything else, they’re responsible for a lot of the mess and are the absolute embodiment of what a lot of people dislike about the government.
One big difference is that unlike in government, MPs will find it much easier to refuse to serve under Brown, which could leave his shadow cabinet fatally weakened. Indeed, the shadow cabinet could completely undermine Brown anyway as it’s elected and so many of its members would not be dependent on his patronage. I don’t believe a Brown opposition would be viable if Cameron wins a clear majority.
OGH “Is this the best team for Labour in opposition?”
Yes, for the Conservatives!
@106:
This is an interesting set of observations. Slowly, steadily, but profoundly, the EU has become a Conservative vehicle.
112 would be great just to see his face ! bit like question 1 at pmq’s this week.
By the way mike thought you might like to know you Are quoted in an Article in todAy’s Bangkok post
98 - Yellow Sub, how the Unions could react in the 30 seat band will be interesting. If it is felt that they lost by abandoning their “base”. There will be a temptation to turn left and the make-up of the PLP would do little to put the brakes on it I suspect. In the end, the main problem is the Labour Party finances. If they are in as much of a mess as we understand, it will be only the Unions that keep them going for quite a while…
Afternoon all
The idea of leaders of defeated parties quitting within hours of the polls closing is a relatively new phenomenon. Callaghan didn’t quit after losing in 1979 and neither of course did Wilson in 1970 or even Douglas-Hume in 1964 or Heath in 1974.
It started with John Major and many have argued that he quit too quickly before the party had even begun to come to terms with defeat but I suspect he has heartily sick and tired of leading the rabble that the Tories had become.
I agree with Mike that I don’t detect the same motivation with Gordon Brown and thus he will stay on though perhaps as a caretaker pending a new leader chosen in or around the Conference.
As others have said, so much depends on the scale of the defeat because I simply don’t see the ideological schism that fractured Labour after 1979 existing now. IF it’s a small Tory majority then it will be as 1970 with the new Shadow Cabinet recognisable as the current Cabinet.
A defeat of 100+, ie: two terms or more in Opposition, and it’s a different situation.
I’m always reminded that how parties deal with defeat is as important as how they deal with victory. IF they can position themselves to take advantage of the inevitable trials and tribulations which will affect the next Government, they have a real chance of getting back in 2015, otherwise they’re out for a decade or more.
120. Let me guess.
“Editor of politicalbetting.com Mike Smithson commented, ‘Sean Thomas was a regular visitor to my site. He was always such a quiet, polite young man. We’re all very shocked at the news.’ “
http://order-order.com/2010/02/04/greedy-mp-does-favours-for-thin-lobby/
Soames has competition..
115: They’re wanting a addmendment though.
The Liberal Democrats say the AV option is “a small step in the right direction” but not a substitute for a fully fledged proportional system.
“If they agree it, this is a death-bed conversion from a party facing defeat at the general election,” said its home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne, confirming the party would put forward its own amendment.
I expect them to fall into line though.
106- I was being a bit sarcastic, suggesting the French and Germans would prefer for Britain to be led by someone who would drive the country into the ground. It’s interesting that three of the eight socialist-governed countries in Europe, as you named them, are on the precipice of an economic crisis that is threatening the euro zone (i.e., Greece, Portugal and Spain).
On topic, I’ve been thinking about this and I’m not sure how Brown will cope with defeat. Last time he lost anything was when TB got the leadership and that wasn’t an election. We all know how he dealt with that, years of all-consuming scheming and back stabbing. Will he even accept it? I know a lot of commentators joke about him clinging onto the door of no10 by his fingernails, but personally I think he’ll be a broken bitter man. His sense of entitlement is that strong. As for Balls, he has always hung his coat on Gordon’s peg and I expect one to fall with the other.
121. Hence the impact of union reform (at 77). If public sector unions (Unite mostly) don’t get to bankroll them, then it is ‘taxi for Labour’ time, and young Clegg becomes leader of the opposition.
126- S and S
the Greek socialists largely inherited this situation last October (even if their reckless campaign promises didn’t help), the Portuguese and Spanish socialists, on the other hand…
Re: 115 - I would be surprised if the Lib Dems supported the Labour AV motion. If, as Iain Dale suggests, an amendment has been submitted, I’d be interested to know what it contained.
I hope the party will vote against AV but an abstention is more likely I suppose as some might try and spin a vote against AV as a vote for FPTP.
I’ve spoken to a few party members and it’s hard to underestimate the sheer contempt felt toward Brown by this proposal. No doubt some on here will continue to claim that the LDs will prop up Labour but that’s not the view I hear within the party.
129- You know, I thought it was very curious several months ago that the ruling conservatives in Greece, with considerable time remaining in their mandate, chose to go for early elections they were sure to lose. It didn’t seem to have any rational explanation. Now we know why they did it!
128 Mike does it again,
http://johnrentoul.independentminds.livejournal.com/271766.html
looks like Pb.com is doing the msm’s job for them
I thought Huhne said the LDs would vote for AV if their own amendment failed?
130 - Chris Huhne has already said that the Lib Dems would grudgingly back the motion:
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/5283/alternative_vote_%E2%80%9Ca_baby_step_in_the_right_direction_huhne.html
The Lib Dems are the mackerels of the political world. Dangle something sparkly and they’ll bite every time.
Interesting to read that story about Sarkozy and Merkel backing Brown. I was speaking to a Labour-supporting friend a month or so back. Now, this fellow worships Gordon and has taken hook, line and sinker the idea that Gordon, and Gordon alone, rescued world capitalism from Armageddon. Anyway, his view was that even if Dave won the election, the world leaders ‘couldn’t possibly risk’ Gordon being out of the frame, so Obama and the EU would insist that Dave make Gordon his chancellor. I thought the idea was wacky at first, but maybe there’s something in it.
Probably not long, although I can’t help feeling that tea for 14 West Oxfordshire Lady Freemasons is not quite enough to get a really top-notch conspiracy theory going.
Well that depends on how many left the tea room.
134 antifrank
130. stodge February 4th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
They would be well-advised to oppose it, imo, as a switch to AV would entrench non-proportional voting for another N generations.
134. Unfair - they just want to help their friends in the Labour Party any way they can.
122: I can’t just see what Brown would be like out of office. More than any of his precedesors, he seems to be consumed by the office. It must be a huge mental change.
Major seemed to cope with it well, with his cricket and going to the Lords. Blair always seemed to be focused on other things (getting filthy rich). Thatcher I’m not sure about, but she did remain as an MP for a while.
For someone which is so focused on control and power…I’m not sure what will happen with him.
@130:
Glad to hear it, Stodge. This entire AV gambit seems to be based around the assumption that the LDs are thick, and can’t see Gordon’s transparent machinations coming a mile off.
Telling him where he can stick it is the LD’s only real option.
124 She looks a bit like Rosemary West…
Sorry Mike, but you’re completely wrong on this. Brown and Balls will be more susceptible to exactly the tactic Labour employed in, oh, the first 8 years or so of Government. If there’s a problem, the Tories will simply blame “the last 13 years of Labour misrule”.
Clegg’s got a tough call…A first in the staging post of ‘Vote Yellow, get Brown’ case could be made if it’s Labour and Libs Vs Tories vote wise.
Probably unfair to make the claim, but it could be made.
O/T
Great attack ad against Giannoulias, the Dem Senate candidate in Illinois: “Alexi Giannoulias: He’d Make Tony Soprano Proud” !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eocJHtBVLyI
The first post primary poll by Rasmussen has Kirk 46 Giannoulias 40
Interesting factoid,
“The three major repayments aside, 56 MPs have been recommended to repay sums between £40,000 and £5,000; one of them is Gordon Brown. 182 MPs have been recommended to repay sums between £5,000 and £1,000, and 149 MPs - including David Cameron and Nick Clegg - have been recommended to repay sums between £1,000 and £100.”
On-topic, I’m not convinced Brown would be effective as Leader of the Opposition. He would probably do well enough at the slam-the-government knockabout stuff but he’d be a liability when it came to creating an electable alternative. He wasn’t a liability in 1992-97 but that’s hardly relevant now. His unpopularity developed in office.
I think Labour’s polling ceiling is ~4% lower under Brown than it would be under … well, who? That’s the problem, of course, but Labour have to work on the assumption that a more voter-friendly leader can be found.
146. So Brown in the top 10% of troughers ?
148. And all that cash just for a spot of cleaning.
Illinois death wish, Democratic edition:
Ever since the Blagojevich scandal and resignation (over which there will be high-profile trials this summer), it has been clear that political corruption is very high on voters’ lists of concerns in the state of Illinois. A poll coinciding with the Tuesday primaries confirmed this. So who did the Democrats choose to lead them into battle in November to contest a governorship and a highly-coveted Senate seat?
The Senate seat: They chose Alexi Giannoulias to fight for Obama’s old seat, a good-looking young man who worked at the top levels of his family bank until he was elected state treasurer four years ago. Only problem is, bankers aren’t too popular these days, not to mention the fact that his bank made sketchy loans to Chicago mobsters and other well-known crime figures, and is currently under federal investigation.
The Governorship: They chose Pat Quinn, who just happened to be Blago’s lieutenant governor. This might not be the end of the world by itself, but who is his running mate (i.e., candidate for lieutenant governor)? A certain Mr. Cohen, a Chicago pawnbroker who was charged with battery a few years back for allegedly holding a knife to the throat of his prostitute girlfriend.
Ahhh, Illinois politics! There’s nothing quite like it anywhere else.
144.”Clegg’s got a tough call…A first in the staging post of ‘Vote Yellow, get Brown’ case could be made if it’s Labour and Libs Vs Tories vote wise.”
I agree, tough call, but he is leader and he has to make it. Personally, I think he is mad to back AV right now. But if he does then I think we can see that the Libdems expect the Tories to win a majority post GE. Going to watch with interest, and wonder at that private Libdem/Con polling in the marginals.
148 - A more cynical interpretation is that all three party leaders were on the fiddle, but only Gordo was any good at it!
Freemasons are passé when it comes to conspiracy theories.
To me, Cameron’s predilection for dentists seems far more worrying. The shamanistic theurgy of the British Dental Association sends shivers down my spine.
148. The Ghost of Harry Flashman February 4th, 2010 at 3:29 pm
In the top 10% of repayers, maybe not quite the same thing.
I would say that he’s not in the most egregious group but in the next group of fellow-travellers. The main thing that sticks in the throat in his case is the contrast with the son-of-the-manse nonsense. Real sons of real manses surely don’t even subscribe to Sky, let alone expect other people to pay for it.
151, why’s it a tough decision?
AV isn’t PR.
It would make Lib Dems look aprty to gerrymandering the system for Brown.
It would remove the chance of a potentially amusing defeat for the government.
Why would Clegg or any Lib Dem back Brown’s AV plan?
153 - Maybe he’s their molar?
152. Gordons ability to “invest” other peoples money has never been in doubt.
A judge today criticised scandal-hit Doncaster social services for failing to protect two young girls subjected to a shocking catalogue of cruelty over a four-year period.
The sisters, now aged eight and ten, were repeatedly beaten with a slipper and belt, had food taken from their plates to give to pet dogs and were sent to school crawling with lice and in a filthy condition.
The girls were put on the child protection register because of the family’s history of neglect, but were removed six months later. This decision by social workers left the children at the mercy of their mother’s brutal boyfriend.
The shocking case emerged just weeks after the same social services department was criticised for its handling of the ‘torture boys’ case in which two young boys left close to death after being tortured by two sadistic brothers.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1248458/Two-girls-beaten-sent-school-lice-ridden-clothes-horrific-years-abuse.html#ixzz0ea8wxLqW
155. Because Lib Dems have the political equivalent of battered wives syndrome. They will keep going back every time Labour try to kiss and make up, until something horrific happens.
150- S and S
Both of them look vulnerable. However, the very tight result in the GOP Gov primary migh thelp Quinn if tensions persist on the GOP side.
153 - You mean, like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg9hhzAe1MI&feature=PlayList&p=B8B5134A862097F4&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=27
145 Chris FB - that is a cracking ad - I’m glad we don’t have them here but wouldn’t it be brilliant entertainment if we did?
Brown and Balls would make an excellent pair of gargoyles if a suitably public spot could be found ….
O/T - Wall Street, FTSE and sterling all dropping like the proverbial (£ below $1.58). Why?
Guido is doing a member’s room booking live update and cross checking them against memeber’s interests and donations here
http://order-order.com/2010/02/04/members-room-bookings-live/
122. The early quitters did start with Labour: both Foot and Kinnock resigned rapidly after 1983 and 1992 respectively.
What about if Balls loses his seat, as looks possible? Would Gordon have to offer him a peerage in his resignation honours list?
159- Yes, the GOP gubernatorial primary still has to shake out after the incredibly close result. If it results in litigation, that will be bad news. Still, I will be surprised to see Quinn win in November as I would expect the GOP to win this one almost by default.
BBCLauraK
CPS are announcing decision on some of MP s expenses tomorrow morning
140. For Thatcher it’s been a disaster. The job became her whole life.
It probably hasn’t helped seeing the party she led suffer the internecine warfare of the 90s and 3 consecutive defeats, even if you want to argue she was partially responsible.
166: Arise, Lord Balls….
Lord Ball of Cockermouth?
The mystery of Cameron and the nefarious dental cabal just gets murkier and murkier
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/02/david-camerons-toothy-smile.html
A “constituent”? How very convenient…
The plot thickens.
I have to say I’m disappointed in Chris Huhne’s response which goes about 80% of the way and then backs off.
The more thoughtful Conservatives on here have worked it out as I have. The proposal is of course for a referendum on PR and had Brown offered STV, Nick would have been in a more difficult position but AV is not proportional.
I hope party opinion will prevail on Huhne to change his stance and I hope the MPs will vote against the Brown proposal.
Brown and Balls aren’t the best team for anything.
Including running a whelk stall.
172 - It’s obvious - he’s their molar.
165 - Neil Kinnock remained in office for 3 months after the 1992 general election and Michael Foot remained in office for 4 months after the 1983 general election. Of course, the William Hill and Paddy Power markets pay out not on when Gordon Brown stands down but when he announces that he will. The Betfair market pays out on the date when he actually stands down.
On the William Hill and Paddy Power markets, it is unclear when they will pay if Gordon Brown leaves by being defeated in a party election that he contests. It would be helpful if this could be clarified, because this is far from fanciful.
172 - Which drug do dentists use?
175 John O, you should be ashamed of yourself.
177, is it timmium, the only gas known to be 100% fatal to astroturfers?
163 John O
http://www.moneyweek.com/news-and-charts/market-data/ftse/market-overview/market-overview-footsie-slide-accelerates–100204-1517.aspx
Why doesn’t Clegg abstain? It’s an easy argument. We like the idea of voting reform but Gordon is making a hash of it. Doubt many would agrue with that
Chris Hulne’s personal defensive strategy seems to dominate LD policy [on our TV screens at least].
oh hit send to soon
5:15 Footsie has slid further into the red following a poor start on Wall Street. US shares were hurt by data showing applications for unemployment benefits increased last week. RBS is the heaviest faller here, joined lower by fellow banks Barclays and Lloyds. Miners are also lower, with Antofagasta the worst of the bunch. Only nine stocks are posting gains, led by Vodafone, which marginally topped revenue expectations in the final quarter of 2009, prompting an upgrade to its full year operating profit guidance. FTSE 100 down 90 at 5,162.
165 David H, at the time I was convinced that Mr Foot’s resignation was largely “forced” by the BBC.
I was house-bound at the time & had the TV on the whole time. The BBC reports started off with things like “Speculating …” and gradually hardened up through the day. They had no actual facts to back it up - or if they did they didn’t present them.
It seemed each news bulletin was feeding off the previous one. I don’t understand how “reportage” can make events happen, but that was definitely the impression I received.
Talking of FTSE / Dow, thought this was quite an interesting graph, especially post 95!
http://uk.ichart.yahoo.com/z?s=^FTSE&t=my&q=l&l=off&z=l&c=^FTSE,^DJI&p=s&a=v&p=s
181: That would be th logical course of action one would think.
Of course this is the lib-dems were talking about. Look at the flippy-floppy on the voting for the referendum on Lisbon..
The morning it was Stephen Glover n the Mail, before that it as Heffer in the hellograph. Now it s Fraser Nelson in the Times: Tory government? What Tory government? Might as well leave Gordo’s Tory government?
“To look at Tory policies so far, it is hard to see any great vision for society. In the draft manifesto, one sees several Labour ideas inserted like pagan offerings to assuage a god of war. We find Labour’s commitment to tax the richest at 50p; a pledge to protect the bloated NHS budget; a pledge to increase foreign aid spending by some £4 billion — while cutting the military budget by about the same amount. At a time of war. If these are to be implemented, it is depressingly hard to work out what will be Tory about the next Tory government.”
181
Are there any advantages in AV for the Lib/Dems?
Forget the principles - do they gain?
169 - Remember Thatcher was quite old by the time she lost her job 1990 (past retirement age in fact). The fact she has declined since (and even more since her husband’s death) may well be as much about the inevitable ageing process than how she viewed the job.
Major was still in his early 50s as was Blair. Brown will be older but still under 60.
A amusing piece on fantasy from some leftie on greeces woes…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/04/greece-eu-fiscal-policy-protest
180 - Thanks. Seems to be getting even worse than when that report was published. Sort of grim fascination in watching the sea of red on the IG Index.
tim is active on other sites this p.m. e.g. Cons Home under the discussion re the Legg report.
140: I think I am right in saying Sir John Major didn’t go to the Lords, and the Lords is the poorer for it Lord Windbag of Kinnock did, and the Lords is also the poorer for that
134.
“The Lib Dems are the mackerels of the political world”
Weaving in and out of the three types of Tory jellyfish? (I don’t forget the Tartan ones)
187 Yes, in hat it helps to smash up the existing system. Get the voters used to the idea of change (how many different voting sytems are there in the UK at the moment?) and it becomes easier to introduce proper STV eventually.
Instant run-off preferential voting (AV) is daft in a Westminster context, but it helps to educate the voters.
190 Rather appropriate that the colour of financial faiture is red.
187 - In terms of pure politics, it means that a date is in the diary for a change that would tend to deliver more Lib Dem seats. In the event of a hung parliament, it makes it harder to deny them a referendum on proper PR (there’s going to be a vote anyway and it’s harder to kick into the long grass).
Generally, though, I’d be inclined to abstain. I don’t think Huhne’s quick reaction was entirely wise on this - he seemed to assume the decision was a fairly easy one when it really isn’t for the party.
186. Fink does a good Fisking of FN in the Times today.
193 - You’re out of school early today. Shouldn’t you be revising for your GCSEs?
Does anyone know whether your vote is anulled under AV if you refuse to give a second preference?
re 176. That’s an extremely good point. The definition in the Betfair market was something that Betfair consulted me about following a potential row in the “when will Tony go” market.
At one stage it looked as though this could take place on either side of Q2 ending in 2007 and Q3 starting.
I was consulted about the wording on this one when it was being set up and is far less ambivalent. It’s his last day in the job. Simple.
saramojtehed
up to three MPs and three peers could be charged over expenses claims
200 - I like the Betfair market much better for exactly that reason. I hadn’t realised that was your handiwork.
199 - What do you mean by “annulled”? It just isn’t reallocated to your second choice as you haven’t expressed a second choice (exactly the same as people’s votes now).
163 John O…refuge is being sought in the US$.some think $1.50 to £1 by may/june time.i agree entirely.
189.
“A amusing piece on fantasy …… on greeces woes…”
Someone finally blown the true gaffe on Mandy, GideO and Oily Oleg?
6 Parliamentarians could be charged tomorrow - Adam Boulton
3 MPs he named David Chaytor, Elliott Morley & Jim Devine
Connection? All Labour - I thought the Tories were the party of sleaze?
A Brown/Balls combination would be a classic opposition double act, in that they would be very good at appealing to Labours core vote and some parts of the PLP. Unfortantely they would also be completely unelectable and would probably cause the Labour Party to split, with the Blairites heading off en-masse to the Liberal Demorcrats.
190 Slackbladder
That CiF piece is fantastic. As the comments point out, near the start the writer includes this
“The plan envisages a reduction of the country’s budget deficit from the current 12.7% of gross domestic product to 2.8 % in 2012 (by way of comparison, British debt hovers around 40% and American over 60%).”
Its depressing to such ignorance from the great and the good but it does explain alot.
203: I was just wondering whether it would be a requirement to give a second preference. I can’t be the only person who would not want my vote to go to anyone except my first choice (as they are the party I dislike the least!!).
192: My word, your right. I thought Major was a Lord. He remained an MP until 2001 of course.
209 - Ability but no requirement to express a second preference is the way AV elections are normally done.
And ANOTHER Tory scribbler points out how useless the official Tories are (similar to the present ones in power):
“The problem is that the Tories …. have no central message. The party’s posters all bear the tagline ‘year for change’. But beyond this, the Tories struggle to explain what change they will bring apart from not being Gordon Brown.” - James Forsyth in The Spectator
Apparently, Our Glorious Leader will be “grilled” by Piers Morgan - so Alastair Campbell has to prep him for it.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23802525-alastair-campbell-ill-tell-pm-to-be-himself-in-piers-morgan-interview.do
Has anyone done an opinion poll using AV to show what the effect would be? I can only assume Brown is in favour of it as he has some evidence that it might favour labour and/or disadvantage the Tories.
206 - Sky - also 2 Labour peers and 1 Tory.
212 Heffer is not a Tory. We wouldn’t have him.
With AV, why does the shuffling stop once one candidate has gained +50%? Surely it would be fairer to carry on until all voters’ later choices have been allocated?
I mean, if the top candidate in the initial “round” has (say) 40%, and that candidate eventually loses, there’s 40% of the votes which could well have tipped the balance in favour of a third candidate.
re 413. Will Piers ask Gord the question he put to Nick Clegg AND will Gord be below or above 30?
213 - Happy Days,
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/13/article-1161850-00030885000004B0-850_468×286.jpg
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/01_02/piersMOS1201_468×417.jpg
212 - not being Gordon Brown is good enough for a large section of the population!!!
re 214. Labour like AV because they believe that almost all LD supporters would put Labour in second place.
But it ain’t necessarily so.
216.
“We wouldn’t have him.”
Sorry {splutter} I forgot, he’s not right wing enough to join your mates in the Armagh-Wroclaw-Kampala Gay Extermination Front!
211 Sir Norfolk: Thank you
215 - Who’s the Tory. Wilshire?
209. This appears to be the nub of the debate that was raging earlier, about people having “more than one vote”. As was pointed out, each voter has no more than one vote in each round, but they could easily have no vote in later rounds. This would seem to be a problem.
208: It is amusing how someone can be so economically dense and bend the facts to somehow support their view. The poor lady from the Guardian is seeming to have a tough time defending how they let a piece of such stupidity throught their lax hands.
I do like:
The violent impoverishment of large masses, the extensive privatisation of services and utilities through the radical reduction of the state sector, and the extensive dependency on foreign markets for servicing the debt amount to a loss of sovereignty compared to a state under foreign occupation, to an extensive re-arrangement of national assets in favour of capital and a serious European legitimation crisis.
Only lefties can come up with such wonderful wittering clap-trap and rubbish.
@199:
It *can* be done either way. The way being proposed in the bill is not to.
In accordance with the principle established by the electoral commission, where a clear intention is discernible, the returning officer should allow it.
So, sticking a cross in one box, like it were still an FPTP election would be counted as a first preference.
Two crosses, however, would not be.
I would have thought the Tory would be Lord Taylor, especially after he shot himself in the foot over his arrangements.
wage slave - don’t start that bollox again - there are plenty of unsavory characters in Labour’s European grouping
224 - no, I didn’t actually recognise the name and typically I’ve forgotten it.
228 (cont)
http://order-order.com/2009/12/06/sunday-sleaze-pesky-bloggers-do-it-again/
213. Guido has some advice for Campbell
guidofawkes
Go on, looking winky-wanky is least of your worries @campbellclaret it looks a bit winky-wanky to set up a Facebook fan page, what do I do?
224 - Hanningfield I think.
Stodge makes the point at 122 that party leaders resigning immediately after losing the election is a relatively new phenomenon, exemplified by John major in 1997. I remember John Major’s resignation well: a short, dignified speech, after which he hurried off to (I think) the Oval to watch Surrey play cricket. Most of the news teams were following Tony, but a few had followed him, and caught the picuture of a remarkably happy, relaxed man, doing something he loved with the weight of the world suddenly lifted from his shoulders.
Can you imagine Gordon doing the same thing? Does Gordon do anything apart from politics? Whereas - in retrospect - I can imagine John Major had been looking forward with relish to stepping down from the leadership of the party, I can imagine Gordon views the prospect with not a little anguish. Which all adds credence to the view that he will end up staying on.
229.
Your knowledge of the unofficial Tories (aka Blue Labour) and their mates is obviously superior to mine but the finer points of relative turd classification has never seemed to me to be a particularly relevant interest.
@232:
Winky-wanky? Nice.
It reminds me of the time Russell T. Davies described hardcore Doctor Who fans as “ming-mongs”.
224 tim
I would assume it was Lord Taylor.
Personally I think Heffer would be perfect as a Brown supporter: He has similar authoritarian instincts, similar people skills and a similar BMI
@236:
Wage Slave, is there any chance we could, you know, just take it as read that you think all the parties are the same, and have you never make the same trite, tedious, boring point again ever?
Pleeeeeeease?
AV would have some advantages for the Tories. UKIP voter could mark the Tory down as their second choice, and so it would be an advantage in seats which are Lib Dem Vs Tory.
As Mike says, Brown’s made the crude calcualtion that more lib-dems which vote Labour than Tory. I dont think it’s as simple as that either. It’s also easily to vote someone out, as tactical voting must be easier.
237 (ish)
Maybe that is one of Oracle’s alternative tellytubbies?
Seems Labour’s EU grouping are standing up for their terrorist brothers in Turkey, even after they have been banned….
“The Party of European Socialists (PES) condemns the decision taken by the Constitutional Court of Turkey on Friday 11 December 2009 to ban the DTP, one of the main opposition parties in the Parliament.”
Why is Margret Moran not on any list ?
Guido has just tweeted that the CPS decision on prosecutions over expenses is tomorrow……
235: Also I think Major had completly come to terms with the fact he was going to lose.
Brown? Who knows what goes on in his head.
238 - no, not according to Sky.
Gordon Brown was the 20th biggest trougher according to Legg.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8493634.stm?table=repay&order=desc#mprepayments
However, the amount of blue at the top of the table is quite worrying for Cameron.
236. but the finer points of relative turd classification has never seemed to me to be a particularly relevant interest.
you surprise me
240.
Martin, you are not, by any chance suggesting that I have finally achieved a ranking close to the Premier league status of the repetitive Tory Claptrap trotted out on here thread after thread after thread by my grossly-superiors ever since this website began?
Bt the way, isn’t a Ming-monger a Focus-deliverer in St Andrews?
248. About half of the top 20 standing down and nxt GE ?
243 - Given this, I wonder if Labour would really be wise to resurrect (or rather try flogging the dead horse some more) their Tory EU stuff?
Some bloke few people have heard of or care about, that Miliband thinks is an anti-Semite and who the Chief Rabbi thinks isn’t.
vs
Actively supporting a banned political party with close terrorist links.
Wonder which the public will be more concerned about (if any)?
249.
“you surprise me”
Enough to raise your knose from the brown stuff?
222 - Mike - I echo that; I think AV would actually be worse for the Labour Party right now than FPTP. Gordon’s entire political career has been about confounding the Tories, and he believes everyone else shares his views and priorites. Politically, he is still stuck in 2001. I don’t think he quite grasps the extent of the anyone-but-Gordon mood which currently pervades the country. AV is very good at wiping out unpopular parties; by changing to AV Labour could turn a defeat into a catastrophe.
252.
“Some bloke few people have heard of or care about, that Miliband thinks is an anti-Semite ”
i agree with you - but this line of attack by the New Blue Tories seems to me to be directed at media hacks of a certain persuasion, not the general public. Whether it has any effect I don’t know. I don’t raise it here for any ‘effect’ - just to assert its truth
239. Simon Heffer belongs to that broad coalition of Tory grammar school boys whose shoulder chips oscillate furiously at the very mention of Dave’s name.
He has also never forgiven DC for dubbing him a ‘fictional character’ at an early news conference after he won the leadership.
Now i’m not being SPAM trapped I will repost!
41.It doesn’t matter one damn what the tories think on here about whether brown shoudl saty on or not, its a decision for LAbour Party members, I haven’t been the greatest fan of brown as Labour leader, but even I think that it would be a disaster for the party if he was to leave straight away after a defeat, far better for him to steady the ship, and then give over to a new leader after Camerons honeymoon period is over.
Are there any Labour supporters who actually disagree with this?
Mike is onto a winner here.
On topic.
I simply don’t accept the premise that Brown is some sort of collosus at the despatch box, and frankly am even less convinced that prowess in this, fairly limited, aspect of the job, makes one a prime candidate as party leader. The truth is that as Opposition leader, Brown will not get the last word in each exchange and the idea that after every encounter the last words ringing in the ears of those watching/listening will be Cameron berating Labour generally, and Brown personally, for bequeathing the mess that he is now dealing with, ought to be enough to make any sane Labour MP resolve to dump The Crashmeister asap.
In which case, of course, it’s a cast iron certainty he’ll stay on.
256: Was DC alluding to Heffer’s remarkably similar appearance to Billy Bunter?
@256:
Heffer is a thoroughly unsatisfactory human being. In all ways he appears to resemble a genetic experiment to produce a giant, angry manatee gone horribly wrong.
256 Baskerville - I imagine Dave gets a briefing each week:
“A good week, Mr Cameron, we seem to be in just the right place. You were slagged off by Polly Toynbee, Johann Hari, Simon Heffer, John Rentoul and Gerald Warner. There’s a slightly favourable article by Mary Riddell, but otherwise nothing to worry about.”
FFS,
“According to the Order Paper, MPs should be debating some (admittedly technical and fiddly) bits of tax law until 6pm, followed by an adjournment debate on train services to Northumberland.*
But no, debating such things as taxation is not for our MPs. For lack of members to speak, the business ended just short of 2.30pm.”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100025034/mps-expenses-nothing-to-see-here-move-along-now/
262 (cont) And this comes after this a couple of weeks ago,
House of Commons suspended because MPs can’t think of anything to talk about
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100024175/house-of-commons-suspended-because-mps-cant-think-of-anything-to-talk-about/
Heffers strategy would have been for Dave to issue a full manifesto and spending plans 3 years ago and then update them weekly as events unfolded.
I should imagine the opposition would have no counter to that strategy - nothing involving beach footwear for example.
261 - Don’t forget Fraser Nelson.
@261:
I think he’s aiming for a kind of political Lagrange point where the stupidities of every columnist in the country just cancel each other out, and he becomes completely invisible to all of them.
262: Tax doesn’t have to be taxing.
Unless you’re an MP.
Also worth recalling the words of a senior shadow cabinet member - also proud of his grammar school roots - after DC’s Blackpool leadership speech in 2005. “The last thing we need is to be lead by that public school w**ker.”
Clearly he has been talked around since.
BBCLauraK MP s claimed more in 2008-09 in expenses than ever before according to today’s figures - 95,576,589 pounds
!!!!!!!!
I wonder if social services use the government’s all intrusive database to check up on children, particularly those of parents who are well known workplace thugs and bullies? Oh hang on a minute, MPs decided that their children wouldn’t be snooped on in this way.
256 - “He has also never forgiven DC for dubbing him a ‘fictional character’ at an early news conference after he won the leadership.”
Did Cameron really say that? Because that’s chuffing brilliant.
265
I am sure he hasn’t and won’t, sadly your “efforts” on here don’t rate a mention.
266. Presumably he’ll be off to Brighton with two lissom teenage boys and a pocket full of crystal meth, if Jan Moir gets too supportive.
Martin some of us had the misfortune to be at university with Heffer (in my CUCA days). He was exactly the same then.
258.
When Churchill lost the 1945 election his stratergy was to leave the Labour party to govern as he thought the public didnt want to here from him or the tories.
Labour can’t just ignore the public, but it would be silly to do a Hague and bring in a leader in the oppositions honey moon. Far better for Brown to stick around for the party.
When it comes to betting, you aren’t betting on what you want or what you think best, just what is likely to happen, and this is likely to happen,
Does anyone who is a labour supporter disagree with me?
Can we chuck James MacIntyre, and Toilets into the mix?
well preferably chuck them into a space cannon, but first things first.
275: I agree somewhat with you, but things are often not dealt with in a logical way when the knives are out.
275 - It is totally dependent on the election result.
That said, I like Gerald Warner. He’s lovably mental.
271. It was something along the lines of. “Newspapers often create fictional characters with the licence to attack politicians and the like… William Hickey, Ephraim Hardcastle, Black Dog, Simon Heffer.”
Chris A : Did he look liked a middle age fat bloke then? I bet he did didn’t he?
275.
“When it comes to betting, you aren’t betting on what you want or what you think best, just what is likely to happen,”
That is the emotional form of betting. Backing your own judgement. Pah! Really successful betting comes from working out the factors which affect the majority of betters to act contrary to reality and playing the odds. if you do this on the Stock market, especially if you have inside knowledge or if you can set a false hare running yourself, you are laughing.
278,
Tim, the tories got hammered in 1997. Do you think they would have got a better result if MAjor had stayed on a year. I do, If HAgue had of been elected he wouldn’t have made so many stupid decisions at the start, and even then I think a year of seeing that LAbour weren’t screwing up and governing from teh centree would have seen Ken Clarke elected leader. IF that had happened. We would have been out in 2005.
So even if we are hammered, better for Brown to stay on for 6 months a year
Brown looks as though he is mincing in that picture; maybe he’s just had a raunchy phone call form Lord Mandy
244. “Why is Margret Moran not on any list” ?
Legg writes in the report “My review was excluded from dealing with issues under investigation before 20 July 2009 by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards or at any stage by the Police”
I think the Police were investigating Moran.
285. But yet she is not on the CPS list for tomorrow.
283 - I agree with the first part of that.
The Tories couldn’t have selected a worse leader than Hague and I suspect if Major had hung around until the Conference they would’ve realised that, if he hadn’t already worked out he was making a big error.
I doubt they would’ve elected Clarke though.
The Europe cancer that was a mirror of Labours nuclear fixation of the early eighties would’ve prevented that.
A further 2% swing in the polls however means all bets are off.
I certainly don’t think Brown will be able to stay on if the Tory majority is 50+, and I think that’s still a likely proposition given some of the marginal polling that’s been done.
I’ve been very bullish about prospects for the minor parties in the election in some of my previous comments, but I think having the expenses saga rubbed in the public’s face once again (along with the Iraq Inquiry) is going to boost their showing at the election.
I still think UKIP, BNP and Greens will poll about 10% between them.
248. Given Legg excluded all the troughers who used their exes for mortgages or lavish rented accomodation the whole thing is a joke.
Nothing about top troughers like Bercow, Palmer, Clegg, Cameron or Blears. Nothing about the flippers or those who claimed exes whilst receiving grace and favour homes or who lived within 10/15 miles of Westminster but still had second homes (McNulty/ Vaz).
The Legg report has no credibility at all because the simple fact is if they revoked MPs tax exemption for these expenses then they would all be paying a damn site more.
Basically the ridiculous handling of the expenses debacle’s has turned it into voyeurism for political onanists.
286 The Ghost of Harry Flashman
The Fees Office knew about her third home, and approved it despite expressing concern.
Unlike Chaytor, Morley and Devine, who at least on the surface, appear to have actively defrauded the Fees Office.
286 - We don’t know whether the list for tomorrow is the final cut or merely the first batch, do we?
Out of interest, is it just me who is having his bets seriously restricted by William Hill. I have placed two bets today - one was restricted to £9.10 (at 11/2) and the other was restricted to £28.10 (at 7/2). I’m not that high a roller, but I would like to be able to put down a bit more than that.
287 tim - To be honest, I don’t think it would have made much difference who was chosen as leader, at least in the short term. No-one was listening to the Tories in the early days of the Blair government.
It’s arguable that someone else might have been more suited to reforming and modernising the party - the role that Portillo thought was his until ‘events’ intervened. But I don’t think the party was ready to be modernised and reformed; and in any case it’s not obvious who such a figure could have been. Certainly not Ken Clarke, who was too unpopular with many.
293, If Labour had off won a good majority of say 80 in 2001. (95% of activists would have taken that offer on May 2nd 1997!) we would have lost our majority completly by 2005!
ANDY JS
re 281 I’m afraid he did. Caused ructions within CUCA even then.
Some of the Daily Mail’s highest-rated comments on this story are splendidly, um, innervating.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1248484/Cameron-Gay-refugees-Africa-given-asylum-UK.html
Most of them are planning to vote BNP now it seems, cos they know how to give the poofs a damn good kicking.
Beeb expenses tool says Moran had to pay back £4k (on top of the £23k for dry rot 100 miles from consituency ?)
Alex Salmond accused of breaching Holyrood rules with lunch auction
Investigation launched after it emerges that the Scottish first minister and his deputy auctioned private lunches in Holyrood’s members’ restaurant at an SNP fundraising event
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/feb/04/alex-salmond-holyrood-lunch-auction
Anyone who doubted the minor parties will have their best election yet on May 6th should think what effect today’s expenses report will have on voters. It’ll give a big boost to UKIP and the BNP, and maybe also the Greens.
298. Tsk - you cant smear Salmond…
293 - Arguably that sense of hopelessness was cemented in by the immediate elevation of Hague, he did exactly what Labour wanted him to do at ecery single step.
Originally he was going to support Howard and then decided to stand himself and was a disaster.
Portillo would’ve been the most interesting in 2001, I suspect speeding up the humanising of the party’s social agenda by four years.
Has the Hills market disappeared again?
Looks like Antifrank has broken them
283 Labour Man
You mistake tim for a Labour man, Labour Man. He is a Tory baiter and Brown hater first, a Blairite warmonger second and never vague on Hague third.
In three months Brown will lead Labour to its biggest electoral defeat since 1931. He will make Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock look Saints by comparison. It is only the prospect of the defeat being worse than 1931 and the lack of an obvious, acceptable successor that has kept him in office.
Even if Brown wished to stay on beyond the Election, his only realistic target would be the 2010 Conference. Provided a party leadership election was guaranteed by Brown in advance, he probably would be allowed to continue. If the leadership campaign kicked off at the Conference it is just possible the new leader wouldn’t be selected until the New Year but Christmas would seem a more likely target. Just some glimmer of hope then for GB being leader on 1st January 2011.
A more likely response to the GE defeat would be an immediate resignation - probably forced by the Shadow Cabinet - with Harriet Harman taking over as Acting Leader until the Conference.
As for the hung parliament, small Cameron majority outcomes, dream on: they will not happen. They are as likely as tim opposing Cameron’s support for an Obama military adventure in Iran. Such things are immutable.
Tweet from Iain Dale
Anyone commented that the highest Scottish repayment is from one J Gordon Brown MP?
FPT - rogerh - “Have just looked at Ladbrokes Scottish constituencies betting. For all the fuss there is only one seat changing hands according to the betting odds - Ochils.”
Nope. Not true.
According to current prices the following Scottish seats will “change hands”:
Dumfries & Galloway (Con FAV at 1/3 with WH)
Dundee West (SNP FAV at 2/5 with Bet365 and Lad)
Dunfermline and West Fife (Lab FAV at EVS with Bet365, PP and WH)
Edinburgh South (Con FAV at 11/8 with Lad)
Glasgow East (Lab FAV at 1/2 with Bet365)
Ochil & South Perthshire (SNP FAV at 4/9 with Lad)
Stirling (Con FAV at 11/8 with Lad)
In addition, we have joint FAV in Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (Con and LD both at 10/11, with VC and WH respectively).
On the point of leaders departing quickly after poll defeats, I accept there is a time lag while elections take place to choose a replacement.
I cannot think of a former Prime Minister who immediately announced his decision to cease being leader of his party within 24 hours of losing a GE before John Major.
Callaghan, Heath, Wilson, Douglas-Hume and Attlee all remained leader of their parties for a period after defeat and leaving Downing Street. I think Brown will do the same albeit as a caretaker until the prospective challengers can put their case to the unions and the activists who of course have a key say in the election.
‘Prosecutions loom as MPs face day of expenses shame’
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7015324.ece
305. After all Major had been through in the previous 5 tears, a lot of it thanks to his party could you blame for wanting to step down ASAP?
O/T I went on amazon.com to look for Mr Smithson’s tome on betting, and this is what I found..a steal at $2.95
http://www.amazon.com/Topps-Minnesota-Condition-Protective-Screwdown/dp/B0035L1AMS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&qid=1265305604&sr=8-2
Brown & Balls - 20 more years, yay
ZNL certainly deserve it
300: You can if its made into mousse first.
Boom Tish
307. Especially with the cricket season just starting..
Sign of the times: the Obama-related merchandise store in Washington, DC’s Union Station has gone out of business.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/doug-heye/2010/02/04/forget-polls-heres-tangible-proof-the-obama-honeymoon-is-over.html
312 - Don’t forget S&S that if it closed because of the failing economy, we know from the man himself that this is nothing to do with him.
Bookies’ best prices - Six Nations - opening matches
Ireland 1/10
Italy 22/1
England 11/7
Wales 7/4
Scotland 5/2
France 2/5
314 - England are odds-on, Stuart (best about 8/13).
304 Stuart - What do you reckon about Glasgow East? Both Easterross and some of your fellow nats seem to think the bookies have got this one wrong, and that John Mason has a good chance of holding it.
- and speaking of the Great Man, he has apparently decided to work with Republicans on a Jobs Bill - imagine that!
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wirestory?id=9746468&page=1
315. Crikey Aaron, you are quick!!!
Sorry for the typo.
Of course, England’s best price is 11/17 with expekt.com
Re AV. No you don’t have to rank all candidates, except in Australia, which is daft.
302 - Seth.
You’ll have to speak up. I can’t hear you above the sound of the Grayling crime leaflets being shredded in every local constituency.
Here’s a counterfactual for you.
Did John Majors flounce to watch the cricket cost the Tories the 2005 election.
For if they hadn’t rashly elected Hague, statistically the worst leader in the history of the party, would they have got closer in 2001 with a grown up leader and forced a hung parliament in 2005 with Portillo as leader?
Meanwhile elsewhere in Westminster chaos reigns:
Prime Minister accused of allowing terrorist suspects access to funding
Harriet Harman, Leader of the Commons, assured MPs that the Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Bill would be “retrospective in its application”.
And if they have spent them or moved them somewhere where the grubby mits of this government cant touch them?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/7158395/Prime-Minister-accused-of-allowing-terrorist-suspects-access-to-funding.html
And she thinks she could lead a political party and even this country. Shish - Give us a break……!
313- It’s funny, a year ago right now, there were Obama t-shirts and lapel buttons everywhere in New York, mostly worn by proud blacks as well as New York Times toting whites who bought them at the many stores and improvised roadside kiosks set up for the purpose. You could scarcely ride the subway across town without seeing someone wearing something Obama-related. Now, you don’t see any of that anymore. I’m sure those same people still support Obama, but they don’t seem proud enough to advertise it these days.
Just a quick post to note that Coral now have bets on whether the Greens, UKIP or the BNP will or will not win seats:
http://www.coral.co.uk/sbuk.go?page=supergrouppage&sportid=30&supergroup=a.UK+Politics&groupid=766579&lang=20&sid=322176122226272507025461&ms=&type=0
The evens price for the Greens to win any seat is as good as the best odds that I’ve found for the Greens to win Brighton Pavilion (which is evens with Victor Chandler and Ladbrokes).
320 on thread… tim you are mishearing, its the laughter at the thought of Brown and Balls leading the opposition..
re 320 That’s an interesting counter-factual Tim. I guess Major was just so pi**ed off with his party by then that he just wanted out.
The Hague decision was crazy though slightly less crazy than IDS. The Tories just lost it until the ousting of IDS in November 2003.
The biggest mistake was Michael Portillo not making the run-off by two votes in 2001. If he’d been elected I think British politics would have been very different. The 2005 battle, in the aftermath of Blair Iraq lunacy, could have been much much tighter.
So Cameron and Osborne got away scot free, the millionaire troughers can keep the mortgage money they took from the taxpayer. Blears is in the same position and several others, it can’t be right.
Today’s decision does mean that for the first time since quantitative easing began 11 months ago, the Bank of England will not be engaged in the purchase of gilts this month. We will now see what price real buyers want to charge the UK government to borrow money.
…
Britain has never quantitatively tightened before. In theory it should work like QE but in reverse. It should destroy money instead of creating it. It probably will not begin before the election but all of this begins to explain why Cameron and Osborne have been talking (to me and others) about involving the Bank of England in decisions on fiscal policy, ie on tax and spending decisions.
In theory, the stock of £200bn of government debt owned by the independent Bank of England, could be dumped on the markets as quickly as they were acquired.
In that scenario, financial markets would have to absorb about £400bn of government debt during 2010 and 2011. Of course that is not going to happen.
http://blogs.channel4.com/snowblog/2010/02/04/qe-is-halted-all-hail-qt-the-mervyn-and-george-show/
316. Richard Nabavi
John Mason is an outstanding MP. And an outstanding candidate.
The Glasgow East victory was 25% a Scottish National Party victory, and 75% a John Mason victory.
13/8 (Lad, PP, VC, WH) for the JM HOLD is too long IMHO.
Margaret Curran MSP ought to be FAV, but Bet365’s 1/2 is too short.
Disclosure note: John Mason once whipped me in a selection contest!
325 - Your point about Portillo is correct.
But surely if they had had a merely half decent leader 1997-2001 there would’ve been the 20 or so new MPs, likely to be more socially liberal who woud’ve put Portillo into the final round.
BBC bias on expenses scandal on BBC Five Live: http://tinyurl.com/y8gvx7a
326 - The allowances have never been means tested, Lilly!
Troughing is troughing whether the trougher is a millionaire or not. Although I suppose arguably it was particularly galling to see some of the better off MPs squeezing every last penny out (e.g. the Hunt ‘phone bill!), even when it was legitimate in the strict sense.
28 antifrank: Even now, you can still lay a Q2 departure on Betfair at 1.99. It seems to me that the odds for Q2 and Q3 are exactly back to front.
Quite right. Even with the best will in the world, the whole process of selecting a leader will take 4-5 weeks which would take us through to at least mid-June after a May election and until July if the GE were delayed until the last possible date on June 3.
The Labour party would also be well advised, at the same time, to consider a change in the rule which sadly for them made the incumbent virtually unsackable - this is bound to absorb further time until a consensus is reached.
Brown himself may wish to continue a leader until the party’s conference, which conveniently closes on 30 Sept!
IIRC both Richard Nabavi and yours truly were shouting from the rooftops last summer to back Brown exiting during Q3 2010, which was then available on Betfair at 7/1 or 8/1, compared with 3/1 now.
326. hello Lilly!
You forgot to mention Alistair Darling too and plenty of other former and current Cabinet Ministers.
What can you say but that once again this complete and utter shambles happened on GORDON BROWN’S WATCH
The man is a walking disaster zone!
Mike Smithson at 325 “The Hague decision was crazy though slightly less crazy than IDS.”
It’s very hard to set a dinner table correctly if you’ve lost half of your cutlery. You just do the best you can and if people have to cut their steak with a teaspoon then that’s life, really, isn’t it?
He’s right. Brown’s best period in politics was in the ‘92-’97 period when he inflicted blow after blow on the weakened Major government and he’ll be a tough cookie for Cameron & co to deal with.
Mike Smithson.
How wrong you are on this one Mike. Browns ‘92-’97 period is a long way past, he is 13 years older and more careworn. The loss of power will be a big blow for the PM and he will go around like a little boy lost and a deflated balloon.
Seeing weakness, the top labour politicians, (including Balls), will seek to get rid of Gordo as soon as is respectably possible.
13 years ago Gordo was seeking power after fallow years: a complete change from the present position.
326.Lily Allen.
Why is it that class and background always clouds the judgement of you socialist nitwits?
Brown was no.20 out of over 300 , so shut up and stop being such a deluded one sided tw4t!
324 - Actually, with the exposure of Grayling crime figures, the revelation that child homicides are lower than thirty years ago and the Tory poll dip after Camerons Edlington speech, perhaps the sound you can hear is the ovrdue smashing of Cameron Broken Britain nonsense.
325 - I’m not sure Portillo was the answer (depending, I suppose, on how libellous the question was).
He was more credible than IDS (although anybody would have been more credible than IDS). But he was divisive and not blessed with amazing judgement looking back on his career.
333 Or Gordon claiming for his “second” home in Scotland when his first home in London… is paid for by the taxpayer as well.
325. As well as being ****ed off at his party, the scale of the defeat was so great that it would have been difficult for him to hang on.
As for Clarke in 97, I think he could have won had he not linked up with Redwood before the final ballot. Apparently Major was backing Clarke until then but changed his support to Hague because he was still angry at Redwood for his treachery in 1995.
The rotten expenses system was put in place by Thatcher with a nod and a wink. To prevent the public knowing that she was raising the salaries of MPs, Thatcher approved the ‘ask no questions’ system of expenses. Brown inherited the system, no one forces anyone else to make money out of the public, even Cameron thought it was ok.
330 - disgraceful.
If the 6 parliamentarians are charged tomorrow, it’ll be ‘A Tory peer has been charged as a result of the investigation into the expenses scandal.’ and at the end it will be ‘mumble mumble 3 government MPs and two peers were also included…’
lucymanning
Belfast: will there won’t be a deal. Will the PM turn up here tomorrow? all up in the air
Bookies’ best prices - Brighton Pavilion
Grn EVS (Lad, VC)
Con 9/5 (WH)
Lab 5/1 (PP)
LD 66/1 (Bet365, Lad, PP)
332 - That’s pretty much exactly how I see it. If Labour are well beaten, I see Gordon Brown following Neil Kinnock’s and Michael Foot’s example of announcing early that he’s stepping down, but allowing proper time for a contest. Even if the contest starts straight away after a 6 May election, the election would only just be concluded by 30 June, so the slightest delay would result in a Q3 departure. For Q2 to win, Gordon Brown would pretty much have to throw the keys of the batmobile at Harriet Harman or for us to have an earlier election and Gordon Brown would need to stand down immediately.
Richard Nabavi and you were indeed trumpeting this last summer, and some of us were listening.
341 LA
More twaddle.
Blair and Brown inherited lost of things and merrily changed anything they wanted, they could have changed expenses any time in the last 13 years. They didn’t.
338 Sir Norfolk - I agree with that. Portillo got a lot right, early on, in his analysis of what needed to be done, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he would have been the right leader to make it happen.
341 Ms Allen, and Mrs Thatcher was PM last in power? Oh yes c20yrs ago.
How are your kids? Teenagers yet?
335.Now he would have to defend his record: selling gold at the worst point, longest recession ever, largest defecits in peace-time etc etc. His attacks would be easily deflected.
Being Leader of the Opposition after being PM…I mean what a comedown. He’ll no doubt be touted around the IMF, or as some global financial regulator when he loses office, God help us.
104 Peter - let’s not forget the most important political biography of all, the long-awaited tome from Anthony Charles Lynton Blair.
That should make interesting reading in terms of what is written about his one time closest ally.
Having been out of office for almost 3 years by the time of the election, it must be assumed that these will appear within a couple of months of Brown being booted out of office.
334 - Hindsight is 20/20 of course, and the menu was not appetising for the Tories in 1997 (to mix your metaphor). But either Clarke or Howard would have been better - although Lilley or Redwood worse.
348 - Careful with the accusations of fiction Plato.
Even Grayling didn’t make up a seaside town with 300 stabbings per year.
Guido on C4 news at 7pm talking about expenses.
O/T. Plato, have you seen this? India threatening to leave the IPCC because it can’t be trusted.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7157590/India-to-pull-out-of-IPCC.html
What do these constituencies have in common?
Brecon&Radnor, Ludlow, Richmond (YORKS), North Norfolk, North Devon, Bridgwater & West Somerset.
341. The real problem is that the number of decent MPs in all Parties who wouldn’t dream of exploiting and/or abusing the system which was deliberately set up to be abused in one manner, but not others, is so low that they daren’t speak up because they would isolate themselves within their own Party and suffer as a result. The second-home flipping of Osborne, Blears and co is an out and out disgrace but the system as written didn’t prohibit it. Nobody in parliament addresses the moral aspects of the matter because, after all, these are MPs and those involved in the flipping don’t even understand the concept, let alone their own place within it.
341.Are you 12? 3 MPs tomorrow named by Adam Boulton as possibly being charged with criminal conduct are all Labour. The expenses system was not set it stone and Labour have been in control of the House of Commons since 1997. They weren’t shy at bringing in routine guillotining of debates, reducing the times for debates, changing the pay scale of MPs introducing a Communication Allowance costing thousands. They have amended so much about how the HofC is regulated that to blame Thatcher is…weak.
354
thanx
Chris Monkton did a hilarious talk in Oz too
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/04/lord-monckton-wows-melbourne/
355- They are all the same shape?
341. the blame thatcher excuse. if the system waso rotten and corrupt why didn’t the sea green incorruptibles tony blair and gordon brown do something to renove the possibility of temptation? they have only been in a position of power and influence since may 1997.
brown and balls perfect combination for keeping labour out of power for 2 parliaments at least.
341. “The rotten expenses system was put in place by Thatcher with a nod and a wink.”
I’ve heard this line of attack on the radio this afternoon from some Labour idiot. Blame Thatcher? The bunker needs some new material.
Why link Balls and Brown together, Labour may hang on in 2010 or go into coalition with LDs. Could be Brown and Clegg, with Darling and Cable running the economy together. Much better than letting boy George get hold of the books, how would Georgie cope? His unsure performance with Sopel did not give me any confidence in his ability, he didn’t seem to have a clue about anything.
361 It was those Polish Nazis wot did it
355 - ANSWER: despite all being very large, rural seats, they’ve decided to count on the night of the election this year.
What do these seats have in common? Northampton North/South, Milton Keynes North/South, Reading East/West.
I think you can guess the answer.
362. and neither have you.
360. You cannot just blame Mrs Thatcher. All the party heavyweights who were in on the conspiracy when they were younger and carried it through to the present day are equally to blame. It is difficult to pass judgement on the MPs who came along later, saw the system as stinking and didn’t take advantage of it themselves but at the same time did not speak out about it either. They would have had to have an awful lot of courage to face the bullies in the whips office and the lobbies.
362 “Could be Brown and Clegg, with Darling and Cable running the economy together.”
HAHAHHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAH
Tweedle Dum and Andy Pandy supported by Tweedle Dee with Noddy
341 - someone’s clutching at straws there, Lilly. It’s not me, it’s you.
362.Who said satire is dead? Ok clearly you are a wind-up merchant, I shall remember to ignore your future posts.
The Democratic nominee for governor of Illinois is already calling for the Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor to drop out of the race, following relevations about his prostitute-beating past:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/2029953,cohen-quinn-knife-quit-020410.article
Never a boring day in Illinois politics.
341. Do your homework and don’t rely on the lies put out by Labour. In any event Brown was given a lot of warnings to sort the expenses system and failed to do so.
320 tim
Hague didn’t lose the 2001 GE for the Tories. Not even the return of the Mummy could have won that.
In 1997, the country shifted to the soft centre: they hadn’t abandoned Thatcherism but wanted its focus to move to public services and for it to be delivered by a leader with velvet hands and a silvery tongue. Blair was the people’s provider.
With the centre ground held by Blair, the Tories focussed their energies on resolving the mutinies in their own ranks. Clarke was made unelectable by Europe, Portillo (if available) by Clause 28, and, Howard by a fear of the Transylvanian night. Boy William managed the party in accordance with his McKinsey training but had problems with his media image. He (and his party) also failed to recognise that Tory troops, policies and strategies needed to be trained for a fight on the centre ground.
Once again, the IDS election was more about excluding candidates than choosing a winner. Howard was just stabilisation, though he deserves the credit for bringing on Cameron and the move to the Notting Hill set.
So Cameron’s election became the first positive choice of leader and the first acceptance of the need to reposition the party.
Would Portillo’s election have enabled the Tories to win in 2005? No. The 1997 Portillo was not the 2010 Portillo.
Had the 2010 Portillo been elected in 1997, who knows? Possible, but Blair had first to withdraw from the centre to allow the Tories to advance into territory that was formerly held by the enemy. Blair didn’t do that, even when carrying the burden of Iraq, until 2007.
A 2010 Portillo vs 2007 Blair in 2005? It would have been a close run race certainly, but it was not Hague’s election that prevented it happening.
367.
Every so often, Plato reveals by deep political analysis that ’she’ is really Martin Day’s nephew.
366.equally to blame? Labour had more than 400MPs in 1997, they had control of the House, they voed for one of their own as Speaker and the consequences have flowed from that, I don’t get your moral equivilence.
Paging Nick Palmer!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/7158528/Man-cant-prove-ID-with-ID-card.html
Darren McTeggart tried to use the £30 card to pick up a replacement credit card from a branch of Santander – formerly Abbey – in Manchester, where the scheme was rolled out on a voluntary basis last year.
Mr McTeggart, one of the first people to get the card, said: “They said it was not on their list of approved ID.
On topic, No Gordon and Ed will have caused the vast majority of problems Cameron has to deal with and therefore he can justifiably endlessly blame them.
Slightly off topic. I really am amazed that the BBC seriously seem to have a campaign to stop the Tories. This is the 4th story on the BBC website
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8498095.stm
Now, Gordon and friends misrepresent figures every single time they speak, so to suddenly make a massivve story out of a lack of clarification by the Tories is biased in the extreme.
The BBC yet again show they are the friends of Labour and the enemy of the people.
I hate to puff this, I really do.
Tony ‘Nipple Count’ Livesy is running a phone-in on his R5 show about MPs expenses and voting intention IIRC - starts at 10pm.
320/372 - The reason Labour got almost exactly the same landslide in 2001 as they did in 1997 is that Blair chose not to spend any of his substantial political capital actually trying to make any big changes to the mainstream political settlement (there were some well-trailed constitutional changes including devolution).
In the face of a do-nothing-too-controversial government allied to a fairly benign global and local economy, it’s unsurprising that the Tories didn’t make much headway. I’m not sure anyone else would have done substantially better than Hague, but I’m still baffled as to why he went for the leadership when he did.
352. Tim
Re Grayling
Do you have to keep going on and on and on and on about the same f4cking thing all the time. I pity your other half! If you have one that is. Just change the record or shut up !
Go out and socialise for a few hours, you would feel and act more human!
Ooh, it gets better (or worse)…
A “sleaze” investigation is to be launched after an SNP donor paid £9,000 for a lunch date with Alex Salmond in the Scottish Parliament.
Nicola Sturgeon, his deputy, was also embroiled in the “cash-for-access” row after she raised another £2,000 for the party by promising to host a similar event.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/7158825/Alex-Salmond-in-cash-for-access-sleaze-row.html
372 - He (and his party) also failed to recognise that Tory troops, policies and strategies needed to be trained for a fight on the centre ground.
That is exactly why he was such a disaster.
377 - what’s the best alternative to R5 these days?
Bacon worked in the evening but jars in the afternoon, and Livesey is just a mess. Campbell & Derbyshire are as irritating as ever, so that just leaves me with the tolerable Logan, the ever-excellent Drive and (on occasion) Up All Night.
373 I know you suspect that I’m actually a bloke, so I’ll assume that’s why you referred to me as a NEPHEW of Martin Day!
Idiot
376.
“Gordon and friends misrepresent figures every single time they speak,”
Your pathetic apology for Grayling doing this same thing - “lack of clarification”, my foot! - shows that you actually approve of what both Gordo and Grayling do. You have total contempt for the electorate and support the end justifying the means as long as it is YOUR end. You do not give a monkeys about the BBC, do you? It’s just a cheap diversion against your own lot being caught with their pants down/on fire/both.
I’m waiting for the day after the GE when Lilly Allen will whip of ‘her’ mask and reveal ‘herself’ to be a well-know right-wing blogger, who’s ‘avin a larf.
380.
“an SNP donor paid £9,000 for a lunch date with Alex Salmond”
Do they not have any NHS access for rich people in Scotland?
382 I’ve defected to R4 or silence in moments of duress - its such a pity as I used to give 80% of their output the thumbs up [I even saved Mayo when I was out at work so I could listen in the evening!] , now its 20%
376 - Lack of clarification?
Claiming 6000 violent attacks per annum in Milton Keynes when the local police say its 81?
341. Here we go again Lilly you really should know what you are talking about before you spout off….
The rotten expenses system was put in place by Thatcher with a nod and a wink
Er no it wasn’t. It was proposed by Harold Wilson’s Government in 1970 and introduced in 1971 by Edward Heath’s.
Lets also have the highlights of the latest Labour Government’s involvement in this:
2001 A Labour MP in the Labour Government introduced an amendment to increase the ACA by 43% instead of the normal inflation linked rise. The one and only time the ACA increase was not inflation linked.
2003. As part of Gordon Brown’s 2003 Finance Bill MP’s voted to exempt their allowances from tax (whilst scrapping Her Majesty’s tax exemption).
2004. It was decided to change the rules regarding second homes for Ministers which provided the prelude for the flipping scandal that involved so many of Gordon Brown’s ministers.
Oh and lets not forget that it was Labour who brought in the Freedom Of Information Act which precipitated the exposure of this debacle in the first place.
Oh and Brown couldn’t even get off his fat arse to vote to get rid of the John Lewis List when it was challenged in 2007.
It is the typical story of this Labour Government, ill-considered actions, incompetently undertaken resulting in a shameful debacle.
I don’t know if anyone read this kaletsky article but apparent Thatcher and Reagan are to blame for all our ills
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/anatole_kaletsky/article7014090.ece
Not Clinton and bush then who had a policy of pushing sub prime and borrowing off the chinese or Brown didn’t really understand the idea of regulation and who encouraged banks to merge and therefore become too big too fail.
We need to truly learn the roots(i.e. Clinton and Brown’s policies) of the credit crunch if we are truly to salvage our version of capitalism and take on China.
385. Me too. Has to be a spoof.
387 true - its only Drive that’s worth listening to now, though Nicky Campbell can put the odd searching question to politicians which catches them out.
I see that all the spread markets are being taken down overnight.
I bet 24 hours - why are they not available?
The reason you should vote Labour is that it is the only way to protect the great liberal consensus which has thrived in Britain in recent years. This consensus protects public services, supports the Arts and promotes equality, tolerance and human rights. Labour leaders may come and go but it doesn’t change the fact that the most productive way to live is through supporting a liberal consensus. Any other perspective produces self interest and a mean spirit which saps cooperative endeavour.
Last year Government ministers were attacking the ONS for the way in which it presented and commented on its statistics. Today the ONS rightly rebukes Chris Grayling. It is a pleasure to see a truly independent department with integrity at work.
re 352. Tim - you have exhausted your Grayling ration for the day.
OT Criminal Records check
Wondered if the combined skill of PB can work again
I am British and need to get a Criminal records check for a visa application for another country and I have been searching everywhere to try and download the forms required to complete by hand or even apply online. Tried the obvious CRB etc and no luck.
Can the forms be downloaded on line? if so where from? Need to get hold of them quite urgently and I am not in the UK so cannot really call into the Post office, solicitor or similar
thanks
388 As always I have little idea what you are banging on about(normally because you invent it) As I understand it their was a change in the way figures were calculated in 2002, and that is the problem.
390 Kaletsky is less accurate than Mystic Meg
I vividly recall a column of his confessing to being a crap predictor of well, anything…
Try Googling ‘kaletsky anatole sorry forecast’
Oodles of hilarious hits
393 - God knows.
Theres a theory floating that they are confused by the UUP-Tory alliance and whether they should count as Conservatives.
What do you make of that?
Lilly Allen, Labour turned its back on the liberal consensus when it introduced identity cards and started locking up people without trial.
393 Mike - I think you’ve answered your own question when you say I bet 24 hours
391. Sally why does it have to be a spoof. We hear that sort of nonsense day in and day out from Labour politicians and spokespeople.
It was only 12 months ago that every second sentence from the Great Flunking Cyst used to be Thatcher this, Major that….
How quickly we forget what a dreadful shower this Labour Government have been.
393 - Presumably because it’s not good business for the spread firms to leave the markets up; I’m not even sure whether they have 24-hour offices, let alone 24-hour coverage of what remain fairly minor markets for them.
352 tim, were you not cherry picking Mori stats the the other day to suit your case.. your hypocrisy is demonstrable.
402 Posting new threads at 0300-0500 says a lot about OGH’s tea drinking habits.
I do the same, but it’s to let whining greyhounds out for a spin
Mr Brown and Mr Pink?
http://popcritics.com/movies/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/resevoir-dogs.jpg
By election today Newcastle under Lyme. Cons seat gain in 2008 by a sizeable majority. Can Labour recapture it. Could be a sign, especially as the Lib Dems and UKIP were not that far adrift of Labour in the ward. Could be an indicator the way things are going. The national constituency is within striking distance for the Conservatives, good for an outside bet, although some might see it as a Bridge too Far.
Re 394.
OK I give up that has to be a spoof…..
ROFLMAO
Who could make up such nonsense…..
404 - They’ve had someone there authorising seat trades in the evenings haven’t they?
I’m sure I’ve traded after 7pm before.
last won by the Tories in 1900….
Oops what was MalcolmG saying earlier about Wee Eck?
Alex Salmond in ‘cash-for-access’ sleaze row
A “sleaze” investigation is to be launched after an SNP donor paid £9,000 for a lunch date with Alex Salmond in the Scottish Parliament.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/7158825/Alex-Salmond-in-cash-for-access-sleaze-row.html
389. If you have a tough, fair Parliamentary Commissioner, the expenses system works. They had one. But she upset the greedy bastards. It really started going pear-shaped when NuLab forced out Elizabeth Filkin because she refused to OK troughing.
404 - Yes, they’ll have people in at least until 10 to cover evening sports action. I don’t think they are through-the-night yet though, unlike most fixed-odds firms.
Will Labour take a (polling) hit tomorrow, if it transpires that 3 of their MPs (and none from any other party) are to be prosecuted?
413. Good point. I’d forgot about that and I forgot to add the accusation that Blair, Brown etc didn’t exactly try to hard to dissuade their MPs against that massive rise in ACA because they wanted to buy them off……
409- It might be nonsense, but it’s more plausible than any other reason to vote Labour.
Greedy hypocrite Kauffman tried to claim £200 for grapefruit bowls!
416. S&S I agree there is no plausible reason to vote Labour…..
414 - I haven’t a clue whats going on but the Next Chancellor Market hasn’t reappeared at all.
I get the feeling expenses has been discounted save perhaps for a small boost to Others (which will peak at less than 5.999%)
405. I suspect if you asked 100 policemen their thoughts on the official crime statistics, 100 of them would just laugh in your face.
They are truly reality stretched as far as Gordon Brown’s delusional statements this week on Defence, Reform, Care for the Elderly, Funds with no Name etc etc.
417.Commons fees office denied the request for Gerald Kaufman to claim £200 for grapefruit bowls.
So I think we can now say for sure that Gerald Kaufman has no balls!
Jon Cruddas (basically) declares himself in the running for the Labour leadership
http://www.labourlist.org/cruddas-would-be-in-the-race-labour-leadership
Is this Mandy getting his alibi ready?
“It wasn’t me guv”?
If this ends up as anything like an unvarnished account of life in Brown’s government, then it could make for grimly fascinating viewing.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5752473/mandelsons-video-diary.thtml
412. JSFL, Nothing to worry about here, just usual Labour antics, thinking others are like them. All that happened here was Eck auctioned a lunch and was going to have it in Holyrood building, Labour whinging as usual and only action is Parliament to say whether he can take people to the restaurant , no investigation. As ever labour will get egg on their faces, Grey should be more concerned about taking money for 7 years from local labour party, but they count that as normal.
419 - lol. I need Others to be well over 6 since I’ve only got three parties running for me. Unless you want to give me the English Democrats and the Natural Law Party as well?
417. Small beer in the greater scheme of things
412 Investigation number 5467 into the SNP. Ho-hum.
424. Typical Labourgraph spin then. OK…
jsfl et al please give me one reason to vote Tory, really can’t think of a single one.
Speaking as a Conservative supporter I have to say that I was very disappointed with Grayling on the crime stats.I know that Brown and NuLab are truly odious in the misleading way they present stats but as we(the Conservative Party) are offering ourselves as a Party who will do things differently then in my view it was clearly wrong in principle to do a comparison between 2 sets of figures when the basis of calculation had changed. It was politically stupid as well bearing in mind that IDS had only a few days ago said that such a comparison was very misleading.There is a very good case to be made politically in how things need to change in tackling certain types of crime and the Tories have a good narrative to tell on it - Graylings stupidity though simply had the result that his narrative on crime was drowned out by the controversy of his misuse of stats.
Sorry all my fellow Conservative(and at least in my case Cameron) supporters!) but if we fess up we should own up and hope the Party takes a bit of notice and gets its act together.
428. JSFL, thank goodness after me stating how honest he was.
429. Swerve.
422 - 20/1 @ SJ looks a spot of value there - he drifted after seeming to rule himself out, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see him back into single figures sooner or later.
429. Don’t worry about it. I don’t think the Tories need your vote.
Have a free cringe, courtesy of POTUS…
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2010/02/president-obamas-remarks-at-national.html
418/429- I suspect this argument will go nowhere…
Is anyone else finding that their posts are not being published on the Coffee House Blog threads? I think I have been given the blogging equivalent of an Asbo there, my first!
I was being critical, cannot say I am a fan right now, but still its a bit off.
417. “Greedy hypocrite Kauffman tried to claim £200 for grapefruit bowls!”
I thought the £9000 telly claim was bad, and that moat cleaning and the duck house were the silliest claims, but £200 grapefruit bowls leave me dumbfounded.
429. please give me one reason to vote Tory, really can’t think of a single one.
To get rid of Gordon Brown. Most of the cabinet and the PLP would sign up for that.
Re lunch with Salmond.
I think whoever bought lunch with Nicola got the better bargain.
Not wholly chuffed with this. I know every other party does this kind of thing - Labour Red Rose dinners, Cameron hosting lunches in his office - but I’d rather have my own lot as squeaky clean.
There is, however, no “sleaze”. As Salmond said “Since the lunch concerned has yet to take place, and since it would cause me no inconvenience to hold it elsewhere, this is the ideal circumstances for the SPCB to decide on a position for the future, which would then, of course, apply to all members.”
428 Have to agree. This sort of access is practiced by all the parties. DC was critised and censured for allowing privileged access to the HoC a couple of years ago for a similar issue. The Conservatives have a list of donation amounts to gain you access to different types of events and personalities. I’m pretty sure similar if not so widely known setups run in all the parties.
435- Tim B
I just love the way his speech is circulated by the White House with (Applause) inserted every few lines…
Anyway, nobody is listening inside the Beltway, everyone is preparing for the incoming snowstorm…
429. Lilly
Couldn’t you think of an easier question?
1. They are not Labour
2. They don’t have leader called Gordon Brown
3. They don’t have a deputy leader called Harriet Harman etc etc….
4. They recognise the problems that face this country (even if they don’t have all the right answers yet) whereas Labour haven’t got a clue
5. They have elected representatives who still believe in democracy, Labour clearly don’t.
6. They won’t roll over and play dead if their leader turns out to be a dud. Labour have.
7. They won’t try and tax their way out of this economic mess that Brown has created. Labour will.
8. They have some half decent ideas on energy and the environment. Labour haven’t got a clue.
9. They will unravel Labours heinous authoritarianism
10. They won’t try and ‘fix’ the voting system.
Need I go on?
On top of that I just think this Labour Government is the most self-serving, corrupt, ill-informed, ill-prepared, incompetent, hubristic bunch of idiots this country has had to suffer and as a result they have done this country such damage that it will take decades to recover frOm.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100025013/vacancy-at-the-imf-any-interest-in-downing-street/
440. “I think whoever bought lunch with Nicola got the better bargain.”
She was only £2,000 instead of £9,000 for the
bigsmall man himselfA steal, as it were…
40 Lunch with Gnashers? Don’t think it will catch on.
40 = 440
breaking news
CPS says 2 MPS will face charges - John Snow
Ch 4 breaking news, 2 Labour MPs will face criminal charges
444.
Pathetic. Spinning for Gordon?
Put the lunatic in charge of the asylum; the alcoholic in charge of the drinks cabinet; the arsonist, the matches.
CH4 2 Lab MPs to face charges.
Two MPs to be charged:
One possibility is the member for Scunthorpe. Another, the member for Bury North. Allegedly.
Oh dear
Politically this could have an impact as Labour’s, to put it charitably, extremely optimistic growth forecasts are what allow it to claim that it will cut the deficit in half in four years. If those forecasts become even more discredited, they might have to be revised downwards in the Budget. This would scupper the government’s deficit reduction plan.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5752628/the-old-lady-is-becoming-more-pessimistic.thtml
451, whose Bury North? I recall Scunthorpe is Morley.
Channel 4 News announced 2 Labour Mps to be prosecuted
135.Interesting to read that story about Sarkozy and Merkel backing Brown. I was speaking to a Labour-supporting friend a month or so back. Now, this fellow worships Gordon and has taken hook, line and sinker the idea that Gordon, and Gordon alone, rescued world capitalism from Armageddon. Anyway, his view was that even if Dave won the election, the world leaders ‘couldn’t possibly risk’ Gordon being out of the frame, so Obama and the EU would insist that Dave make Gordon his chancellor. I thought the idea was wacky at first, but maybe there’s something in it.
ROTFLMAO!!
That’s the funniest thing I’ve read in ages
451. That’s two Tory gains we can mark down then.
Don’t know if anyone has followed the appalling attempts to create further hatred against gays/lesbians in Uganda but the US President has spoken strongly against it this morning. That the US right having been some of the precursors for this legislation is not surprising when you see that nearly three quarters of self identified Republican supporters don’t think that gays/lesbians should be allowed to be teachers.
“Pillay said the draft law would breach international standards and it “proposes draconian punishments for people alleged to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered — namely life imprisonment, or in some cases, the death penalty.”
It could lead to a prison sentence of up to three years for anyone failing to report within 24 hours the identities of any lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered person, she added.
Uganda’s Ethics and Integrity Minister Nsaba Buturo has said a revised law would probably limit the maximum penalty for those convicted to life in prison rather than execution.”
Well, that’s okay then….
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6134EZ20100204?type=politicsNews
If I was to believe in good and evil in the religious manner I know which side these supposed Christians would be on, and it’s not the one that they imagine.
O/T - but being busy and just glancing through it’s worrying how much of an echo chamber recent threads have been - a large number of people just agreeing with those who they see as being on the same side. The number of ‘hey, look what I think’, ‘you know what, you’re right’ conversations just crossing over each other gives me little hope for constructive government in the near future, especially if passing legislation without the necessary votes is needed.
452, it won’t scupper the plan because there isn’t one, just a vague notion of reducing the deficit whilst the lunatic in Number 10 runs around promising to spend more here there and everywhere.
453
Chaytor
They certainly deserve it, although why just them? There are plenty of others who were just as bad.
456
I would have thought Independents would have stood a good chance.
If Devine isn’t charged, it’s a travesty.
422. Wibbler. Thanks for that.
423. Aaron. I’m on! I now have a Baker’s dozen in my stable of runners for the Next Labour Leader Handicap Stakes.
Bad news for Labour and Brown about these prosecutions.
459, cheers.
I don’t know if there are any others quite *that* bad, but there are certainly a number more who have very dubious positions.
460, possibly, though I hope the loathsome Rantzen loses badly in Moron’s seat.
Devine surely? Or have they found that sparky that put his shower in?
Lord Hanningfied named as Tory peer up for CPS action.
Rest are Labour - Morely, Chaytor, Devine, Uddin and someone else
461, which one’s Devine?
[Sorry, I seem to have forgotten much more than everybody else about this].
440. Oldnat, agree partially with you, however not in any way comparable with th eREd Rose Dinners. Be interesting to see if anybody cares to check who has done similar previously. Also far from Gray’s spot of trouble where the local Labour council provide men and marquees, etc for 7 successive years to help Labour raise cash. That was good use of public funds.
OT: No Lib Dem on QT, again.
I’m annoyed by this. Much as I tend to find the pretentious, holier-than-thou EU-phile clowns that appear for Team Yellow irksome, they should, with few exceptions, have a regular seat on QT. Instead we have a Labour peer, a Labour MP and an ex-Labour MP, plus a Conservative and a twonk from the press.
465 Plato
Where was that? C4 only mentioned 2.
so, tories for silly claims, labour for criminal claims
480. Scott, you are well behind, only thing from this is to check whether they can take people into the Holyrood restaurant, how can you investigate something that has not happened.
466 Morris Dancer
Amongst other things, he was alleged to have made up receipts from a fake company for shelving expenses (and other stuff too, IIRC).
465 Is that recent Plato, because those are the names who were in the frame for ‘consideration’ all day.
The two MPs are the ones who look like they are actually being preceded on.
468 - There’s no Labour MP.
472 - The allegations against David Wilshire are similar but larger so it looks like they are just going for the phantom mortgages.
468.Morris, I agree.
472, much obliged, Mr. wibbler.
I’d forgotten that, or maybe I just never heard about it. A problem (one of many) with the Telegraph’s rubbish reporting was that there was a flood of information, making it easy to miss the serious stuff.
re 454. Anybody got any links?
469
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7015324.ece IIRC - have visted so many sites I may be wrong
I would like a high turnout at the next election, and if the only way for that to happen is if all 390 fiddling MPs stand down, so be it.
474, oh, is Clare Short independent now?
That’s still a Labour peer, two ex-Labour MPs, a Tory and a cretinous columnist. A panel of 5 but no need apparently for the third major party in British politics. Lib Dems deserve mocking for their silly views, cowardice, and the fact that they have Ed Davey as a frontbencher, but that’s no excuse for habitually excluding them from a supposedly public service broadcaster’s regular political panel show.
I’m doubly annoyed. Not only is it indefensible and stupid, it’s forced me to speak up for the Lib Dems. Grr.
480 Ditto - a clean start would be fab, the downside is loads of newbies who don’t get it [that may perversely be a good thing right now]
480 - That means Clegg Cameron and Brown, by your definition.
The turnout in the Euro elections last year was actually down on the previous ones in 2004. The expenses scandal did put people off, not encourage them to vote on that occasion.
ITN News’s website is an absolute disgrace. I just spend about 10 minutes trying to find their news headlines and all I kept coming across was their corporate spiel despite trying numerous links.
479 I think that’s the stuff under discussion. CH4 said the 2 were ‘breaking news’.
481 - I agree with you on the Lib Dems.
483 thats right tim, smear everyone.. its the only way….
481.Morris Dancer, so close to a GE, QT should be making sure that there is clear representation from all the parties. And if that is not possible because they do not provide a guest, they should state this.
new thread
New thread
DPP will announce prosecutions at 11am tomorrow.
Morely, Uddin, Lord Clark named by Sky plus another who I didn’t catch
I was curious to see how often expenses would be mentioned in tonight’s phone canvass - the team said it didn’t come up much, in fact. No dominant theme at all - travellers, road markings, care charges and other local things dominating. But quite a lot of interest - very few people saying they wouldn’t vote. (I’m going to be more discreet about the findings as the election approaches.)
On another front, the all-party reform committee is pretty miffed with both front benches at the possibility that there will be an unholy alliance to kick the proposed changes into touch - expect to hear more about this in the next few days.
oldnat. 440. “I think whoever bought lunch with Nicola got the better bargain.
Not wholly chuffed with this……… but I’d rather have my own lot as squeaky clean.”
But as highlighted earlier in the day Salmon is not “squeaky clean” on his multiple parliamentary incomes, has form on expenses and won’t apologise:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5320566/Alex-Salmond-claims-he-was-victim-of-MPs-expenses-system.html
Released from the cares of high office, Brown and Balls together are the Opposition combination Tories would be wise to fear..”
Never read so much nonsense.