Introducing the Andy Cooke Seat Calculator
February 8th, 2010
Based on the concept of a pendulum - not a ratchet
Later today we’ll be introducing a totally new commons seat calculator that has been developed by long-standing PBer and statistician, Andy Cooke. This will be published here sometime after lunch.
It’s stems from the thinking outlined in Andy’s initial post yesterday in which he argued for the merits of “pendulum thinking” as we seek to project the coming election rather than the mind-set of “the ratchet.”
For the conventional approach to seat projection is simply to go back to what happened in May 2005 without any thought of the previous two elections when there were disproportionated swings in what for the coming contest are the key marginals.
What happened before is locked in as if in a ratchet. Andy wants us to think in pendulum terms and go back to Tony Blair’s landslide in 1997.
The percentage movements are huge. Andy wrote: “….when all three elections are taken into account, the 2010 Labour seats with up to 10% majorities hold an extra pro-Labour swing of 4.3-4.9%. This drops off to 4.2% for the marginals with majorities of 10-15% and 2.7% for those with 15-20% majorities, and drops down to negligible amounts beyond that.”
So what happens if a proportion of this historical swing starts to unravel - a critical question because so much of it occurred in the constituencies which are the 2010 key battle-grounds and where YouGov, ICM and Ipsos-MORI have recorded disproportionate moves.
-
Andy’s post this afternoon sets out the detailed assumptions and illustrates them with a table showing the effect at different levels of Tory lead/deficit. We get a range of possible seats for the three main parties together with a percentage probability of three separate outcomes - Conservative majority, Conservatives the largest party, Labour the largest party.
We also get what will be a very controversial suggestion of what the minimum vote threshold for a Tory majority government might be.
The reason we are publishing this in three separate segments is partly for our own convenience - I’m out all day and Andy won’t be able to deal comments until he gets home from work - and partly to prepare the ground. Those who have not yet read Andy’s post of yesterday morning might like to do so.
Only time will tell whether Andy is right or not but at the very minimum his challenge to the prevailing consensus will lead to a more informed approach to the coming battle.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Yay
What a tease! Can’t wait.
Good article Mike, now I’ve read it. Methinks I’ll go back and read Andy’s first article later today. You certainly know how to drag thing out.
Will Andy be providing a separate Scottish seats calculator, as both Baxter and Scotland Votes do?
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll_scot.html
http://www.scotlandvotes.com/westminster/
Reuters: ‘Labour closing in on Conservatives’
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE6170HF20100208
6 nad here’s the article Plato posted at end of earlier thread..
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-we-need-to-get-a-grip-1892247.html
I like the pendulum idea. We talk of swinging voters, yet treat them as if they can only swing in one direction.
“when all three elections are taken into account, the 2010 Labour seats with up to 10% majorities hold an extra pro-Labour swing of 4.3-4.9%. This drops off to 4.2% for the marginals with majorities of 10-15% and 2.7% for those with 15-20% majorities, and drops down to negligible amounts beyond that.”
Isn’t this what old fashioned-ie pre the pendulum and the ratchet-folk used to call ‘tactical voting’? And isn’t this already catered for and why pollsters spend so much time looking for shy lying misrememberers?
“8.I like the pendulum idea.”
For certain MP’s, I prefer the Pit and the Pendulum idea!
Food inflation in January was at the highest rate for two years…
The pendulum idea is very, very far from being new (I seem to recall grainy old b&w pictures of a BBC election pendulum being swung back in the mid 20th century). However, Andy is to be warmly welcomed as a modern proponent, just as John Napier was welcomed when he popularised the decimal point.
IMHO both Baxter and Wells are about to get their bahoochies skelped in the coming GE. We’ll be struggling to suppress the guffaws for years to come.
What happened to VIPA (and VIPA Caledonia)?
New Scottish Poll
http://www.snptacticalvoting.com/2010/02/new-scottish-poll.html
8. Cameron note to self:
1. keep Hague off the telly
2. Ditto Gove
3. Give Hilton a kick up the backside. We’re looking amateurish.
TNS-BMRB/Herald – Holyrood voting intention
(+/- change on TNS-BMRB 3 Nov 2009)
Lab 37% (+5)
SNP 35% (-5)
No other figures published yet, although article says: “there is little change in the standing of the other parties”. ( In November TNS measured the Conservatives at 13% and the Lib dems at 11%.)
From The Herald: “… Labour jubilation would be premature. The sternest warning from this poll is that 37% of voters are “don’t knows” or “don’t cares”.”
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/herald-view/snp-frozen-out-by-a-winter-of-discontent-1.1004476
Note: TNS-BMRB are a member of the BPC, therefore we ought to have the detailed tables soon.
IMHO it is highly significant that The Herald has failed to publish the Westminster v.i. figures.
Why?
My guess is because they are good for the SNP (but I would think that, wouldn’t I?)
Note the TNS-BMRB/Herald Westminster vi figures from Nov 09:
Lab 39%
SNP 25%
Con 18%
LD 12%
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/scottish-voting-intention
Any bets that the SNP Westminster figure is within the MoE of 25%? ie. unchanged
12. Stuart. That’s a new one even for PartisanPoliticalBetting.com. Don’t link to the newspaper that runs the poll (putting Labour ahead of the Nats) but link to a website that tells you why it’s crap!
14. Sorry Stuart I misjudged you!
15. Roger
Err… please see my post at 14: a link to The Herald article is provided.
And who said that The Herald was not partisan? You clearly know little of the cosy relationship between John Smith House and most Scottish (ahem) “journalists” (sic).
16. Roger - “… Stuart I misjudged you!”
Don’t worry Roger dear chap: ’tis a common flaw in PB posters to misjudge me!
It is only human to err.
The idea of a pendulum seems very sensible to me and I fully agree that 2005 should not be the base year from which to look at things, but rather the sweep of votes changes over at least one government cycle.
The graph of absolute vote counts across the years suggests that all the parties have their irreducible core vote and that a notably smaller number of voters move between parties. You may or may not agree with what I see in the graph – namely that very broadly the movements seem to be mostly between Tories vs DNV and Lab vs LibDem.
What must surely be true is that the marginals are the seats where there are, for whatever reason, a bigger share of these movable votes. Both Labour and the Tories will get at least 175 seats or so each. These seats are not really in play. Likewise the safe seats for all other parties. There are only about 250 out 650 seats that are in play. And of course these must be the ones where we have seen more swing in past elections.
So, whilst the swing observed in safe seats adds to the overall national swing data, it is the swing in the 250 odd marginal seats that actually makes any meaningful difference to the outcome in terms of MPs. By definition these must surely expect to see a higher swing.
And who cares what the polls are saying in Bootle or in Kensington & Chelsea? We know the results there already. The outcome is to be understood from what a poll of the 250 would tell us.
Odds on the high tory seat bands have come down significantly in the last 24hrs, yet the con overall maj market on betfair has barely moved at all - You can still get 1.5 (or 1/2 in old money). If the polls stabilise and Andy’s analysis stands up to scrutiny, i expect the NOM odds to lengthen, pushing the con overall maj odds down.
Or at least that’s what i’m hoping!
20. - “20.Odds on the high tory seat bands have come down significantly in the last 24hrs…”
Have they?
Admittedly Corals seem to have given up on pricing CON MAJ >100, but they are still offering 25/1 on 91-100 Con seat maj, and 22/1 on 81-90 Con seat maj.
http://www.coral.co.uk/sbuk.go?page=supergrouppage&sportid=30&supergroup=a.UK+Politics&groupid=791102&lang=20&sid=20&ms=MS&type=0
Cameron PS to self:
1. Tell Willy H next time he and his bosom buddy Ashcroft go on a jolly to the US by private jet could he have a word in his shell-like about coughing up a few quid in UK tax to at least show willing.
Betfair - Party Seats Line
(party seat numbers at UK GE 2005 in brackets)
Con 343.5-349 (198)
Lab 216.5-220.5 (356)
LD 53.5-54 (62)
SNP 10.5-12.5 (6)
PC 4-5.5 (3)
DUP 7-8.5 (9)
Shall we just award the poster of the year troiphy now?
This is exactly the sort of long term strategic thinking that we need. For a while we’ve all been hung-up in the froth of daily polls and over-analysing small swings from the majority of voters who aren’t properly engaged yet.
The beauty of Cooke’s thesis is that it allows us to get away from froth and think about the art of what’s going on, even though expressed in mathematical terms.
It’s a seminal set of posts and will be a real game changer.
Like the best ideas, Andy has proposed something that hasn’t been obvious but, now we’ve been told, it seems obvious.
Andy Cooke. PB Poster of The Year 2010 (?)
11 - You are confusing the physical use of a pendulum and the concept behind it. The old BBC “pendulum” wasn’t representing anything other than the swing from a base point at the last election ie. UNS. The key idea here is that the base point should not necessarily be seen as the last election. The further any seat is from its “base” point, the greater share of the national swing it is likely to receive subsequently. See for example several seats in North London that the Tories have recovered since 1997 (obvious example Enfield Southgate).
Of course the problem Andy has is that we have not had a proper “base” election for 2 decades, since when there has been significant demographic change and probable permanent political shifts (where eg. Conservatives are no longer contenders in favour of LibDems/SNP).
24. bunnco - “Shall we just award the poster of the year troiphy now?”
IMHO Andy Cooke is an unsung hero of PB.com.
Even if he had never published another word, he ought to be carried aloft to the podium for his seminal post picking to shreds the “Labour govt swingback” theory, showing beyond reasonable doubt that swingback only happens to Tory governments!
When was that? 2007? 2006? (My Google search skills have just failed med.) And who won Poster of the Year that year? Sean “I’m-voting-Lib-Dem” T? Go figure.
Disclosure note: I must shamefully admit that I voted for SeanT the year he won PB Poster of the Year. I am now older and wiser (and more handsome with each passing week).
This one is for Sean. We still love you!
http://www.theenglandproject.net/wordpress/?p=501
http://is-is.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2211414274&topic=2561
http://www.andrewduff.libdems.org.uk/news/000232/andrew_duff_mep_elected_leader_of_uk_lib_dems_in_european_parliament.html
Are we witnessing an unprecedented level of local variation emerging in the polls?
I’ve seen a few posts lately that seem to be suggesting that a national view of polls and UNS have had their day. My gut feel is that this may be right.
(and I still want to know how pollsters deal with the issue of people who only vote occasionally. How do they select samples to include the right proportion of people who may not have voted since 1992 but are pissed off enough to do so again now. Any polling gurus in the PB commentariat who can advise?)
Beware of pendulums they can be very hypnotic
25. My understanding of his theory is that people vote differently in different constituencies depending on how likely they are to change the result. What I don’t understand is why this differs from ‘tactical unwind’?
Cameron. Note to Steve H.
1. Can you E our front benchers to stop wearing black suits with white ties. They look like Mormons. That Hague wallahs didn’t even fit. No wonder we’ve lost our va va voom.
Looking at the picture at the top I just have a horrible feeling this thread will now be dominated by that elusive holy grail of
’swingback theory’
*fixes seatbelt in place and braces for impact*
28. Patrick - “… seem to be suggesting that a national view of polls and UNS have had their day.”
Indeed.
One of the great achievements of The Rt Hon Dr James Gordon Brown MP has been to destroy the Labour Party as a national British party. IMHO Labour are never going to recover vast swathes of central and southern England, which were absolutely essential to the Labour victories of 1945, 1964 and 1997.
Without Middle England the Labour Party can forget ever returning one of their leaders to Number 10.
Wilson, Thatcher, Blair and Brown. All did their bit to slowly kill the Union. But Cameron could yet surpass them all.
31 — No wonder we’ve lost our va va voom.
I believe the term is ‘mojo’ now. Well I think it is ? Incidentally anyone have any idea what ‘mojo’ actually refers to?
perhaps its ‘lost our MOJOrity’?
34 - Music Of Jewish Origin.
33 Stuart Dickson
Yesterday’s NoTW story about faction fighting within the Labour Party sounded grim for Labour’s future.
http://blogs.notw.co.uk/politics/2010/02/unions-75m-plot-to-seize-control-of-labour.html
If the Unions’ faction are successful, then Labour will need another Kinnock, Blair, Mandleson before they can challenge for government.
33. Stuart
I’m intrigued.
You gladly pass the Tory poison cup every time, which is really just your way of saying the SNP will adopt SF tactics.
So how do you square the SNP accepting Tory support to pass its budgets and other laws ?
Given the UK is possibly on for its 3rd consecutive PM of Scottish extraction, how does this work against Scotland ?
Bookies’ best prices - Euro 2012 - Group Qualifying
England To Qualify (1/16), England Not To Qualify (7/1)
Ireland To Qualify (13/8), Ireland Not To Qualify (4/9)
Scotland To Qualify (10/3), Scotland Not To Qualify (1/5)
Northern Ireland To Qualify (9/1), Northern Ireland Not To Qualify (1/25)
Wales To Qualify (12/1), Wales Not To Qualify (1/50)
34.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhTCYqJsfqs&feature=fvw
Roger @30: “My understanding of his theory is that people vote differently in different constituencies depending on how likely they are to change the result. What I don’t understand is why this differs from ‘tactical unwind’?
You’re right that what you described is (partly) tactical unwind, but that’s only one component of Andy Cooke’s explanation of how Blair got his UNS-beating swings.
He also thinks that, for example, the swing Blair got was due to the marginals containing swingier voters than the non-marginals, so marginals get bigger swings, whichever way the pendulum is swinging.
(Hopefully someone will correct me if I’ve misunderstood him.)
New Sniff Petrol out:
http://www.sniffpetrol.com/
OT
Greece is definitely going to default.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/7183524/Gordon-Brown-to-attend-crisis-talks-over-Greece.html
First he saved the world, now he is going to destroy it. We need to draw lots and throw him overboard.
42, then he’d jinx the sea, it’d dry up, and the ship of state would be stranded.
What we need is to fire him into space from some sort of giant artillery gun.
43
Or to use a slight twist on the traditional have him swallowed by an EnormoHaddock
36. Dave B - “If the Unions’ faction are successful, then Labour will need another Kinnock, Blair, Mandleson before they can challenge for government.”
Nope. I honestly think that too many English folk have had their fill of the Labour Party for the rest of their lives.
Since WWII, the longest period that Labour have been out Number 10 is 18 years (1979-1997). If the Unions’ faction are successful then that 18 years would be comfortable surpassed. But the problem is: Labour have not got 20 years in which to regroup and find a winner like Blair. Why? Because the Union will just not survive another 18 years of Tory govt in London.
Labour have got a tiny, tiny window in which to swiftly defeat the Far Left 5th column and the Unions. A tiny, tiny window in which to re-appeal to The Centre. The brains in the outfit (eg. arch-Blairite Jim Murphy) realise this, and thus detest Brown’s retreat to the Core Vote Strategy.
If they miss this window (late 2010 - mid 2012) then they can forget the entire game.
I confidently expect them to miss the window by a country mile. Brains like Murphy in the Labour camp are as rare as hens’ teeth.
44 - something needs to be done, he has no intention of starting to pay down any debt..
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE61700V20100208
promises promises.
Is it logical that marginal constituencies would have swingier (Cathy Mcgowan lives!) voters than anywhere else?
That the marginality of the constituency makes them vote differently is understandable but not that these constituencies breed a different sort of voter!
47. Is for Edmund at 42
Be warned! Wlliam Rees Mogg in the Tiomes today has forecast a minority Conservative Government in a Hung Parliament. With his record for forecasting, that can only mean one thing - a massive Labour victory.
6. The Indy is peddling any old nonsense now, isn’t it? Poll of polls my eye. What? Polls with different methodology. Somebody put that rag out of its misery.
50, also, no Angus Reid.
UK firms ‘cut dividends by £10bn’
“Shareholders in UK companies saw their dividend payments cut by £10bn last year, according to a report.
UK companies paid out £56.9bn to investors in 2009, 15% less than in 2008, said Capita Registrars.
Investors in the banking sector were among the worst hit, said the report, after the industry cut payouts by £6bn from 2008 levels.
It predicted dividends were unlikely to grow strongly in 2010 because of a sluggish economic recovery.
The report said banks which are partly state owned paid nothing to shareholders in 2009, HSBC made small reductions and Standard Chartered paid more cash to shareholders in dividends than it had in 2008.”
For the state supported banks: Bonuses or Dividends?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8503014.stm
47 It would be useful to have data on their demographics.
There are marginal constituencies (mostly Conservative/Lib Dem battlegrounds) where you get two large blocs of polarised voters, with a relatively small number who shift between the two.
Then there’s the other, more numerous, sort, that shift between Conservatives and Labour. It seems reasonable to suppose that they contain an above-average number of the sorts of voters who judge the government on its performance, and stick, or switch, accordingly.
‘Former ITN Chair and Chief Exec Appointed to Head Scottish News Pilot Bid’
http://www.allmediascotland.com/press_news/24466/former-itn-chair-and-chief-exec-appointed-to-head-scottish-news-pilot-bid
So if the various indicators that marginal polls are not showing the same thing as national polls are indeed correct, then we should assume a non-UNS outcome.
I’m interested in absolute numbers of votes more than swings (as the term ‘swing’ sort of implies a steady number of voters who change their mind, which is not quite the reality). There is a key difference between most Tory seats and many Labour ones that may make Labour especially vulnerable in their marginal seats – the average turnout in Labour held seats was much lower.
2005 turnout was 61% overall – obviously with a range of higher or lower turnouts. Of all the seats which had a 60% turnout or lower, fully 86% were Labour. (211 out of 244 seats). 60% of all Labour’s seats are in this ‘low turnout’ range. And in the ‘very low turnout’ range of 55% turnout or less 91% are Labour (106 out of 117).
The Tories, on the other hand, skew hugely to the high end. 94% of their seats came in at over 60% turnout and 58% at over 65% turnout. If you draw a graph of MP numbers against turnout bands you see a big red lump on the left and a smaller blue hump on the right.
I suspect Andy’s model will show how swing goes much more in the Tories’ favour in these marginal seats. This will be compounded by the low turnout many, many Labour MPs were elected on. If you think in terms of lead as an absolute number of votes rather than as a percentage, it really doesn’t take a lot for big numbers of Labour MPs to lose their seat.
49 Given his record, it could also mean a big Conservative majority.
51. Quite. It would have knocked their ‘SINGLE FIGAZ!’ hyperbole into a cocked hat.
49. But what of Bob ‘President Kerry’ Worcester? Lib Dems gain EVERYTHING?
WE HAVE THE WESTMINSTER NUMBERS
‘Labour takes poll lead over SNP’
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/labour-takes-poll-lead-over-snp-1.1004562
50. Still shooting the messenger. Anyone with one eye can see the tide is turning. Labour is in the ascendancy and Brown is rising from Blair’s ashes like a phoenix. Alastair Campbell is finally turning the juggernaut round and Cameron looks like a little boy stranded on a motorway.
60 Roger
stay of the pastis at this time of the morining.
If we pump 42%, 26%, 18%, 11% into Baxter we get:
Lab 42 seats (+2)
LD 7 seats (-4)
SNP 7 seats (+1)
Con 3 seats (+2)
(Speaker 0 seats (-1))
60, there has been a decline in the Tory lead with most pollsters. This is due to a rise in the Labour numbers.
However, you remain a silly man.
Be interesting to see how Cameron’s speech goes today. He’s got to remember to bollock the Tory peer and contrast the whip removal with Brown’s “oh, I *am* disgusted!” words yet failure to remove the whip.
45. Stuart: I honestly think that too many English folk have had their fill of the Labour Party for the rest of their lives.
You may well, but I can imagine the indignation which would greet an English poster opining on what “many Scottish folk” think!
I don’t expect another fourth-term government in my lifetime - the 24 hour news cycle surely only increases the speed with which the public gets fed up with a government and votes for change. With the Lib Dems apparently having only reverse Mark Anthony mode, Labour will remain the voice of the left and the only alternative to the Conservatives — even in an independent England, were such a thing to come to pass.
Seats changing hands:
Argyll and Bute CON GAIN from Lib Dem
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk CON GAIN from Lib Dem
Dunbartonshire East LAB GAIN from Lib Dem
Dunfermline and West Fife LAB GAIN from Lib Dem
Glasgow East LAB GAIN from SNP
Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey LAB GAIN from Lib Dem
Ochil and South Perthshire SNP GAIN from Lab
re 40 Andy is best able to answer these himself and hopefully he should be on the site late afternoon.
On Roger’s very fair “isn’t this all about tactical voting” point my understanding that this forms a large part. But what Andy has done is to taken the differing levels of swing over the past three elections in the different sorts of constituency and has observed that they vary substantially from the norm.
This was precisely the same pattern that we got in last week’s 2009 aggregate polling data from MORI broken down into constituency type.
It’s that data as well as the specific marginals polling from ICM and MORI that suggest that there’s something in the Cooke thesis.
The political problem here is that for five years Labour has had the “Tories need a 10% margin advantage” so embedded into its thinking that this is hugely challenging. Andy could be said to be taking away that comfort blanket.
Roger
You’re not Sion Simon by any chance are you?
I don’t know if any of you saw it before but he wrote a great piece for the New Statesman.
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/conference/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
60. Then let me fetch my RIFLE.
Interesting poll there Stuart, Labour continue to pile up votes where they aren’t much use. Whilst the LDs are on 11%? I know they’ve fallen back in Scotland, but that much?
47 Roger. It must be logical that marginal seats are ‘swingier’. Unless all seats everywhere are in a narrow band of ‘swinginess’ then there will be a distribution from high to low for this phenomemon. The ‘unswingy’ ones will tend to be safe seats. The ‘swingiest’ will tend to be marginal because, well, they are ‘swingy’.
It’s not that marginals breed ‘swinginess’ so much as that the ‘swinginess’ makes them marginals.
It’s what you get under an FPTP system – unmoving blocks of entrenchment at either end and a mobile middle that decides the outcome. Is it a coincidence that the political ‘middle’ happens also to be ‘middle England’? Probably not.
Has Roger had champagne on his cornflakes this morning?
Looking forward to Andy Cooke’s new seat calculator.
49
Yeah! still he has yet to top his, ‘Jacob is a very popular candidate’ well he is in the Mogg houshold anyway.
60. Roger.
Put the lid back on the glue, strap yourself in ya chair and stop floating around the room blurting such nonsense!
Honestly, getting all excited because Labour have finally managed to get 30%.
Big shock though Rog, Every pollster has overstated Labour by 2-3% pre election for the last 25 years!
Have a look at all the poll numbers before the Euro’s last June, some overstated them by 5% and yet they came
a miserable 3 rd behind UKIP!
What a bunch of losers!
Patrick @ 70
It’s not that marginals breed ‘swinginess’ so much as that the ‘swinginess’ makes them marginals.
That should be filed alongside Rumsfelds Unknown unknowns as a sentence that enriches the language.
63: interesting that No 10 is attacking Cameron as “desperate” for his attack on the PM over 3 Labour MPs apparently seeking the test the laws on parliamentary privilege. I wouldn’t go as far as “desperate”, but it seems a misjudgement (again…) by DC to link the actions of 3 sleazy soon-to-be-stood down MPs to the PM.
I really don’t see why Brown should take the blame because 3 of his MPs seek to test a possible line of defence to criminal charges in the courts. What if Lord Hanningfield decided to do the same at his trial - what would Cameron say and do about that?
As every weeks passes, I seem to get some new reason to fear for both the prospects of Tory victory and what a Tory Govt would actually look like should it come to pass.
69. astateofdenmark - “Whilst the LDs are on 11%? I know they’ve fallen back in Scotland, but that much?”
11% is fairly typical of Scottish Lib Dem levels in recent polling.
Most recent Westminster polls have had the Scottish Lib Dems at:
11% (TNS-BMRB/Herald today)
12% (Ipsos-MORI 23 Nov 09)
12% (YouGov/Daily Telegraph 20 Nov 09)
Most recent Holyrood polls have had the Scottish Lib Dems at:
11%? (TNS-BMRB/Herald today)
13% (YouGov/SNP 13 January 2010)
12% (Ipsos MORI 23 November 2009)
70 I imagine Roger’s point is to query whether marginal seats move *differently* from safe seats at election times. If, say, there were a 6% swing from Labour to Conservative, would one not expect that to be replicated in every constituency?
Andy Cooke’s data show that Lab/Con marginals showed bigger swings to Labour than the rest, in 1997, and 2001, and his argument is that they will show larger than average swings in the other direction, if the tide turns.
74, Brown is criticising the accused, but lets them keep the whip and use Labour’s official lawyers (on their own account, but apparently Watt was not permitted to use them). It’s hypocrisy, and a legitimate area for attack.
The Lib Dems also want to alter the law (albeit with an amendment rather than a new act), which will support Cameron’s position.
For a full list of recent Scottish polls, please see:
Westminster polls:
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/index.html?userpoll_scot.html
Holyrood polls:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliament_election,_2011#Opinion_polls
75. clarification:
11% is fairly typical of Scottish Lib Dem levels since early 2006 (when they pole-axed Charlie Kennedy).
74 No, it’s sensible. Labour enjoyed great success in the run up to 1997 by linking the sleaze of a few Conservative MPs to the government as a whole.
62: % change is Scotland: Lab +2.5, SNP +8.3, LD -11.6, C +2.2. Great Labour figures and SNP figures would be great if one forgets that they used to be ahead; a colossal LD meltdown. Do you Scottish contributors think that the general tendency in England for LD MPs to do better than the average swing holds true there too?
74. Bob, you’ve been negative about Cameron and the Tories for as long as I’ve posted on here. I can’t remember one positive thing you’ve ever written about him. Infact, your not Simon Heffer in disguise are you?
78.
This latest snapshot says 74% of Scots favour pro-union parties.
79 That suggests that a party gets a real boost, in Scotland, from having a Scottish leader.
I wasn’t around over the weekend, so don’t know if this was picked up yesterday, but a snippet in one of the papers yesterday claimed one of Brown’s latest “vote winning” ruses will be to propose to switch us to European time permanently (ie, GMT+1 in winter, GMT+2 in summer). Apparently voters will flock to Labour to back longer summer evenings.
I don’t know how serious this proposal is, but surely even Brown has realised that every extra evening hour of daylight means one less morning hour? Up here, it would just be coming light now under Brown time, and in the depths of December, we’d have to wait until about 9.30am some mornings for daylight. Even worse in Scotland.
During the winter months, the only daylight I see in the working week is on the way in to work and at lunchtime. I don’t really want Brown to rob me of what rare glimpses of daylight I already have in winter.
He’s robbed me enough financially as it is…
84
Tories should do well then - just tell Cameron to eat more porridge.
81. NPMP, thats what Lib-Dems get for being suckered into coalitions with you lot in the Labour Party - They have been warned!
81 I’m sure they will outperform, but if a party loses half its vote, it’s bound to hurt incumbents, too.
Bob @ 85
I don’t know how serious this proposal is, but surely even Brown has realised that every extra evening hour of daylight means one less morning hour?
He hasn’t even realised that each extra pound of government income means a pound less of private income, so I wouldn’t hold your breath.
85. Bob Sykes.
Yeah, it was mentioned last night. You can tell the bunker is on manoeuvres when the welcher describes something as “should receive cross-party support”, as he did repeatedly last night.
Does today’s TNS-BMRB poll mean that we can spot some value bets?
Argyll and Bute - you can buy CON at 2/1
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk - you can buy CON at 10/11
Dunbartonshire East - you can buy LAB at 11/4
Dunfermline and West Fife - you can buy LAB at EVS
Glasgow East - you can buy LAB at 1/2
Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey - you can buy LAB at 6/1
Ochil and South Perthshire - you can buy SNP at 4/9
82 - I’m offended that you should compare me to Heffer, a most loathsome individual!
You have a short memory, or weren’t around in 2005, then! I was backing Cameron before even Cameron was backing Cameron. During the first weekend after the 2005 GE I said he was the man. He retains my support, and I think he will be a good PM. But I’m not a Tory member or activist, just a natural supporter. So I retain some objectivity, and am not afraid to speak out when I think he’s straying off the right path. In the past 18 months, I have had genuine cause to doubt his judgement, and have said so.
Clearly other “Tory-inclined” voters think the same, hence a 15 point poll lead has become 7-9.
O/T but I see that Costa Rica is about to elect a President Chinchilla.
Wonder stuff from Andy Cooke. I love it ! He is saying in a posh way the same things I have been rasping in peasant tones since 2008.
Here is my credo.
1.Whatever the state of the polls in the days before a GE is called, the final outcome will be worse vote-wise for Labour.
2. Whatever the actual outcome vote-wise the result Seat-wise will surprise everyone except Robert Smithson,Andy Cooke and their disciples.
On a betting note: Isn’t it strange how everybody wins ? OGH Sold the Tories at 350 and Bought back at 338 as did all the sensible people.
I BOUGHT the Tories at 340.5 and will only be Selling back somewhere in the 50s.
Some doubts being raised over the latest Scottish Poll:
http://www.scottishunionist.com/2009/02/tns-system-three.html
47 - Roger
I view this question as a genetics v culture question. Voters are not born differently, so there is no reason why marginal votes would swing more as a result.
However, the FPTP system effectively trains voters in marginals to swing, as all the parties attention is focused on their votes, rather than those specifically in safe seats.
Consequently, my view is there should be higher swings in marginals as a result of the electoral system. A different system would not necessarily have the same consequencies.
76 No you wouldn’t expect it.
I would imagine that upmarket urban, downmarket urban and rural seats have quite a bit less potential movement. The country is not uniform.
Towns and ‘edge of suburbia’ seats will be naturally more volatile.
84. Sean Fear - “That suggests that a party gets a real boost, in Scotland, from having a Scottish leader.”
Should we be surprised by that?
I would guess that most English voters prefer to vote for a party with an English leader. Neither Kinnock nor Brown went down too well in England, did they?
Roll on May!!
76. and 70. Sean and Patrick. If you look at Edmund at 40 he says that it’s not just that marginal seats behave differently at election time (understandable that those who can make a difference are more likely to vote tactically) but that those constituencies contain a different type of voter. This is the part I found illogical.
47 “That the marginality of the constituency makes them vote differently is understandable but not that these constituencies breed a different sort of voter!”
Other way round i think. There’s different types of voter and they’re found in varying proportions in different seats. It’s having higher proportions of the swingier voters that make marginals marginal.
Don’t forget: the marginals swung twice as heavily to Labour in 1992 than the country as a whole.
Maybe the same thing might happen 18 years later (in the other direction).
85 - Read last nights thread.
All the evidence is that double daylight saving saves lives and energy.
99 Well maybe towns are demographically differnt from city / urban or rural seats.
95. Goupillon
Lib Dem rubbishes TNS-BMRB. Quelle surprise!
Where is Mark Senior when you want him?
(Note of caution: the blog you link to would more accurately be titled “Ulster Unionist”. When you know that basic fact about the blogger, it explains an awful lot.)
74: I gather that Hanningfield (who unlike the Labour trio was a front-bench spokesman until last week) has already said he’ll try the same defence. Cameron’s technical case appears to hinge on the difference between suspension and whip removal, which is a bit Westminstery. More broadly he’s trying to do what Sean Fear at 80 suggests.
Personally I think we should take the gloves off and observe that a party leader who buys a country mansion as his “necessary second home” with taxpayers’ assistance is a bit desperate if he starts making outraged speeches about expenses. There was nothing illegal about it, but it was clearly outside the spirit of the system in a way that very few of the Labour claims for interior furnishings can match. Similarly, the average Tory repayment per MP required by Legg was twice as large as the average Labour repayment.
So far, Labour’s held back from this sort of thing as there’s a danger of an orgy of mutual finger-pointing that will simply depress turnout. But if DC wants to make it a Tory issue, we should respond.
105 - Agree.
And look who still sits in the Shadow Cabinet before assessing Camerons hypocrisy.
96/100: you can’t generalise about marginals. Some have more of the swingier voters, as MrJones says. Some have roughly equal blocs of entrenched voters, with a small swing group deciding. The other marginal in Nottingham, Gedling, is as I understand it a bit like that - there’s a very deprived bit (e.g. Netherfield) which votes solidly Labour and a very posh bit (e.g. Burton Joyce) which votes solidly Tory.
99 I think there are seats in rural areas where the Conservative vote is more stubborn than in say, marginal seats along the motorways, and ditto with regard to the Labour vote in somewhere like the Greater Glasgow area.
It’s not just that there are more Conservative or Labour voters in these strongholds to begin with, but that these voters do seem to view politics differently from their colleagues in more marginal seats.
105
oh good Nick,
since you want to talk about the ethics of claiming public money, which of your colleagues ( all parties ) should hand back the capital gains they made from “flipping “, and what disciplinary action should be taken against them ?
I said on here yesterday that Jack Straw and Tony Blair were going to be recalled to Chilcott this week.Straw is back today for a regrilling and i expect Blair to be back tomorrow or Wednesday.
Possibility of Campbell going back as well i am hearing.
Why are marginal constituencies marginal in the first place ? If two contrasting socio-economic areas of equal size have been yoked together then one would expect swings to be rather less than the national average as two bands of core voters stick to their guns. If the constituency is marginal because it is a homogeneous group of people in the middle of the socio-economic spectrum, then one might expect the swings to be greater than the national average
“So far, Labour’s held back from this sort of thing as there’s a danger of an orgy of mutual finger-pointing that will simply depress turnout. But if DC wants to make it a Tory issue, we should respond.”
Another Labour leader might succeed in doing that, but it’s not a route I’d want to go down, if I’d been ordered to repay £12,000.
Looking at the metaphors involved and knowing nothing about the detail, this is surely a swingback theory? on the grounds that that is what pendulums are famous for doing?
Interesting to see how it plays in titanictown - triumphant vindication or hated upstart rival. Or, of course, oscillating between the two.
105 Nick, problem there is Gordon with a Grace & Favour home also claiming for his large house in Scotland plus of course the millionaires Balls, Darling etc doing the same as Cameron.
105 - On the Cameron second home point, I think you’re wrong there and would run into trouble trying that line given some Labour MPs aren’t short of a bob or two. The allowances could have been means tested but quite obviously weren’t so, wisteria aside, there isn’t much traction there.
On the broader point that the Tory repayments were significantly higher than average, that is a more legitimate point to make.
102: tim - but has the Bunker considered the evidence of the impact this would have for Labour in Northern England and Scotland where for many of us it would mean months of weekday darkness?
Even in early April and by mid September it would mean daylight not arriving (for me) until about 7.45am, and 7am darkness by the second half of August!
86. Here’s a traditional Scottish song to rouse the Cameron vote.
March Of The Cameron Men
There’s many a man of the Cameron clan
That has followed his chief to the field
He has sworn to support him or die by his side
For a Cameron never can yield.
I hear the pibroch sounding, sounding
Deep o’er the mountain and glen
While light springing footsteps
Are trampling the heath
Chorus
‘Tis the march of the Cameron men.
‘Tis the march, ’tis the march
‘Tis the march of the Cameron men.
Oh, proudly they walk, but each Cameron knows
He may tread on the heather no more
But boldly he follows his chief to the field
Where his laurels were gathered before.
Chorus
The moon has arisen, it shines on the path
Now trod by the gallant and true
High, high are their hopes, for their chieftain has said
That whatever men dare, they can do.
105, why did Brown claim a second home allowance when he’s always lived in Downing Street? Why did he claim Sky? Why did Darling and Hoon repeatedly flip?
And yes, Grayling did likewise, of memory serves, and yes, he should be axed too.
Why is your party leader so disgusted with the accused yet won’t remove the whip?
Is it moral for Labour to give public money to the union and then receive ‘union’ money to fund its own operations?
Does Brown have a 50k slush fund?
Do you spend the ‘communications allowance’ to use taxpayer-funded propaganda in a bid to retain your seat?
There’s plenty of shit to go around, but most of it belongs to your party.
Gosh, I agree with NPMP !
The hypocrisy of the socialist’s on here especially Bob Sykes, suggesting Brown is
not at fault for 3 of his MPs getting nicked for their alledged expenses misdemeanours!
What these socialist’s fail to forget is that the whole of these expenses scandals took place on Browns/Blairs/Labours watch!
And Brown just made it into the top twenty offenders out of over 350!
Brown keeps banging on about cleaning up politics, when he really only managed to get his flat cleaned!
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport/sport-headlines/capello-optimistic-as-england-draw-narnia-201002082449/
119: see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BroxComms/?yguid=108500499 for examples of how I’ve mostly spent my Comms Allowance (though I did once spend it for a non-partisan general newsletter).
I agree with Morris that there’s plenty of stuff for the parties to fling at each other: if everyone starts then I think it’ll end up as a negative score draw in the eyes of the public. I sort of agree with the policy of not doing it up to now, but if the Tories are going to posture on the issue, we need to respond.
112. Quite. And let’s not forget the Cabinet also contains Jack “accountancy is not my strong suit” Straw and Alister “three times a flipper” Darling and Peter “twice resigned” Mandelson plus several other very senior offenders.
If the mud starts flying Labour will lose.
They will lose for several reasons, one of which Nick Palmer inadvertently cites in comment 105 - the whole affair puts people off politics. If people are turned off politics that means turnout goes down which means the Tories will gain, because those most motivated to vote are those angry middle class people who Want Labour Out.
The Tories’ goal now must be to
1. depress turnout and
2. make the election overwhelmingly negative
The two go neatly together, of course.
119 Morris Dancer
“There’s plenty of shit to go around, but most of it belongs to your party.”
Yes, and it’s sitting in suits on green benches.
LEGAL ADVICE!
All, be careful what allegations you make on here re. Expenses!
124 SeanT
Go negative - correct
Low turnout - wrong.
BTW, the result of the straw poll on use of the Comms Allowance in the flood prevention survey linked to at 123 was that 95% thought it an appropriate use of taxpayers’ money.
123. Bring it on, bunnylover. A negative score draw means a win for the Tories, for the reasons adduced in 124.
The dirtier this election gets the worse, in the end, it will be for Labour, because you are defending 13 years of disaster and you are the incumbents and your voters are less likely to show up.
I trust the Tories have realised this and have a nasty vicious negative campaign ready to roll.
And yes Cameron is well advised to attack on the “priveliges” defense. It is astonishing the MPs even thought it might fly, and Brown made another error in not immediately condemning it, and the MPs themselves.
“The hypocrisy of the socialist’s on here especially Bob Sykes”
Gosh!
I’ve been called many things, but never that!
Example
Seat 1: 100% stock broker
Seat 2: 100% coal miner
Seat 3: 40% stock broker, 40% coal miner, 20% electrician
124 Fairly or not, it’s those who are in power who lose overall if mud is flung around.
118. Any of our Scottish posters know the March of the Camerons? (Mr Polly remembered it from his childhood). I reckon they should sing it each morning at CCHQ.
128, a majority wanted a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, and want the death penalty back. Going to support those positions too, or are the public only right or relevant when they agree with you?
However, cheers for posting that link.
127. Low turnout is bad for Labour. The only motivated British voters I encounter are the ones that hate Brown and the government. If only they show up on May 6th then the government is toasted.
132 And, that’s not to deny that the behaviour of some Conservative MPs, in relation to their expenses, has been despicable.
There are two, in particular, who I consider fortunate to be avoiding prosecution.
What is missing for the tories is a significant “mood for change” and enthusiasm for them. People were sick of Major and the tories in 1997, and a good deal of people are sick of Brown and labour now. But the difference is the feeling of actively wanting nuLabour to have a go - I don’t detect such a mood for Cameron.
It takes decades for a bad image to be shaken off - think Skoda - and they haven’t completely done it. I think the differnetial swing identified by Andy Cooke is highly plausible, but surely relies on enthusiastic and motivated electors actively wanting change. I will be knocking obn the door at 7.00 am to cast my vote, but there aren’t enough like me despising Brown I don’t think.
Real fears of a hung parliament
129: speaking as a lawyer, I really don’t think it would be appropriate for the PM (or the Leader of the Opposition) to tell individuals charged with criminal offences what defences they may or may not run. And that’s why I think Cameron has got this wrong.
Now there might well be outrage if they got off with it because of Parliamentary privilege. And rightly so. If they do, then change the law so it can’t be relied on again.
105. NP. Couldn’t agree witb you more. Isn’t it time this was shouted from the rooftops? The idea of cameron lecturing anyone from his tax payer funded 4 bedroomed Cotswold retreat is nauseating.
Any mud slinging contest will rapidly descend into an examination of morality and its place in politics. Labour are on exceptionally dodgy ground here:
Spin
Bullying
Dossiers
Lies
Nokias
Referendums
Manifesto pledges
Postal voting
Moral compasses
etc
etc
Labour would be mad to open up a fight on morality. They’ve been pissing on standards of decency in public life for a decade. That is one fight they would lose very badly.
138 Bob Sykes
I’d be careful letting people know you’re a lwayer, better to say claim a respectable profession like dockside hooker.
The Scottish Tories have decided to have their own “20 seats” moment…
http://tinyurl.com/ykoz6s8
141: yes, I did think carefully about that, having kept schtum for several years. But as some on here already think i’m “a socialist” (see 121), outing myself as a lawyer doesn’t seem so bad…
139. Not as nauseating as the sight of Brown telling us all about his “moral compass” from one of his two or three taxpayer funded homes, with his vast amounts of gardening and his dubiously paid cleaner and his £13,000 accidental overclaim and his bizarre flipping of properties between himself and his wife and the mere fact he makes us pay for his f*cking Sky TV in his seventh bedroom when he is taking home the equivalent of £300,000 a year.
Worth repeating: he makes us pay for his Sky TV in the bedroom of his third home even though he is gouging the taxpayer for a third of a million quid a year.
Disgusting man.
81.”Do you Scottish contributors think that the general tendency in England for LD MPs to do better than the average swing holds true there too?”
No. If there is clear tactical unwind at this GE, it will effect both Labour and the Libdems. This could possible be the other unexpected surprise on the night. And the fact that Clegg is going to back Gordon Brown over the AV vote this week is the best indication yet that the Libdems are clearly worried about happening.
Both are clearly hoping that AV would counter this tactical unwind in the near future. If its cynical and grubby for Brown to do it, then its ditto for Clegg and the Libdems.
142.
thanks for that rullko!
132 “Fairly or not, it’s those who are in power who lose overall if mud is flung around.”
I think that’s true in terms of people’s opinions but not sure it’s true in terms of getting out to vote. I think floaters are more likely to be put off by “they’re all the same” than core voters so i think whichever party is ahead with the floaters actually stands to lose the most votes.
Guess.
139 Cameron could afford to be paid nothing for his Parliamentary career, I’m sure, but if we didn’t pay MPs, (and I’m not unsympathetic), then it’s arguable that a lot of people would be excluded from the process.
Betting
Still hundreds of pounds on Con majority available on betfair at 1.5 - my boots are full or I’d have even more.
137. Jon C: What is missing for the tories is a significant “mood for change” and enthusiasm for them
There’s certainly a mood for change. As for enthusiasm for the Tories - well, that will never happen, since people vote Left with their hearts (Blair, Obama) but Right with their brains.
And I’m not sure enthusiasm would be helpful - look what happened to Blair and Obama.
144 Sean T
actually I would quite like Brown to start some mudslinging.
Given Blair, Prescott and Blunkett are allegedly coming back to help campaign it would be a good chance to get their record back in the limelight.
I can’t help but feel they have escaped the public mood too lightly.
Good Morning Sobbing Scottish Rugby Voters For Nick Palmer Worldwide
Meanwhile …. John Harris in the ‘Guardian’ looks at the prospect of a Green win in Brighton Pavilion :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/feb/08/brighton-green-mp-caroline-lucas
138 - Cameron seems to be having a stab at prejudicing a fair trial.
Any defence lawyer will love his blabbering.
139 - Its 5 Bedrooms and he refers to it as his cottage.
The Coffee House Blog - Clegg must resist Brown’s sweet nothings
“Gordon Brown is usually at his most patronising when confronting Nick Clegg. Last week, however, hectoring gave way to affection. Brown was almost tender. Of course, this sudden change has an obvious explanation. Brown and Clegg are brothers in arms: devotees of electoral reform, or so the Road Block would have us believe.
Robert McIlveen laid counter-arguments against Brown’s opportunism and Boris Johnson repeats them in his Telegraph column today, concluding:
‘There is one final and overwhelming reason why Britain should not and will not adopt PR – that it always tends to erode the sovereign right of the people to kick the b––––––s out.’
The Lib Dems have been caught between their principles and Brown’s expediency. PR empowers minority parties disproportionately at the expense of those with a larger mandate; the temptation for Clegg to submit to Brown’s indecent proposal and claim a spot in government is palpable. Not that I’m in favour of electoral reform but Brown’s last gasp attempt to cling to power will damage the cause. If Clegg values his party’s long-standing commitment to electoral reform he should reject Brown’s cynicism.”
137: No one votes for tories for ‘enthusism’ becuase they (unlike labour) don’t promise sunshine and rainbows for forever and a day.
People vote tory to do a job. Tories are like accountants, you don’t get excited or look forward to them, but you darn well want them.
“Cameron seems to be having a stab at prejudicing a fair trial.”
Anyone seen the line from the bunker this morning? Oh, here it is…
paulwaugh
HHarman just warned Cameron his spch cd jeopardise the trial of Lab MPs re exes. “None of us wd want to see that.” she adds swiftly.
147. Your analysis is true if all else is equal, i.e. if the parties are already held in similar regard then a negative campaign affects them equally, and thus the party that is ahead amongst non committed voters has more to lose from disenchanted floaters deciding not to bother.
But the situation today is different. Labour are now hated considerably more than the Tories.
The way I see it there is now a core of about 35-45% of people who just despise Labour and are desperate to punish them. Most of these people will therefore vote whatever happens, to hurt the government. The vast majority will vote Tory, a few will vote tactically.
So let’s say they vote, and the only other major group of voters are the Labour core: 25%. Add a couple of points to each party for the floaters who can still be arsed (there will be some, even in a very negative campaign), and you get a result of maybe 28% Labour and 42% Tory.
That gives the Tories a handsome win. Low turnout is good for the Tories.
154: The Lib Dems have been caught between their principles and Brown’s expediency. PR empowers minority parties disproportionately at the expense of those with a larger mandate.
For crying out loud. AV is NOT PR. Does no one understand this?
TNS/System 3 polls prior to the 2005 GE :=
Feb 2005 Lab 42 SNP 22 Con 16 LD 16
Mar 2005 Lab 46 SNP 23 Con 16 LD 13
Apr 2005 Lab 45 SNP 23 Con 14 LD 14
Not very accurate were they ?
I am concerned about the obvious increase in strength for the Labour party in Scotland. It seems to me that we are already getting a re-run of the 80’s/early 90’s where the more the English liked the Tories the more the Scots turned against them. Perhaps the Nats on here will be unconcerned but this inverse relationship will eventually spell death to the Union. I think it is inevitable that a reinvigorated Scottish Labour party will turn more nationalist once they see their party laid waste south of the border.
I see we have nasty snarling Nick P back again today, with his hara-kari tactical proposals. A real air of desperation about his recent posts.
138/139. Rattled are you? Cameron is right about this and Gerald Shamash, labour lawyer, should not be advising Chaytor et al.
137. As for enthusiasm for the Conservatives, there is a split between the people and the media. In 1997 the population was groomed to support Tony and ditch the Tories not just by the political press, but from a very wide array of soft sources (such as the satirical shows). Brown now has a truly astonishing grip on the British media, both broadcast and print. This covers the spectrum from Barclay bros and Dacre to Maguire. He still has considerable influence with Murdoch senior, and since the letter debacle, the Sun seems very nervous about attacking Brown. The revolving door between the Labour party and many important figures in broadcasting is well known. Labour have not simply been planning to win the election, they have spent many years in a very effective Gramscian style campaign of infiltration to eradicate the Conservative party, or at least to render it impotent, good only as a punchball and figleaf for democracy, but unable to win office. Indeed the headway Cameron has been able to make never ceases to surprise me. It illustrates the deep bedrock of Conservative support in this country, despite the best efforts of the media, and of course the extraordinary ineptness of Brown. I don’t see this as any ordinary election. It’s a battle for the entire political culture of the country.
143 Though not a socialist, I get the impression that you’d insist on playing by Queensbury Rules, even when your opponent was armed with a baseball bat.
158. Slackbladder.
Well, quite. It tends to be less proportional than FPTP, which makes me wonder what’s the bloody point of it.
Here are some value seat bets following today’s TNS-BMRB poll:
Lab at 4/5 in East Renfrewshire
Lab at 4/6 in Edinburgh South West
Lab at 1/5 in Ayr, Carrick & Cumnock
Those LD polling numbers are interesting.
Considering the size of the electorate in Scotland. Extrapolating a likely turnout in the 60% range. Taking 11% of that as the LD vote. Discounting the votes they will pile up in their 4 or 5 safest scots seats (eg wee Charlie).
Leaves just enough votes to get the dockside hooker treatment.
162. ‘It’s a battle for the entire political culture of the country’
Indeed it is, and fainthearts like Bob Sykes need to remember that.
Funny when Cameron removes the whip from a Conservative peer nobody blinks an eye - but when he calls shame on Brown for not removing the whip from MPs he is bringing down the justice system.
All coincidence I’m sure.
165 (cont.)
Hills, Ladbrokes and Ladbrokes respectively.
162 You’re dead right Polly. Which is one reason why I think the turnout will be high. This is a very high stakes election. Much more so than the last few.
165 Anyone who used the TNS polls in 2005 to place value bets would have lost a fortune .
My favourite newspaper, (the Daily Mail, dontcha just luv it) spares no effort in its continuing campaign, to link every instance of S*xual misconduct in the country, with David Cameron and his pals.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249296/Graham-Davies-Tory-PR-guru-held-sex-attack-cleaner.html
There are of course extra points if you can include Zac Goldsmith in any way.
SeanF. “124 Fairly or not, it’s those who are in power who lose overall if mud is flung around”
It depends where your starting point is. if Labour trash Cameron (successfully) the Tories are finished. There’s little that the Tories can do to Brown that hasn’t already been done.
170, for what it’d worth, I suspect turnout will be flat or down slightly on last time. A lot of people will be turned off, but those who are anti-Labour especially will be very motivated. The tribal Labour vote will also be well motivated.
160 DavidL
I think that will be the theme in Scotland for the next 5 years. Stuart was already hinting as such earlier. Scotland will descend in to Royston McVasey and an orgy of self-pity. This will be pushed along by politicians who frankly should know better.
159. Mark Senior
Of course, you make a very, very valid point: TNS System 3 have an appalling record. Especially when it comes to over-estimating Labour and under-estimating the Lib Dems.
(However Mark, I always take posts, especially statistical posts, more seriously when the poster LINKS TO THE SOURCE of their data!)
The reason TNS have such an appalling record is that they do not use past-vote weighting (and perhaps also because they use face-to-face interviews).
174. Intersting. I really don’t know how to call it. We have one crowd that thinks it’ll be 42/28 in the end and one that says 37/33 - or something along those lines.
We have a high turnout mob and a low or flat turnout mob.
Bit of a ‘mare for the pollsters these days I’d have thought.
I’m still with high turnout / Tory good majority.
38 The odds on Wales to qualify look quite interesting to me. Although we havent qualified since….ok move on…. there will be two teams going through this time.
For the sake of argument I agree that England are most likely to qualify, but the other teams in the group are not particualrly inspiring - and the 12/1 odds are of Wales beating Switzerland and Bulgaria into second place (assuming Montenegro finsih bottom).
Worth a flutter IMHO
Nick Clegg “lovebombing” Telegraph readers with the help of Mary Riddell:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/nick-clegg/7170466/Nick-Clegg-kingmaker-of-a-hung-parliament.html
170, 167, 162.
Ditto. If the Tories lose this election the country will not only be economically f*cked, but Labour - knowing that the next GE will see inevitable and terrible defeat - will also bring in some kind of AV making it difficult for the Tories to return to power on their own, for decades, thus enfeebling the nation in perpetuity.
It’s a massively important election.
Where I disagree with you all is your thinking that this will increase turnout. The above arguments are too sophisticated/boring for most people. Moreover, see the recent Social Attitudes Survey on people’s views on the duty of voting - many simply don’t see it as a civic duty any more.
And expensesgate etc will also depress turnout.
The upside is that this will mainly be to the Tories’ benefit, for reasons rehearsed upthread.
Maybe the reason the Ali Campbell was so upset yesterday is that he knows he is about to get found out.
The Chilcott recalls prove that the Inquiry team are not happy with what they have heard.
Maybe his old mucker TB has really found god and his conscience and is about to confess all.
That would make Mr Campbell want to weep..
Bob Sykes “I really don’t see why Brown should take the blame because 3 of his MPs seek to test a possible line of defence to criminal charges in the courts.”
How about the fact that the Labour Party’s official solicitor, Gerald Shamash, is providing the advice?
171. Mark Senior - “Anyone who used the TNS polls in 2005 to place value bets would have lost a fortune.”
Yes and No.
For a start, there were very, very few Scottish seat market in 2005 on which to lose a fortune!
But leaving aside that basic fact, I’d point out two things:
- despite a poor track record in terms of predicting absolute vote share, TNS are still useful in helping to identify broad trends
- all punters must use discretion: never simply pump poll numbers into a seat calculator, but use their powers of criticism
176 Source as I am sure you know is
http://www.alba.org.uk/polls/2005polls.html
156 I’ve corrected it for you:
“HHarman just warned Cameron his spch cd jeopardise the trial of Lab MPs re exes. “None of us wd want to see that.” she LIED swiftly.”
181. Hasn’t Blair already purchased an indulgence for his past sins?
173. “There’s little that the Tories can do to Brown that hasn’t already been done.”
So far, the only people who have been able to pass judgement on Gordo are the spineless chumps in the PLP.
The electorate are waiting for that chance. The Tories don’t need to do any more. There is no answer to the question, “Gordon Brown, 5 more years?”
Bruce Anderson: Tories may wobble but Brown remains their strongest asset
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/bruce-anderson/bruce-anderson-tories-may-wobble-but-brown-remains-their-strongest-asset-1892280.html
157 To gain from the sleaze/morality argument I think the Tories (or whoever was currently ahead) would need to win the battle decisively - a lot of clear blue water. I think a score-draw would hurt them. So if they do it they need to go all out tooth and claw for a win.
For me the question isn’t whether or not it’s a good idea but whether they’ve got the personnel to fight that kind of battle.
Bananaman
He has taken up jogging and goes to the gym
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7186310/Gordon-Brown-eating-nine-bananas-a-day-to-ween-himself-off-KitKats.html
182. How about the fact that the Labour Party’s official solicitor, Gerald Shamash, is providing the advice?
ooooooooooooh!
Well if Dacre and co. aren’t Dave fans, thats nothing compared to Gerry.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100025336/davewatch-the-reincarnated-blair-lama-puts-christians-right-on-homosexuality/
Runnynose! best not read it.
Bob, Cameron isn’t speaking as a lawyer; he’s speaking as a politician, a politician who knows that Brown is going to take a hit over thinking that people charged with that most egregious offence in the eyes of the voters - criminal troughing at their expense - are people worth keeping close to his bosom.
183 (cont.)
Oh yes, and another thing: in 2005 we were “flying blind” in scotland, because we were using the gravely flawed Rawlings & Thrasher guesstimates for the 59 new seats. In retrospect they were absolute guff in many seats (Inverclyde springs to mind, but there may even be more extreme examples than that).
On mudslinging and turnout: The conventional wisdom in the US, where there is a lot of attack-ad expertise, seems to be that flinging mud damages both the attacker and the attackee by depressing turnout on both sides. But it damages the attackee more than the attacker, which is why they do it.
In Britain is that there are more than two parties, so if Con and Lab get in a faeces-throwing fight they risk helping the LibDems and Other. Under FPTP voting Other in England has the same effect as not voting (except for Brighton), so the main beneficiary is the LibDems.
But if the Tories are aiming for a majority while Labour are aiming for a Hung Parliament, damaging Con and Lab while boosting LibDem is good for Brown and bad for Cameron.
Labour strategists, bring out your Demon Sheep.
184. Mark Senior
In case it escaped your notice Mark, it is not only Scottish politics junkies who read these threads!
106.”Personally I think we should take the gloves off and observe that a party leader who buys a country mansion as his “necessary second home” with taxpayers’ assistance is a bit desperate if he starts making outraged speeches about expenses.”
Picks jaw off the ground!!
Lets just look at Gordon Brown’s little property portfolio, and then add in his grace and favour homes at taxpayers expense. Could you also just remind which Scottish Labour MP had to pay back the most expenses?? Have you bothered to look at the wee holiday cottage that Gordon uses when he retires to his constituency of a weekend? That post is about as pathetic as it gets. Can you not see the hypocrisy in your own post?
For years it was not a ‘political’ problem for either Brown or Blair to have a similar home in their constituencies, but now its a Conservative leader who enjoys a nice constituency home, it would appear to be an affront to our senses?
Thanks Andy for an excellent article and some sterling research.
What you say makes sense and put some substance behind the often touted view that at the next eection the Conservatives are likely to punch above their weight in crucial areas.
I look forward very much to the next instalment.
196. Desperate is exactly the right word for Nick P’s recent posts. Perhaps Easterross is right about him facing a five-figure margin of defeat.
MPs’ expenses: David Cameron ‘could jeopardise trials’, warns Harriet Harman
- David Cameron’s attacks on Gordon Brown’s handling of the expenses scandal risk jeopardising the trial of three Labour MPs facing theft charges over their claims, Harriet Harman has warned
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/7187114/MPs-expenses-David-Cameron-could-jeopardise-trials-warns-Harriet-Harman.html
Morning all.
Whatever Harriet Harman and Nick P say, Cameron is quite right about the potential misuse of parliamentary privilege by the MPs and peer who have been charged with criminal offences of dishonesty. If they are innocent of the substantive charges, then they should (and, one hopes, would) be found innocent in the courts. But the public will quite rightly be absolutely outraged if they use a defence of being not subject to the same criminal law as everyone else.
Of course, Brown can’t dictate to them how to conduct their defence. But he could take stronger action to ensure, that, pending their cases coming to court, they do not bring the government, parliament, and indeed the Labour Party, into further disrepute.
In any case: does Labour actually disagree with Cameron’s suggestion that the law on this point should be clarified?
189. So Brown is aiming to take the coveted Bananaman title from his rival Miliband? What a competitive bastard.
194. Drivel.
Again you ignore the vast bulging reservoir of anti-Labour feeling in England and Wales. A negative campaign will just put off floaters (who might float to Labour otherwise), it won’t put off the committed anti-Labourites, who will vote however they can to get rid of Gordon.
If Labour are swept away by the Tories and Lib Dems in England its game over, Cameron is in number 10.
‘Viktor Yanukovych set to be Ukrainian president’
- Early election results indicate narrow lead for opposition leader
- Yulia Tymoshenko likely to appeal against electoral ‘fraud’
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/08/viktor-yanukovych-ukraine-president-election
Lively as ever on here this morning
On thread - how exciting this all is - I wonder how many peeps in CCHQ etc will be pressing F5 a lunchtime
I’ve just been listening to R5 doing yet another ’should we feel sorry for…’ phone-ins. Last time it was Gordon, this time Alistair Campbell FFS.
The more I think about his performance on Marr, the more convinced I am that he pulled a stunt.
I’m not at all sure about Cameron going for Gordon this morning in a speech - if he’d done it ’spontaneously’ then I’d be more comfortable but a speech? Unless he’s got something really good up his sleeve to legitimise it…
200 - Cameron seems to want them expelled befor the trial.
Thats novel.
But this will benefit the Lib Dems, Clegg is on Womans Hour at the moment clearly enjoying Daves decision.
Does anyone have an email address for OGH?
BBC report: ‘Tories attack PM in expenses row’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8503516.stm
205. tim - do you think Gordon should remove the whip from these 3 MPs ?
“194.On mudslinging and turnout: … But it damages the attackee more than the attacker, which is why they do it.”
I was imagining there’d be a differential depending on whether or not the attackee is currently ahead or behind - or more exactly, when the party behind is down to core vote only.
203 I was hoping the woman with freaky bread hair would win in Ukraine.
205 tim - It’s not novel at all, although it is not normally necessary. Honourable politicians accused of criminal offences resign from their posts to clear their name, and, when found innocent, return afterwards. They do this in order to avoid damaging the government and their party. It is only New Labour which has developed the novel idea of carrying on as though nothing had happened. Of course, that luxury is not granted to councillors, teachers or policemen wrongfully accused of offences.
As for the politics: Cameron 5, Clegg 1, Brown 0.
Does this mean that Gordon is set to miss yet another PMQs this week:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/7183524/Gordon-Brown-to-attend-crisis-talks-over-Greece.html
212. Pot/kettle spring to mind..
“The Prime Minister will preach a “tough love” message for Greece and along with the other major leaders will urge the country to slash its spending over the next three years. “
212 If so - he’s really pathetic. Great sign though if he’s ducking it again.
‘Fury over PM bid to sell Dover to France’
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2843761/Fury-over-PM-Gordon-Brown-bid-to-sell-Dover-to-France.html#ixzz0ewFit8ZG
Team Bunker’s ‘lines to take’ are more coordinated of late. Here’s Charlie Whelan 3 hours ago on twitter:
”When politicians panic they loose their judgement. That is what has happened to Cameron with his ill judged personal attack on PM about 3 hours ago from UberTwitter”
Then the little bees, like tim, repeat ad nauseum all over the internet.
I think a daily check on the line to take from twitter could be an interesting feature to watch.
http://order-order.com/2010/02/08/s-t-u-p-i-d-gordon-meeting-greek-pm/
215 I heard this last night and assumed it was a joke - clearly not, what a crap idea - only Brown could think selling a border point was a *good* thing.
212 Culd give rise to interesting line of questioning as Gordon is going to lecture Greece on running up a big unaffordable deficit of 13% of GDP, which has resulted in high interest rate demands for Greek borrowing, so he’ll demand that’s cut to 2% over 2 years.
For those betting on Brown remaining as Labour leader, there’s an important paragraph in the Bruce Anderson article linked to by Scott at 187:
Lord Mandelson has another difficulty. The other day, a Cabinet minister had lunch with a journalist. “What happens if you win?” enquired the hack. The minister looked astonished. It was clear that this possibility had not occurred to him. Having regained the power of speech, he replied: “There’d be an immediate leadership challenge”. Mandelson may be running the election campaign, but Gordon Brown will be leading it. That is a challenge beyond even Lord Mandy’s powers.
216. asod.
I see that Charlie Whelan is just another netluser who can’t spell “lose”. Maybe he should of (sic) paid more attention when he was at school.
216. Cameron (courtesy of the bunker) has got the press just where he wants them. All eyes on his speech. I think it’s going to be a corker.
216. Well both the PB Labour parrots have been squawking in unison today.
215 Well that’s Dover in the CON GAIN column then.
Interesting to see Nick Palmer attacking David Cameron for claiming too much mortgage relief from the taxpayer.
And, to be fair, it is true, Cameron has been claiming quite a lot, £1750 a month in mortgage payments in 2005/6 for instance. That’s quite a lot of money. And here’s the proof:
http://mps-expenses.guardian.co.uk/document/49/
But hold on, who’s this, claiming even more than £1750 a month in mortgage, who’s this claiming a whacking £1885 a month for his mortgage in the same year, ah yes… Doctor Nick Palmer.
http://mps-expenses.guardian.co.uk/document/4331/interesting/#doc-pages
On topic, I am almost literally on the edge of my seat waiting for the seat calculator. To show I’m not slavishly fawning, however, could I complain about the metaphor? Pendulums (pendula?) move in straight lines back and forth. What is being suggested is an aysmmetrical unravelling, more akin to the uncoiling of a spring.
217. Now we’re with STUPID
“Until the recent Irish austerity budget the financial world talked about the risk of the P.I.G.S. (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) defaulting on their sovereign debt. Now Ireland is controlling government spending with swingeing public sector cuts they are not being talked about so much. Attention has shifted to the S.T.U.P.I.D. countries: Spain, Turkey, UK, Portugual, Italy and Dubai. These are the countries the City now fears to be at risk of sovereign default.”
218 - The symbolism of selling to the French is bad and it will do him no good, but are you seriously suggesting nationalising all ports, Plato? Bit of unreconstructed socialism there - like it!
222. PollyB.
What time is the speech?
More on Greece here with references to the ERM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/7182739/Greek-Ouzo-crisis-escalates-into-global-margin-call-as-confidence-ebbs.html
“But I remember vividly lunching with the British prime minister’s economic adviser in August 1992 and being told that Germany would soon rescue sterling in the Exchange Rate Mechanism by cutting rates. Such was the self-deception of the British elite. Anybody following German politics – such as George Soros– knew it was nonsense. “
Today Gordon is selling Dover, tomorrow everything south of a line from the Mersey to the Trent.
It’s his new strategy to cling to power…
228 SNP
actually don’t think so. If the article is correct the port will be sold to a consotrium led by Calais. Call me a cynic but my guess is Dover would be slowly reduced in favour of jobs in depressed northern France. Hardly helping competition.
162.PollyB, did you catch the Campbell phone on Five Live this morning? There was a definite theme developing, and one long over due IMHO. And that was the underlying dissatisfaction with the quality of our political media in the UK right now. The politicians and the pollsters will both be judged on election night, but I think that the MSM are going to have to start addressing their own shortcomings too.
218 - If the French pay a bit more, can we give them the whole of the isle of Thanet? I’m not sure anyone would miss Margate.
good one from brown “third generation services ” doesnt he mean “third rate services”
Christina’s and others defense of Cameron’s troughing that it isn’t as bad as Brown’s is both feeble and misses the point. The charge against Cameron is hypocricy. As self proclaimed market leader on standing up to troughers he has by far the most to lose.
My advice to Brown. Commence the bun fight. You have no further to fall-Cameron has.
Andy fascinating stuff, thanks. I’m sure you’ll havemore to rejoice about than in the Crosby household come 4th June.
O/T Has Mandy been asked if he is still intensly relaxed about people becomng obscenely rich?
Brown on Sky doing a Health speech…
meanwhile..
The Prime Minister will on Monday announce plans for the 1.6 milion cancer sufferers to have specialist care from nurses in their own homes.
The plan will cost £100 million over five years but the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats immediately questioned how it will be funded as the health service faces a £20billion blackhole.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7181977/Funding-of-Labour-home-care-cancer-plan-questioned-by-critics.html
234. We should do a swapsie. Give us Aquitaine, and you can have Gravesend and a bit of Chatham, too.
BBCLauraK
Labour has now suspended the whip from the three MP s, Morley, Chaytor and Devine, facing charges
LOL he just bragged he cut expenditure in 1997 .
brown lying again on sky “I cut spending in 97/98″ no he didnt it was tory spending plan he was following !
The reason why marginal voters are “swingier” is nothing to do with the voters themselves, but is because the parties, Labour in particular, have recently devised ways of targetting them with more resources far more efficiently. The Tories are now trying the same, but of course, Labour won’t suddenly give up targetting…
236 Roger - If you’re looking for examples of hypocrisy, perhaps you’d like to explain why it’s OK for Labour to attack Cameron for saying the same thing as the Labour Home Secretary:
On Sunday, Home Secretary Alan Johnson said the four politicians should be tried in court, as people wanted to see MPs treated like everyone else.
He told the BBC: “They are entitled to a fair trial and the public… would be aghast if they thought there was some special get out of jail card for Parliamentarians.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8503267.stm
Stuart Dickson - good to see the cybernats wiffling a lot today. Are they practicing so they can put a good show on at the Whitby Folk Festival later this year?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHm2b_huTnM
241 The Bunker still dancing to Cameron’s tune then.
240 - My sources tell me that the U Party (standing in Hampstead & Kilburn, though shadsy is not yet offering odds) has a policy of taking back Burgundy.
re 206 Mike@politicalbetting.com
225 - SeanT.. well spotted. LOL that is more than funny. NPMP has a bit of explaining to do.
241. Oh dear - an abrupt volte-face there. How embarrassing for the squawking parrots.
241, hope someone tells Cameron.
241. Cameron calling the shots - has Gordo given up on the AV vote ?
251 runnymede - It looks as though Brown has once again managed to snatch humiliation from the jaws of defeat.
241 Yet again Brown dithers, gets the bad publicity, then acts.
252 - he’s obviously trying to nobble Cam’s speech, but he’s done the same as he did when expenses first hit, he dithered.
255 snap.
RodCrosby @244: “The reason why marginal voters are “swingier” is nothing to do with the voters themselves, but is because the parties, Labour in particular, have recently devised ways of targetting them with more resources far more efficiently. The Tories are now trying the same, but of course, Labour won’t suddenly give up targetting…”
Presumably if both the parties are targeting the marginals with equally increased efficiency the effects would cancel out, right? (Or do you need more resources to defend a target than you do to attack one?)
If there was a disparity because Labour got better in 1997 and the Tories didn’t, and the Tories are getting better this time, presumably that would significantly help the Tories relative to UNS. Especially if the targeting is about money, where the Tories have a bigger relative advantage than before?
251. What’s that smell? The burning of rubber as the clattering Labour spin-machine does an embarrassing handbrake turn?
I thought we weren’t meant to prejudge these MPs? I thought Cameron was being a hypocrite? I thought this kind of action might jeopardise a trial… whoops, no, all that was wrong and the Tories were right.
Hilariously poor.
Browns NHS speach hes just plucking figures out of thin air now hes going to save 10,000 lives each year, waiting lists didnt exsist after 1997 ! hes in lala land again
But seriously, Brown telling Greece what to do about their deficit;
how can Armando Iannucci compete with that ?
258 - Another way of thinking about this is that elections might be trench warfare like World War One, where the rival armies exhausted themselves trying to win 100 yards (eg the 1974 elections), or blitzkreigs like at the beginning of World War Two, where one overwhelms the other with superior force (eg 1983 and 1997), where the results might be entirely unexpected at the margins.
245: Richard, I usually find your point of view interesting, so since I disagree with you on politics of this, would be interested in your reaction
blog post here:
http://hopisen.wordpress.com/2010/02/08/on-being-nasty
Key graf : “I don’t think this area is a profitable one for partisan attack anyway. The whole point about the perception of modern politics is that “they’re all in it for themselves”. Trying to use the scandal for party advantage, when so many of each party are implicated re-enforces that message. Far better to try to be high-minded.
In that sense, Nick Clegg is probably getting the tone, if not the policy right (and Harriet Harman did pretty well on the Today programme too)”
The dataset for the ICM poll is just out.
BEFORE the so-called spiral of silence adjustment the split was
C40-L29-LD20
On the new Andy Cooke calculator that would mean…..
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2010_feb_st_poll.pdf
261, Brown making satirists redundant = higher unemployment
60.
LABOUR GAIN - LALA LAND!
232 - It seems quite unlikely that there would be scope to reduce capacity through owning ports on two separate land masses. It is fundamental to the nature of a sea port that it serves the land mass on which it is situated.
But even if there was a plan to reduce capacity, that isn’t necessarily anti-competitive as you suggest if you are going to apply basic free market economics.
paulwaugh tweets
Great victory for Cameron. Labour suspends whip from 3 exes MPs. Why did Brown take so long
Sky also said he did it under pressure from DC
I don’t think McDoom’s thought through the sale of Dover from an immigration / Sangatte point of view.
(lol)
225: SeanT
Re Nick Palmer’s expenses, I am certain that he claims not a penny for mortgage interest. In previous discussions here he told us that he rents a flat near parliament.
You can bemoan the high rents charged by landlords in central London, you can argue that NP could much rent cheaper if he took a flat in some ghastly part of the capital but you can’t fairly accuse him of enriching himself at the taxpayers expense.
Hmm, I wonder whether David Cameron will use words this morning like: “I lead my party, while he follows his”, or “weak, weak, weak”?
236.Excuse Roger, can you tell me where I defended Cameron’s expenses in my posts this morning? I think that you are being extremely disingenuous, I was in fact attacking the hypocrisy of NickP’s attacks on Cameron in his post up thread. You just don’t get it. The expenses scandal has tarred all politicians and Parliament itself, and no amount of petty point scoring is going to change that. I note that you totally ignore the sheer cheek of Palmer’s post up thread. Hypocrisy is always a bitter pill to swallow, but its that bit harder when its champagne socialists who are spouting it!!
What signs are there that Labour has deserted its core voters in England and that a few years ago they woke up to it and abandoned Labour?
1. The growth of the BNP in working class areas.
2. The fact that the C2s, Ds and Es have embarked on a voter strike from Labour = NickMP admits that and all those canvassing see it whenever they canvass them.
3. The issues Labour are NOW talking about to desperately get there core vote back, Class Envy, Immigration etc etc.
How people expect Labour to get 30% or higher at the GE is beyond my understanding.
273. Perhaps the votes will be adjusted for the “spiral of silence” ?
225. Seant
So now we discover Palmer’s big lie. He was claiming mortgage interest for much of the time was he?
I hadn’t checked this year but eventhough Porker (or is that Porkie) Palmer was in the top 20 Labour porkers for 2002-2007/8 having claimed £42 less than the max for ACA making putting him amongst the elite of prize porkers, he further managed in 2008/2009 to claim another £23,393 (only a six hundred or so short of the max - cutting back nick?).
So since 2002 Porker Palmer has claimed £151,151 in ACA out of something around £152,000
That is one fat porker!
The unfolding Greek Tragedy is fascinating on a geopolitical level. This really is the crunch moment for the EU, or at least euroland.
They have two choices: let Greece drown, and probably decouple from the eurozone. This is politically easier to sell to northern Europeans but it arguably jeopardises the integrity of the euro and the European Union itself, long term.
Or they can bail out Greece in return for taking over Greek finances - i.e. Brussels, Berlin and Paris get control over Athens, Greek debt is europeanised, Eurobonds are issued, and then true political union swiftly follows this closer monetary union. Because in the end the euro will only work if it is matched by a proper Federal government at Brussels.
At the moment it could go either way. Sehr interessante.
Finally Labour wake up to the fact that people it regards as unfit to stand again as MPs because of police involvement should also be unfit to take the party whip.
How many effing months did it take to get G. Brown to decide that?
It only took 1/2 a day for Cameron to attack him on it and action happened……
267 SNP
normally I would agree, but with a French owned rail tunnel in between ( one end at Calais ) the scope for manipulation is considerable. Even if it’s just to divert the more profitable work to France the effect could be considerable.
241.Someone give Harman a towel to wipe the egg off her face this morning.
Now will Clegg and his party continue to back Brown on AV this week in Parliament, going to be interesting to see what actually happens.
263 Hopi - I agree with your general point, and in any case the Tories are hardly in a position to throw stones without shattering quite a lot of their own glass.
But on the specific point about the use of Parliamentary privilege, I think Cameron (and indeed Alan Johnson) has it right. I cannot imagine anything which would inflame public anger more than the idea that the very few MPs who face charges might be able to mount a defence which effectively comes down to claiming immunity from prosecution under criminal law for offences of alleged dishonesty.
This is very dangerous territory for Labour, and I think Brown has been foolish not to address it.
Parish Committee request
Can we please now layoff NickMp’s claims? The point has been made but I for one appreciate his postings. Thanks
275. Calm down. The form SeanT links to is a claim for “Mortgage Payments or Rent” So it doesn’t involve any “big lie”.
But hey, you could have known that, if you’d clicked on the link.
278 - It doesn’t appear a very credible strategy to run down Dover and instead ship things destined for the UK to Northern France and transfer it all to the Channel Tunnel. Seems absurd on its face.
Well done Cameron, for getting the 3 Labour troughers de-whipped.
A massive humiliation for Brown.
281, aye. I agree it’s a relevant point given the thread’s discussion, but there’s no need to bang on about it. We’re not all tim, after all.
Compare and contrast: Fabio Capello and David Cameron v. Gordon Brown on decision making.
Compare and contrast: the qualities needed to lead a country into the World Cup and the qualities needed to steer a country through the deepest recession in 80 years.
Who would you vote for?
paulwaugh
Harriet Harman left looking like a chump by the move to suspend the whip from the 3 Lab MPs
278
have you ever been faced with french labour laws and CGT led strikers ?
it might not be sensible in anglo-saxon terms but in France things are different.
287 - does he mean chump in the Mandelson fashion?
270. You can rent an extremely desirable one bed flat in central London for £1400 a month, and this is at 2010 prices.
http://tinyurl.com/yj5s3ls
In 2005 Palmer was gouging us for £1800 a month. Where the f*ck was he living? A crystal walled loft in Belgravia? He has been living in a high old style, at our expense, for all his time at parliament, and if that isn’t enriching himself I don’t know what is.
Plus he regularly claims £100 for food! On top of his salary, the massive rent free flat, the first class travel, the subsidised booze and tucker at Westminster. Despite all that we have to pay for his toast in the morning.
And if you dig deeper into his expenses you will find his making those strange claims for “petty cash no questions asked” that were allowed until recently, just basically putting your hand in the till, nod nod wink wink, no receipt needed.
This is the man who told us “no one goes into politics for the money”.
Pass the spittoon, I feel a bilious episode coming on.
281. Given that Nick has chosen to make aggressive and lurid personal attacks about other MPs’ expenses over the last few days I don’t see why he should be immune from criticism at all.
258. No-one really knows, but it seems obvious the Tories have realised they need to run just to stand still (relatively-speaking) in the marginals. I suspect the much-vaunted Ashcroft strategy will not be as effective as many believe.
286 Baskerville there is also the Cabinet minister who admitted to breaking an immigration law was fined and Brown let her stay in her job*
New Labour “Criminals R Us”.
*and I lost £50+ in a bet….
Hurst Llama you’re correct that Nick P doesn’t charge for a mortgage but he is on record on here as saying he could rent somewhere cheaper. Lots of adverts for places in the likes of Kentish Town at half the price, for instance. And let’s not forget this largesse is not being enjoyed with Nick’s own money, but with OUR money and he should be beholden to be as frugal as possible with it.
283 SNP
see 288 sorry mis-typed number
276. Problem is that if the Greeks have to take the medicine it will taste even more bitter if dispensed by Dr Berlin. Public order will be at serious risk.
Why arnt sky asking harman about her missing a women only short list meeting so her hubby can be selected for a safe seat ?
“I wonder whether David Cameron will use words this morning like: “I lead my party, while he follows his”, ”
More like “I lead my party, and his too…..”
282. Ah Hopi the resident apologist for all sins socialist. So you think Palmer excuses himself by renting an extravagant pad do you.? How champagne socialist what what old bean?
Well I should have guessed it would be you who would pop up. No denial of the fat porker charge I see either which is by far the more serious. Palmer’s just another MP robbing the Taxpayer blind!
Tell me how is it that an MP from Glasgow can survive on around half the ACA Palmer has when he only lives in Nottingham?
Harriet Harman? “We should not prejudice a trial by talking about them like Cameron as scumbags, which is why we have decided to er label them as unfit to be members of the Labour party”.
shurely shome mistake..?
guidofawkes tweets
Freudian slip of the tongue? RT @MeshChhabra: Gordon just said ‘our desperate’ before correcting to ‘our deficit’ reduction plan.
Oops.
280. Indeed, I don’t think Privilege is a good ground, politically, morally or legally. But since Johnson and Harman said the same thing, I think it’s off to say Labour tolerated this argument.
Besides, as Harman pointed out this morning the government were going to make specific legislation about expenses claims -but removed it after tories said was covered by existing law.
Also, apparently Cameron’s voting record is not spotless on this, as laura K is saying on News 24 now, though I don’t know the details of that.
jsfl February 8th, 2010 at 11:09 am (to Hopi Sen) “Tell me how is it that an MP from Glasgow can survive on around half the ACA Palmer has when he only lives in Nottingham?”
Maybe they live off a Glasgow diet and aim to die before they are 60? NickMP has more sense.
Christina - I think Roger’s point is that Cameron is involved in point scoring over this. The man is a serial trougher, but pretends that he is leading over the issue of cleaning up. If the man seriously wanted ‘change’ then he would be an advocate of real reforms - not just the tinkering that suits his short term agenda.
Cameron is showing more and more signs of being a tyrant. His party are simply a prop for his personal power trip. He has personally taken over the running of his campaign. His response to showing no idea of the way he would like to govern or manage the economy is to indulge in increasingly negative and personal attacks on his opponents.
I think it is funny how the Tories complain that Labour’s centralising is their bette noir - and yet the moves over the last week or two show a small Tory core who are determined to concentrate more and more power on themselves.
I have no idea how this is going to play out - there is a lot of evidence that Cameron is a lucky politician, and Labour have lost so much of their goodwill. But Cameron certainly is not inspiring, and the more we see of him, the more it becomes clear that his raison d’etre is power for power’s sake.
301 - could things be about to start going wrong for Brown again? It’s about time, if so. This period of the press cupping his groin and stroking his hair is getting very tedious.
299. I tell you what.
I’ll deal with your latest ad hominem after you apologise to Nick Palmer for calling him a liar.
281. Bollocks with hairs on.
Palmer started this by making a nasty little smear: that Cameron was enriching himself at our expense by “buying a country mansion”.
True or not, he can hardly complain if we then take a look at the evidence of his own troughing, evidence which is plentiful.
I too welcome Nick’s contributions, I also think that, like most MPs, he is lacking in self awareness, is full of self justification, has forgotten what it is like to be an ordinary citizen paying ordinary taxes, and is capable of the most odious hypocrisy - and this is one example.
Skynews political coverage is a hoot right now.
304. Hysterical post, in both senses of the word
306. ROFLMAO
Labour Lies
Labour Spins
Labour twists in the wind
306. ROFLMAO
Labour Lies
Labour Spins
Labour twists in the wind
133. Polly you tube is your friend.
bagpipes - first tune.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHktXwVPgaw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1m3e7H_tuU
294 - Absolutely. And what applies to him applies to all other MPs as well. So why on earth we are paying for minsters and shadow ministers to have family homes in two places is quite beyond me. The difference between renting and owning, of course, is that when Nick loses his seat in May and has no need for a place in Londfon he gives up his flat and that’s that. All the MPs with homes here can flog them and make a fortune. That seems very wrong to me. They should at least repay the entire subsidy plus interest they have had from Parliament.
Hmm.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jul/01/labour-parliament-standards-bill
“On the third and final day of debate on the parliamentary standards bill in the Commons, the government was defeated by three votes, 250 to 247, on plans to end “parliamentary privilege” and allow parliamentary debates to be used in court as evidence.”
A case of being for parliamentary privilege before being against it?
308, ridiculously pro-Brown or amusingly anti-Brown?
236 I don’t think that there is anything to attack Cameron over, in relation to expenses, apart from the Wisteria, which cost £700.
Cameron hasn’t broken the law; nor has he abused the rules, nor has been ordered to repay a hefty sum of money.
307 - If what NPMP has said about Cameron’s country pile is true, then how on earth can it be a smear?
Interesting figures in that ICM poll re paying MP’s an extra £15k to make up for loss of expenses, looks like a resounding no to me.
76% total disagree, 62% strongly diagree
304.Look Paul, I am not getting into a pi**ing contest with you over this. I thought that NickP’s comment up thread was rank hypocrisy in light of the situation for all politicians of all parties right now, and said so. End off.
The expenses scandal has damaged politics and Parliament, and until that point really hits home right across the political spectrum, its going to continue to fester.
302 Hopi - But the specific legislation argument is nonsense, isn’t it? Unless I’m mistaken, it wouldn’t have addressed the question of parliamentary privilege. We don’t need new offences, but simply to ensure that the existing criminal law applies to MPs in cases like this, as it would to anyone else.
Politically, it’s hard to argue that Labour has not tolerated the argument on privilege; whilst Johnson (but not, at least in the interview I heard, Harman) spoke out strongly, Brown hasn’t done so. What’s more Labour lawyers are those advancing this argument. Of course, legally there is nothing wrong with that, but it’s Ms Harman herself who in another context reminded us of the importance of the Court of Public Opinion. Cameron has taken the initiative on this, and I think he will win this one in the latter court.
314, you’re scaling a mountain of wrongness.
Parliamentary privilege for freedom of speech to protect MPs from prosecution for what they say is absolutely what it should be. Parliamentary privilege to prevent MPs from being prosecuted for crimes such as theft is absolutely not what it should be.
316 - But he is enriching himself by using a discredited system - as are all other MPs that do the same.
318. They should all be paying back 15% of what they have claimed in the last 7 years not getting a payrise!
318 - MPs (as opposed to ministers) are already absurdly overpaid for the work they do.
Here’s a fun story:
EU chumps cry because UK doesn’t let convicts pick the government:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8503370.stm
They can piss off, as far as I’m concerned.
317 SO - It’s a smear because it omits to point out that the maximum claim is limited. Therefore the size or price of the ‘country pile’ (actually a normal middle-class family home) is irrelevant - this is pure class envy, notable only for the fact that Labour supporters don’t criticise Gordon Brown on the same spurious basis.
321 - he’s doing a classic Blair thing, and no doubt this will be Labour’s approach throughout the day. Blair always used to say ‘you voted against X, meaning you are soft on Y’, when X actually had very little to do with Y - it just sounded like it should.
Cameron has never said ‘let’s abolish Parliamentary privilege’; simply that it shouldn’t protect MPs from prosecution when what they’ve done is in the course of them being s**tbags, rather than their Parliamentary duties.
320 - Cameron has quite rightly seized a political opportunity. But I do not imagine that anyone is claiming it is any more than that.
310.311 jsfl. Don’t put yourself in the Wayne column. you’re usually better than that.
There is something squalid about watching MPs screeching over the immediate decision to prosecute some of their number.
My sources suggest more MPs, and more particularly more peers, will be charged in the coming days and weeks. It’s clear this morning that some MPs are trying to find a way of extracting party advantage from the hysteria
http://blogs.channel4.com/snowblog/2010/02/08/tough-times-at-the-trough/
317. Palmer said this:
“Personally I think we should take the gloves off and observe that a party leader who buys a country mansion as his “necessary second home” with taxpayers’ assistance is a bit desperate if he starts making outraged speeches about expenses”
This is a clear insinuation that Cameron bought an UNnecessarily large second home, even though Cameron acted entirely within the spirit and letter of the law, given that he has to house a large family, and, at the time of buying the home, a very disabled son who needed a live in nurse (as I understand it).
Also there is that little bit of Palmerian nastiness in the word “mansion” as if Cameron bought Blenheim Palace or Chatsworth, when, as far as I know, it is just a nice large-ish house in the country, not what most people would regard as a mansion.
This constitutes a smear.
The hypocrisy is doubled because Palmer himself is regularly in the top percentile of claimers, rents an extremely luxurious flat in central London entirely at our expense. And then he has the gall to charge us all for his fecking food, when he nips down from his rent free pied a terre to the local Waitrose.
321. Indeed, but let me put it this way - If David Cameron and George Osborne had voted the other way on that vote, then the privilege defence would not exist in this case - and in others.
If you’re going to throw mud, expect mud to come back at you.
Personally, I think the privilege defence for a financial crime would get laughed out of court, for the reasons you suggest.
I also think it’s ridiculous for to argue the government is tolerating such a defence. To be honest, I think it would be much more likely to prejudice a trial if a Prime Minister went round telling defendents what they could and couldn’t use in their defence. If I were a defendent, I’d have my lawyers right on that.
325 - Never mind letting criminals vote in elections, we appear willing to elect criminals* to vote in Parliament.
*Please note that this in no way prejudges any trial and is just a form of words used for a nice neat epigram. Innocent till proven guilty, that’s my motto, and that includes the use of Parliamentary privilege where legally appropriate, even if it morally sucks.
325 - this was discussed on the Today programme this morning, apparently as it’s against prisoner’s human rights then technically any election could be ruled invalid if someone tried to take it to the ECHR.
get out for Gordon?
324. Correct. Let’s have a 10-year levy on their earnings to repay the costs of the expenses investigation and capitalise some appropriate charities - a 10% levy would raise several million a year, no?
With the Tears with Piers programme coming up.
This site is for all Labour PR people.
http://cryingwife.com/
326 - It is not a normal middle class home - that is a quite ridiculous claim. In Cameron’s constituency, a normal middle class home would be a three or four bedroomed semi or a detached on a privately built housing estate, or a semi or terraced place in Witney or a similar town.
Camerion does live in a country pile and the taxpayer is paying a large amount to allow him to do so. Of course, he is not the only one and the whole thing is a disgrace.
Votes For Prisoners is Lib Dem policy. The more publicity for this the better. The voters hate the idea.
312. Dr Spyn - thanks for that - YouTube is amazing. Mr Polly was strangely reluctant to sing it
Cameron has put Brown on the back foot this morning I see. You can always tell the bunker is rattled when they put Hattie in the line of fire.
“The hypocrisy is doubled because Palmer himself is regularly in the top percentile of claimers, rents an extremely luxurious flat in central London entirely at our expense”
A luxurious flat in central London for £1800 a month? Don’t be an idiot!
334. I saw this discussed somewhere else. Apparently the Irish get round this by legally allowing prisoners to vote, but they are not allowed to go to polling stations or use postal votes…
332, and if the Commons had voted to abolish trials the trio of accused wouldn’t be able to use privilege as a defence either.
Abolishing privilege would damage freedom of speech in the commons. A new law, or amendment, is all that’s needed.
Maybe Labour will bring in postal votes for parliament that way all their MPs retain their vote.
333 iirc having a criminal conviction is no bar to becoming an MP.
To echo Nick Palmer, there are a number of open Tory sores into which Labour could usefully throw some salt:-
1. The fact that it is Tory MPs who top the list of those asked to refund Expenses
2. Global Warming and Tory denial of the science - the next Tory split issue (cf. Their lunatic hatred of the European Union)
4. Tory obsession with national debt over jobs and,
3. Lord Ashcroft (the gift that keeps on giving).
Brown and his election team look like their biding their time, but these issues have potential to do real damage.
341.
337 - indeed, it would seem that Mr Nabavi is the sort of person who believes that “normal middle class” = combined income of £200k+, a retreat in the Dordogne, three kids at fee-paying schools and 4 foreign holidays a year.
329 Roger,
Don’t patronise me as you do others. I’m not better or worse than anything when it comes to dealing with the mendacious dishonesty that lives in the DNA of Labour.
337 Southam - Nonsense on both counts. Anyway I note you haven’t addressed the main point, which is that the taxpayer would not have saved anything if Cameron had bought a less expensive house, so it is totally irrelevant.
If your employer pays you a maximum allowance per day for hotel costs, and you choose at your own expense to pay more, is that ‘troughing’?
322 On 3rd July 2008 Cameron voted to support the reforms of the Expenses system including removal of use of ACA for furniture purchase, capital improvements and requiring itemised receipts for all spend, neither Gordon Brown nor Nick Clegg voted.
The motion was defeated and the discredited system stayed in place, The Conservatives gave up an Opposition day to allow a re-vote. It was lost and again neither Brown nor Clegg voted to support reform.
One party leader recognised early the expenses issues importance and supported reform, the other two had more important things to do.
331 - I have no argument with the claim of hypocrisy. I think that any MP of whatever party who attacks another MP of whatever party for having used the discredited expenses system is necessarily a hypocrite. The only ones that are above the fray are the very few who made no claims at all.
But I fail to see where the smear is. Cameron has purchased a very large house using the Commons expenses system. He did not have to purchase a house of that size. In fact, he could have just bought or rented himself a flat to do his constituency work as his main family home is in London. So, he played the system and has done very well out of it. Just as many other MPs have done.
has cameron given his speach yet ? nothing on sky ?
341. Brilliant!
347 - Yes, it’s all very Daily Telegraph, isn’t it?
OT, interesting take on Gordo’s latest
electoral bribecunning planHow the cancer that is government grows
Paul Marks (Northamptonshire) UK affairs
The British Prime Minister, Mr Gordon Brown, is going to promise nursing at home for all cancer patients who desire this. Such nursing is already provided by the Macmillan charity (hence “Macmillan cancer nurses”), but people will soon forget that. If the plan goes ahead and (a rather wild assumption) the British government manages to stagger on for a few more years without bankruptcy from its endless schemes, people will soon be saying “if it was not for the government people with cancer who wanted to stay at home could not do so - unless they were RICH” (the word “rich” being said with hatred).
This is how the expansion of government happens. The government takes over something (and civil society retreats) and soon people do not even know that it was ever done voluntarily. And, too often, the people who used to undertake the activity welcome the advance of government - “now we will not have to go begging for money” they tell themselves, not understanding that where there is government finance there is also government control.
http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2010/02/how_the_cancer.html
351 - the point that you haven’t made, SO, is that not only has he (and others) enjoyed a large home, but that when he ceases to be an MP he will be able to make a fat profit on its sale.
Perhaps if he had offered to return any proportionate capital gain to the Treasury he would have a sharper case to make.
Re 340 At the Days Inn in Vauxhall you can get a single room for £49.
Who would want anything more? In any case the while argument for having a pad in town has gone now that the Commons rarely site late and has much reduced hours.
There is also a good Travelodge
352, I think it’s been pushed back to midday, probably due to a need for a rewrite as he didn’t foresee Brown buckling.
345. “Tory denial of the science”
Lol - a bit late for that ? The AGW worm has turned - if Labour arent divided on this issue then the whole party is on the wrong side of it.
“Tory obsession with national debt”
Lol - see Greece. National debt is not a hobby horse like foxhunting or votes for prisoners.
“Lord Ashcroft” - voters couldnt give a t0ss in the main but he has still donated less money to the Cons than Lord Sainsbury and Lord Paul have to Labour.
Your point 1 is borderline - Brown was top of the Scottish list of paybacks and 3 Labour MPs will face trial.
0.5/4 - must try harder Ben.
345 IIRC, Barbara Follett, and Harry Cohen topped the list. But, there are Conservatives whose behaviour has been appalling.
National debt is rather a sensible thing to be obsessed over, just now.
322 The system is wrong. But, I don’t consider he has breached either the letter or the spirit of the rules (appallingly lax though they are).
345 IIRC, Barbara Follett, and Harry Cohen topped the list. But, there are Conservatives whose behaviour has been appalling.
National debt is rather a sensible thing to be obsessed over, just now.
322 The system is wrong. But, I don’t consider he has breached either the letter or the spirit of the rules (appallingly lax though they are).
354 SO - Excuse me! I don’t mind the cut and thrust of vigorous debate, but accusing me of being a Telegraph reader is going too far.
350 - Why has Cameron got Hunt and Spelman in the Shadow Cabinet?
Their presence invalidates any angry-tough acting award he’s going for.
Roger from your mansion on the Côte d’Azure £1800 might seem a pittance but most people, even in London, don’t earn that much a month after tax.
362 - It was a grotesque accusation. I thought it had more of the feel of the FT Weekend “My Favourite Home” feature.
358 thanks, and what brown has said about the nhs earlier !
340. A luxurious flat in central London for £1800 a month? Don’t be an idiot!
by Roger February 8th, 2010 at 11:30 ”
Given that Nick was claiming £1800 a month in rent in 2005, five years ago, that’s probably the same as about £2000-£2250 a month now, if we are very conservative and generous to him. Here is the kind of flat you can rent for that sort of money:
http://tinyurl.com/ygnyavn
http://tinyurl.com/ylp2oxx
http://tinyurl.com/yzr384c
Beautiful period conversions in the heart of Mayfair and Marylebone. Perhaps they are bit cheap by your standards, Rog, but most people would find them fairly agreeable.
349 - What kind of world do you live in Richard? I wonder how much this four bedroomed house in Witney cost when Cameron was buying:
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/3174702
I am not saying that Cameron did anything wrong. I am just saying there is nothing wrong in claiming that Cameron has used the expenses system to buy a very large house in his constituency - one that is now worth considerably more than when he bought it and one that he owns in addition to his family home in London. NPMP may well be a hypocrite, but that does not mean what he says about Cameron is untrue.
345. BenM
2. Global Warming and Tory denial of the science.
Please explain to me how Gordon Brown’s Government adopting a nuclear (hardly environmentally friendly) solution and giving it to the company that Gordon Brown’s brother works for (would have nothing to do with nepotism would it?) fit into a positive narrative about the government’s approach to climate change issues?
Also please can you explain to me how introducing electric cars is going to improve our carbon footprint?
Furthermore, please can you explain why the Government has committed to invest vast sums in the most inefficient form of clean energy generation(windfarms) which also is a blight on the landscape.
Before Labour try to create non existent rifts in opposition parties perhaps they might try do develop a credible plan of their own that doesn’t look corrupt and incompetent.
No doubt by the time they have the lights will have been out for a generation………
@359.
1. What is it? 12 of the top 15 Expenses paybacks are Tories?
2. Er, no. AGW is happening and the more hysterical the (almost exclusively rightwing) deniers get, the less electable the Tories become.
3. National debt is not so important as the maintenance of employment and the avoidance of deflation. Tories are overhyping debt in a fantastic election losing display of talking the country down.
4. When Ashcroft clarifies his tax status perhaps this gifthorse may be nullified. It certainly ain’t so yet.
I can feel Labour’s election team loading the cannons as I speak.
350. Ted - please give more details. Your comment does not match the info given on Lib Dem Voice:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/mps-expenses-14774.html
356 - I have made that point. If you rent, when you stop renting at the end of your time in Parliament that’s the end of it. If you own, even when you stop being an MP you get to sell your house and make a fortune - especially if it is a big house in the leafy countryside.
328 Funny, Southam, that’s how I saw it.
It’s Dave’s job to do that and he’s fully justified in doing it. It’s our job as objective Political Punters to see it for what it is.
Where’s the problem?
153. ‘Cameron seems to be having a stab at prejudicing a fair trial.
Any defence lawyer will love his blabbering.’
Smeaering. Not farming as usual.
Nick P -please, PLEASE go on Cameron’s second home. Can’t wait for the discussion about Gordon’s second home.
A very easy issue for the public to understand.
363 Why is Caroline Spelman in the Shadow Cabinet?
A mystery which I couldn’t attempt to supply an answer to.
AV news: Dale reckons Brown believes it advantages Labour and disadvantages the Tories:
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/02/browns-av-fiddle-now-we-know.html
“But those wonderful academics at the University of Plymouth, Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher have revealed the reason why Brown now thinks AV is best. It would give Labour more seats! Bet that’s surprised you, hasn’t it! According to their studies, if there had been AV for the 2005 election, Labour would have won 364 seats rather than 356. The Conservatives would have won 15 fewer (183, asopposed to 198) and the LibDems would have gone up from 62 to 71.”
Cameron or Hague should go on this at PMQs.
370 The three who face prosecution aren’t included in that list.
368 SO - Four bedrooms is hardly excessive for the Cameron family, is it? What world do you live in?
But what is objectionable is (as always with the left) the sub-text of class hatred and the implication of dishonesty. You seem to be arguing that the system of allowances was wrong; that is arguable, although to my mind it is much more arguable that MPs should not have to so rich that they can afford themselves to maintain two homes. But you are personalising it in a most unpleasant way.
Why pick on Cameron? Why not Darling, or Brown, or Ed Balls?
I think we know the answer, and it is not pleasant.
Looks like the Tories are giving the green light to elected politicians to compare Dave to Adolf.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1595593/
345. Is there any reason in particular you decided to order you list 1,2,4,3 (did the mention of Ashcroft get you over-excited? It seems to get Labour types all of a sweat) instead of 1,2,3,4.?
O/T: does anyone have the latest polling approval ratings for Brown/Cameron?
Gordo still running flat out to try and catch up with Cameron
BBCLauraK
PM s spokesman does not rule out changing the law on parliamentary privilege if necessary
“National debt is not so important as the maintenance of employment and the avoidance of deflation. Tories are overhyping debt in a fantastic election losing display of talking the country down.”
They are of equal importance. What’s happening to Greece right now illustrates the dangers of borrowing too much - not for investment, but to finance current expenditure.
Ethel Austin has gone in to administration..
this bit caught my eye..
Administrators blamed the move on failure to secure necessary funding, compounded by poor trading conditions during the severe weather in January.
How many more businesses are in the same situation? That 0.1% recovery is looking very shaky.
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8504086.stm
I think the capital gains on ACA point that Nick Clegg makes is very fair. These are expenses, not salary; capital gained from them should return to the taxpayer. A rent-only system would be far better.
That said, it is faintly ridiculous for people maxing out the ACA to criticize other people maxing out the ACA based entirely on the size of the property.
Darling claimed for painting over graffiti on his front door. Anyone know which of his 5 houses it was?
378 - I think the point is Cameron could’ve bought a four bedroomed house on a £1200 monthly mortgage but he chose to max out at the taxpayers expense.
Finally, Brown has withdrawn the whip from Chaytor, Morley and Devine. This is a significant victory for Cameron in the latest battle over expenses. Once again, the Tories are streaks ahead on this issue. As Henry Macrory notes, it took Cameron 86 minutes to reach the obvious conclusion that Lord Hanningfield should be suspended; Brown agonised for 4305 minutes. Truly, this is the man who can be trusted to ‘take the tough decisions’ on the economy when needed – my guess is that most of us all will die at a Keatsian age in Dickensian penury.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5759753/success-for-cameron.thtml
SO we agree that Nick Palmer is a hypocrite. All that’s left is the question of whether he smeared Cameron or not.
I’d say the use of the words “country mansion” is by itself a smear, as it implies Cameron bought a massive manor house with hundreds of acres etc etc. He didn’t. He bought a very nice detached Cotswold stone farmhouse.
But enough of this, they are all troughers. And while we are on this theme, I’d like to add that Palmer is no worse (and no better) than the rest of them, but he certainly is in there with the rest of them, greedily troughing his way through our money, so he should probably stop attacking others for grafting and gouging.
Not sure if the Tories had the media strategy on this one worked out ideally. It is a brilliant and righteous win for them, yes, but the timescales are too short for much of the public to notice.
By briefing the speech to the press yesterday, it gave Labour an opportunity to react before it was delivered. How much more damaging would the whip removal have been if Cameron had already given the speech?
OT - It’s worth watching Hardtalk this week with Hans Blix being interviewed. He dropped Jack Straw in it and I now see that the BBC have written it up on their website.
Former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw gave some incorrect answers to the UK’s Iraq war inquiry, former UN weapons inspector Hans Blix has said.
Mr Blix told the BBC he was “puzzled” by some of the evidence that Mr Straw gave to the panel.
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8503454.stm
Strangely he hasn’t been asked to appear at Chilcot.
371 See who voted
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2008-07-03&number=253&display=allvotes&sort=vote
381 These only seem to be reported regularly by Yougov and MORI (ICM sometimes ask the question).
IIRC, according to Yougov, Cameron leads Brown by 32:22 on best Prime Minister, and his approval rating is 47%, compared to Brown’s 25%.
MORI’s figures are somewhat closer. Cameron’s rating is 43%, compared to 33% for Brown. However, MORI doesn’t apply any turnout filter to its approval ratings, unlike its voting intention survey. Party support among all voters was Con 38% to Lab 34%, compared to 40:32%, after the turnout filter had been applied.
387. Palmer could have rented a rather nice flat in Camden or Maida Vale for £1200 or £1500 a month, instead he chose to live in the lap of luxury, at our expense, by claiming the maximum allowable.
383. And the wonderful irony is that that wild overspending is indeed quite likely to lead to deflation, of the most grinding kind.
287. ‘Harriet Harman left looking like a chump by the move to suspend the whip from the 3 Lab MPs.’
Well at least there was something in it for Gordon.
387 tim - But it is perfectly normal in all walks of life to use your allowances for the purposes for which they are intended. By that argument, senior civil servants and politicians should all fly economy. Why should we pay for these very rich people to drink champagne in Business class, still less Krug in First Class?
Actually, maybe they should fly economy, but no-one blames them for not insisting on that themselves,if that is what the rules allow.
And why do you say ‘Cameron’? Perhaps you mean Darling?
Off topic, it appears that the press rumours that an April election is under consideration have had some impact: the Betfair month market now has April at considerably shorter odds than March.
April is now the only month on which I lose significantly. I’m deep green on March and May and very very light red on June.
394 - NPMP, of course, wont be pocketing any profits from his arrangement. I think most people can spot the difference.
394 - I don’t think Dave or Nick are in any position to lecture anyone frankly, particularly given the nature of Camerons Shadow Cabinet which he never cleaned out.
141 - I’d be careful letting people know you’re a lwayer, better to say claim a respectable profession like dockside hooker.
with apologies to Ronald Reagan
“The legal profession is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realise that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.”
378 - I am picking on Cameron because that is who the argument is about. You will notice that I actually state in every post I make that he has not done anything wrong and that he has not done anything that other MPs do not do.
But that does not mean he is not a hypocrite. He is.
I believe absolutely that a system which subsidises MPs to buy houses and then lets them keep these houses - and all the profits accruing from them - after they have ceased being MPs is completely wrong, whichever parties those MPs belong to. Someone who really wanted to reform the expenses system would be advocating that MPs should keep their second homes for as long as they are in Parliament, should sell them within one year of leaving Parliament and should return all profits made to Parliament. It would hardly be the most difficult thing to do.
DFinally, the idea that Cameron lives in a normal middle cloass home is ridiculous. He doesn’t. The one I linked to in Witney is a normal middle class home in that part of the world. It is not class envy or reverse snobiishness to point that out, it is just a statement of fact. Crying class envy every time a Tory displays him or herself to have very little knowledge of average middle class life is a little lame, is it not?
393. Thanks Sean. I presume they are the most recent, in the past month?
390. I’m not sure it makes much difference wibbler. The actual speech means relatively little these days (except in rare circumstances). The speech is often just the excuse for the press release and leaks beforehand. The main story on Today programme all morning was Cameron’s message and that Labour calls Cameron’s attacks “desparate”. By lunchtime labour has caved in on both points and this is reflected in journos coverage. Job done for Cameron.
397 - “By that argument, senior civil servants and politicians should all fly economy.”
Damn right they should.
On a related note there is nothing more ridiculous than public servants insisting that they hold on to their “right” to charge taxpayers £100+ extra for every train journey they make by booking first class.
Anyone watching The Daily Politics? Andrew Neil said something that I don’t think was meant for broadcast
Guess Who is First Up for PMQs?
Oral Questions to the Prime Minister
Unless otherwise indicated the Members listed below will ask a question without notice.
*1 Mr Jim Devine (Livingston): If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 10 February.
http://order-order.com/2010/02/08/guess-who-is-first-up-for-pmqs/
385. Wibbler if they hadn’t exempted themselves from tax on their expenses in the 2003 Finance bill Clegg’s comments would have been irrelevent they’d all have been paying (income)tax all along……
Cameron has given his speach but not shown on SKY ! anyone got a link ?
403 Assuming I’ve remembered correctly, those are the most recent figures.
Highlights of Dave’s speech on Beeb now
370. Sorry Ben - I didn’t realise your were a spoof.
Brown’s spokeman now saying that he would back a law to change parliamentary privilege .
409 - Cam on Sky now.
397: Richard Nabavi @ 12:00
“Actually, maybe they should fly economy”
I say, steady on. I bow to no one in my contempt for the political classes, but even I wouldn’t demand they fly cattle class. There are limits, lines a civilised society shouldn’t cross.
On accomodation Mr. Smithson made a good point above. Why, especially now that the house does not routinely work into the evenings and all MPs have offices, do MPs need a London home? Those that have constituencies within commuting distance should go home of an evening the same as everyone else and the others can put up in a reasonable hotel and claim the, actual, cost back.
409.That is odd, they usual do cover his speeches.
Jim Devine looks well:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/02/08/article-1249361-082A62E5000005DC-797_468×349.jpg
Elliot Morley looks like Ted Heath’s stupid brother:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/02/08/article-1249361-082A65B5000005DC-742_468×409.jpg
410. Thanks. Very interesting.
415 they cut brown off mid speach but atleast they showed it live !
402 SO - That is absurd. Because you favour a new and complex scheme for tracking and recouping capital gains (and presumbly making the taxpayer liable for losses), you think Cameron is a hypocrite when he says politicians should not be able to claim privilege as a defence against charges of alleged dishonesty?
413.Thanks Kristin.
371 I did Clegg a disservice on the vote on Conservative Opposition Day debate - he voted to support the Conservative motion.
402 Cameron’s house is quite small … compared to the mansion of the former MP for Witney, now the Labour MP for St Helens South.
414 - I dont think forcing people to live out of hotels for long periods is reasonable. It would put an awful lot of people off becoming an MP too.
415 or maybe sky were saving it for the lunchtime audiance ?
ICM poll detail is up (apologies if previously posted)
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2010_feb_st_poll.pdf
Regional figures
North
Con 24
Lab 40
LD 17
Midland
Con 46
Lab 28
LD 20
South
Con 52
Lab 19
LD 23
So polarisation along the Humber/Mersey lines seems even more stark.
Incidentally, before the final adjustments were made the figuresa for this poll were Con 40 Lab 29 LD 20 (see pg 3 and 4)
424 dave - cam is on Sky now..
David Cameron has scored a direct hit today by pre-briefing his demand that Brown suspend the three Labour MPs charged with exes fiddles. Labour look way off the pace in taking 72 hours to do what Cameron did in just five minutes (with Hanningfield).
But it is another message in Cameron’s speech today that could have greater long-term significance.
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/02/cameron-declares-war-on-the-lobbyists.html
402. Do we know where Gordon’s first home is yet?
Whip has been withdrawn - but have the nice benefits..
“Gordon Brown has been challenged to disclose whether the Labour party is paying for its official solicitor to represent the three MPs charged with false accounting over their expenses. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/7182953/MPs-expenses-Gordon-Brown-challenged-over-Labour-party-solicitor-representing-MPs.html
402 - it’s one of the symptoms of Groupthink.
427 -
*FOOTNOTE: No, it’s not a war on The Lobby, don’t be daft.
By the way, for anyone wondering why Cam’s speech is only now being shown on TV rather than live, the reason is simple. The satellite truck broke down.
426 many thanks
from waugh
“By the way, for anyone wondering why Cam’s speech is only now being shown on TV rather than live, the reason is simple. The satellite truck broke down.”
427 - The final line of that piece explains why the David Cameron speech wasn’t on tv. Paul Waugh is rapidly turning into a national treasure.
419 - the Inland Revenue seem to manage perfectly well in calculating capital gains (and losses) on property.
434. I heard SKY describe him as ‘the excellent Paul Waugh’ a couple of days ago.
He makes some of the TV pundits look stupid and I expect he is less well paid.
It seems perfectly sensible to me that if we are subsidising MPs’ second homes and there are capital gains, the public should get the benefit of those capital gains in priority to the MP up to the point where the subsidy has been repaid. Only then could the MP benefit from the capital gain. As a generous concession, I would be content if the subsidy was repaid interest free.
428
Niflheim
434. Considering he is regional press (London Evening Standard)he outperforms a lot of media colleagues in national.
Ted - focussing on Cameron voting is picking out one fact and trying to make an argument fit. You could also pointed out that the Lib Dems turned out proportionately in greater numbers on this vote than the other two AND all voted in favour of reform (as opposed to 1/3 of the tories who voted).
To tie in with the other point - I agree with SO - Cameron isn’t the only one who is guilty of hypocrisy on this. But he is the one who has turned this issue both personal, and deeply party based. As such, it is valid to ask him what steps he is going to take to redress his own troughing behaviour.
Ultimately, I think the worst aspect of this has been the party politicising of the issue. This is a case where bipartisanship (triparisanship?) would have been more beneficial to all - but this whole obsession that Cameron and Brown, and to a lesser extent Clegg, have developed that they have to ’show’ leadership has dragged out the process, increased the finger pointing, the bitterness and the increasing sense that they are all in it for themselves.
So yes Brown looks dithering, but I disagree that Cameron has come out of this well - he looks nasty and self-serving and hypocritical.
423: Neil @ 12:16
Lots of people regularly have to spend part of their working week staying in hotels.
The argument that it might put people off becoming an MP hardly holds water. It is a job that has no fixed hours, no performance criteria and requires no formal qualifications. It provides a warm room, subsidised food and booze and commands a very decent salary and there are dozens of applicants for every vacancy. I hardly think that having to spend a maximum of three nights a week in a decent hotel when the House was sitting would put anyone off. Certainly not the sort of person one would want as an MP.
436, 439 - We are seeing the emergence of a new generation of political journalists who are unafraid of the new media and work with it. The old lags look positively pedestrian by comparison.
425 : I can’t see where they get their final figures of 39/30 from in that poll, its not obvious at all.
However the regional figures look bad for Brown in the Midlands and South.
Midlands 46/28 and the south 52/19. North is 24/40.
440. Looks like the “excellent” Paul Waugh and David Blackburn of the Speccie disagree with you on who won todays war.
11. Stuart Dickson: “What happened to VIPA…?”
It was stoled by Rod Crosby in “The Wrath of Crosby”
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/01/04/is-there-anything-to-learn-from-jan-2005-polls/#comment-1369897
“Cameron does live in a country pile and the taxpayer is paying a large amount to allow him to do so. Of course, he is not the only one and the whole thing is a disgrace.”
This and subsequent arguments about Cameron’s mortgage are nonsense. It is, of course, the modern obsession that MPs should maintain a home (of whatever sort) in the constituency as well as live and work in London that means we have got to a system that requires some sort of expenses for a second home (whether in the constituency or London).
Cameron could have rented that or another constituency home for an amount similar to the mortgage interest. How would that have made any difference?
The expenses system is not subsidising the purchase since he has to pay the capital. If he’d rented at an equivalent cost to the expenses, then he could have used that capital elsewhere to achieve capital growth.
All we have here from SO is typical envy and spite towards a member of the party he dislikes.
435: actually you’ll find its hard-working accountants which calculate capital gains and losses.
The Revenue do pretty much sweet f-all.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/feb/07/tv-debates-parties
No doubt this has been posted before, but it seems so important I’ll risk the duplication. Personally I will believe that these debates will happen when I actually see them.
If Cammo is willing to risk the collateral damage of dredging up Lord Ashcroft’s finances by some ’shock and awe’ against the PM, then I can’t see how they will agree to a decent and honest debate.
This election will surely descend into guttural mud-slinging in the blogosphere ??
447 - You had me up to “hard-working”.
440 Paul, Clegg has politicised the issue just as much if not more - the point I made about the voting was that it was in 2008 that action could have been taken to avert the worst and Clegg wasn’t interested, demanding two years later that Parliament sit through the summer was risible.
As leader he took no action that could highlight the troughing of any of his MPs, careful not to demand anything of them except that demanded by the independent audit - keep your head down boys then perhaps they will think we are cleaner than clean seems to have been his motto.
449: If we don’t stick up for ourselves, no one else well
402 SO As someone who lived in Witney until 3 years ago, can I suggest you stop pontificating on the area. Every post you have made on the subject on this thread has displayed your total ignorance of Witney. No-one in Witney would regard ANY house in Queen Emmas Dyke as a “normal middle class home”. It is in the wrong part of town, which is reflected in house prices. If you want something locals would regard as “normal middle class” you need to look at Burford Road, Woodgreen, Woodstock Road, Crawley Road, etc.
No-one locally would describe Cameron’s house as a “country pile”. It isn’t.
451 - not even the lawyers stick up for the lawyers: cf The Screaming Eagles.
I don’t think the personal attacks were all that vicious, to be honest.
I don’t find it difficult to believe that Labour lead the SNP in Westminster voting intentions in Scotland.
I do find it virtually impossible to believe that their percentage vote will actually end up being higher than it was in 2005.
As i see today in Football terms.
after a ten minute spell of the blue team performing averagely giving away the ball too easily and being outmuscled by the reds, their captain has shouted at them to pull their socks up. He’s then gone on to do a strong 50/50 tackle on the red teams captain in the middle of the park (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8503267.stm) .
The tackle has bought the red man tumbling down to the ground, but the ref says play on. Red team players appeal to the ref for a foul (see NickP today) but the ref dismisses their histrionics and ignores them while taking note of their pettiness. The Blue Captain gets up quickly and lays a nice pass down in to a corner behind the red defence for a winger to run on to. It’s now up to the rest of the team to up their game for the last 30 mins of the game. Meanwhile the Red Team Captain is picking himself up and is staring daggers at the blue captain. This game looks like it could turn nasty.
417/410. There is a model out there (not mine) which on those figures predicts a hung parliament with Labour the largest party…
“Politics as an extension of the entertainment industry”
Interesting words given “Tears for Piers”
Anyway here’s Gordon’s bolthole for the weekend, sorry second home..
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/06/19/article-0-0567E6F9000005DC-805_468×327.jpg
Still looking for the first one.
453: Well, thats becuase they’re lawyers. We’re slightly higher up the cesspool.
I’m sure someone can come up with a better joke about ’swing’ and ‘punches’ than I can…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/8503542.stm
I wonder if bookies will be offering odds on politicians’ chances of punching voters during the GE campaign ?
Iain Martin speculates on what might be in the budget..
http://blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/2010/02/08/next-a-battle-over-the-budget/?mod=rss_WSJBlog&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
459: Now thats an impressive house…
I wonder if that matches the average in his consituancy? Camerons is probably closer to the average….
440. ‘So yes Brown looks dithering, but I disagree that Cameron has come out of this well - he looks nasty and self-serving and hypocritical.’
Cameron’s digs are very low key in comparision with those of Labour in opposition pre 1997. A lot less mean and self serving. And a lot less hypocritical.
Blair acknowledged their attacks were unfair, personal and ill founded. He accepted they damaged politics but it was an open goal and he just ‘couldn’t resist’.
By comparison, Cameron has clean hands. Large swathes of Tory battlegrounds are being fought without going negative. A risk.
These ‘attacks’ on Cameron are so laughably hollow for anyone with a decent memory.
Montgomeryshire seems to have something in the water. At least it seems to affect Lib Dems peculiarly:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/8503542.stm
I particularly like the way that the BBC’s account majors on the alleged assault on the paramedic without troubling to tell us why the AM was being ejected from the restaurant at 2.30am. Though I think we can make an educated guess.
And a rather ironic coincidence from Betsan..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/betsanpowys/2010/02/blowin_in_the_wind.html
446 - “The expenses system is not subsidising the purchase since he has to pay the capital.”
Not true.
The amount avilable to the purchasor is dicated (i) by the term of the mortgage and (ii) by the monthly repayment that he/she can afford.
The longer the term and the lower the interest rates, then the more the purchasor can borrow.
If the taxpayer is footing the interest bill, then the purchasor is able to borrow more (given the ceiling of his affordable monthly repayments) than if he was footing both the capital and interest repayments himself.
At the end of all this, the purchasor is then able to sell the property. This will (usually) be at a substantial capital gain, one that will be larger than if the purchasor was funding the purchase wholely himself, as proportionate growth on a larger initial sum will give an absolute larger gain.
465: If its Lib-Dems it could be anything…;)
453 - For some reason, the public don’t like lawyers. I can never fathom out why.
I mean Tony Blair is a Barrister, and the people voted for him in droves.
454 Radio 4 picked up on ‘most personalised attack’ line which was meant to counter Cameron and make him look mean. There have been so many persnal attacks on Cameron from emails to posters and yet that line has not been taken.
Of course, started in The Guardian. But no doubt the BBC think the Guardian is neutral.
“2. Global Warming and Tory denial of the science.”
If ZNL’s open borders immigration policy leads to a population of 80 to 100 million then Britain’s carbon footprint shoots up. Oddly this doesn’t seem to concern the global cooling deniers.
“Why is Caroline Spelman in the Shadow Cabinet?”
She’s female and doesn’t give off baby-eating vibes. Given el Toree’s difficulties when they try to sound tough i think those aren’t bad reasons.
I listened to Cameron’s speech and for the likes of myself (pro radical decentralisation) it was music to the ears but again so have Cameron’s speeches in the past on democracy been so. Now there were a couple of intriguing new bits in there IIRC regarding petitions. Has the text of the speech been published online yet?
Anyway he does have to prove it with actions in Government. Word are not enough and harbouring a ‘General’ of elitist autocratic centralism in the shadow cabinet (Clarke) still does not bode well.
460- as a fellow accountant I would say we are ahead of lawyers, Mp’s, journos, PE teachers, estate agents and actuaries. But that’s about it.
459 We pay for that one don’t we?
And Downing Street. And Chequers.
473 - As a Solicitor, I would like to point out 90% of the people we defend in fraud cases are Accountants.
Neil, long periods? How many days do you think Parliament is sitting this session? It’s probably well under 200. If my work required me to work elsewhere I wouldn’t consider it in the least unreasonable to be put up in a hotel. And what is more the NHS rules would severely limit the choice as well
474 - we pay for Downing Street and Chequers, but the incumbents down’t get to keep them when they leave them (and profit from any resale).
473 - Although I nearly became both, after getting an LLB, KPMG tried to recruit me, and told me, they took anyone with a first or 2:1 from a good uni.
How about that, an accountant who was trained as a laywer. Surely everyone would have hated me?
450. Ted - does the “trougher tag” really apply to any of the LD MPs. Did you note this from Mary Riddeell’s Nick Clegg interview in the Telegraph:
Though Mr Clegg does not say so, part of his vexation may lie in the fact that big party politics risks eclipsing what should be a Lib Dem moment. The Chilcot inquiry and the expenses scandal both show his party in a favourable light. On the final Legg report, he says: “We have our blemishes. I had a thing about gardening [he had to pay back £910], and there was Chris Huhne’s trouser press. You should see his trousers; they are beautifully pressed. But in terms of the two big abuses – MPs flipping property and becoming spivvy property speculators and/or avoiding capital gains tax — not a single Lib Dem MP did that.”
473. I can only assume you’ve left out bankers because we are in a completely different group of the dispised…
476 - My preferred choice would be to take over a tower block in Lambeth or Westminster and give each MP who needed London accommodation a flat rent-free. Nadine Dorries could continue to stuff money in her bra if she so wished.
470- couldn’t agree more, the Chameleon adverts, the constant references to Camerons education, the email scandal etc and all Brown’s attacks on people inside his own party all mean that Brown really shouldn’t complain about this. But then again, Brown is a cretin.
481: I beleive that they do that in places like Sweden…offer set accomodation.
But then, all those MPs, under one roof…think of the scandals.
@481:
You could easily fit 300 bunk beds in Westminster Hall.
478 - I trained with a couple of law-defectors.
474 I’d like to know which one Gordon is paying for.
477. So any home purchase that is subsidised by the taxpayer should be subject to Capital Gains Tax?
Is that Libdem policy by any chance or have they alternative regressive ideas?
479 - That’s the deftest that Nick Clegg has been on this issue. But it’s too late: he should have been that deft 8 months ago and again on Friday. As it is, he just looks like he’s catching up.
The public have vaguely formed the view “they’re all at it”, which isn’t that far off the mark. Certainly they were all complicit in it. I don’t think that the Conservatives will benefit particularly from David Cameron making the running, but they have ensured that neither Labour nor the Lib Dems will and that Labour might well be further harmed. That constitutes a missed opportunity for the Lib Dems.
472 - spot on jsfl, I thought it a good speech however it’s the delivery that counts. First though there’s a little matter of an election.
Re 487 should = should on sale
Tabman@467.
That is such a ridiculously tortuous argument as to be meaningless.
The expenses system can pay out equivalent amounts in rent or mortgage interest. To declare one a ’subsidy’ and the other an allowable expense is sophistry.
The fact is that a buyer risks his capital that could be deployed elsewhere if he were to rent. There is a potential gain in either case.
But to be OK with rent in the case of Dr Palmer but not mortgage interest simply because it’s Cameron is either daft or simple spite.
That man Waugh leading the pack as always
paulwaugh
Has Cameron just gifted UKIP an ‘in-out’ referendum? http://bit.ly/9CIqDt
482 I couln’t care aboutthat the Labour party can whiners. They look pathetic, but the BBC should add some balance. Yet it eats up whatever rubbish the Guardian put on a platter.
475- they’re just the bad apples old boy, the good ones don’t get caught…
478- then truly you would have been the lowest of the low
480- I forgot the bankers, I’d place you ahead of journos, MP’s and PE teachers
Very entertaining morning on here - Paul Lloyd calling Cameron a tyrant has to be my personal highlight.
478 - “And told me, they took anyone with a first or 2:1 from a good uni…”
But weren’t you at Cambridge? O tempora O Mores.
As to the “cleaner than clean” Lib Dems, Torybear has been threatened with legal action over his Teather allegations. I shall not link from here.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7186038/General-Election-2010-Gordon-Brown-will-be-in-power-for-ever-if-Nick-Clegg-gets-PR.html
Another good bit of missing-the-point obfuscation and flim flam from the London Mayor. Many of the comments have it about right: running scared, Boris?
457 I’d be interested in seeing it.
By way of comparison, Cameron is in a far better position relative to Brown (at this stage of the Parliament) than Howard was to Blair.
492. An In or Out referendum? Yes please. Why not put this issue to bed once and for all and stop it convulsing our politics?
483 - And if the LibDems were bunked together, think of the sandals.
488. ‘I don’t think that the Conservatives will benefit particularly from David Cameron making the running, but they have ensured that neither Labour nor the Lib Dems will and that Labour might well be further harmed. That constitutes a missed opportunity for the Lib Dems.’
I agree, but I think there is a leadership dimension to it for Cameron:
1. I can deal with this, he can’t.
2. He can’t deal with anything because he always dithers.
I supect the 3 MPs
491: In fact, one could argue that renting actually represents worse value for the tax payer.
476: Chris A @ 12:48
Quite right.
As for the number of days parliament sits, it is about 140 a year. Of course all MPs don’t have to be present on every day and on the last day of each week they can go home. So the number of nights they would be required to spend in a hotel is probably about 100 a year. That is less than I had to do in various jobs when I was working.
I do think that OGH was going a bit far when he suggested Days Inn in Vauxhall. As I said in relation to air travel, there are limits. There are any number of reasonable, decent, 3 star hotels in central London which should be acceptable.
476: Chris A @ 12:48
Quite right.
As for the number of days parliament sits, it is about 140 a year. Of course all MPs don’t have to be present on every day and on the last day of each week they can go home. So the number of nights they would be required to spend in a hotel is probably about 100 a year. That is less than I had to do in various jobs when I was working.
I do think that OGH was going a bit far when he suggested Days Inn in Vauxhall. As I said in relation to air travel, there are limits. There are any number of reasonable, decent, 3 star hotels in central London which should be acceptable.
“416.Jim Devine looks well:”
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/02/08/article-1249361-082A62E5000005DC-797_468×349.jpg
Probably worried about all the sexual advances he’ll have to fight off in prison.
o/t - How about this for a politician with integrity? Well, he’s not actually a proper politician. Another by-election coming up in Ireland it seems:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0208/breaking40.htm
498. Kristin but its the content of the speech that might impact the motivation of many on the right and effect the result as a result. That’s why I was interested in the petitions section.
I think Cameron might be proposing a DIY method for the British people which by chance could break the Brussels paradox. Thats why I want to know the detail of the proposals on petitions.
502 pressed to early.. .
I suspect the ‘3 mps’ and AV will be brought together to suggest everything he does in response to expenses is cynical and self serving and not about cleaning up politics.
Drat-double post again, sorry.
Where will Jim Devine sit, now that he has been dewhipped?
He has first question at PMQs on Wednesday, after all.
500. Because if we have a referendum and vote to stay in, Euro-enthusiasts will take that as an endorsement of federalism.
In/Out is far too black and white.
488. Antifrank - yes that has been mystery to me too! Although in the run up to the election I imagine the point will be made a quite a few more times and maybe more and more of the electorate will get the message.
511 - *looks left and right to check James Kelly isn’t about*
Perhaps he could sit next to the 3 SDLP MPs.
Keith Vaz’s Policeman chum found guilty of corruption
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23803418-scotland-yard-commander-guilty-of-corruption-charges.do
“London’s most senior black policeman faced jail today after being convicted of trying to pervert the course of justice.
Commander Ali Dizaei, 47, was found guilty of assaulting and attempting to frame the man who had designed his internet web page.”
BBC News - Labour say the whip was withdrawn after “intense discussions over the weekend” and not due to pressure from David Cameron. HaHaHaHaHa.
491 - nothing tortuous about it, its very simple.
If you have £1000 a month to spend on a mortgage and someone gives you another £1000 a month to spend on it, you’re going to be able to buy a bigger house.
And when you sell it, you will have made a bigger capital gain:
£100k house increases in value by 10% = £10k gain
£200k house increases in value by 10% = £20k gain
479 Clegg is doing a Brown. He declares that its flipping and avoiding capital gains tax that are the issues that really matter. In fact it’s not - that’s a construct by Clegg to deflect anger from the other claims. Quite clever but not true.
The public were outraged by duck houses, flat screen TVs, antique furniture, porn films, gardening, decorating and indeed trouser presses and hob knob biscuits. Problem for Clegg is that a certain Sheffield MP spent quite a bit on gardening, on shopping trips to IKEA. His claim was that all expenditure was to protect the capital value of his home which he promised would deliver any capital gain back to the taxpayer. Cushions, blinds, curtains? Food?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5314418/How-Nick-Clegg-pushed-expenses-claims-to-the-limit-MPs-expenses.html
496 - I was only paraphrasing what the chap said.
I prefer to be elitist and snobbish.
512 AndrewG - Spot-on. The only effect of an In/Out referendum would be to entrench the current drift towards federalism - the UKIPpers would lose hands-down.
Given Cameron’s speech, these words are prescient
When you reach your fifties, says the narrator in Martin Amis’s new novel, The Pregnant Widow, “there is now an enormous and unsuspected presence within your being, like an undiscovered continent. This is the past.” And that, it occurs to me, is precisely the problem that now besets New Labour. Of course, the adjective “New” — still used with a straight face by Gordon Brown and his colleagues — has long since seemed ridiculous. But there is more to it than that. “New Labour” is now weighed down, like the man in his fifties, by its past. It reeks of yesterday.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23803266-new-labour-is-sinking-under-the-weight-of-its-past.do
497. Yes anyone can find via google. Seems he is not for backing down however and has repeated his claims.
Polly, I assume that means the BBC are at least refering to the pressure from Dave???
516. Oh, dear. Have they told another Brownie?
Another Brownie? GB announced whip suspension of Morley on May 14 + Chaytor soon afterwards. So why withdraw again today?
512, 520, Well if thats the will of the people then so be it. At least we’d get a resolution once and for all rather than this rather odd, neither in or out position we’re in now with the Conservative Party in particular constantly being rocked by the UKIP tendency.
457 Surprisingly, MORI’s ratings for Blair in Spring 2005 are similar to those for Brown, 33%. However, Howard’s ratings, 22-25%, were far worse than those of Cameron.
Yougov shows a much bigger difference (although its archive is not complete). In January 2005, it recorded 40% for Blair (compared to 31% for Howard) and in February, Blair led Howard by 15% as preferred PM.
523 SallyC - Anyway that makes it worse. If Labour were already considering this, why have they spent so much effort attempting to rubbish Cameron’s position?
Game and Set to Cameron.
523. Sally - Good point!
o/t “-6C temperatures . . . and snow’s on the way as the big freeze returns to Britain”. It’s sleeting in North London.
452 - I live about 30 miles from Witney and have family there. I know the town well.
Cameron’s house is not average. He could easily have chosen to spend much less on perfectly good accommodation, especially as we are not talking about his main residence here. It is not class envy or spite to point that out. It was Richard Nabavi who origainlly claimed Cameron lived in an average middle class residence.
I actually do not care where Cameron lives. I am just pointing out that he is a hypocrite. Again, it is not class envy or spite to point that out.
Jeezus.
“491 - nothing tortuous about it, its very simple.
If you have £1000 a month to spend on a mortgage and someone gives you another £1000 a month to spend on it, you’re going to be able to buy a bigger house.
And when you sell it, you will have made a bigger capital gain:
£100k house increases in value by 10% = £10k gain
£200k house increases in value by 10% = £20k gain”
If you have a £1000 a month to spend on rent and someone gives you £1000 month to cover that. You still have £1000 a month to invest.
When that investment matures you’ve made a capital gain.
There is no difference, in principle between this gain or one made on a house sale.
492
“Has Cameron just gifted UKIP an ‘in-out’ referendum?”
He may have and this is a good reason why UKIP supporters should lend the Tories their vote at the GE.
505 HurstLlama - apparently you’ve never stayed in a three star hotel in London! It’s the worst town for hotels I can think of (fortunately I live there so it’s not a problem for me).
517 Tabman - what if house prices fall?
508, that’s exactly what Waugh has picked up on, though he misses the mark on capital punishment as the EU has top trumps on that. There’s irony in there somewhere.
There be no problem get 1m+ votes for an EU referendum, dog whistle ?
Less spads, independence of the civil service and more free votes, all good aims though I’m sure any PM would use the whips to push their agenda especially if they get a small majority.
@525:
We already *have* our resolution. Polling shows that the people of Britain consider the EU a mind-numbingly dull subject that they don’t want to talk about; David Cameron has made it quite clear that the Conservative Party policy is to remain a full member of the EU.
There’s your resolution. UKIP loons notwithstanding, everything else is just intellectual masturbation.
500 - I agree.
The EU has been a boil on UK politics for too long. Time to lance it once and for all.
It will help draw the sting of UKIP and the B&P.
Patrick Dunleavy,Political Science Professor at LSE aptly describes David Cameron’s Conservatives as “fragile”
Feb. 8 (Bloomberg) — Stort Chemicals Ltd. Chairman Ken Gilkes joined 62 executives who endorsed former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Labour Party in a letter to the Financial Times before the 2005 election. Now he doesn’t know who to vote for.
“I might decide 24 hours before,” Gilkes, 69, said of the election, which Blair’s successor, Gordon Brown, must call by June. “I have no wish to publicly declare I am changing my allegiance, but I cannot endorse the current leadership.”
Gilkes’ hesitation to support the Conservative Party, which he voted for when it was led by Margaret Thatcher, shows David Cameron’s failure to capitalize on Brown’s weakness and the risk that neither party will win a majority. The pound has fallen 2.2 percent against the dollar in the past four days on concern a hung parliament would make it difficult to approve spending cuts, threatening Britain’s AAA credit rating.
In a Bloomberg News survey of those who signed the 2005 letter, 20 of the 38 who responded declined to say they’ll back Labour. All but one also refused to support the Conservatives.
“The election is certainly a lot more up for grabs than we had been thinking,” said Patrick Dunleavy, a political science professor at the London School of Economics. “We’re expecting a shift away from Labour, but the Conservatives are somewhat more fragile than they should be at this stage.”
New Thread Up
525 GIN - But it wouldn’t represent the will of the people, I would suggest. I think the overwhelming majority want us to stay in the EU as an economic community, but claw back the more egregious and unnecessary intrusions into matters which are unrelated to the Single Market, such as the idiotic concessions Blair (quite unnecessarily) made on the Social Chapter.
If Cameron ever proposes an In/Out referendum, or a referendum which comes to the same thing, it would mean that he has given up on any further reform, and wants to close down debate by accepting the whole shebang.
So, Cameron proposes the ability for x signatures to propose a Bill in Parliament. Interesting.
This gives a perfect opportunity for UKIP to “lend” their votes to Tories this year to boot out Brown (which is where many UKippers hearts will lie anyway) - on the basis that they will not stand against a Tory who agrees to vote for this measure. But on the distinct understanding that once this law is passed, the UK can have the in-or-out referendum without the Tories being able to prevent it. The Tories then have to either support or oppose the measure - which has to get them right in the awkward spot that UKIP would want them…
I really look forward to seeing your calculator, Andy.
I understand and agree your thinking. I appreciate it is logical to consider 3 elections.
However surely the pendulum seat swing did not start in 1997. To quote Peter Snow (sorry he is no longer on BBC election coverage) from 1997, Labour maximised their swing where it mattered most - semi marginal seats.
But to go back to 1992, Conservatives had an overall majority of 21 but on the then UNS should have has an overall majority of 61. Therefore Labour bettered UNS in 1992.
I was just wondering Andy whether you considered 1992 as your starting point please?
“Has Cameron just gifted UKIP an ‘in-out’ referendum?”
At most, he’s gifted them a bill on it, assuming they can get 1 million. The Commons can still vote it down if it wishes.
Marquee Mark @539, has Cameron said the proposed bill would actually get government time, or are they all just going to get filibustered to death?
(I’m guessing that it’ll be the latter, but that we won’t know for sure until after the election when Cameron has hoovered up the votes of the more gullible UKIPpers.)