So where does the Ashcroft story go from here?
March 4th, 2010
There’s been news within the past half hour that the Electoral Commission is to rule that donations to the Tory party by a company owned the controversial deputy chair, Michael Ashcroft, have been declared to be legal.
The body has been examining 173 donations totally more than five million pounds in the five years up to February 2008.
This will obviously help him and his party and take some of the sting away from the attacks. If the Commission had gone the other way it is hard to see how Ashcroft could have remained as deputy chairman.
But this move is only on one of the areas where he’s been under fire. There’s still the non-dom status issue and the circumstances of him being made a peer.
Whatever today’s move is going to make it a lot harder for Ashcroft’s detractors in the media and Labour and Lib Dem parties to sustain their campaign. In the public eye this is complicated enough and Tory spokesmen will simply say - “he got cleared”.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Reportedly (FPT) the Speaker is being utterly ineffective in stopping Labour turning Business Questions into a pre-election assault on Ashcroft and the Tories.
Just as Brown seemed to have (incomprehensibly)gained a modest sympathy boost from the bullying allegations, I wonder if Ashcroft and the Tories will do the same. Funny old world.
I think it will go the way of the CIA being behind 9/11 and Elvis still being alive.
Some people will never let if go - the rest will move on.
Most of MPs’ expenses were legal too, but people didn’t care much. It is a tiny improvement on a tiny problem for the Conservatives.
Yes, ironically, by pushing the Electoral Commission to publish their ruling, Labour have diverted attention from the Tories’ weak point, which is the confusion over the original commitment.
As Mike says, they can now just shrug their shoulders and point to the EC’s ruling.
385 FPT Well Ashcoft is trying disproportionally to influence UK govt policy directly, not least tax policy, way beyond the power of any mere voter. This is not a good starting point in a democracy. Yes Labour have donors, but none to my knowledge have personally grabbed the reins of power within the party to the extent Ashcroft clearly has.
I doubt marginal Labour MPs have a personal relationship with JK Rowling. After the election lots of MPs are going to owe Ashcroft a personal debt of gratitude.
But it gets worse than that.
It turns out that despite all his megabucks, he is too frit to have any personal stake in what Tax policy the UK has. His Tory party could put all our taxes up to reduce the deficit and he wouldn’t pay a penny.
Surely you can see this is far from ideal politically for the Tories.
6. Pretty lame stuff Jonathan, and in the case of your latter remark re tax almost certainly untrue.
(four threads ago) weathercock [Foot] was a supporter of many of Stalin’s policies, including the occupation of Chekoslovakia in 1948.
Er, the USSR occupied Czechoslovakia in 1945. Czechoslovakia was one of the countries which chose its own Communist government in 1948 by indigenous choice / actions, without it being imposed by force by the USSR.
Richard Nabavi
“Labour believes that Ireland should, by peaceful means and on the basis of consent, be united, and recognises that this will be achieved with the introduction of socialist policies.”
Not sure how that reconciles with the first half of the next sentence, though:
“We respect and support, however, the right of the Northern Ireland people to remain within the UK,”
And then it contradicts itself in the second half of the sentence:
“although this does not mean that Unionist leaders can have a veto on political development.”
What it means is
(a) Labour wanted a united Ireland
(b) but it will only happen if the people of Northern Ireland say thatt hey want it (in a referendum)
(c) The results of a referendum take precendence over what the UUp/DUP leaders say.
Such an outcome happened in 1998 when the Good Friday agreement was agreed by referendum, against the wishes of the DUP. If the Good Friday Agreement had been subject to the veto of Paisley just shouting “No!” all the time, regardless of what the people as a whole wanted, it would have been killed off.
coldstone I’ve never been convinced that all that door knocking etc. does much good. I can’t imagine a surer way of losing votes around here than interrupting an episode of ‘Emmerdale’
Even worse would be interrupting “EastEnders” or “Coronation Street”
(last thread) 203. coldstone Errr is [Nikki Sinclaire] really really big? Or is [Nigel Farage] really really small?
Yes and no respectively. They are 6′4″ and 5′10″ respectively.
282. DavidL I would be astonished if the SNP do not take Dundee West. It could only happen on a very bad night for them overall. The boundary changes really favour the SNP bringing in areas not only where they are well supported but also extremely well organised.
There are no boundary changes in Scotland this time.
————————
I’ve just watched last night’s Newsnight item on Michael Foot on the BBC iplayer. Does anyone know why my third-cousin-once-removed* was gazing up into the heavens while she was being interviewed? It was as if she was watching herself on a TV monitor (which was bizarrely placed at a high angle) and forgetting to look at the camera while speaking. Or has she just gone bonkers?
* ( = Shirley Williams)
6 - he’d pay plenty of pennies on the millions in UK tax he pays.
And let’s talk about Bernie, shall we, since that’s the best example of a law being changed to fit what a political donor wants? I certainly can’t think of any government policy Ashcroft has altered…
6, Attorney General Goldsmith, Labour donor and then made a peer and then gave the go ahead to Iraq, didn’t have any ‘undue influence’?
And if you’re arguing the tax policy of the UK wouldn’t affect him it’s hard to see why you think he can be seeking benefit from power, when he wouldn’t pay any less tax.
Looking at Hagues performances and this
FPT -James Arbuthnot was the Chief Whip involved in the Ashcroft peerage negeotiation and it’s just been revealed live during an interview with him.
No Comment
No Comment
No Comment etc etc.
It seems the Tories are still unable to answer basic questions about Ashcrofts promises when Hague supported his Peerage.
And in marginal seats it is starting to be written about.
HOW NOT TO START AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN
Last updated at 12:24, Thursday, 04 March 2010
Are David Cameron and William Hague gullible fools or are they good at evading the truth?
I only ask because I think we need to know before the likely election date of May 6.
The question has been raised because Tory party deputy chairman Lord Ashcroft has finally admitted his non-dom tax status.
This means the billionaire spends most of his life outside the country and only pays tax on the meagre earnings he makes in the UK.
This hasn’t stopped him from contributing more than £4m to the party in recent years, much of which is being spent on campaigns by Tory candidates in marginal seats.
It has been reported that when he was made a peer in 2000 it was with the understanding that he told then-leader William Hague that he would stop being a tax exile and start paying full tax in this country on all his earnings.
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/opinion/mark-green/how-not-to-start-election-campaign-1.679428?referrerPath=opinion/
FPT 370 ““I think it’s not the electorate that matter [when it comes to Europe]” - the authentic voice of the Tory activist” - Nick P.
Hmm. Somewhat selective quote there, Nick. Not surprising given Labour’s own record on listening to the electorate on matters European!
FPT Stuart
You wondered about the absence of SLABers. I suspect it’s because those of us Scots (of all parties) who post on here are happy to engage (and furiously disagree!) with those of different parties and furth of our own political system. SLABers tend to stay within their own cosy little community - even if they engage sometimes with non SLABs, they would be reluctant to put a toe over the border!
They personify the Scottish Cringe.
“Well Ashcoft is trying disproportionally to influence UK govt policy directly,”
What, has he also been given a place on the Privy Council in exchange for cash, like Labour’s Lord Paul?
fpt
Simon, that’s not where the original cast iron guarantee was made, as you well know. It first appeared in the Sun in 2007, and the ratification qualification is much less clear:
“Today, I will give this cast-iron guarantee: If I become PM a Conservative government will hold a referendum on any EU treaty that emerges from these negotiations.
No treaty should be ratified without consulting the British people in a referendum.”
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/eu_referendum/article273758.ece#ixzz0hD53T0of
Why do you keep denying the obvious? If it wasn’t a lie, or a broken promise, it was certainly a very stupid thing to say without being much more explicit as to what he REALLY meant.
This error was compounded by the “not letting matters rest” nonsense, followed by the actual mendacity of the Tories’ present European policy, where they have promised referendums on future Treaties in the full knowledge there will be no more Treaties.
Tut.
I agree with Max. He needs to energise his core, Europe is a good issue to do it on. He will soak up the 5% of UKIP voters if he does it - and that means victory - but of course he needs to find a form of words which won’t frighten the horses.
I also agree with the many comments prethread that the Tories are pathetically feeble in their counter-attacks against these monstrous Labour lies. They seem paralysed between their desire to detoxify the brand and be *nice*, and the fact they are being continuously kicked in the goolies by Labour.
The Tories are playing cricket, Labour are cage-fighting. Time to fight back.
6 Jonathan
well if you’reworried about donors demanding their policies are implemented can we have some moral outrage on Trades Unions.
It won’t stop labour going on the attack as they can hardly sing about their reecord in government!
3 TGOH
Sgt Presley was at Prestwick Airport yesterday. I saw him on TV!
Bearwood’s donations are totally legal?
Wonder how the Labourbots are going to spin this…
3.The Ghost of Harry Flashman
I don’t know what you are on about. Elvis is alive and well. I saw him at our local Asda, he said he buying some burgers for him and Marilyn Monroe
7 Well I suspect lot of Tory MPs will always take his call whether he remains at the top of the party.
Of course he would never use that influence, no never. The merest thought would never cross his mind. No of course not. How could I think such a thing.
His address book will be quite a valuable document.
18
“Where am I ?” was his quote ?
12 David H
“Hmm. Somewhat selective quote there, Nick.”
Not surprising. The Labour party were happy to tolerate Damien McBride until he got caught, a small misquote is nothing.
Note the BBC’s predictably sniffy inverted commas: ‘clears Ashcroft’.
Are you thinking what they’re thinking?
Seant,
Perhaps you fail to recall - Cameron’s promise of a treaty absent ratification (which is clear in your post anyway) was clear enough for the BBC to attempt to claim the Tory conference was in disarray due to his failure to commit to a referendum come what may. Of course, the BBC changed this once it became clear pretending he’d “reneged” was more fruitful.
It’s a shame you are doing the Beeb et al’s work for them.
Bercow: “we cant talk about this as it has nothing to do with business”
McShane: “Ashcroft blah blah”
Bercow: “repeats”
Labour MP: “Lord Paul is amazing and Ashcroft is evil”
Bercow: “repeats”
Skinner “Ashcroft blah blah”
Bercow: “Thats it, no more.”
Finally.
The Tories have had a couple of days of bad coverage over a mess which was avoidable had communication been better and everyone been more straightforward with each other a decade ago.
As it is, Ashcroft pulled a bit of a fast one on Hague and the Lords’ Appointments Commission back then. But that’s all history now - Hague not half as clever as he thinks he is is hardly news.
It’s all a bit unsavoury, but these things often are and I’m not sure it has anywhere left to go now.
Labour’s rage at the prospect of losing power has addled their brains.
What started out as a calculated exercise is turning into an own-goal. The more bitter and partisan elements (Prentice, Harman, et al) are out of control: suborning Parliamentary committees to launch party propaganda assaults; invoking Parliamentary privilege to make defamatory remarks; giving puce-faced, splenetic interviews, etc. Even Paul Waugh is expressing astonishment.
Carry on: let the British people see what petty, nasty, unbalanced creatures have been ruling them for the last 13 years.
“369 359 in previous thread - Tabman - But you haven’t addressed my point. Almost everyone (including the sane half of Labour) agrees huge cuts in public spending are required. Your esteemed leader went so far as to call for ’savage’ cuts.”
FWIW I think quite a bit of the fiscal gap will be closed with tax increases rather than cuts. This, after all, is what happened under the Tories in the 1990s. Lamont invented a whole series of new taxes and raised most of the existing ones. At the moment it’s easier for politicians to talk tough about “cuts tomorrow” because this is vague enough to avoid frightening either the electorate or the markets. But the sheer size of the task, and the horrendous political implications of closing the gap entirely through cuts, will lead to significant tax rises.
On topic. It will remain a problem as long as Ashcroft remains in post therefore he should go. The ruling in fact makes it easier for him to do so as it now can’t be that forcing him out.
Whether it was within the rules or not is beside the point. Apart from the Court of Public Opinion, this wasn’t the main issue (though it would have been had the ruling been different) - that was and remains his tax status and why he hasn’t kept to his undertakings.
6 Jonathan none to my knowledge have personally grabbed the reins of power within the party to the extent Ashcroft clearly has.
Ah, the ’shadowy figure pulling the strings behind the scenes’ conspiracy theory, much beloved of undemocratic political movements for a century or more. Disturbing to see Labour going along that unpleasant road.
His Tory party could put all our taxes up to reduce the deficit and he wouldn’t pay a penny.
Eh? He pays UK tax, you know.
In any case I hardly think that he is working on behalf of the billionaire special interest group. He can live almost anywhere in the world he likes; there are plenty of very pleasant countries that would welcome him with open arms, and offer him a superb deal on taxation.
14. More seriously, there can be little doubt that Labour’s multiple ultra-rich donors have only given their cash in return for various ‘favours’.
There have been a couple of rather glaring examples of such ‘government for sale’ in the recent past.
Jonathan: what about all those Labour donors who became Ministers? What about the Labour donors who made donations just after the Government decided not to raise the tax on private equity?
Labour MPs are going to have to be careful talking about so-called Ashcroft sleaze outside the House. They risk libel suits. Plus if they go on about what promises he made it gives an opening for the Tories to raise the question of what promises Labour made to their donor about peerages etc….
Must be the first bit of “not bad” news for the Tories in weeks.
Well, apart from Brown bottling March 25th that is…
31 Richard, if Ashcroft had personally funded your campaign and you got it in. Would you take his phone call?
13 oldnat
does a “slabber” (noun) mean the same in Scotland as it does in Ireland ie someone who talks drivel?
Westminster Village story. No one cares outside of anoraks.
27 - SNP.
Up to a point.
Lets see when Cameron does an interview, although Hague over the media is good for Labour and the Lib Dems.
The interesting thing is just how jumpy the Tories are and the fact that every candidate in every marginal will now be asking the Conservative candidate whether they have had money from Ashcroft.
Cor..labour will really stoop to any level to keep their grubby hands on power won’t they.
Where it goes next is people keep chasing after Hague and Cameron asking what they knew.
Sort-of feels like the same mistake they made over Lisbon with “We will not let matters rest”. Too-clever-by-half obfuscation, which was just about good enough to hold the line until it suddenly wasn’t.
If I was a Labour or LibDem candidate in a marginal seat I’d be finding the cheapest-looking paper I could to print my leaflets on to contrast with the nice-looking stuff the Tories will have been putting out. Any time the Tories do anything that looks like it cost money, I’d try to get voters to make a “they’re funded by dodgy tax-avoiding millionaires” association.
35 - Not only that, I’d make him a Privy Councillor. Just like Gordon.
35 Of course, Jonathan. And no doubt Blair took calls from Ronald Cohen. Hell, he went as far as appointing Lords Drayson and Sainsbury as ministers.
And your point is?
Where does it go from here?
Nowhere, if Labour have any sense.
I see nothing wrong with a Non-Dom making donations to political parties out of his UK-taxed income.
And the Ashcroft donations have now been cleared by the Electoral Commission. So no problems there for the Tory Party.
However, the recognition of non-domiciled status depends on the level of one´s commitment to another country, rather than to the UK. I would have thought that the acceptance of a position in the national legislature was a clear sign of one´s commitment to the UK.
I wonder if HMRC will now re-open the files of Lord Ashcroft and Lord Paul, and reconsider their non-dom status after the acceptance of their peerages.
Is there a betting market on Ashcroft remaining in post or not?
The Tories have questions to answer, of this there is no doubt, but Labour are pushing this in the wrong places, on the wrong subjects and with the wrong people.
I do hope, sincerely, that Lord Ashcroft’s lawyers now take slander and where appropriate libel proceedings against all the Labour politicians who have suggested he has been less than honest etc. Also I do hope that the BBC and SKY political journalists and others are treated similarily.
There is a conspiracy going on within these news organisations which is anti democratic and insidious, almost reeks of facist/communist type campaigns. They have got to pay for this.
Wouldn’t it be absolutely glorious if the likes of Robinson, Craig(Sky), Victoria Derbyshire, Boulton and Co. Brown/Mandleson/Johnson etc are all made to make PUBLIC apologies and donate, and make those donations public, to a charity named by Lord Ashcroft. Perhaps Bullying Helpline?
re 39 Edmund - Ashcroft would sue - that’s defamatory. You can’t make claims like that in election literature.
Definitely a win for Cameron. It’s not his money they need, it’s the organisational skills and formidable campaigning skills.
I would like to know it Lord Paul and Laksmi Mittal underwent the same type of ridiculous scrutiny. Laksmi Mittal isn’t even a tax exile, he has literally no links to the UK yet he has a massive say in UK policy and Blair has supported legislation which would help Mittal’s business.
Now that Ashcroft has been cleared by a committee of sorts they can go on the attack over Lord Paul at least and probably Mittal as well. The union donations are another big area in which the Tories can make headway, a lot of people in the private sector resent how much say the public sector unions have in legislation and Labour (government) party politics.
Tim says “every candidate in every marginal will now be asking the Conservative candidate whether they have had money from Ashcroft.”
And the Tory will respond: yes/no and now let’s talk about how Britain is going to get out of the economic mess your party has caused.
You just don’t get it, do you? The voters aren’t interested, and today’s ruling means that even Westminster is getting bored.
Ashcroft attack = Labour fail.
15. It was clumsy rather than cynical. The date of the original article is crucial - Sept 2007. An immediate election was then quite heavily odds-on. It was careless of Cameron not to cover the bases in case the election wasn’t until 2009 or 2010. It should have crossed their minds as to what would happen if the treaty was ratified before the election and to be fair, as soon as that possibility came onto the agenda, the Conservatives made clear that it would be pointless holding a retrospective referendum. Unfortunately, that was contrary to a strict reading of the earlier words.
Electoral Commission statement
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/news-and-media/news-releases/electoral-commission-media-centre/news-releases-donations/electoral-commission-announces-outcome-of-investigation-into-donations-reported-by-the-conservative-party-from-bearwood-corporate-services-limited
Labour may like to paint the picture of Ashcroft ploughing in millions of pounds to individual constituencies, but that isn’t the case.
The target seats team decide the destination of central donations, of which Ashcrofts money apparently makes up a very small amount. They decide the destination of that money based on a number of factors, but a very important one is effectiveness of local campaigning and results produced. This isn’t a case of trying to buy seats, but to give the aid to seats which have effective campaigning abilities to help them to communicate with the voters.
An essential part of democracy is communicating with constituents. If Labour can’t find enough people willing to give money to assist them with that then that is their fault, nobody elses.
If almost all of the central money being spent came from one donor then I could see there being an issue, but this money comes from many different sources. Ashcroft has just set up a system whereby this money is able to be spent a bit more efficiently than previously, and I believe he delegates most of the decision making process to his team.
The more the public learn about the facts, the less of a story the funding part of this will be. The Conservatives problem is that the public are probably not actually that interested in the facts.
6 - Jonathan. The House of Lords has no say on the Finance Act due to a constitutional ban on them having any say over taxation, so actually he can have no affect on the law relating to this.
Udmund.
And what do the Tories “strategy” on Europe and Ashcroft have in common?
Put it this way.
Thatcher had Whitelaw.
Cameron has Hague.
50% of Tory Leaders are better off without a Willie.
Mike @47: I didn’t say print that on the election literature, I said try to get voters to make the association.
In any case the only potentially defamatory bit is the “dodgy” bit, right? Millionaire and tax-avoiding (not tax-evading) should be pretty uncontroversial.
51. wibbler.
And the key conclusions:
The Commission concluded that Bearwood Corporate Services Limited met the permissibility requirements for making political donations.
The Commission considered that, on the evidence before it, there is no basis to conclude that the donor was anyone other than BCS.
The Commission considered that there is insufficient evidence to conclude, on the balance of probabilities, that the party was uncertain as to the identity of the donor when accepting the donations.
In light of its conclusions on these three points, the Commission concluded that no breach of PPERA has been established and that accordingly no legal action in relation to the Conservative Party should be taken.
In other words: Labour - pwned.
55: In theory anyone which opens an ISA is tax avoiding.
40,41 Well guys the Tory “change” mantra didn’t last long did it? Business as usual I’d say. I thought you were supposed to be better. Oh well.
I wonder will the Ashcroft party be the largest single grouping in the HoC?
54. The post of someone who knows this line of smear is up.
Good effort tim - ultimate fail tho..
37.You are assuming that would be regarded as a bad thing because both the Libdems and Lab see it as a bad thing. Telling the voters how focused and hardworking the Conservatives have been in targeting marginal seats is about the best free adverting that they could ask for right now just before a GE. Are we going to get a swathe of local papers focusing and scrutinising on those Conservative PPC’s just before a GE is announced?
Don’t expect the floating voter to automatically throw up their hands and scream as they run into the arms of the resident Labour or Libdem MP at the very idea that the Conservatives are actively working hard in their patch to win their votes. I don’t think that Labour or the Libdems have thought this current ‘Lets get Lord Ashcroft’ cos he has been successful in running a marginals strategy out to its conclusion. They might think that the current hysteria being displayed by both parties in the Westminster bubble is going to resonate, but I have my doubts. And the Indy and the Guardian can run a front page vendetta as long as they want, but I wondered how many people are aware of crimestoppers or wander through the Imperial War Museum annually?
46 Strapworld. Yes you might be forgiven for thinking that given the crazed look in Landale’s eyes in lat nights BBC Ones’s 10 pm news. It’s time some of these so-called impartial journalists sat back so they can see the wood from the trees.
John Pinnear has just been on R5L: This is now a political row.
If true, the overwhelming mass of people will now switch off. As Mike says - they will simply invoke the LibDem defence.
As to local matters if you read the “Follow the money” series on the Red Box blog, the vast majority of money for the Tories now appears to be coming in via local associations. A simple “local money for local campaign” on the next leaflet kills off any danger if needed…
So just like the Lib Dems over their fraudster, the tories can now say ‘the Electoral Commission have cleared us’. End.
Lord Paul bought a Privy Counsellor position. I wonder if the outraged Labour masses will move onto that.
55 EIT
well Edmund what if his lawyers decide to sue Mps jointly and severally ? ie as well as suing the local party he sue the candidate individually?
You are 55 probably going to lose your seat, your CV is all politics and its the middle of a recession. How confident would you be that HQ will back you in the accusations or is it just better to campaign on the issues ?
60 TGHF
be careful tim doesn’t like to discuss Labour failures
64
Based on here, the purchasing if privy councillor and ministerial status (a la Lords Paul and Sainsbury) and policy (a la Ecclestone) is fine for Labour.
Presumably to query that would be unpatriotic.
59 - Is that a reaffirmation of your own logic that Lord Paul was made a Privy Councillor because of his large donations to Gordon Brown’s campaign? But you can’t bring yourself to say it though, can you?
15, That’s what I was talking about, the 10 pledges made to The Sun readers.
I agree that he should energise the core, but Europe is the wrong issue as it still causes splits within the party. I think they need to use aspiration to energise the core. Aspiration comes either from a tax cut or sweeping changes in education policy by reintroducing selection at secondary level.
Anyway, getting that 5% of UKIP voters is worse than useless as UKIP only ever stand in safe Conservative seats anyway. Votes won in these seats aren’t worth the trouble Europe would cause within the party.
“…the Commission has asked to meet Tory party officials “to ensure that they are clear about their responsibilities for complying with this aspect of the law.”"
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Ashcroft-Row-Electoral-Commission-Finds-Donations-Legal/Article/201003115567064?lpos=Home_First_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region_2&lid=ARTICLE_15567064_Ashcroft_Row%3A_Electoral_Commission_Finds_Donations_Legal
That’s odd. Somehow the Electoral Commission’s ruling hasn’t made it to the Guardian. They are still running with:
Ashcroft set to be cleared over donations
Exclusive: Electoral Commission inquiry to be concluded due to lack of evidence
59 Jonathan. “I wonder will the Ashcroft party be the largest single grouping in the HoC?”
“Ashcroft Party”!
Stop it Jonathan - you are just coming over all bitter-and-twisted.
That’s a shame. You are one of the best pro-Labour posters on here. And I AM being sincere there.
If any Conservative candidate is asked whether Ashcroft has personally funded their campaign, they can look the questioner in the eye and say “no”.
Conservative campaigns are financed by locally raised funds and by CCHQ grants. Nothing comes direct from Ashcroft, unless he has made any specific direct donations, which I doubt.
This is even more true during the actual election campaign itself I believe. I’m not sure of the exact details, but I think that on all sides, the actual election campaign is traditionally financed locally.
56. Of course Edmund, the response could be that Gordon Brown personally took money for his leadership campaign from a tax-avoiding millionare who he subsequently appointed to the privy council. Some candidates may try and make a fuss about Ashcroft, but to be honest, I doubt many voters will care much and those that do will already be voting for them.
So, how and why did Lord Paul become a Privvy Councillor?
The move to have Ashcroft and his peerage investigated by the Labour-dominated PAC is poor politics. It’s made things even more party-political when the best thing Labour could do is let the Conservatives stew in their own juice.
FWIW, Radio 4 news last night claimed that the Cabinet Office paperwork covering the granting of a peerage to Ashcroft no longer exists (for whatever reason) and that key people involved had either died in the interim or were refusing to speak. So what will the inquiry achieve?
John Loony re. Czechoslovakia - I think you’re statement is an oversimplification!
67 David
don’t forget Mr Blair intervened to support Mittal in one of his purchases, claiming Mittal was a british company. This came as a surprise to most of the steel industry.
Nothing more bitter than a leftie scorned.
This won’t stop shallow opportunism from the likes of Chris “shit I’ve just lost my seat” Huhne, or vacuous oafs like burnham and bradshaw.
I wonder if somewhere along the line the limp dims will strike a secret deal with McMental to join forces at the next election.
Looks like cable has already signed up to it judging by his planted questions to help harpee at pmqs. A pretty sound reason NOT to vote limp dim.
70 - hilarious. Are you just taking random lines from things now?
Lost in the hysteria, QE still suspended:
http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2010/03/04/165191/threadneedle-tumbleweed/
This story is fast turning into a major fiasco for Labour (and to a lesser extent the Lib Dems). They are managing to look petty, trivial, nit-picking, partisan, hypocritical and wrong simultaneously. But like a tramp with a bottle of meths, they can’t resist having another swig even if they half-suspect it’s a bad idea.
The Scrapheap non-dom non-story PB boycott continues…
Let’s get back to real politics, how red does Cameron’s face go!
What about the Latvians!
These are the key issues for the general election as per team red.
56 EIT,
Your suggestion seems an absolutely stupid way for Labour to go, unless they want the election to become a filthy, mud-wrestling contest. There are plenty of tax-avoiding millionaires in every party.
My own belief is that Labour should [1] start by admitting some mistakes and saying sorry for some blunders like Iraq, [2] then put forward some positive suggestions as to what they would do in the fourth term.
Oh, and I think we now have our answer about why Lord Ashcroft explained his tax position this week.
86.antifrank, indeed we do.
86 An astute point, antifrank.
57:
And still The Guardian is using nudge-nudge, wink-wink language to suggest that the EC’s ruling hides something else.
“The conclusion of such a long inquiry which fails to state that the donations are permissible will prompt concerns that the investigators could not unravel Ashcroft’s complex financial affairs.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/04/electoral-commission-lord-ashcroft-donations
This has been a witch hunt from start to finish. The only ‘crime’ that Michael Ashcroft has committed has been that of a Conservative supporter. That, and only that, has been the root of all else that has followed.
Also lost in the hysteria, May GE has tightened to 1.14 on Betfair and you only get 11s to Lay before 6 May GE.
Still looks like free money to me. Anyone know when Betfair will settle? Will they wait till the day itself or settle when it is called in March/April???
And what does the average voter see?
Discredited troughing MP’s squabbling over rich tax-avoiding Lords over an issue they can barely understand and therefore have very little interest in.
Nett result - lower voting turnout.
i am old enough to remember the days when Labour MPs would be apoplectic in equal measure about wealthy Tory donators and the closure of steel works.
This has to be a victory for the Tories in the media war, although on the substantive it’s a bit of a straw man - Labour’s case wasn’t ever that Ashcroft’s donations were legally suspect, it’s that they were morally and politically suspect. Indeed it would have been foolish to make the former case, since the EC is fairly soft on permissibility (at least, in relation to major parties, see 5th Avenue, passim). If Labour want to keep the story running, the focus on what he promised, to whom, and at what point they knew he had failed to make good on that promise, is the only angle left. How well it plays depends on what the rest of the class narrative on international businessmen is in the campaign.
The story is about the honesty and integrity of:
Ashcroft
Hague
Cameron
Who knew what and when?
82 Yes, QE suspended and interest rates on hold. Looks like the Bank is trying to get a hold on inflation. Broon should have called the election for March 25th as the next lot of inflation and unemployment figures are going to be quite bad. Interest rates are going to have to go up soon but I’m sure the ‘independent’ Bank of England aren’t under any pressure to keep them on hold.
85. “My own belief is that Labour should [1] start by admitting some mistakes and saying sorry for some blunders like Iraq, [2] then put forward some positive suggestions as to what they would do in the fourth term.”
Fat chance of either of those happening.
85. Gwynfa: My own belief is that Labour should [1] start by admitting some mistakes and saying sorry for some blunders like Iraq, [2] then put forward some positive suggestions as to what they would do in the fourth term.
You may be right; but (1) Gordon Brown seems to be psychologically incapable of admitting error, and (2) Labour as a whole seem to be psychologically incapable of making positive suggestions rather than attacking Tories.
There is a wider issue here on party funding.
If Ashcroft calls PM Cameron in a couple of years asking for a favour it does put Cameron in an invidious position that he wouldn’t be in if Ashcroft was limited to, say, £10K a year in political donations. I’m not saying he will (perhaps he’s too splendid a fellow) or that Cameron will respond (perhaps he’ll say “begone with your dirty millions”). But that’s putting a lot of faith in individuals.
This is the case for all parties with large donors, including the trades unions of course. I’m putting it out there as a genuine, non-party political point.
83. Brilliant Antifrank
Christina.
Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of the Ashcroft issue for a minute, even on your own terms the Conservatives have made a big mistake.
You are a big fan of Cameron and think his media presence is good for the party - yet the timing of the Ashcroft announcement blew coverage of his Sunday speech off the air.In addition he now seems to be turning down invitations for interviews while no-marks like Arbuthnot are having to revert to No Comment statements regarding their own role.
Aren’t you angry at your strategists?
And aren’t you angry that WIlliam Hague, who no rational person would leave to look after a barbeque let alone adult politics, has been allowed to replicate his Europe strategy with this debacle.
The events of the past week have at least given the Conservative Party a little taster of what to expect in the GE campaign (when it eventually comes).
They must have suspected which parts of the media would be supportive, and which hostile, but it has been a useful dry run.
90. asod: Anyone know when Betfair will settle? Will they wait till the day itself or settle when it is called in March/April???
I would expect settlement either on announcement or on dissolution, probably the latter.
93 - What are they supposed to know? The county towns of England? The ten longest rivers in Russia? How many Labour MPs it takes to flog a dead horse?
I aspire to be a tax-avoiding millionaire.
There I’ve said it!
People approached this thinking Lord Ashcroft was stupid - perhaps a mistake.
The Ashcroft story is running into the sands of sheer tedium now. Unless there is a major revelation by the end of today, that is that.
Hopefully Labour will continue to bang away, nonetheless, like a bunch of chimps wanking themselves stupid in Michael Jackson’s menagerie.
SCANDAL FAIL.
97. SNP.
Under a Cameron government, Ashcroft will, like everyone else, be limited to donating £50k pa.
90. I think it’s a two horse race now. April looks like it has all but dropped out of the frame.
June now becoming a very real possibility though.
As TGOHF has said on more than one ocassion - nobody ever won money on Gordon calling an election before he has to.
YouGov tables are out:
Unweighted-Weigthed
Labour Loyal 375->432
Labour Disloyal 106 ->100
Conservative 432->433
Liberal Democrat 167->199
Others 76 ->50
None 436->407
Don’t know 69->42
http://www.yougov.co.uk/extranets/ygarchives/content/pdf/TheSun-results_03.03-trackers.pdf
Sky News reporting that documentation was missing and Tory officials refused to meet the Electoral Commission.
99: On the other hand tim, declaration on Moday, drawing all the bile and venom,
Vindication on Thursday, leaving Labour looking stupid, petty and bitter….
93 Not any more, Gabble, it has been closed off by the Electoral Commission.
But no doubt Labour will, with increasing desperation, keep banging on about it to the bewilderment of voters.
They messed up; they had a point about the original commitment, but that has now been lost in the noise they made. Everyone is now utterly bored with it.
The bot-spinning has reached truly laughable levels on this thread, possibly an all-time low.
108. In the GE will each Labour vote count as 1.15 votes ?
May be enough to save Broxtowe ?
The more fuss Labour is making about Lord Ashcroft the more I’m learning about his Lordship and I’m realising what a truely great man he is. For instance until this morning I never knew Ashcroft founded Crimestoppers. I’ve also recently read that Ashcroft ahd never clamiled a penny in expense’s. The more I learn about Ashcroft, the more I think he’s the victim of a very nasty witch hunt.
O/T of non-story.
Pensions Reform - Tories tried to vote it down y’day as they aren’t happy about the Govt stitching up a procurement contract with TATA for providing the NEST pension service admin.
Cue laughable pathetic faux-outrage from the 2 lightest weight DWP ministers it has been our countries misfortune to have in 13 years (and there has been a shed load of them to choose from, s0d continuity)….
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Yvette Cooper says the move is a “shocking attack” on pension provision for people in work.
But Cooper says: “These reforms, supported by the CBI and the British Chambers of Commerce amongst others, will give millions of working people vital pension support for the first time - the most radical reforms for working people since the introduction of the national minimum wage.
“Now we know the Tories want to kick people in the teeth and take that pension promise away.”
Meanwhile, Pensions Minister Angela Eagle says: “I am astonished that the Tories have thrown their toys out of the pram just when the prize of pension saving for millions of people on low and medium earnings is in sight. This is breathtaking irresponsibility.
“The Tories are being disingenuous and hypocritical by talking in favour of the consensus but voting against giving millions of people access to a workplace pension.”
Hargeaves Lansdown head of pensions research Tom McPhail says: “This is like watching a poor quality spoof of the Monty Python People’s Front of Judea sketch. The Tories are right that the delays are short term political sleight of hand to save money.
“Voting against the reforms is just petty and the tone of moral outrage from Cooper and Eagle is contrived and dishonest. I say a plague on both your houses, reform of the pension system is too important to be the subject of petty bickering.”
Hear Hear!!!!
109.
Read the report yourself, welcher.
The Commission concluded that Bearwood Corporate Services Limited met the permissibility requirements for making political donations.
The Commission considered that, on the evidence before it, there is no basis to conclude that the donor was anyone other than BCS.
The Commission considered that there is insufficient evidence to conclude, on the balance of probabilities, that the party was uncertain as to the identity of the donor when accepting the donations.
In light of its conclusions on these three points, the Commission concluded that no breach of PPERA has been established and that accordingly no legal action in relation to the Conservative Party should be taken.
In other words: Labour - pwned.
gabble, why can’t you understand? Ashcroft has done nothing wrong, he has been cleared by the electoral commision. HMRC have no problem with him. So why do you so desperately want to know when Hague and Cameron knew he had done nothing wrong.
By the way (for a change) you failed to answer my question last night.
If Cameron and Brown demanded their respective parties paid back all funding from non doms over the last five years who would lose the most money?
108: That none party seems to be doing well.
93 minnieroyle
yes indeed. There have been a series of job losses announced this week which normally would have had unions protesting and Labour MPs demanding something should be done.
Instead the party seems to think Lord Ashcroft is of more interest to the electorate. I’m afraid Labour are now getting somewhat distant from the people they used to represent.
Those Hague for next foreign secretary bets are looking a bit better today - lol.
72,79 I am really not bitter. Personally I think the onus on the Labour Party when faced with Ashcroft and his funding is to beat the Tories anyway. Crying foul gets you nowhere in life.
That said personally all this clearly stinks a bit. It is depressing to see Tory posters who do not hesitate to direct their righteous anger at Labour quietly, quickly and with real ease brush this under the carpet. “Move along there is nothing to see here” is what they say.
I hope in private they’re asking questions. Because however you cut it there is something to question here. The Ashcroft programme is not something to be proud of. It joins a long list.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/leftwatch/2010/03/tories-turn-up-heat-on-lord-pauls-appointment-to-the-privy-council.html
There certainly are questions to answer
Andrew Spencer @74: “Of course Edmund, the response could be that Gordon Brown personally took money for his leadership campaign from a tax-avoiding millionare who he subsequently appointed to the privy council.”
It could indeed. But that kind of counter-attack is a lot weaker at the constituency level. (Obviously the Greens and the BNP, who don’t have any money to speak of from anybody, will want to pound on all three of the main parties. The UKIP isn’t clean itself, but they may as well give it a shot too.)
For people saying, “What if someone gets sued for libel”, there are plenty of ways to get voters to make this association without making any claims that aren’t already in the press. In fact, you could do the whole thing with just press clippings. eg.
1) Get some screenshots of the most headlines about Ashcroft from Sky or the BBC.
2) Make a big fuss about the issue with the local paper, resulting in a headline there about how the local Tory candidate got a load of money from Ashcroft.
3) Make your own leaflet, badly printed on cheap paper, showing BBC headline to establish that there’s something murky about Ashcroft, and the clipping from the local paper to establish that he’s directly funding the local Tory. Say that unlike them you haven’t got much money.
4) Send out the rest of your leaflets on cheap paper too, in contrast to the expensive-looking Tory ones, so that you reinforce the message even when you’re talking about the NHS or whatever.
The Tories are financially stronger than their opponents right now, so their opponents need to use some jujitsu.
Gabble’s acting like the electoral commission just took a dump in his soup.
LS - Cheers. That’s what I’m hoping, might send them a mail to check.
SNP - I’m in favour of all donations being capped to 50k. No state funding. Abolish the Propaganda Allowance.
Lee - Me too. As does everyone if their honest. Just look at the Millibands.
Flashman - Worse than that. The bunker genuinely thought they could get a resignation out of this. Fools led by a weirdo.
Of course Ashcroft should pay full UK tax if they want to sit in the Lords, but so should Lord Paul and all the other non-dom peers.
Should donations be permissible by non-doms? What about companies they own? What if they only own a minority share? Not sure, but erring on the side of caution is always wise.
However, the hypocrisy of Labour on this is disgusting. Everyone knows party funding stinks, but their refusal to go along with the solution a few years back limiting donations, including from unions, was the most cowardly and unprincipled stance possible. I can’t remember the limit suggested, but it was something like £50000 - far below the current millions donated.
I really hope the Tories go after Lord Paul with a vengeance now.
90. I think it’s a two horse race now. April looks like it has all but dropped out of the frame.
June now becoming a very real possibility though.
As TGOHF has said on more than one ocassion - nobody ever won money on Gordon calling an election before he has to.
Note to Mods. I have two copies of this post awaiting moderation, due to me mistyping my email addy, could you please delete.
lucymanning
Tories insist they didnt refuse to speak to Elec Comm - they just wrote back and asked if it was necessary, and never, they say, got a reply
105 - Its not as big a story as the rising pound you mean?
tim, gabble, jonathan, et al seem to be decending into
‘It’s bad, and awful….I’m not sure why it’s bad, or why it’s awful….but it is!!!’
107 - I understand that was announced as an aspiration a few years ago. But I am willing to bet £50 with you now that this limit (nor a comparable one perhaps with an inflation uplift or whatever) will not be implemented in the first term (or ever in fact, but that wouldn’t be a fair bet for me!) Maybe I’m being over-sceptical, but I doubt it.
lucymanning
Tories accuse Labour of politically orchestrated campaign to divert from real issues with continuing attacks on Lord Ashcroft
123: 80% of the people would just look at it and say ‘what a crap leaflet’.
121 - Jonathan, there is always going to be an image problem for politics when it is wealthy individuals funding parties, which goes on with each of the parties. One way would be to return the Parties to mass-movemenent organisations and rely on subs to keep things going or to get centralised state funding, which would cause outrage with the public. The former looks hard, the later looks impossible. Where next?
130 - Anyone know whether Cameron is doing an interview or a presser on this great victory?
127. I am torn on June/May
upthread - betfair paid out on 2010 on their GE “quarters market” in mid Dec - but previously they told me it would be 01/01/2010.
I would think they might wait until close to the date incase of “events”
121 - You would have rather more credibility with such sanctimony had you also expressed misgivings about Brown, Lord Paul and the Privy Counsellorship.
121, 134 - The real solution is for political parties to learn to live within their means. You know, it might actually be good practice for government too.
BBCLauraK
Conservatives deny Elex Commission claim that party staff refused requests for interviews about Ashcroft
tim, stop thrashing around, you are embarrassing yourself. It’s over you lost (again). Give it up, the same way some of the tories on here should have done over bullygate.
135 tim
go suck a lemon it will leave sweeter taste in your mouth
BBCLauraK
Electoral Commission has not published full report on Ashcroft, only case summary - Labour MP has already put in FOI to get the whole lot
99.tim, not at all, and I set out my reasons why @61. Cameron got an extra day in the media on Monday, and now we have Hague and Clarke dominating the news for the rest of the week as every local newspaper searches out every local Conservative PPC to ask them if Lord Ashcroft gave them any dosh. I mean, how are they going to cover this one in Watford?
Saw one cracking article up here where the Scottish Conservatives were under the spotlight to come clean and say whether they had received any funding this time around. You just cannot buy this kind of publicity for my party up here.
83 Ever since the 2005 election when losing Labour MPs blaimed Ashcroft for their losses - it was a conspiracy of money not unpopularity that lost them - there has been a ratchetting up of the demonising of the man and of his influence.
As you say they have gone hysterical over it - Ashcroft is apparently the eminence gris of UK Politics, buying seats and MPs, deciding policy and the puppeteer of the Cameroon wing.
Reading Jonathan’s posts above just shows the hysteria - his party has been funded £10m or so from non-doms, mostly from the sub continent with steel interests, it has been kept solvent by guarantees from one Union and the influence of another, Unite, over policy and candidate selection cannot be overstated.
The Liberal Democrats received over £2m from a non-dom, convicted of fraud, which cash they are being pursued though courts to return, as it was the proceeds of crime, and which funded much of their 2005 campaign. Chris Huhne pontificates despite having taken non-dom contributions.
Like Expenses it will damage all three.
142 Scott - Ah yes, antifrank was right. Like a tramp with a bottle of meths, they can’t resist having another swig even if they half-suspect it’s a bad idea.
136.
Betfair rules:
“What will be the official date declared for voting on the next UK General Election? Unmatched bets will not be cancelled at any time. Betfair is NOT responsible for suspending the market once an official announcement is made. However, once Betfair becomes aware of an official announcement, we will suspend the market. This market will be settled as the first date officially declared as Election day by the Government. Should the date of the Election subsequently be changed, for whatever reason, the result of this market will NOT be affected.”
Should be settled as soon as an announcement is made as the market is about the date announced, not the date of the actual election.
142 - And FOI requests will take quite a long time I would have thought. Then on top of that, wouldn’t it grind to a halt during the purdah?
144
it will damage all 3 and boost the protest parties.
129 Tim “Its not as big a story as the rising pound you mean?”
You mean that the markets are already being cheered up by news of the failure of Labour’s increasingly desperate attacks on lord Ashcroft.
I must confess to being (pleasantly) surprised that this story is still running….I can understand the Times having an axe to grind, but the other broadshets and broadcast media are keeping it stired up as well. It was the second story on Radio 5 Live at 5:30 this morning, and it looks like it might have enough “legs” to last unil the weekend. Here’s hoping!
Cameron got an extra day in the media on Monday, and now we have Hague and Clarke dominating the news for the rest of the week
Thats a top quote, even for you.
Shall we test your theory and ask Marcus Wood to tell us if he’s got links with Ashcroft money?
“Anyone know whether Cameron is doing an interview or a presser on this great victory?”
I suspect the subject of party funding, donations to political parties, peerages as reward and tax status might just make an appearance in Cameron’s ITV special.
121. This has not been the Tories greatest moment, morally or politically. It’s an unedifying spectacle.
But I’m sorry, setting aside partisanship, Labour’s recent record of corruption and sleaze exists on a different and higher dimension. Labour are, after all, the party whose peers actually SOLD LEGISLATION FOR MONEY.
This beats everything else into insignificance. Or can’t you see that?
I reckon one of the problems for Tories in counter-attacking Labour on the issue of corruption is that there are so many targets to choose from. Cash for ermine, cash for laws, Ecclestone. Mandelson’s mortgages, Jack accountancy-is-not-my-strong-suit Straw, the PM’s twelve grand he had to repay, Mr Tessa Jowell, Lord Paul, on and on and on.
The Tory situation resembles that of a footballer faced with six open goals who is so bewildered by the wealth of opportunity he ends up missing the ball altogether and tripping over his laces.
toenails getting panned
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2010/03/lord_ashcroft_donations_legal_and_permissible.html#comments
tim, does Brown have any links to Lord Paul’s money? You know the proven dodgy non dom bloke as opposed to the cleared non dom bloke Ashcroft.
Whether or not the EC found in favour of Bearwood, this keeps Ashcroft in the news for a further news cycle. Also, this is a completely separate issue to the non-dom, obligations for peerage, who knew what when, who was kept in the dark, who was economical with the truth. This simply allows news organisations to say ‘but these other questions remain unanswered, and on it goes for a further news cycle.
Where this also differs from many other ‘westminster bubble’ type stories, is that many local papers, in marginals will pick up on this - so voters will be reminded again as these free papers drop on every door mat in certain constituencies in the next couple of days.
This is a rather tricky one for the Tories to clamp down on.
hey tim, how much money did Lord Paul flog to Brown for his Privy Council place eh?
tim - the pound is down today - are the markets crashing as the Conservatives have wriggled free of the Ashcroft scandal and will now bounce back in the polls ?
6 Jonathan kindly tell us when the Tories gained power and could change the law? Strangely I thought it was Labour who stood accused of allowing a donor to persuade the government to look again at proposed law changes or maybe I am wrong and Bernie Ecclestone didn’t donate £1 million to Labour shortly before advertising cigarettes at formula one was given an extended period!
I am curious about the “local” effect.
The Tory campaign is a choice between change or 5 more years of Gordo.
So the counter campaign is, “but the change was financed by the man who set up Crimestoppers”?
144 – Ted, a great post and well said imho.
“Like Expenses it will damage all three”
Unfortunately also true.
159: And he got the money back!! Old Bernie’s a canny one for sure.
150 - Except that the story is now Ashcroft cleared. And who knows, Augustus, perhaps attention might now be more focused on Huhne’s interesting financial relationship, and the LibDems wholesome links to one Michael Brown?
160 - Jason Rust in Edinburgh SW seems keen to distance himself from any Ashcroft cash.
Why would he do that?
antifrank: “like a tramp with a bottle of meths”
That was my feeling about hearing Cable talking about this. The national LibDems should rising above it all and letting Labour fling the mud. For them to join the attack only invites a counter-attack, which risks telling the voters things about the LibDems they didn’t already know.
I can see the calculation for Labour in running on this - I think they’ve got it right - but I’m having a hard time imagining the strategy that made the LibDems think it would be a good idea to get involved.
131. SNP.
I’ll take you up for £20 of that if that’s ok - Er Indoors will kill me if I go for more than that.
Is this acceptable to you?
145. I think that post by Antifrank is a good contender for best of the year.
I suppose from a Labour perspective, the Ashcroft saga has succeeded in occupying the political news cycle for nearly a week and therefore avoided the Conservatives building on any momentum that Dave’s weekend speech may have provided.
From the average voter’s perspective, all they see is discredited troughing MP’s squabbling over rich tax-avoiding Lords about an issue they neither understand or care about.
Nett result - More voters switching off and lower turnout.
164 – tim, just when it is impossible to imagine you could sink any lower.
You somehow manage to do so.
166. Jason Rust in Edinburgh SW seems keen to distance himself from any Ashcroft cash.
Why would he do that?
Because he didn’t take any. Which is what the article said
Robinson is an Ar*e as most of the BBC reporters have been over this episode.
Just heard the WATO and the head of the EC was on it saying that the Conservative party had provided all the documentation they had requested and that Tory party officials didnt have to turn up to be quizzed.
John Mann made himself sound stupiod but the BBC lady kept scrambling around trying to keep the issue alive.
It is scandalous.
Lets hope they are as rigorous with Lord Paul.
It would not surprise me if Guido has something up his sleeve which he will leave until after Chilcot.
173. Yes I think the left-liberal media establishment have really let their mask slip on this.
I posted last week that this story had a whiff of yachtgate about it.
Man doesn’t take donation. Week of non-news.
Man makes legal donation, and pays UK tax. Week of non-news.
There may be more to come out. Labour seem determined. My favourite of the day so far was the backbench Labour MP asking Hattie to pressure the EC to release the report before the election, 10 minutes before they released the report…
Just watched PMQ’s from yesterday and what a treat! It was certainly one of the most entertaining PMQ’s I’ve ever seen. Hattie seemed completely out of her depth, from her blunder referring to Hague as the “foreign secretary” to her scoldings from Bercow to her generally substance-free answers. Hague seemed to be truly enjoying himself.
TV debates and Expectation management
Labour spinners will try to make a virtue of their man’s misanthropic, malevolent awkwardness, suggesting that Cameron is nothing more than a suit and a haircut. They will massage expectations down so low that any sort of coherent performance will be trumpeted as an extraordinary coup, as if Brown was an orangutan that had been shipped by crate from Borneo and taught to speak English only last Tuesday.
http://mreugenides.blogspot.com/2010/03/on-debates.html
lol!
Labour need to re-think how to approach this. Their response so far has sounded pathetic with a touch of desperation about it. To start quibbling with the EC decision isn’t smart.
The word “cleared” is mighty powerful and the Tories will use to to respond to all the criticisms of their deputy chairman.
My advice to Labour and the Lib Dems is to shut up for 24 hours while you re-think if and how you want to take this forward.
What gets me about this whole Ashcroft thing is why and how the media have bought the Lab/Lib Dem response to the charge of hypocrisy (ie that it’s rich of them to bleat about Ashcroft when they have and do accept funding from non-doms.
The line from Lab/Lib Dems has been “yes, we have non-dom funders but they have contributed nothing like as much as Ashcroft and have nothing like the same influence over our party as he does over the Tories”.
That line has been willingly swallowed by a craven media when it should have been nailed.
The only legitimate grounds for criticising the Tories/Ashcroft is on the PRINCIPLE of donations being made by a non-dom being wrong. That is clearly not a charge Labour or the Lib Dems can make, as they have accepted donations from non-doms too.
The amount given is irrelevant. Are we really to believe that Brown or Huhne said to their respective non-dom benefactors: “I’m happy to accept your dosh at the current levels but if you were to offer us a seven-figure sum, clearly that would be unethical”?
Of course they wouldn’t. The reality is they are bleating because they don’t have an individual willing to support either of them to the same extent as Ashcroft.
Of course, even that issue will be addressed if Cameron wins because of the £50k per person limit on individual donations the Tories propose.
But Brown won’t support that on the ‘principled’ grounds that it would cost Labour millions in union donations.
I really wish the media would get a grip and challenge the news agenda they are being asked to take by Mandelson, Campbell et al.
171/2 - So no nervousness about association with Ashcroft then?
LOL
Someone upthread (can’t find it now) said The Times may still have an axe to grind re Ashcroft. It was also said earlier in the week. What’s the connection with The Times? That one has passed me by.
Well as it’s more relevant to this thread
Anecdote alert - just initiated a debate on the Ashcroft afair in the tea room over lunch (remember these are supposedly hard-left public service layabouts we’re talking about). Of those who had heard of him - a minority - the consensus was that he hadn’t done anything wrong or illegal and those moaning about him were just jealous that they can’t choose to become non-dom themselves.
Much like the Brown Bully story and subsequent Pratt fall, the emphasis from Labour is to keep anything, absolutely anything on the front pages other than the economy. So we have a story that should have been chip paper by Tuesday still being dragged along by a suppine media, much to the annoyance of an electorate that frankly couldn’t really care less.
Labour run a number of risks with this strategy. Specifically as regards Ashcroft, even ignoring the obvious hypocrisy, the now strident calls for A RESIGNATION, will be met with the simple question: “Who was the last government minister to resign for fouling up?” Labour’s expedient policy of simply ignoring calls for ministerial heads to roll until they eventually subside will now be used against them. Shame that.
More generally, however, as the election date nears and the inevitable “events” surrounding the economy occur (Budget, Q1 GDP, unemployment figures, house prices, etc.), many of which are likely to be, let’s say, unhelpful to the incumbents, Labour will stand accused, and quite likely convicted in the eyes of many, of fiddling while the UK economy went up in smoke.
That’s the problem with a strategy of diversion and confusion. You have to keep it up indefinitelty, otherwise the fog disipates and people can see just how totally devoid of convincing arguments you really are. Keeping Brown away from the electorate is understandable, but not sustainable, and Labour will suffer as a consequence.
cathynewman
C4News EXCLUSIVE: David Cameron knew Lord Ashcroft was non-dom “within the last month”. More details to follow
178. I’m sure both your party and Labour won’t be able to resist yet another swig from the meths bottle, Mike.
Any decent cynical journo would smell the wind and see that all this sucking up is going to be counterproductive come May 7th.
“Arise Sir Tom Bradbury - Prime Minister Cameron is waiting to give his first exclusive interview, psst - take toenails to the tower….”
zzzzzzzzz
no-one cares
The killer fact for anyone who isn’t following this minutely is that Labour also has non-dom major donors. For 99% of people this then becomes a dull Westminster schoolboy politician tit-for-tat non-story.
Which it is
176: I thought the Hague/Hattie segment was joyous too, on many levels. I didn’t have time to watch the full half hour (I only wanted a 5 minute argument…;-)) - did Dennis Skinner manage to get a question in in the end, and if so, what was it? I saw him keep trying to catch Mr Speaker’s eye.
@180:
In P&L we’ve been too busy spending Lord Ashcroft’s lovely Belizean wonga to sit around fretting.
185. I think they really believe they can swing the election and get a Lib-Lab pact, Harry.
183 - was it on Monday perchance?
178 - They need to do more than that. They need to rethink what they are trying to achieve in the first place.
Labour appear to be trying to make a vice out of the Tories’ spending power (hence all the attacks on posters, Lord Ashcroft etc). That’s smart enough in the abstract, but they’ve got emotionally involved with Lord Ashcroft. Since Lord Ashcroft is obviously pretty smart himself and has had a lot longer to think this all through with much more information, they are on a very sticky wicket.
The Lib Dems don’t appear to have a strategy at all. They are looking like idiots. Or is the thinking “any publicity is good publicity”?
185, “Nick ‘Toenails’ Robinson is missing. It is presumed he has become irretrievably stuck up the posterior of a Mr G. Brown. The BBC has appointed James MacIntyre as political editor, alongside new deputy editor Derek Draper.”
“So no nervousness about association with Ashcroft then?”
Eh?
Man who has no association with other man makes no claim to have had association with said man.
That’s a story?
170. Lower turnout favours Tories. People who hate Labour are more likely to show up and vote, despite all this, as compared to people who want to vote Labour for positive reasons - the latter will be disenchanted by yet more sleaze, wherever it emanates.
Dangerous game for Labour.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill:
Lords 1st Reading took place yesterday.
Lords 2nd Reading now scheduled for 24 March 2010 - ie it’s been stalled. If there was any doubt this surely confirms no attempt will be made to get the Bill through in its current form pre GE.
After 24 March at most there will be approx 10 days left and in that time it would have to go through Lords Committee, 3rd Reading and amendments in both Commons and Lords.
It could still pass but only by agreement - ie with the AV referendum dropped.
190 Which is much more mathematically plausible IMHO than many Tories on here would like to admit to themselves
YouGov survey results on TV debate also up
http://www.yougov.co.uk/extranets/ygarchives/content/pdf/TheSun-results_03.03-topical.pdf
Interesting to note that 40% of Lib Dem voters mights still change their mind versus just 20% for the other 2 main parties.
131 tim
Its not as big a story as the rising pound you mean?
Has Lord Ashcroft being playing the currrency markets?
146, 163 Yes arguments about dodgy funding are like those between pots and kettles to most people. Ashcroft, Paul, Michael Brown…ho hum, another one will be along soon.
The only interest in this is the timing IMO - it’s surprising the Tories waited until the day after Cameron’s big speech to go public - it would have been better to have done it much further away from the election. Suggsets a lack of strategic insight.
188- I just finished watching it and, to answer you question, I don’t believe so.
“did Dennis Skinner manage to get a question in in the end”
He asked it during business questions this morning. Bercow told him to shut up and Hattie not to answer it.
TNS voting intention poll
http://www.tnsglobal.com/news/news-8E2C4F76765E4553BB28F1558710EB04.aspx
36/32/21
Not clear if weighted by certainty or not.
183.ScottP, I think this exclusive is has been handed to them gift wrapped with a bow on top.
Poll Alert!
TNS has headline figures of Con 36, Lab 32, LD 21
See my twitter link…
http://twitter.com/Alewin7
Never hate your enemies, it clouds you judgement.
Michael Corleone, a wise man.
[153] - seanT, but the sad fact is that none of the major parties are clean; in fact the civil service is not clean - senior civil servants go rapidly to consulting jobs int he private sector, after pushing for lucrative contracts to those same companies.
Arguing that Labour are worse than the Tories [or vice versa] is futile; neither meet an acceptable standard. It’s plausible that Labour have more transgressions now only because they have had more opportunity, due to being in government.
The Ashcroft story has transaction purely because he appears to have broken a promise he made as a condition of taking up his peerage. The Labour non-dom peers did not make such a promise.
It comes to something when the ex-Prime Minister of a country creates an opaque accounting structure to avoid paying tax in the country he once led. That’s the basket case we have become [on Labour's watch], but in all your fury surely you can see that the Tories are cut from the same cloth.
178. Mike, I dont think Labour politicians can be quiet about Ashcroft. He is a red rag to a bull and a scab they keep wanting to pick, they hate and fear him that much. They have got as much out of Ashcroft as they probably can but that wont stop them trying to get more out of it, but for meotional reasons rather than tactical ones.
205 Andrew Lewin (LD PPC Hertford & Stortford)
Too late
Like the expenses story, the way this story has played out has gone beyond ‘legality’. Cameron himself, in a Guardian article about ‘ethics’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/27/david-cameron-personal-responsibility?showallcomments=true#comment-51 last week said:
“Personal responsibility is the foundation of an ethical society. Without it we cannot hope for people to ask the right questions of themselves. But people are so used to a world of regulations…that their inner voice of moral reasoning has been mute. We saw this most clearly during the MPs’ expenses crisis. Time and again we heard: “It was within the rules” and “We were told we could do it”. Too few asked: “Was it right for me to [use taxpayers' money] that way?”"
The problem is for the Tories, that the very same Conservative Party is hiding behind this very defence - i.e. it was ‘legal’. But the truth is, whether, Ashcroft and the Tories have found legal loopholes to a) get Ashcroft into the House of Lords and b) divert substantial sums of money from abroad - the public generally thinks this looks ‘unethical’.
Beyond the dialogue of the deaf and the mudslinging that is the world of politics, the resonance of this will most probably be “well the Tories are still owned by the super-rich and would govern in their interest”.
Meanwhile, in short-term political terms, even if this story fades for the mean time (which I am not necessarily sure that it will), the Tories have lost 4 days worth of news cycles in the wake of the Cameron relaunch, and ‘bully’ Brown has been all but forgotten by the media this week. Another lost week as the Tories keep trying to bang the reset button.
Furthermore, the other loss that the Tories have had has been the idea that there may not be total unity at the top table of the Tories. With Cameron advisers aparently apoplectic over Hague’s handling of the situation, there is for the first time a sense that the Tories have taken a blow. Up until 4 weeks ago, there was no sign that the Tories were so fragile, but there is now a sense that they are easily blown around by events
205, who/what is TNS?
The firm voters are more prevalent in the Tories than Labour.
205: that should get Tory bums a-squeaking again…
I think for the sake of pre election clarity each of the parties should state their going rate for knighthoods and peerages. Such a rate to be termed an “Ashcroft” and each Ashcroft would be £1M.
As guidance I’d say :
Knighthood - Two Ashcrofts
Baronetcy - Five Ashcrofts
Life Barony - Ten Ashcrofts
Hereditary Barony - Fifteen Ashcrofts
Hereditary Viscountcy - Twenty Ashcrofts
Hereditary Earldom - Twenty Five Ashcrofts
196. Could Brown not use the Parliament Act to get it passed with AV referendum intact?
I can see Labour taking the moral high ground here, saying it is wrong that the unelected Lords can prevent the electorate having their say on voting reform. In fact it would probably play out very well for Brown, because most of the electorate feel the current system is unfair and would feel it only right that their views are heard in a referendum.
TNS:
Hung Parliament, Labour 32 seats short
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/swing-calculator
Thanks Ashcroft.
212. I doubt it
205 TNS-BMRB poll
who they?
Dizzy on donations
http://dizzythinks.net/2010/03/how-politics-works-lesson-2.html
215 The poll was taken 18-24 February, so is 1 to 2 weeks old.
TNS is a market research company I believe?
212, really? I’ll wait a for a better known pollster before I get worried.
213 Jack W
You missed one off the bottom of the list:
Watford - One Ashcroft
Just a thought, if the rozzers feel Lord Paul’s collar over his House of Lords expenses and the flat which may or may not ahve been unoccupied, will Gordon Brown ask the Queen to revoke Lord Paul’s membership of the Privy Council?
I will not hold my breath.
Lets hear it for Labour:
Tony Blair persaudes the Romanian government to sell their steel industry to Lakshmi Mittal who as far as I can see is still an Indian and not even a British citizen
Lord Mandelson resigns over his links to the Hinduja borthers
Lord Cashpoint obtains secret loans totalling at least £18 million which Mr Harriet Harman the Labour party treasurer knows nothing about.
Tony Blair is interviewed twice by the police over the allegation that Peerages were sold in return for donations to the Labour Party.
Several of the donors concerned request repayment of the loans they had given.
Lakshmi Mittal converts a £2 million pound loan into a gift.
Mr Sainsbury donates millions to Labour, becomes Lord Sainsbury and a government minister and continues to donate millions to Labour
Bernie Ecclestone gives Labour £1 million and shortly afterwards when cigarette advertising is outlawed re sports events, Formula One is made a special case.
Mr Drayson ditto
Sir Ronald Cohen donates over £2 million to Labour while aggedly being a non-dom
Finally: 3 Labour MPs charged over alleged misuse of parliamentary expenses system.
And Labour has the audacity to go after Lord Ashcroft!
196. Your scenario also assumes a May election. If there is any way that they can get this AV referendum passed, it will be far more important to Labour in the long-term than winning this one election.
This Ashcroft business.
Look we are now effectively in an election campaign. The strategy is to 1. attempt to get your message out 2. Stop the otherside talking about what they want to.
This is the case in every election in every western country.
The Ashcroft business has stopped the Tories getting their message out since Monday. Given they had a major conference on Sunday and hoped that Cameron’s speach would set the agenda for the next week or so, I think CCHQ will be disapointed (no more than that) and Labour HQ will be satisfied with their work and the fact the tightening of the Polls at 5-8% has been confirmed.
No one will remember this any more than Jennifer’s Ear and the myriad of other spats.
One thing to note, if we were to get fixed term Parliaments, election campaigns would stretch out for 6-9 monthes every 4 or 5 years!!!!!!!
“Could Brown not use the Parliament Act “
IIRC he doesn’t have enough days left
219, so, unless we had the election on 25th February, about as relevant as one of tim’s patented thread derailments.
TNS - interesting method of polling:
“TNS-BMRB surveyed 1,954 GB adults aged 18+ via face-to-face interviews in respondents’ homes from 18th to 24th February 2010. Respondents entered their answers to the voting intention questions on a laptop in private so the interviewer and other people in the room could not see how they were answering.”
http://www.tnsglobal.com/news/news-8E2C4F76765E4553BB28F1558710EB04.aspx
Hard to read much into this poll unless they’ve got previous ones we can compare to though.
Why was Ashcroft required to be “resident in the UK” when Lord Paul was not?
Odd that. Why did the Lib Dem head of the committee require unique terms for Ashcroft? That seems to be discrimination?
C4News EXCLUSIVE: David Cameron knew Lord Ashcroft was non-dom “within the last month”. More details to follow
So Hague is blaming Ashcroft and Cameron is blaming Hague.
213: Should not the Lib Dems have Sir Michaal Brown of no known address then?
Someone will correct me if I am wrong but I don’t think that TNS past vote weight their samples.
206 - how true.
Can you imagine the shrieking over the past few days going on for a whole election campaign?
IMO, Labour has just wasted a week of hearts-and-minds that it needs to do, because of their obsession with somebody 99% of the British public neither knows nor cares about.
Yes, it did drown out DC’s speech, but it’s not like he won’t make another one.
225 RR
you missed out
3. hide the fact that Labour don’t actually have a message
tory cover-up!
“The report said Lord Ashcroft had provided “some” information relating to BCS voluntarily, however, his solicitors said certain papers could not be handed over because “his policy was to destroy documents unless retaining them was a requirement for an auditing, tax, or regulatory reason”.
The report also revealed Tory party officials had been asked to attend interviews with the commission “on a voluntary basis” but those requests were turned down.”
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Ashcroft-Row-Commons-Committee-To-Hold-Hearing-Into-Appointment-To-The-Lords/Article/201003115567064?lpos=Home_First_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region_2&lid=ARTICLE_15567064_Ashcroft_Row%3A_Commons_Committee_To_Hold_Hearing_Into_Appointment_To_The_Lords
Some Tory supporters need to stop hammering on about the Pound. There was a panic sell earlier in the week, but now the issue of Greece is settling down, people will feel more relaxed about the Euro zone. It also seems February was a good month for the UK growth story, and that positions the UK for pretty decent Q1 GDP numbers. March is always a good month for economic activity.
Sadly Conservative strategy of blowing this crisis out of all proportion is going to backfire spectacularly at the General Election. Whether the election is held in May or June, people are still going to be feeling pretty good about the phony recovery Labour have delivered. And Osborne’s doomsday predictions are so wide of the mark it’s not funny.
The pain will really start to kick in after the election of course. But by then, it will be too late for the Tories.
First item on Classic FM news, Lord Ashcroft and Tories cleared by Electoral Commission. End of story.
Most interesting reworking of Ashcroft on the Beeb was R4 last night 10.00 pm news - “Interview” with William Hague. After what seemed to be minutes of a**ing around they got to the shocking revelation that Hague hadn’t enquired recently as to Mr Ashcroft’s Tax status. He had found out presumably in passing a few months ago. This “revelation” was still being played on the morning slots.
As bollocks go this takes some beating. But, it is interesting that no-one bothered putting them straight so clearly Hague et al are comfortable to let the story run out of steam.
Now if I employ someone then I know I am meant to check into their status. But why the heck was Hague expected to know one way or the other about the tax status of a third party ???
If some pr*** were to ask me live on radio I would ask them about their tax status. And then, what donations have you made in the last ten years ?
BBCLauraK
Liam Fox tells me David Cameron only found out last month about Ashcroft’s tax status - well after William Hague found out
227 MD - More to the point, it is unclear whether it is properly weighted, although it is a large sample. It also shows higher certainty to vote amongst Conservative supporters (which is not factored into the headline figure).
Overall, hard to know whether it means anything much at all, but they’ve clearly put some effort into it.
207: “The Ashcroft story has transaction purely because he appears to have broken a promise he made as a condition of taking up his peerage. The Labour non-dom peers did not make such a promise.”
But, it’s rather more telling that they weren’t asked to make ANY promise.
In any event, quibbling over whether Ashcroft was asked, should have been asked or did or did not make a commitment to “permanent UK residency” as opposed to the agreed “long-term UK residency” is also a bit silly. No one, and certainly not Michael Ashcroft, could ever give a commitment to “permanent residency” since no one can know the future.
He gave a perfectly good, valid and acceptable assurance that he would not be an off-shore peer. And would pay, as a consequence of his residency, UK tax on UK income.
And that, incidentally, is “full UK tax” in the proper meaning of the words and not, as has been suggested in many quarters, less than full UK tax simply because overseas income NOT repatriated to the UK remains taxed elsewhere.
[146] - Ever since the 2005 election when losing Labour MPs blaimed Ashcroft for their losses - it was a conspiracy of money not unpopularity that lost them - there has been a ratchetting up of the demonising of the man and of his influence.
Ted, to be fair, Labour seemed to despise the man right from the off, given that they seemed to think that the Tory party would have ceased to exist without his support while Hague was leader.
gabble, just for future reference. Will you ever answer a direct question? It will save people time in the future and let them know what sort of person you are.
I suspect that, with hindsight, the biggest effect of this business will be that it will enable the Tories to overcome their scruples about using every scrap of dirt against individual Labour politicians once the election starting gun is fired. Whether that helps or harms them remains to be seen.
A secondary effect has been to prompt the BBC to burn the last of its boats.
Interesting comment on toenails blog
getridofgordonnow wrote:
Quoted from various reputable sources:
“A recent analysis found that every Labour donor who has given more than £1m has received a peerage or a knighthood”
“Since 2001, when the Electoral Commission began detailing political donations, the government has bestowed honours on 12 of the 14 individuals who have given Labour more than £200,000″
“Of the 22 who donated more than £100,000, 17 received honours”
“Suzanne Evans, a statistician at Birkbeck, University of London, found Labour donors are three times more likely to be honoured than Tory backers. “The probability that this difference could have occurred by chance is less than three in 1,000. Statistics cannot prove cause and effect but the results should arouse concern,” she said.”
“Sir Alan Sugar, the Amstrad electronics magnate, donated £200,000 to the Labour party on the same day that one of his companies won a lucrative place on a list of preferred Government suppliers.”
240, did mention the certainty thingummyjig.
I wonder if they’ll do polls more regularly. I don’t think I’ll pay much heed to it, given it’s out of date and has unclear methodology.
214. Could Brown not use the Parliament Act to get it passed with AV referendum intact?
No - the Parliament Act requires legislation to pass through the Commons twice and at least one year must elapse between the first and second Commons bills. So there is not time for this process to be gone through before the election.
If Brown really believed in AV he would have proposed it in 2007, not waited until now.
Well Ashcoft is trying disproportionally to influence UK govt policy directly, not least tax policy, way beyond the power of any mere voter. This is not a good starting point in a democracy. Yes Labour have donors, but none to my knowledge have personally grabbed the reins of power within the party to the extent Ashcroft clearly has.
by Jonathan March 4th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
This carefully ignores Lord Paul supporting and paying for Gordon Brown’s campaign to become Prime Minister.
Now who has the levers of power and patronage in his hands: the leader of the opposition or the Prime Minister.
And who used that patronage to make his donor a Privy Councillor?
Hint: not David Cameron.
And which non-dom Lord is a regular at Chequers and Downing Street and buys up Brown’s books? Who is at the centre of state power?
Hint: not Ashcroft.
225 - Sensible post that has a ring of truth about it. But if the Ashcroft ’story’ was going to become public, then arguably best to take any hit - not that there seems to have been any thus far - very early in the campaign. There’s still 2 months before May 6th (heaven help us!).
217. Iirc BMRB are the market research company who compile the BCS, among other thngs of course.
We can also moan about the media really going hard on the Cashcroft debacle. But none of us were complaining when the Gordon Brown bullying stories were the full focus of media attention. So we can hardly blame the New Labour war machine for pressing this issue hard. This is some pay back for Labour.
It also paints the Tories very badly: Same old rich boys club avoiding the tax the rest of us have to pay.
It amazes me that people responsible for selling newspapers or competing for TV audiences can be pushing this Lord Ashcroft thing. The entire saga is simply dripping with boredom.
Liam Fox tells me David Cameron only found out last month about Ashcroft’s tax status - well after William Hague found out/i>
Anyone fancy a bet on Hague as next Foreign Sectretary now?
He’s not safe with a packet of sparklers, let alone a major dept.
224. The AV referendum is just a bargaing tool aimed at making the right noises to the Lib Dems.
The Lib Dems will want a caste iron guarentee of at least a referendum on electoral reform, and they will want STV on it.
The AV referendum is aimed at making Labour look flexible and the Tories as being against change.
If Labour were in a position to offer the referendum, I think they would allow a free vote on it, like the Common Market referendum in 1975. I don’t thnk Gordon’s conversion to AV is that strong, FPTP suits Labour but they could live with AV.
235 “The report said Lord Ashcroft had provided “some” information relating to BCS voluntarily, however, his solicitors said certain papers could not be handed over because “his policy was to destroy documents unless retaining them was a requirement for an auditing, tax, or regulatory reason”.”
Gabble, that is the very definition of a NON-COVER UP. Papers pertaining to ANY kind of regulatory purposes were kept and those NOT required for that were binned. And you think that’s a cover-up?
You’re even madder than I thought. Or more stupid. It’s hard to know which.
231. I know it’s a stretch, you being a Tory and all, but:
Oh, yawn, Michael Brown. Was he given a knighthood or peerage? No. Did he get any Lib Dem policy changes? No. Was he made Deputy Chairman of the Lib Dems? No. Was he put in charge of the Lib Dem General Election campaign? No. Did his money buy anything from the Lib Dems at all? No. Did the Lib Dems know he was a crook until after a long police investigation? No. Did the Lib Dems take a single penny from him after it was discovered he was a crook? No. Did the Lib Dems defend him? No. Did the Lib Dems try to cover up his crookedness? No.
Is there any comparison between a one-off donation five years ago and a decade-long conspiracy to consistently lie to cover up tax-dodging by a man who’s bought a political party? No.
232. In the words of Mark Senior -
‘TNS/System 3 polls are notorious for their inaccuracy .
They did 3 polls prior to the 2005 GE . Compared to the actual result of
Lab 39 LDem 22.5 SNP 17.5 Con 16
they gave
Feb 2005 Lab 42 SNP 22 Con 16 LDem 16
Mar 2005 Lab 46 SNP 23 Con 16 LDem 13
Apr 2005 Lab 45 SNP 23 CON 14 LDem 14
I believe they poll face to face and do not use any past vote weighting or likelihood to vote weighting which puts them in a similar but worse position to Ipsos Mori overstating Labour support and SNP support .’
222 Seth O. Ashcroft should have bunged another few million and made it Lord Ave It of Watford !!
253 tim - What odds are you offering? (I’m attracted by your proven record in bets on Cameron’s team)
I’ve been getting matched at betfair between 1.3 and 1.8
255: Makes one wonder wether Gabble has kept every since bank statement and sales receipt he has ever received
258 - and I’ll have whatever he’s having!
Brown, Chilcott and Afghanistan are about to start dominating the news again.
“Makes one wonder wether Gabble has kept every since bank statement and sales receipt he has ever received”
Difficult to submit them to the fees office if you don’t…
256. So as Mike would put it, another “Recidivist Labour over-stater”.
256. Pollster using people who happen to be at home when they call finds increased support for the party of welfare and benefits shock !
Lol.
Since sleaze is on-topic (ish)…
Interesting news from north of the border for anyone interested in ensuring transparent dealings between media and government.
Today’s Scotsman reports that Ofcom is launching an inquiry into the STV channel amid claims of a ‘cash for programmes’ deal between the broadcaster and the Scottish Government.
The inquiry comes after private letters emerged from STV undertaking to consider future programming decisions “for the benefit of the [Scottish] Government”.
http://fullfact.org/?p=772
265, http://mylabourposter.typepad.com/.a/6a0120a8abc3e4970b0120a8ac7388970b-pi
What I like about this affair is the way it was set up. The PM suddenly on hand to greet a nonentity, so Harriet gets the attack dog position, and more importantly Hague is on the stand.Priceless! And it has all gone pear-shaped.
Don’t you wish we could just fast-forward to election day? All this bollocks can’t be good for the mind or the soul.
[241] - But, it’s rather more telling that they weren’t asked to make ANY promise.
Yes. However that is apparently deemed to subtle by our media overlords for us poor enfeebled people to understand.
Macavity Cameron kicks the Ashcroft story back into life.
“Cameron Knew Ashcroft Status ‘In Last Month’”
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Ashcroft-Row-Cameron-Knew-He-Was-A-Non-Dom-Within-The-Last-Month/Article/201003115567064?lpos=Home_Carousel_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15567064_Ashcroft_Row%3A_Cameron_Knew_He_Was_A_Non-Dom_Within_The_Last_Month
Mike S. Are you aware as to whether TNS are BPC members ?
Well, a comparison of the last three unweighted UK yougov data:
26th 43 30 17
27th 41 31 14
—Ashcroft–
2nd 41 32 15
3rd 39 29 19
So, on this basis the tories are down two, labour are down 3 and lib dems up 4. This is looking like, just as with the expenses labour mps arrests that lab and the tory parties are suffering. Now that ashcroft has been cleared, itll be interesting to see whether both parties or just the tories recover if, indeed, they do!
235 - Ashcroft’s policy of destroying documents unless they were needed for “auditing, tax, or regulatory reason[s]” is a clear sign that he was covering something up.
It’s all terrifically exciting and hints at all manner of shenanigans from Lord Goldfinger of Belize, doesn’t it?
I am quite sure that Ashcroft’s Sainsbury receipt from 2 March 2008 contained information about his taste in cheese that could prove to be political dynamite if it entered the public domain.
Incidentally, as a small business owner, I make a point of keeping all non-essential paperwork because I want to make my office as big a fire hazard as possible.
266. Oo-er that sounds dodgy….
Its turning into a veritable Shadow Cabinet parade in the news this week. Cameron, Hague, Clarke, and now Liam Fox.
271. Just one more swig…
If Labour DO want to bang on about this they need to get people whose arms are not tired like Gordon Prentice and John Mann.
Every time John Mann speaks I want to change my accent.
276 - Is that a spoof?
271. Gabble, I thought you wanted to know the answer to when Cameron knew, now you do surely you shoulds be saying “Cameron puts Ashcroft story to bed”?
The chief polling ramper speaks:
Lost [sic] more interest in marginals because of closing polls and cashcroft. Am told C4 news has an interesting poll tonight
http://twitter.com/charliewhelan/statuses/9973728674
Ashcroft is headlining the BBC but isn’t in the top 10 most read. No-one beyond politics nerds cares.
261. I think you’ve had enough today John O !!
@256 If TNS’ methodolgy is unchanged, then a score of 21% is all the more encouraging for the LDs.
We really need some more non-Yougov polls to get a more balanced picture of the true Lib Dem position… My hunch is that we are on at least 20% and if we were to start a campaign with this foundation, we could quite feasibly be seeing scores of 24/25% a week before polling day.
Appreciate that this may sound especially optimistic in light of what YouGov is showing, but I’m convinced that the traditional LD campaign bounce will be exenuated both by the fact that Clegg is a first time leader and by the leader’s debates…
The other finding from the TNS poll is that 52% of people who intend to vote are undecided, there is still a huge amount to play for…
“The report said Lord Ashcroft had provided “some” information relating to BCS voluntarily, however, his solicitors said certain papers could not be handed over because “his policy was to destroy documents unless retaining them was a requirement for an auditing, tax, or regulatory reason
Gabble
Well blow me down a company having a proper Document Retention Management (DRM) Policy. Unheard of surely. My company spends a fortune each year ensuring we only keep those documents we actually need. This is not a cover-up it is proper business procedure, something no Labourite seems to know about judging by the mess they have achieved with our Economy.
gabble, thanks for your non response, you have confirmed my opinion of you. You can now safely be added to the list of people to be scrolled over.
235 - Ashcroft’s policy of destroying documents unless they were needed for “auditing, tax, or regulatory reason[s]” is a clear sign that he was covering something up.
Its such a shame we never got to see Tony Blair’s expense forms when all the others were released. I wonder what happened to them?
Drip, drip, drip….
“The Shadow Defence Secretary was later asked, “You volunteered the information that David Cameron knew about Lord Ashcroft being a non-dom within the last month – can you say exactly when he knew?”
Fox said: “I know that is was within the last month – that’s as much information as I can give you.””
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/cameron+knew+ashcroft+was+nondom+within+the+last+month/3569357
Carefully worded, non-commital admissions.
Why don’t the tory leadership just tell us the truth!
281 - we expecting anything Mike, or are C4 going to quote that bit of market research?
“Tory uncertainties sees Labour support continue”
“LABOUR BACKED AGAIN FOLLOWING MORE TORY SCANDAL”
“Following the Tory party scandal surrounding Lord Ashcroft, there has been further support for the Labour party to take the most seats at the General Election, with Coral bookmakers trimming the price of an outright win to 4-1 (from 9-2), and to 6-4 (from 13-8) to retain their position at number 10 with a no overall majority decision.”
http://www.liveoddsandscores.com/news/press-releases/425909/tory-uncertainties-sees-labour-support-continue
Thanks Ashcroft.
285 - If the party had continued it’s policy of shredding its leaders once it had no use for him, none of this would have happened.
Any party demanding the truth after they were the govt that wrote the Iraq dossier is skating on non-existant ice.
re 54 but the Lords do have the power to reject the Finance Bill - it’s even enshrined in the Parliament Act 1911. Like all other acts it receives royal assent by and with the asserted of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons…
Ineos looks to cut tax bill with Swiss relocation
Ineos, the UK’s biggest private company by sales, is preparing to move its headquarters to Switzerland in a bid to save on tax bills.
It is the latest, and one of the biggest, of a string of UK companies that are moving abroad because of rising corporate and personal tax bills at home for some enterprises.
The chemicals group asked lenders yesterday for permission to move its headquarters and tax residence to Switzerland to save up to €450m (£408m) in the next four years, money that would have otherwise been paid in tax to the UK.
“Over the past year we’ve been leaving no stone unturned to improve cash generation and get through the recession. Tax is a big cost for us, and as our business recovers and we become more successful it will become a very big number,” said Tom Crotty, chief executive.
“Many leading chemical companies have European or global operations resident in Switzerland, and we need to compete effectively with them.”
The move is subject to an internal review and requires approval from two-thirds of lenders. Ineos said the savings would support future investment in skills, plants and technology, considered by the company to be critical to growth.
Although Britain has a relatively low corporate tax rate, it is significantly higher than Switzerland’s. Ineos would also have been hit by a 2008 cut in capital allowances as it returned to profitability.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0f823e50-272d-11df-b84e-00144feabdc0.html
286
Wow! hardly any point you coming on this site, you only read the, ‘I think Dave is wonderful’ ‘Wonderful I don’t think thats even begins to describe just how wonderful Dave is’ etc, etc,. Must make it a very boring site to visit.
287
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Just ‘cos Blair did it doesn’t let Ashcroft off the hook: this is gonna run-n-run.
281 - YouGov were doing the polling for Channel 4 News. Not sure where that contract stands, post tracker.
On the rather interesting point from the Sun poll that suggests 40% of Lib Dems could switch with much smaller numbers for the other parties.
I think it is because a sizeable proportion of Lib Dem voters know full well they are not voting for a potential government. If either of the other parties could present them a case that they felt drawn to, they would switch. Labour and Tory voters, on the other hand, know by switching from the main parties they are, in most cases, registering a protest and effectively abstaining.
Apart from long-standing Lib Dems, of whom I know a few, the main responses I hear when I ask people why they will be voting Lib Dem is ‘because I hate the others’. It’s not an overarching desire to either get rid of Gordon or to back Clegg into No10. The Lib Dems need a national break-through, as they aimed at against the Tories in the 1990s and they should be aiming at against Labour now, before they will be anything other than a bucket for protest votes.
I’m not really anti-Lib Dem. I consider voting for them, and have found their councillors, in many of the cases when I’ve had a Lib Dem councillor, to be excellent. But in a general election, most of their votes are there to be shot at if the potential government parties can persuade them they have a real case.
The Lib Dem vote share rose pretty much on a single issue last time. They had a real ‘we’re different’ narrative on Iraq and used it well. I’m struggling to see how they can move forward from the 2005 position in 2010.
Getting into the stable to flog the Ashcroft horse is not going to differentiate the party from Labour. They need to do this to limit the leak from this 40% figure.
253 Tim. Labour as represented on here by the obsessive Tim continue their long term policy of trying to hack off the branches (Hague and Osborne) in the hope it will eventually kill the tree (Cameron). I imagine the Tory leadership is perfectly aware of this cynical strategy and will duly ignore it.
291 - genuinely funny
But gabble, the two yougov polls have shown very little movement. Just with bullying brown, this story is irrelevant. People dont care. They all know political parties have to raise money. The choice is simple: tax people, or get rich people to do so. I know which id rather have! And, after this debacle from labour, if you think labour will continue to receive millions from the unions after the next election you can think again. If cameron wanted to, he could single handedly bankrupt the labour party after the next election by banning blanket donations/limiting donations to £50,000 and i hope he does. Then we’ll see who starts begging for non-doms to be allowed to donate money…
297. Yes I think the Lib Dems’ glaring lack of a distinctive theme is going to hurt them this time around.
Surely the Bulger story is the story that the general public is talking about today, not Ashcroft. It may even mean a lower poll rating for Labour in the tracker poll.
287 - I’m not sure I agree with that necessarily. It’s just good business practice to have a policy on routine destruction of out of date documents that are no longer required.
From Whelan’s twitter.
Lost more interest in marginals because of closing polls and cashcroft. Am told C4 news has an interesting poll tonight
Sorry if its been posted.
ICM are doing stuff for C4
Anyone listen to 5 live this morning at about 7:40?
Strange little segment on racism (against the English) in Scotland.
Seems even Nick C’s children have been victims…….
Seems to have attracted no comments at all from any of our Scottish posters?
Yep. The cover-up is THE story:
“Tory officials refused to co-operate with Ashcroft inquiry”
“The Tory party refused to allow any of its officers to be interviewed during an 18-month investigation into multimillion-pound donations from a company linked to Lord Ashcroft, it emerged today.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7049785.ece
286 - Most of us did that years ago.
293 - Not according to this article:
“The Finance Bill is briefly debated in the Lords but peers cannot amend it as the House of Lords has no power to amend bills dealing with public taxation. ”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/82147.stm
Arrgghh more bullsh1t from Twitter
295 - “Two wrongs don’t make a right. Just ‘cos Blair did it doesn’t let Ashcroft off the hook: this is gonna run-n-run.”
Two wrongs don’t make a right only applies if you have two wrongs.
Shredding documents which aren’t required to be kept is not wrong.
Why didn’t the tory party co-operate with the commission?
What are they hiding?
28 - good points Colin.
Labour really are not good for democracy (let alone the countries financial health), the quicker we consign this government to the scrapheap the better.
219
ROFLMAO
240
“Overall, hard to know whether it means anything much at all, but they’ve clearly put some effort into it.”
Much the same could have been said of the Maginot Line
290 - bet your house on that gabble. It could be good for the soul.
312
They did cooperate, you are so yesterday Gabble, listen to the news before putting foot in mouth.
312. Shergar?
236 Michael Branch
Some Tory supporters need to stop hammering on about the Pound.
I only half agree with your analysis.
“Hammering on about the pound” has been part badinage on here and part proper political comment. What Monday’s “panic sell” demonstrated was that market confidence in the UK is directly influenced by political expectations.
We have all heard Tory claims of Labour election victories damaging the pound in past elections: mostly these claims have been overstated. But in this election, the current state of the country’s finances and the absence of any firm plans to tackle the underlying structural problems from the political parties mean that the markets will be particularly sensitive to the 2010 election outcome. The Monday sell was an important shot across the bows which should not be neglected. The danger is clear and present.
I am also not convinced the Greek problem is “settling down”. The deficit reduction targets set by the Greek government in agreement with its Euro partners are unrealistic and unattainable even before we factor in the impact of social unrest and union opposition. The heat has been turned down but that has just delayed a return to boiling point. We are likely to be scalded again long before a May election.
On Q1 GDP figures and current growth, I am more inclined to agree with you here. There has been some good news overlooked in the MSM and on here that point to improving prospects: Tata Motor Group reporting increased sales and output for Landrover-Jaguar is but one example.
The key for the Tories is managing expectations. If the country is expecting a fall in GDP on April 23 and it turns out to be a 0.5-1.0% rise then Brown and Labour will definitely get an electoral boost. The Tories should be focussing on the performance of the economy relative to our competitors or other benchmarks. Hague’s comment at PMQs that it cost Britain twice as much to borrow money as PepsiCo and MacDonalds is a good example of how to drive the point home.
The biggest threat of all to the Conservatives is an austerity budget delivered by Darling that is well received by the markets, but which delays the additional pain for voters until after the election. Such a budget is now looking more rather than less likely. It is time for the Tories to spell out the long term prospects for the economy and explain in simple and clear terms what the impact will be for the average voter. In the interim, a campaign based on identifying “stealth cuts” would hammer the point home. These are the cuts to the public sector already being implemented but not announced in public: the ‘hidden costs of Labour’s failure’.
317: Ashcroft!!! He’s actually Lord Lucan…(its so clear now!)
39 - “Cor..labour will really stoop to any level to keep their grubby hands on power won’t they”
Come on, be fair they wouldn’t have opposition mp’s arrested would they?
oh……..
“The Tory party refused to allow any of its officers to be interviewed during an 18-month investigation into multimillion-pound donations from a company linked to Lord Ashcroft, it emerged today.”
Update. The Electoral Commission wrote to the Conservative Party requesting a meeting with Party officials. The Party responded asking if this was necessary and received no response. The Electoral Commission has accepted that this did happen, due to a misunderstanding and has agreed to amend the final report accordingly.
Gabble fail!
311
Really! you are of course assuming that the documents that were shredded, would not have shed any light on this matter, or perhaps more importantly would have.
If documents have been shredded, then people will think the worse, and thats that.
holster March 4th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Interesting post but difficult to read without gaps between paragraphs.
321 - that’s got to be the quickest Gabble fail of all time.
307 Gabble - Niall Patterson on Twitter
Tories say they didn’t “turn down” requests for interiew (Sic), merely asked if they were necessary. Tories say ElecComm didn’t then respond.
So no Cover up.
300 Both parties have been remarkably unsuccessful in leglislating on political funding. The Tories tried to get rid of union funding for Labour by imposing ballots on the existence of political funds in the confident expectation that union members would vote them out of existence. Only they didn’t. Then Labour tried to ban donations by dodgy foreigners (because it was widely believed in the 90s that the Tories were being funded by people who were not eligible to vote in the UK). And that didn’t work either.
Only two choices really - state funding or leave well alone. I would go for the former but I suspect that we will get the latter.
324 - Everything that gabble does is a fail.
TNS GB poll
http://www.tns-ri.co.uk/news/uk-press-office/news-article.aspx?id=8E2C4F76765E4553BB28F1558710EB04
Con 36% – of those 55% firm : 45% soft.
Lab 32% – of those 44% firm : 56% soft.
LD 21% – of those 38% firm : 62% soft.
Oth 12% – of those 49% firm : 51% soft.
Michelle Harrison, CEO of TNS-BMRB comments: “Parents with young children could become the battleground upon which this next election is won or lost. It is clear that education is high on the radar of all three key parties, but this may not be enough to engage this important group. The ‘elephant in the room’ when it comes to young families, especially young mums, is the role of the family and particularly mothers in the workplace. Issues such maternity/paternity pay, childcare vouchers etc, can divide opinion, but are also the topics that resonate in the mindsets of a lot of potential voters, many of which are still in the process of deciding how to use their vote. Taking a stand and creating polices in this area could be the difference between success at the polls and a failure to connect with UK families.”
318 - Seth.
I have to go out and do some tilling.
Will your assessment of Hagues odds to be next FS change if it is true that he kept Cameron in the dark about Ashcrofts tax status?
I will return
322 - Coldstone,
Lord Ashcroft retains all documents required for auditing, tax, or regulatory reason – and dumps the rest…!
Most reasonable people see it as a well run business initiative and basic common sense.
322: So documents which may or may not have said anything, may or may not imply something, and they would all have been shredded anyway…
so weak.
312 Keep it up, Gabble. I’m sure the voters will be extremely impressed by Labour attacking the Electoral Commission’s ruling.
Perhaps you should start a smear campaign against Jenny Watson. According to the EC website she’s a past Deputy Chairman of the Banking Code Standards Board. Maybe you should run with “Questions are being asked about links between bankers and the Electoral Commission, which, in a murky ruling dogged by controversy, recently ‘cleared’ Tory paymaster Lord Ashcroft of some of the complaints made against him.”
59 - “I wonder will the Ashcroft party be the largest single grouping in the HoC?”
nothing to say about Unite?
Nothing at all?
Typical
322 Shredded doesn’t normally come into the equation, so don’t think it will be the Bonfires like Whelan and Mcbride rather think recycled like any green company.
321. Colin
That confirms that there was no co-operation from the tory party.
Why? What were they trying to hide?
Tilling? Makes a change from turfing.
Could someone please explain to me why Lord Ashcroft should be required to be domiciled to be a peer, but this is not a requirement for Labour peers. I would really like to see some writs flying around, particularly in the direction of those MP’s who have shot their mouths off on camera. Parlimentary priviledge would not apply in those cases.
318.Seth. At last an interesting and important post to debate. I suggest Tories on here ignore Labour bot Gabble ( is he a single individual?) and mad obsessive Tim and don’t respond to the cut and pasted crap about Ashcroft. Concentrate on what really matters.
So Lord A and the party is cleared whilst the only crumb of comfort for Labour and the Gobbilite claque turns out to be incorrect. I doubt this is the last we will here but it is all starting to sound a bit desperate from them.
337 - maybe that’s coming next?
Timing could be interesting, especially during a GE campaign
335. Are you having trouble reading?
Furthermore, why is there no mention of Government funds going to the unions and then being donated to the Labour Party? It stinks!
332 - Jenny Watson of the Electoral Commission is a lefty: ex-Charter 88, Liberty, etc. Labour appointed her and probably thought she could be relied on to do a Suzy Leather.
335 - No they were asking a question you blinkered partisan f–kwit.
322 - “If documents have been shredded, then people will think the worse, and thats that.”
I shred documents on a weekly basis.
Are you suggesting that I, and the thousands (probably millions) of people and businesses who own and use shredders should stop doing this.
Are you going to donate all the storage space this will require?
I posted this elsewhere, but it seems relevent here:
I think that the bigger story is being missed here. Why was it that when Ashcroft went to the cabinet office, they suggested to him that he need only be ‘normally resident over the longer term’, and able to keep his non dom status.
The simple answer is that Labour were likely to face funding problems in the future which were to be plugged by those who they would most likely grant peerages. Lord Paul would not have wanted a peerage had he been forced to give up his non dom status- the cost would have been too high.
So quietly, the cabinet office were asked to relax the stipulation. When Brown came to power, he knew that he would always have the cabinet office file to use come the election, so he has used the pliant media to ramp up the story, then infomed the right person to apply under FOI for the cabinet office file, and finally has timed the disclosure as close as possible to calling the election. Adding to the injury, he is using the Labour dominated Administration comittee as a kangaroo court.
Why has the BBC not asked how Mittal, Paul and others who were enobled by Labour were allowed to keep their Non dom status? Why were none rejected due to their tax status as Aschroft originally was? If Labour are fundemetally opposed to Aschroft’s tax status, why did they enoble these people at all. How much money did it cost to buy Labour’s principles?
330
Really, shredding of documents only ever means one thing, (regardless) getting rid of unwelcome information.
306. I worked in Scotland during 2007 (when they voted SNP into the Scotish Government). My experience was that they were friendly hospitable, hardly anyone even mentioned I was English, and nobody was at all hostile.
322. “Most reasonable people see it as a well run business initiative and basic common sense.”
Indeed very few businesses retain more paperwork or other documents than they are required to. The field of document management is a very big business and companies like Oracle and IBM have made a lot of money selling computer systems to manage this onerous task.
344. xenon: “No they were asking a question you blinkered partisan f–kwit.”
No, they were trying to avoid giving evidence.
Why? What are they hiding?
cathynewman
tory sources: 3 tory members of Public Administration Committee to boycott Ashcroft investigation
lucymanning
3 tory mps on public admin cttee say not taking part in ashcroft investigation, say”political tactic motivated by narrow partisan interests”
347. No it doesnt, “unwelcome” is a very specific word chosen by yourself that doesnt even come close to reality.
Most people shred to get rid of uneeded info, I shred old bank statements so that the information on them cannot be stolen and used.
350. No they werent, and prove it rather then making bland statements of what you consider fact.
347: Lol coldstone, you’re just making a fool of yourself now.
You’re telling me, you still have a copy of every payslip, bank statement, phone bill, you’ve had over the last 40 years? I’d love to see your filing.
352: Excellent!! good for them…
351. “cathynewman - tory sources: 3 tory members of Public Administration Committee to boycott Ashcroft investigation”
The cover-up continues…
Gabble, Coldstone and all were very chipper about this earlier weren’t they.
Look at them now. It all seems to be falling apart for them really doesn’t it. Their whole case now seems to reply on people questioning why someone doesn’t keep every document they have ever had. It’s all a bit sad really.
347 – Coldstone, shredding of documents only ever means one thing, lack of storage space and/ or the prohibitive cost of storage.
You obviously have never run a business, either large or small.
355. They are all in piles of plastic bags in his front room, along with tins of food and bags of flour hoarded since 1974.
I hope Gordon doesn’t read this; he’ll probably think it’s a good idea
http://uk.travel.yahoo.com/p-promo-3311398
345
I’m sure that your need to shred documents, is both honest and necessary, but then you aren’t Ernst Stavro Ashcroft the Evil Baron of Belize at the centre of a media storm.
SthLondon - well that’s the Beeb for you. Anyway I said reject. Look up the text of the Parliament Act 1911 if you want the details
347. “Really, shredding of documents only ever means one thing, (regardless) getting rid of unwelcome information.”
You are utterly wrong.
350 - No they weren’t and as you seem to have a thing about people not hiding things. Care to tell us why you hide behind a pseudonym? Care to stop?
“Tories in disarray as Ashcroft row deepens”
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/legal-and-constitutional/tories-in-disarray-as-ashcroft-row-deepens-$1363580.htm
The Herd in denial.
“Labour’s Gordon Prentice said the public administration select committee had decided to hold a ‘’special one-off inquiry” on March 18.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/7367392/Lord-Ashcroft-to-be-called-before-MPs-over-peerage-controversy.html
Is Gordon Prentice bidding to be the UK’s answer to Senator Joe McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee?
Any odds on the first question being, “Are you now, or have you been a member of the Conservative Party”?
Aha - finally, three days after the story broke, found some people in “the real world” talking about the Ashcroft saga.
Looks like they’ve, er, not reacted in the way some on here would hope:
http://www.wfcforums.com/showthread.php?t=32672
363: Apparently we can still flog the Shetlands back to Norway for £240m…bargin i’d thought.
Talking of cynical political machinations…
MPs are now debating a series of proposals for Commons reform. Technically it’s a free vote. But Labour MPs have received an email from Tony Lloyd, the chairman of the parliamentary Labour party (PLP), with some “useful information” that they might want to consider when deciding how to vote.
Lloyd has told Labour MPs how Harriet Harman, the leader of the Commons, intends to vote. And he has revealed that she intends to vote against a plan to set up a backbench business committee – a potentially powerful body that would take control of the time allocated for private members’ bills and debate – immediately, before the start of the next election.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/mar/04/labour-mps-free-vote-commosn-reform-harman-lloyd
366. “Labour demand” nice.
strapworld, 47
“I do hope, sincerely, that Lord Ashcroft’s lawyers now take slander and where appropriate libel proceedings against all the Labour politicians who have suggested he has been less than honest etc. Also I do hope that the BBC and SKY political journalists and others are treated similarily.”
Tory respect for parliamentary democracy and press freedom on full display.
Unfortunate then that lawyers can’t win you elections…
Lib Dems threaten the future of Youtube
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7367386/YouTube-under-threat-from-Digital-Economy-Bill-changes.html
Can somebody explain why they are rising to the bait being spread by the tedious, pencil necked, old man Coldstone? I make a great deal of effort to scroll past his posts only to find others constantly referring to them.
They are nothing but troll bait and if ignored he will go away.
366: ‘As labour get more desperate’ it should read.
347 - “Really, shredding of documents only ever means one thing, (regardless) getting rid of unwelcome information.”
You do realise that typing that doesn’t make it true don’t you?
I shredded some old copy sales invoices and remittances at work the other day which are older than required. Can you explain to me what I’d find unwelcome about doing business for people and them paying me? I can’t see why that is unwelcome, but you do seem quite sure.
re my post at 367.
Actually, Lord Ashcroft should volunteer to appear before Prentice’s Star Chamber. On condition that Lord Paul, Sir Ronald Cohen, Bernie Ecclestone, Laksmi Mittal, Sir Gulam Noon, the Hinduja brothers etc, etc are all witnesses at the same session.
357 - so they should boycott it - this one off investigation is nothing more than a politcal stunt and will be no more than a kangaroo court to “try” Lord Ashcroft.It is a gross misuse and abuse of the Committee system.
373 - now that is something that will annoy people
374 - Sorry Don, I know I shouldn’t encourage them, but when they are on this form it’s hard to resist.
366 - you stupid bastard. That entire story is based on your already defunct premise that the Tories were somehow uncooperative with the EC. Now the EC have actually accepted the Tory version of events and will change their report accordingly, that story is totally out of date.
367 - small correction; McCarthy had nothing to do with the HUAAC, it being a House committee and him being a Senator. The leftie version of history has told us that it was all to do with him, however.
What these shenanigans show how little the Tories are prepared to trust the people. Thus parliament/the media must be silenced, their real outrage that their precious Money (source of their sense of the ‘right to rule’) will be ignored by an ungrateful/unworthy public.
Hopefully the same attitude will be reflected back at them.
318 Seth O L, Yesterday I watched a link from a Labourhome comment, about a 2nd wave of US mortgage collapses which is about to take off. From what it said, these debts were chopped & packaged in the same way as the sub-prime mortgages.
Have you heard about this? Do you know whether this is also going to impact on the banking system, or whether it will be confined to the US?
I can understand why left wingers are suspicious of destroying documents;
1. they don’t run businesses.
2. they remember Blair’s Parliamentary expense claims.
And guess who pops up putting his feet straight in it:
Liberal Democrat frontbencher Chris Huhne said it was “extraordinary” that Conservative officials “should refuse a meeting to answer questions from the regulator designed to ensure funding is open and honest”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8549243.stm
Immediately I heard about this commitee kangaroo court I said the tory members shouldn’t take part. Glad to see this is what they are going to do.
This is pure Gordon. Find a dividing line. Go on and on about it. In the internet age, this includes getting a bunkerbot to spam popular websites like this one. Tedious.
306.”Strange little segment on racism (against the English) in Scotland.
Seems even Nick C’s children have been victims…….”
I noted a similar experience in Devon a few years while on holiday when a couple of men realised we were Scottish, the anti Scottish rant was carried out in front of my children and nephew.
New poll out showing 4% Tory lead so says Anthony Wells’ site, no confirmation. Pollster unknown?
385. What an idiotic rent-a-mouth Huhne has become
378 - why don’t they just give their verdict now, I’m sure they have it all ready to roll. Labour have debased politics in this country aided and abetted by the MSM. Anyone would think that the economy was fine and there were no more pressing problems in the country and that tax payers money could be put to better use.
Joe McCarthy alive and well in the Labour party?
Who would have thunk it?
Is Gabble on of Joe’s ‘patriotic investigators’?
390 - could be = couldn’t be
385 - Huhne is on the editorial board of Total Politics Magazine which is 25% owned by a certain peer.
381. The Raven: “Now the EC have actually accepted the Tory version of events…”
The ‘tory version of events’ is made up of the no-show tory officials and Ashcroft’s selection of ’shredded’ documents, neither of which the EC have been able to examine.
Cameron is looking increasingly dishonest.
388:Probably this one
http://www.tnsglobal.com/news/news-8E2C4F76765E4553BB28F1558710EB04.aspx
Nothing to get overly excited about due to the lack of prior polls and the ‘unique’ methology and weighting.
391 - “Is Gabble on of Joe’s ‘patriotic investigators’?”
Right now, looks like he’s on an 8-ball
Have the Lib Dems just thrown away the student vote with their idiotic copyright amendment?
367.”“Labour’s Gordon Prentice said the public administration select committee had decided to hold a ‘’special one-off inquiry” on March 18.””
Oh dear, I think that will rebound on them in a very negative way. This vendetta is now getting out of hand, and I hope they have very carefully considered their actions rather than resorted to a knee jerk reaction to the findings of today’s EC report.
Mind you Labour are on a loser with one day ‘investigation’. Wasting time when they should be doing something about the hemorrhaging jobs situation and the weakness of the UK’s credit rating.
But as usual they are only concerned with clinging on to the perks and power.
Much of this week has been about drowning out the bad news for Labour on the economy. And the mindless fellow travelers in the media are helping them.
coldstone should you ever come into this hospital shall I just put your personal details in the bin for any one to find?
What an utterly stupid comment.
395. “Nothing to get overly excited about due to the lack of prior polls and the ‘unique’ methodology and weighting.”
Pity. So we can safely file it in the ‘Angus Reid’ category, then?
The Lib Dem lord (Lord Clement-Jones) who introduced the amendment gets £70000 from DLA Piper, an “intellectual property” law firm which stands to massively benefit from the new law
http://richardwilsonauthor.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/when-disputes-arise-your-commercial-objectives-are-our-main-concern-whose-interests-does-lib-dem-lord-clement-jones-really-represent/
And what time is Gordon appearing at Chilcot tomorrow? lol.
394. And again you dont asnwer questions, then spin the lines that have been pointed out as bullshit several times again and again.
I have said earlier in this thread that the Tories have questions to answer, I still think that but the points you are making are pathetic and borderline lies.
The House Committee for UnLabour Activities?
395.
“TNS-BMRB surveyed 1,954 GB adults aged 18+ via face-to-face interviews in respondents’ homes from 18th to 24th February 2010″
So people who work unlikely to have been polled.
398 - There is about zero chance that they are carefully considering anything. Labour have decided that Ashcroft is guilty and they will just keep looking for the body tat will accord with their distorted opinion. Frankly I wish people out there were tuned in because this affair says more about the Labour and Lib Dem’s than it does about anyone else.
394 - the issue of whether the donations were legal is not in doubt Gabbie - the reason why the EC wants to meet with officials from the Conservative Party is due to how rigorous were the checks on the donations.
402 - cash for laws ? I thought they were stamping down on that in the Lords.
Huhne gets the phrase ‘criminal suspect’ into Sky interview, he rally is a creep.
406. “So people who work unlikely to have been polled.”
I dare say it may have occurred to them to visit on evenings or weekends to tackle that problem.
TNS-BMRB (part of the huge Taylor Nelson Sofres group of marketing companies) is a member of the British Polling Council.
They do not weight by past-vote in their Scottish polls. Dunno about this Great Britain poll.
366 from your link: “In a separate move, the Lib Dems are demanding HM Revenue and Customs investigate whether the commitment to ‘permanent residence’ is compatible with Lord Ashcroft’s non-dom status.”
Now, this is where the LibDems are getting REALLY silly. Ashcroft committed to ‘Long term residence’ - NOT permanent(a logical impossibility since none of us can foretell the future) - and that, among other reasons, is allowable for non-Dom status where ‘permanent’ make it much more difficult.
Though Hans Rausing, Swedish scion of the inventor of the Tetrapak and part-heir to his fortune seems to manage both permanency and non-dom status.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Rausing
Note: “He moved to England in the 1980’s for tax purposes.”
“All-in” : Obama shoves all his political capital into the HCR political game
…He ran for president on a promise to tackle the nation’s most challenging problems–and, since winning election, he’s gleefully defied those who warned him he was trying to do too much. On Wednesday, he made clear that he hasn’t changed his mind about that:
“At stake right now is not just our ability to solve this problem, but our ability to solve any problem. The American people want to know if it’s still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future. They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I do not know how this plays politically, but I know it’s right.”
…Obama on Wednesday committed himself more fully to comprehensive reform than he has at any time since this effort started–rejecting incremental reforms explicitly, refusing Republican calls to start over, and demanding an up-or-down vote on his proposal.
…Will it work? Who knows. The next few weeks will be excruciating, as Obama works with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to build the 216-vote majority necessary to pass the Senate bill through the House. It’d be foolish to bet against the two of them. (Pelosi has been, if anything, even more determined than Obama.) Wavering members have every reason to hold out for maximum leverage, which means most won’t commit until absolutely necessary.
Public support would obviously help–a lot. And Obama made a specific plea for it on Wednesday:
“I will do everything in my power to make the case for reform. And I urge every American who wants this reform to make their voice heard as well–every family, every business, every patient, every doctor, every nurse, every physician’s assistant. Make your voice heard.”
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/all
I bought 222 contracts at an average of 52% chance today.
387 ChristinaD
Well said. These incidents are nothing to do with politics, but about a small % of appalling people that are found everywhere.
Members of the BPC:
http://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/officers.html
Note: Chris Eynon, TNS System 3 (their old name, before Taylor Nelson Sofres bought BMRB’s parent company)
Coldstone, re your post at 347 and mine at 376.
I’m still waiting to hear what I find so unwelcome about people paying me. I’m starting to get a bit worried about it to be honest. I always thought it was a good thing, but you seem so sure about what you are saying that now I’m not so sure.
Can you let me know soon please.
402. Politics for sale once again. No wonder the Lib Dems are so keen on the EU, where grubby deals between firms and ‘regulators’ to boost the commercial interests of the former (or both) are endemic.
The tories have got off, for now, on a technicality ie. lack of evidence.
Why was there a lack of evidence?
Because the sleazy tories failed to supply it.
Oh, FFS!!!!
MPs to get 1.5% pay rise
Proposals to increase MPs’ £64,766 salaries set to reignite public anger over expenses
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/04/mps-to-get-1-5-pay-rise
Meanwhile problems mount for “Honest” David Cameron & William Hague
From Sky News
David Cameron found out that Lord Ashcroft was a “non-dom” within the last month, according to a member of his Shadow Cabinet.
Liam Fox told Five News’ political editor Andy Bell: “I understand David Cameron knew within the last month about the non-dom issue.”
Huhne pops up again.
Huhne, Prentice and Mann.
With those three on the case, it’s like Gabble and Tim are the A(shcroft)-Team.
418. Innocent until proven guilty Gabs.
“30.On topic. It will remain a problem as long as Ashcroft remains in post therefore he should go.”
Possibly very bad move imo given how mental ZNL get over Ashcroft. I’d say there’s a fair chance of an eventual negative reaction to how purple-faced they get over it. Also if ZNL keep banging on enough to get people to care about non-dom donaters then they’ll also start to pay attention about Lord Paul etc and more importantly el Torees can re-open cash for honours along the lines of was it actually cash for honours or cash for government policy with honours used as a kind of camouflage.
418. Good Lord, have you just given up posting sensibly?
418 - truly dreadful smear Gabbie - the EC was quite clear that the donations were legal - they in no way said that their decision on that had been hindered by lack of evidence.
401 - ah, it’s popular left-wing blogger James Kelly. Tell us, James why do you post lies about PB on your blog?
“a simple ‘hello’ tends to be greeted with a “why do you always have to be such a w****r, James?” from the usual suspects.”
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2010/03/david-brent-is-cybertory.html
You don’t say a simple hello - you post low-grade insults and now you’re telling whining lies because some people criticise you.
8. I think you will find, John, that the Czechoslovakia, though liberated by the Red Army in 1945, from the Nazis, (and some US forces that were forced to withdraw)
The Government which was formed was a coalition of parties and was usurped by a Soviet KGB inspired coup d’etat in 1948.
BBC - Gerry Adams’ brother Liam hands himself in to police
“Conservative Party ‘refused to allow interviews during Lord Ashcroft investigation’”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/7368915/Conservative-Party-refused-to-allow-interviews-during-Lord-Ashcroft-investigation.html
Truly desperate stuff from the leftoids - the last bullet in the gun has been fired and its missed the target.
I expect politics to get even grubbier from here to the election - can’t say its going to be an edifying spectacle.
426. Colin! I’m touched! Thanks for posting the link - modesty forbade me and all that.
You’ll just have to point out for me where the ‘lies’ are? Didn’t quite spot them.
423: “non-dom donaters ”
IO don’t know who first came up with the term ‘donaters’ but it’s been excessively present over the past few days.
Please, people, there’s already a perfectly good English word for what is meant: ‘donors’.
418 Bloody hell now “Gabble” is whingeing about the referee. You really are desperate to stop this non-issue for 98% of the population from going down the plughole.
I would like to Hat tip MrNed on Guido who sums it up quite nicely. Compare and contarst with Labour members in precisely the same situation
76Mr Ned says:
March 4, 2010 at 8:28 am
Ashcroft has paid every penny that the law requires him to pay. He has also NOT claimed tax-payer’s money for attending the house of Lords, unlike the labour Nom Dom Lords who are only to willing to trough at everyone else’s expense and rip off their own worker’s pensions.
VERY Future fair for all. NOT!
What Lord Ashcroft has done is put his own money where his mouth is in creating crimestoppers to cut crime, in buying VCs to put on display for free for the good of the nation out of respect for the fallen and he directly contributes, with his own money, for the good of this nation. He has donated more money to good courses than would have been taken in tax, and therefore has seen that the money has been better spent than if it had been voluntarily donated to the treasury.
We need a thousand Ashcrofts!
Weren’t TNS formerly Llansantffraid?
398: It’s looking like Labour and their friends in the media are overplaying this.
What a birthday for Lord Ashcroft and it will not go away
From Times Online
The intervention by Lord Turnbull, former head of the Civil Service, in which he accused Mr Hague of failing to ensure Lord Ashcroft honoured his commitments, was devastating and cannot be shrugged off. Now we learn that Mr Cameron has known for the past month. There will be obvious questions on why he and Mr Hague remained silent about the affair until Lord Ashcroft came clean.
Whether the Public Administration Committee manages to fulfil its wish to get Lord Ashcroft in front of it looks doubtful. It has the power to send for “persons and papers” but the chances of the peer being available on the one day set aside for the investigation look slim and Conservative MPs have already dismissed it as a political move.
But this does not yet look like an issue that Labour and, more importantly, the newspapers are prepared to let go.
429. Gabble - you should read the article.
A spokesman said: “We absolutely refute this. In January, after 18 months of investigations and in the run up to a general election, the Electoral Commission asked to speak to seven party officials for up to three hours each.
“Understandably, we simply wanted to clarify whether these interviews were necessary or reasonable. We wrote back politely saying ‘does this need to happen’ and we have heard nothing back. This is not refusing to co-operate on any possible definition of the term.”
416 - It’s OK Coldstone, you don’t need to bother now.
I decided to speak to my accountant instead. I told him what you’d said about shredding and it appears you’re talking rubbish.
“And nobody in the Tory high command today, many of whom are furious with the predicament the donor has landed them in, believes that the commission’s report is the end of the tale. They are well aware that the Sunday newspapers are working on their takes of the affair.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7049886.ece
435 “They’ll be dancing in the streets of Total Network Solutions tonight!”
423 - this week, Labour had the chance to go for either Cameron after his speech on Sunday or Lord Ashcroft a day later.
Their choice was very telling.
He’ll be kept on as a flypaper - he has the clout to hit down anyone who steps over the mark, and detract attention as and when required.
Huhne is rapidly going to the top of my ‘people I want to lose their seat’, along with Balls.
402. Not just an IP law firm, it’s the world’s biggest law firm.
Lord Ashcroft is a thoroughly decent man. There aren’t many Lords of the realm if any, that have contributed so much to society as he! He has not taken a single penny in expenses for turning up at the House of Lords debates, unlike some of the greedy troughing MP’s, who are making a song and dance about his affairs.. All these allegations are idle tittle tattle and nonsense from a bunch of hypocrites!
- Taylor Nelson Sofres is a leading market research and market information group. Formerly listed on the London Stock Exchange and a constituent of the FTSE 250 Index, the firm was acquired by WPP Group in October 2008 for 1.6 billion pounds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Nelson_Sofres
I got it the wrong way round I think. I think that BMRB was a WPP subsidiary, so when WPP bought TNS, they merged the Scottish firm TNS System 3 and England-based BMRB (short for British Market Research Bureau) to become TNS-BMRB.
I think that the new company may be based in Scotland.
328
So counting “firm” voters only (analogous to certain to vote??) gives
Con: 41.1%
Lab: 29.3%
LD: 17.4%
Oth: 12.2%
Make of that what you will.
428. When will his brother follow suit, I wonder?
430 Ghost of Harry
I owuldn’t neccessarily say that the Lefties are behind this so called scandal. Rather its a case of a story coming to light and mandelson milking it for political purposes. Fair enough in my view, all’s fair in love and war.
However i don’t think the Tories should be so exorcised about this because it’s a waste of emotional resources. Once that election is called, people WILL start to focus on the real issues, and quite literally everything from the last 2 or 3 months will be seen as froth and bubble.
I mean lets be serious about this, all these questions about bullying in No10. As if those issues even register at all on the scale of importance against the economy, the Afghan war or anything at all, is just laughable.
For me, i’m still pretty certain that Labour will end up the largest party in a hung parliament.
Gabble is in danger of burning out I fear.
Pace yourself man - we want to be able to laugh at you all the way up to election day…
447. Big Tory win, I would have thought.
This is the head of the Electoral Commission:
“They did provide us with a substantial amount of documentation, and I think people should be reassured that we have looked very carefully and thoroughly at the evidence before us and this is the conclusion we have come to.”
From the Telegraph article Gabble linked-to.
In the end, it comes down to “Ashcroft investigated. Ashcroft cleared.” Unless something really substantial comes up in the Sundays, this is a dead story.
447. Jon C. Quite interesting I think and might explain why Labour dodged an “early” election.
It’s important for Labour that Hague and Ashcroft stay in place, stinking up the tory leadership and the marginal constituencies.
447. “So counting “firm” voters only (analogous to certain to vote??) gives
Con: 41.1%
Lab: 29.3%
LD: 17.4%
Oth: 12.2%”
I think we’re about to discover it was scrupulously well-conducted, and almost certainly more authoritative than YouGov, ComRes and Mori.
328 If the percentages are re-evaluated to reflect ‘firm’ voting intentions only, the split becomes:
Con 41.4%
Lab 29.5%
LD 16.7%
Others 12.3%
A 12% lead for the Conservatives.
449. Are you saying Gordon has a raft of innovative new policies he’s not talking about until the manifesto is released ?
I wait with baited breath.
This story has got so entangled with who said what when etc. that it is easy to lose sight of what Ashcroft is actually accused of doing wrong.
As far as I see it, he has been legitimately giving money to the Conservative Party. The Electoral Commission agree, so nothing wrong there. Understandably Labour MPs and activists don’t like this as he has given a lot ofmoney and it has been targeted at vulnerable Labour seats, but it is perfectly above board.
Ashcroft is a non-dom and has given money to the Conservatives. There is a significant argument to be had over whether people who are not full UK taxpayers should be able to give money and sit in the Lords, but all parties have accepted donations from non-doms so Ashcroft is no more egregious than anyone else on this point.
Ashcroft was made a peer on the basis of certain undertakings on his tax status. He cleared his status with the Cabinet Office and other relevant authorities but NOT with the Conservatives or with the media/Labour Party/public. This seems to be the only really reprehensible thing Ashcroft has done: that he allowed one impression to go out about his status when it was actually different. However, there is nothing illegal about this or indeed improper. He complied with what the authorities wanted and decided to ignore everyone else. Rather foolish politically and it has made life difficult for Cameron and Hague but it is not a hanging offence.
What I would like to know is what Labour leaning posters think Ashcroft has done so wrong? What is the nub of the allegations against him as far as you are concerned?
Ms Watson defended The Electoral Commission’s decision to publish only a summary of their investigation into the donations of Bearwood Corporate Services, Lord Ashcroft’s firm, to the Conservative party, and said “no further legal action” would be taken.
“We put into the public domain what I think people will agree is a very full summary,” Ms Watson said. “It would be unusual for an organisation to put a full investigation into the public domain.”
Ms Watson denied suggestions that the investigation was incomplete, saying “there is no further legal action to be taken.”
“We must conclude now with this conclusion of our investigation,” she said.
With regard to the investigation, she said the Conservatives supplied the commission with a “very substantial amount of documents,” but that not every interview the commission had wanted to conduct took place.
“We were disappointed that we couldn’t agree with the party to interview a number of staff but I would say the party provided us with a substantial amount of information.”
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/6256/no_further_legal_action_to_be_taken_with_tories_says_commission_chair.html
458 - “What I would like to know is what Labour leaning posters think Ashcroft has done so wrong?”
He’s rich and he’s a Tory.
Cased closed, your honour
460. He didn’t claim a penny on expenses making the rest of the troughers look bad ? Send him down..
455 - “I think we’re about to discover it was scrupulously well-conducted, and almost certainly more authoritative than YouGov, ComRes and Mori.”
LOL
That said though, perhaps we also ought to look at certainty to vote more closely.
455 James Kelly
Re TNS methodology
IIRC studies suggested that face to face polling has advantages in a number of aspects of polling, though for political polling it tends to exaggerate support for the largest parties - hence their overstatement of both SNP and Lab in 2007.
457 Ghost of Harry
No not at all. In fact i don’t think that there are any new policies, at least not ones which haven’t been alluded to already.
No i just think that this Tory lead will melt away. So much of the Tory lead was anger directed at Gordon Brown and his crew for denying people a general election in 2007. But once that election gets called, a lot of the hostility towards Gordon Brown will dissappear.
The Tories had better be ready with a trump card such as their IHT announcement in 2007 to shore up their polling, otherwise it will just vanish.
I find it strange that Sky News seem to be more anti-Tory Pro-labour than the BBC. BBC now has the headline Ashcroft cleared. While Sky is still going on about him being a non-dom.
420 David Cameron found out that Lord Ashcroft was a “non-dom” within the last month,
I am beginning to find the whole cAshcroft issue more than a little tedious; however if this is true then it adds to the impression that the Tory high command did not handle this well - are we really supposed to believe that Cameron had never asked about Ashcroft’s tax status until last month??? Lacks credibility IMO.
456. James Kelly - “I think we’re about to discover it was scrupulously well-conducted, and almost certainly more authoritative than YouGov, ComRes and Mori.”
Indeed!
456/457
Look how prescient James Kelly was!! Quite uncanny.
466. Considering your party was subject to a criminal investigation in relation to Cash for Honours, I can understand you cynicism.
455: The polling was done betwixt 18 to 24 February.
“So much of the Tory lead was anger directed at Gordon Brown and his crew for denying people a general election in 2007″
I’d say it was anger at trashing the economy.
460. One does rather suspect that, but I am hoping that our Labour friends might be able to come up with something substantial. As far as I can, the worst that can be said is that Ashcroft showed an understanable but perhaps excessive concern for his privacy and that the Conservatives, Hague in particular, demonstrated naivety and incuriosity.
The Labour party has loads of non-dom donors if i was the Telegraph I would do a big expose on Lord Paul.
464 - that assumes that Gordon Brown/Labour makes no cock-ups whatsoever and DC/Tories make gaffe after gaffe (proper ones too).
Still of the belief that the narrowed poll leads are down to exposure, differing levels thereof.
So Gabble
Lord Ascroft has sat over 293 times over the last 3 years and claimed no expenses.
Lord Paul 275 times and has trousered £270,000 of expenses.
Hmmmm
Which one of those has also donated large sums of money to Help for Heroes?
You know the charity that was formed because this govt wouldnt put the money in to refurb the swimming pool at Headley Court.
They in the end were shamed into it.
Your “non-story” supported by Pravda is going down the pan.
Bring on Chilcot and stop trying to get this to run into tomorrow to take the spotlight off GB.
460: “He’s rich and he’s a Tory.
Cased closed, your honour”
Exactly. And it’s taken three days and umpteen posts to deliver the verdict that Labour have had sewn into the linings of their jackets since 2000.
“Lord Ashcroft: the questions the Tories refuse to answer”
“1. William Hague has now confirmed that he has known about Lord Ashcroft’s tax status for a “few months”. When exactly did he discover your party’s deputy chairman was a non-dom?
2. Why did Mr Hague not immediately publicly clarify Lord Ashcroft’s status which both he and the peer had previously pledged would be that of a permanent UK resident?
3. Did he immediately tell David Cameron about Lord Ashcroft’s true status? If not, why not?
4. Why did Mr Hague take more than nine years to establish Lord Ashcroft’s status when he had personally offered written assurances to both Tony Blair and the honours committee that Ashcroft would become a permanent UK resident and pay “tens of millions a year” in tax as a condition for receiving the peerage?
5. Why did Mr Cameron not establish Lord Ashcroft’s true status until more than four years after becoming party leader?”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/mar/03/lord-ashcroft-questions
“454.It’s important for Labour that Hague and Ashcroft stay in place, stinking up the tory leadership and the marginal constituencies.”
Tories need to hold their nerve i think. If the Ashcroft story can be made to force people to care about non-dom *donors* then it gives them a great opportunity to open up a big can of ZNL worms that the punters wouldn’t normally pay attention too under normal circumstances.
Possibly even worthwhile trying to crank it up a bit by defending Ashcroft primarily on crimestoppers / charity / VC grounds - see if that winds them up to producing ever darker shades of purple outrage which can then be flipped onto cash for honours etc if it looks like the public are taking notice.
477 gabble
the headlines in my local papers are all about:
- council tax increases
- council job cuts
- job losses in industry
Not surprising you wish to stay off Labour’s record
471 Harry
Negative. If you remember, Gordon Brown’s poll rating plumetted straight after he cancelled the election, and that was at least 2 months before the financial meltdown had begun.
Granted some experts say it started in August 2007, but at that stage it was just a ripple, and no-one knew what was coming.
So Gordon Brown’s travails are purely political. Plus of course these economic tsunamis we’ve faced have been so severe, i’m not sure if the general public will really feel safe being run by a government made up of the well-heeled.
Whatever happens, this election is going to be a sociologists/psychologists dream.
478
There’s no need to ‘hold nerves’. He’s been cleared. It’s over. If Labour and their mates the Lib Dems go on about it they will look a bit obsessed and questions start to be asked about their nom doms.
Who prevented tory officials from co-operating with the EC?
Cameron?
Hague?
Ashcroft?
477 - The horse you’re flogging died a while ago and is now starting to decompose.
Gordon Brown will make a long-awaited appearance before the Iraq inquiry on Friday, giving the first full account of his role in a deeply unpopular conflict that he defended and funded but never fervently advocated.
Sitting in a cramped inquiry room within yards of bereaved families and within weeks of a general election, Mr Brown will be asked if he has any regrets over toppling Saddam Hussein. The moment will be more political theatre than fact finding.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fed383a0-27a1-11df-b0f1-00144feabdc0.html
481-Its the BBC who dont want to let it go.
Toenails looked as though he was about to cry when he realised there was now very little to go on.
Bring on Chilcot.
477. Gabble, why should they answer those questions? What is the allegation behind them? What do you, or the Guardian, think Ashcroft, Hague or Cameron did wrong/illegally?
481 “There’s no need to ‘hold nerves’.”
Could have fooled me.
458 - “What I would like to know is what Labour leaning posters think Ashcroft has done so wrong? ”
They don’t seem to agree with his policy regarding storage of documents.
477: Those who this sort of thing matters to have made up their minds either way, and the vast bulk of the population will hear he’s been cleared and ignore the bubble nonsense.
Mike,has Lord Ashcroft ever approached pbc to invest in ??
Political Investments Limited (PiL) is the holding company for Lord Ashcroft’s investments in politically focussed companies. Under this umbrella Lord Ashcroft holds stakes in the magazine Total Politics, Total Politics Book Publishing, PoliticsHome.com, ConservativeHome.com and the FreeHerald.com.
480. Actually Northern Rock was before the cancelled election. I would have thought that this was more than a ripple in the public’s mind.
482-The EC prevented the Tory party cooperating as they didnt respond to the Conservatives request.
The EC have agreed to amend their report to reflect this.
Game over Gabble give it a rest.
478 – The Left wing attacks on Lord Ashcroft prove it was not based on any principles or on moral grounds, if it was they would be asking the same questions of Labour supporting non-doms.
Lord Paul – £69,250 in donations to Labour, including £45,000 to Gordon Brown’s leadership campaign. A close friend of Gordon Brown and appointed to the Privy Council last summer.
Lakshmi Mittal - £4.125 million in donations to Labour.
Sir Ronald Cohen - £2.55 million in donations to Labour. Cohen was appointed chair of the Social Investment Taskforce, which was announced by the then Chancellor, Gordon Brown.
Sir Christopher Ondaatje - £1.7 million in donations to Labour.
Sir Gulam Noon - £532,826 in donations to Labour.
William Bollinger - £510,725 in donations to Labour.
Mahmoud Khayami - £985,000 in donations to Labour including £5,000 to Hazel Blears’ deputy leadership campaign.
Dr David Potter - £90,000 in a donation to Labour.
Perhaps the BBC might care to ask some questions on the subject ?
Gabble - more smears than a VD clinic.
482 - Pitiful.
Have you not even had the courtesy to read post 321
“Update. The Electoral Commission wrote to the Conservative Party requesting a meeting with Party officials. The Party responded asking if this was necessary and received no response. The Electoral Commission has accepted that this did happen, due to a misunderstanding and has agreed to amend the final report accordingly.”
But then you are Gabble, the loathsome lying toad who still defends the smearers of Dr. David Kelly.
483. Indeed, it’s a veritable Eohippus
482 - “Who prevented tory officials from co-operating with the EC?”
The EC, by not responding to the Conservatives question.
Someone earlier said that they have confirmed this is the case.
383 AnneJGP
2nd wave of US mortgage collapses which is about to take off. From what it said, these debts were chopped & packaged in the same way as the sub-prime mortgages.
You are referring to the banking sector’s exposure to commercial property lending. There is a widespread belief that commercial property is overvalued and is due for a large corrective fall in market prices.
Banks that have lent against the security of pre-correction values will find that their loans have become ‘impaired’ or ‘toxic’. This is the same process that caused lending against the pre-crash values of residential property to become toxic.
The difference now is that bank balance sheets have been shored up by injection of capital principally from taxpayers. This has been followed by the ’stress-testing’ bank balance sheets by regulatory authorities, which essentially means testing the capacity of the banks to absorb possible future losses. Because a collapse in commercial property prices has been widely forecast, the stress tests should have covered for anticipated losses.
So yes, a collapse in the Commercial Property market is a risk. If, or when, it happens it will depress growth and pollute other asset prices (eg equities) but it should not, if the regulators and the banks have done their job properly, result in catastrophic banking sector collapse. That’s the official line!
477 I really can’t be bothered this time; these questions are even more ridiculous than the last lot.
The bigger question is why Labour’s media effort has gone off the rails so much in the last two weeks. They gave legs unnecessarily to Bullygate, although in the end managed to deflect it with a vicious campaign of character assassination. This week they’ve gone bonkers on the Ashcroft non-story, even managing to bury the one good point they had under a stinking heap of randomly-thrown mud.
Has something changed? They were doing very well earlier this year.
469 Cash for honours investigation covered both parties - Michael Howard was also interviewed.
The Times in particular does not seem to want to let Ashcroft drop - are there issues between him and Murdoch? P Webster has quite a hostile piece on the website which suggests that the Sundays are digging deeper - looks like we haven’t seen the last of this yet.
472 and others - the trouble is, this has been going on for a good few days now with no smoking gun. Plenty of innuendo, but the only substancial thing is Ashcroft getting cleared.
Even if something did pop up on the radar on Sunday, who would really care?
Must say, I’ve had a real eyeopener into the minds of those who lean towards Labour this past few days.
McShane’s on the Total Politics board.
Gabble works for Lord Ashcroft!
R5 - Brown to meet dead soldiers families at Chilcot : IN PRIVATE.
Is the Civil Service strike originally planned for early next week still going ahead?
On a totally different matter, call me Mr Cynical Conspiracist, but how do we KNOW that one of the Bulger killers has been returned to jail and how will we EVER know, if his anonymity is going to continue to be protected?
BBC still leading with Ashcroft story, there playing it for all its worth - unbelieveable. I’ve already complained to the BBC twice this week.
Now Chris Huhne is on - arggh!
Now Harriet Harman is on - arggh!
478.
‘Possibly even worthwhile trying to crank it up a bit by defending Ashcroft primarily on crimestoppers / charity / VC grounds’
I agree. In a contest between a guy who did that and claimed no expenses and one who claimed 270,000, its no contest.
482 Gabble. Smearing. Desperate.
Note: Gaby Hinscliffe complimantary about the impartiality of Ashcroft’s site on this issue.
500: This goes a long way to explain it, and why the Times is leading the charge..
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/03/times-columnist-ashcroft-gove
499. Richard Nabavi: “I really can’t be bothered this time”
Fact is, you have no answers that wouldn’t admit guilt.
116 Gin
something else you might like to know about Lord Ashcroft
—————————————-
Today the Michael Ashcroft Trust, which was established to care for and protect the VC collection, now owns 152 Victoria Crosses, just over a tenth of the 1356 VCs that have been awarded to individuals since 1856. It is by far the largest collection of Victoria Crosses in the world. The trust has plans to open its collection to the public when a suitable location can be found
————————————————–
This guy is a top guy and protects the nations heritage for future generations unlike…. well you get the picture
Labour truly are the ‘very nasty party’
http://www.victoriacross.org.uk/vvashcro.htm
497 Indeed thay have issues a statement saying they got a high level of co operation.
Now remind me what Yates of the Yard said about co operation from Downing Street!!!!! Or lack thereof.
Still no sign of a budget date. Looking at 2001-9, the announcement of the date has been 21, 62, 35, 47, 21, 34, 27, 41 and 69 days in advance. (The years with 21 days’ notice were 2001 and 2005, election years.)
Consider that (a) Alistair has said the budget will be in March, (b) it’s now 4th March, (c) they’re now usually on Wednesdays, and (d) the media, accountancy firms, etc., need some notice of the date to gear themselves up. Does that point to 31st March as budget day ?
That would leave about five days for the finance bill before dissolution for a 6 May election.
Breaking News !!!
Gordon Brown is now not to appear before Chilcot-PMQ’s tomorrow but instead Mickey Ashcroft will stand in for Gordon (he’s at a wedding) and he will instead confront Chris Huhne and ‘McShane’ reading out red team blogposts to his face.
Non-dom, non-story.
Budget anyone?
507 slackbladder you can read Ashcroft’s book on the Times and New Labour’s vendetta against him in his book, he won. They won’t forgive that.
http://www.lordashcroft.com/pdf/DirtyPoliticsDirtyTimes.pdf
508 Gabble. You beginning to sound like some sort of fascist.
511. If they have a similar Ester recess as last year, they will be going on their Easter hols on 25th March.
511: Won’t work. You’re forgetting about Easter, Good Friday is on 2nd April.
Which means the likely day for the budget is actually 17th March…
tick tock…
For all those of you who have been begging for reasons why people should vote Labour, labourlist have done it for you.
http://www.labourlist.org/why-vote-labour-rachel-reeves
The comments are very revealing.
508 Gabble - Hilarious! What guilt do you think I might be admitting to by failing to suggest answers to five fatuous questions from a Labour-supporting newspaper?
More to the point, do you know whether there has been a change of personnel in Labour’s media operation to explain why it has got so much worse recently? It’s a genuine question - there has been a marked deterioration.
500 “Cash for honours investigation covered both parties”
But the governing party is the one in a position to change policy to suit donors.
Instead of trying to shut this down i think the Tories should try and play this up somehow (if they can think of a good way). I used to do a lot of judo and judo’s all about using the other bod’s weight against them - using their attack to flip em. For some reason Ashcroft is like a red rag to bull to ZNL - got to be some way of using that for fun and frolics.
477. Gabble.
Now correct me if I am wrong but Gordon Brown was Chancellor of the exchequer from 1997 to 20o7 and then until now he has been Prime Minister - the manager of the current Chancellor of Exchequer.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer is in charge of the HMRC.
Now presumably HMRC knew what Lord Ashcroft’s tax status was. Therefore please explain why Gordon Brown or Alistair Darling has not exposed the heinous demon Ashcroft? After all they’ve only had access to his tax information for 13 years.
Or indeed did Brown make enquiries and has been covering it up for part or all of that period?
Is there a market for date of budget anywhere?
My money would be on the first wednesday after return from Easter recess, as it was last year. This would, of course, rule out a May 6th election.
480. Alanbrooke - “the headlines in my local papers are all about: - council tax increases… “
So, you don’t live in Scotland then.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/2852339/Council-Tax-held-for-third-time-in-a-row.html
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/160099/Council-tax-300-less-in-Scotland-
Why did Gordon Brown cover up Lord Ashcroft’s tax status?
522 SD
ah Stuart if only……
519. “For some reason Ashcroft is like a red rag to bull to ZNL - got to be some way of using that for fun and frolics.”
Get Lord Ashcroft to take a tour of marginal constituencies throughout the land in an open topped bus…
…Showing his collection of Victoria Crosses to people who otherwise would have no opportunity.
I need to go and walk the dog but the ‘guilty until proven innocent’ and smears from Gabble and his pals today, the basis of which is innuendo, is appalling.
What have Labour become?
It’s very sad.
krishgm
C4 News/Yougov poll of 60 Lab/Tory marginal seats predicts Tories short of majority in hung parliament.
498. Seth - US commercial property prices are already up to 40% down from their peaks, on some measures. And commercial property loans are going sour very rapidly.
There’s a problem here, too, but the banks have been going easy on commercial loans that are ‘under water’ because they don’t want to crystallise their losses.
517. Bono, Blanchflower and Jo Brand!
523 The answer is up thread. He needs to protect his own non-doms. They are cash strapped.
521: I’m starting to get concerned that labour simply won’t have a budget….
527 That’s seriously interesting.
Re my 447:
John Marston at 456 is correct - I used the wrong LD figure. Principle is the same though!
I am actually surprised by the low number of “non-firm” - is it always like this?
509. Indeed Batch file. I must admit I’ve always been a bit uncomfortable about the Conservatives Party’s association with Ashcroft, but the more I’m learning about him, the more comfortable I’m feeling with his association with the party.
Something else I wasn’t aware of until the other day is that he put up reward money when the lovely Jill Dando was murdered on her door step (I guess because of her association with CrimeWatch and his association with Crimestoppers)
He really does seem like a generally decent chap (all-be-it mega rich) who is the victim of a very nasty witch hunt by the true nasty party and their sinister agents.
Scotsman - No sacred cows as council budgets are slashed by billions, warns Cosla chief
507 Thanks - very interesting. This is probably enough to ensure that the story keeps running for a few more days. I don’t think it will move the polls much, if at all, but it prevents the Tories from getting on to whatever agenda they intended to be on this week at least.
527. Another day, another poll from a recidivist Labour over-stater (copyright Mike Smithson)
504 - “Is the Civil Service strike originally planned for early next week still going ahead?”
Yes, though action is only being taken by PCS and not any other union in the civil service.
531 Slackbladder - If they tried to hold an election where there was any possibility of them forming the next government, but without holding a budget first, the financial markets would go berserk.
krishgm
Exclusive C4/Yougov poll results http://bit.ly/bjmt96
530. SallyC it was rhetorical….
427. Bad news for Cam.
527-This could move the spread markets quite considerably.
532. The money markets will find it very interesting, though not very entertaining.
538. Thanks Neil. The Union is hardly doing it’s Labour Masters any favours in the run-up to the election.
Ann keep plugging away. I complained about the NICE drug story today - missing potential conflict of interest - and they’ve amended it.
541 Sorry!
527. “C4 News/Yougov poll of 60 Lab/Tory marginal seats predicts Tories short of majority in hung parliament.”
If that’s true, it’s hugely significant, because the only real get-out clause for the Tories over the last couple of weeks has been the notion that they might be doing massively - and it would have to be massively - better in the marginals. It’ll be interesting to see how far short of a Tory majority that poll is suggesting.
‘Bid to replace Labour MP Anne Moffat set to go to vote’
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Bid-to-replace-Labour-MP.6122929.jp
I have to say that on today’s form, the Gabble-Tim tag-team are doing more to drive me back towards the Tories than anyone in the Shadow Cabinet…
If ZNL are at bedrock and the Tories aren’t then i think “they’re all the same” helps Labour by disproportionately hurting the Tories. So i think the Ashcroft attacks would potentially make sense in that regard and even more so if it got the Cameroons running round panicking. However seems to me there’s scope for turning it on its head because of how mental they get over Ashcroft.
456 Andy Cooke 95 seat majority with firm votes, can’t figure out their weighting for firm vs soft. Headline leaves Tories 10 short of a majority.
535 ChristinaD
So do you want to raise Council Taxes, or do you approve of their having been frozen?
Luxury flights and holidays with Hague and FFFFFFion? God, Im almost sorry for the guy.
krishgm
http://bit.ly/bjmt96 shows the Tory lead has shrunk sharply but they are still way ahead of Labour in terms of parliamentary seats
548 11 short according to the poll - too close to call between Tory minority and Tory majority on the basis of this trend holding and almost certainly nothing but a full rainbow alliance keeping Cam out of number 10 (again, on these figures)
539: I would say so too! However look at the dates, we need about a week after the budget for the finance act to pass through.
Easter is the key period. Assuming the Easter recess starts on good friday, for 2 weeks, then that takes us to the monday upon which Brown needs to go to the palace for a 6th May election.
So, assuming the budget is on a wednesday, that rules out 31 March (2 days before good friday), 24th March is the most likely, but then thats now less than 3 weeks away.
If we get into next week, or beyond with no announcment, expect things to get interesting.
545 - “The Union is hardly doing it’s Labour Masters any favours in the run-up to the election.”
PCS is not affiliated to the Labour party.
540 Some interesting splits in their - apart from the headline figure its mainly good for Cons.
SNP on 21% in Scotlans..
Polls
can’t see what the excitment’s about myself . People have become so used to slam-dunk elections they’ve forgotten what it’s like to have a real one.
I have to say that on today’s form, the Gabble-Tim tag-team are doing more to drive me back towards the Tories than anyone in the Shadow Cabinet…
by Bob Sykes March 4th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
Interesting that neither of them ever post good reasons for voting Labour.
Great Question :
“And which, if any, of the following statements about David Cameron do you agree with? (Please tick all that apply.)
He’s just a salesman not a potential Prime Minister
He’s too posh to understand what ordinary people want….”
458 - “What I would like to know is what Labour leaning posters think Ashcroft has done so wrong? ”
They don’t seem to agree with his policy regarding storage of documents.
by Keith Jenner March 4th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
Simple really they no doubt are in the same place as Tony Bliars expenses receipts. So basically he his being attacked for following government policy
548. 11 short of a majority according to C4.
We need some polls suggesting a close result/hung parliamant. The more its talked about, the less chance it will happen.
In fact, in an ideal world, we need pollsters who generally overstate the Labour position and make things look closer that they are.
@558 Neil, but it’s all about perception. Most people equate unions with Labour, they don’t check if there is an affiliation they just assume there is one.
Paddy Power are offering odds on the most accurate polster post election day. Second favourites are Angus Reid at 9/4 (Y.Gov shortest at 2/1)
Bookies don’t normally throw money away , do they ??!!
565. *than they are!
http://blogs.channel4.com/snowblog/2010/03/04/poll-only-1-in-5-say-cameron-would-be-change-for-the-better/
On the Yougov poll, I think one thing we have learned is to wait for the details. Have to see their weightings and how much they have rated up Labour and rated down the Tories. It’s really becoming quite ridiculous how much one polling firm is setting the narrative right now, especially since they haven’t explained why they seem to rate Labour up so much…
540. This poll is in line with what the national YouGov polls are showing and confirms that the Conservatives are doing better in marginal seats than in the overall polls - The swing from 2005 is 6.5%.
An interesting question is whether the weighting scheme used here is the same as in their previous marginal polls…
So YouGob still indicates that the Tories are gettinga bigger swing in the marginals than the country as a whole, but as the lead generally has narrowed, so the lead in the marginals has natually narrowed as well?
553.Nice try oldnat, this is a very valid and relevant story to highlight on PB.com in light of the fact we are just about to have a GE in a matter of weeks.
Channel 4 poll is amazing for Labour!
I would advise anyone to treat ANY YouGov polls with a healthy dose of salts.
569
Yes, one would expect a better class of electorate - the bounders.
570 I notice they haven’t released the weighting information in the detail although perhaps it will appear when Yoougov publish it on their site?
573 - In what sense, it shows you are going to lose.
569. Hopefully we’ll be getting an ICM poll at the weekend and then Populus next Monday. I’m getting a bit fed up with constant YouGov polls as well, I must admit.
573 indeed, it shows 95 of their MPs geting turrfed out on the street where they belong.
Quite amazing
561 Kristin
tim and gabble are attack dogs. It is their job to keep you talking on their theme. They will reply if you are talking “on message” and ignore you if not. The only way to get an answer is to break up their theme. Though tim will probably throw a hissy-fit.
What tim and gabble definitively don’t want to talk about is the government’s record of failure; particularly if this relates to targets they themselves have set in previous manifestos.
If Ashcroft has bought all these VC’s set up crimestoppers and not claimed expenses then that point should have been made regulalrly at PMQ’s, and asking for a comparison with the REAL foreign troughers who donate to the Labour Party and those who gained a peerage for the privilege.
Tories too soft and still playing by Queensberry rules. Need some hard guys to set the agenda. This is a war, and not fought with a glass of Pimms in one’s hand.
More signs that Cameron’s fading popularity is a big part of the problem -
“What can Mr Cameron do to reclaim the big lead he enjoyed 18 months ago? One task is to improve his personal standing. In September 2008, 38 per cent rated his performance as “good” or “excellent”. That is down to 24 per cent.
Over the same period, the number giving Mr Brown that accolade has climbed from 10 per cent to 18 per cent.
So the massive 28-point advantage that the Tory leader enjoyed 18 months ago has shrunk to just six points.”
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/analysis+tories+short+of+overall+majority/3569147
573. Two points behind when you were 11 ahead in 2005? Its better than it has been but amazing? No.
570: It is:
Con 1215->1070
Lab 861->1015
572 ChristinaD
Of course it is. Which is why I was seeking your opinion on it.
577.
It means you aren’t going to have a majority. Given that a year ago you were all predicting massive tory majorities, noit having one at all is very very good.
C4/YouGov
Gordon Brown does have a three point lead over David Cameron in the question which party leader is best equipped to lead Britain out of its current economic difficulties, on 31 per cent.
Astonishing. Hardly credible.
540 re YouGov marginals poll - full details are avaiable if you follow th link.
I’m not sure that poll tells us very much new. Since Feb 09 the Conservatives have dropped from 43 to 39, Labour up 1 from 36 to 37, and LibDems up 2 from 13 to 15. That’s in line with the change in national polls, is it not?
Note also the massive re-weighting again.
Con Unweighted 1215 becomes 1070
Lab Unweighted 861 becomes 1015
What this shows is that the headline lead figure is extremely dependent on the accuracy of the calibration of their weighting. It doesn’t mean they are wrong, of course, but it would be nice if their sample didn’t need such a huge adjustment.
Which media outlet was it that carried the story saying that the EC had agreed to the Conservative version of events re: interviews - in that they never replied to the Con’s letter - and were happy to amend the report accordingly? Can someone show me where it was because I certainly read it earlier. It needs to be sent to every outlet still claiming they refused to have interviews.
SNP announce that the Aberdeen bypass will go ahead before Christmas, and to great fanfare. Now the reality hits the North East.
BBC - Council considers Aberdeen bypass savings
“Aberdeenshire Council is considering which services may have to take a hit to help pay for the Aberdeen bypass.
A report has warned the cost of the project is unlikely to be met within existing resources, unless savings are made or additional income generated.
Aberdeenshire Council said it had been made clear from the start that savings would have to be made.”
“When voters were asked who would make the best chancellor, Vince Cable receiving 27 per cent of the vote, compared to 17 per cent for Alistair Darling and 15 per cent for George Osborne.”
THERE is the Conservative’s problem, summed up in one sentence.
With the ecomony certain to be the main issue, just 15% saying Osborne would make the best Chancellor, is a great concern. Less than half the Conservative voters would appear to support their guy.
579/583 et al.
I guess I was just expecting us to be out of power for a generation if not forever or indeed that the LAbour party would be over taken by the lib dems or that Cameron would bat thatchers record or whatever….. on this showing Cameron = edward heath
581 redcliffe62
A pint glass of Pimms, however, makes a very effective weapon!
@ 580 What tim and gabble definitively don’t want to talk about is the government’s record of failure; particularly if this relates to targets they themselves have set in previous manifestos.
by Alanbrooke March 4th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
You mean like this one..
The Government has reneged on its commitment to update the 1935 overcrowding standard, housing charity Shelter claimed today.
In a response to more than 2,000 signatories of a Shelter petition, the Government has said it will not update the overcrowding standard, as promised in 2004, until “the right processes are in place to support overcrowded households”.
http://www.24dash.com/news/Housing/2010-03-04-Shelter-Government-has-broken-promise-to-tackle-overcrowding
I know where I would go from here if I was Ashcroft.Starting with the BBC,Newsnight,Radio 5,Nick Robinson,Marr,Wark etc, Independent,Guardian,Times,Mirror and Downing Street.Sue the bloody lot of them for attempted character assassination and then put The Lib Dems and Labour under the same close scrutiny of their non doms.The first question to ask them is how much have they claimed in expenses compared to Ashcroft? that should start the ball rolling nicely.
566 - It’s important to be accurate though. And the thought that Labour is standing up to vested interests in public sector unions may not be a damaging one to the government.
586 - I just love the broad generalisation that every Conservative was predicting huge majorities. I haven’t deviated from my belief that the election will result in a small majority between 40-50 for the Conservatives. Nothing has yet come along to change my mind on that.
Peter Kellner
…326 are needed for an overall majority.
…Add in 95 gains from Labour, and they would have 305. To secure an overall majority, they would need to gain another 21 seats from the Liberal Democrats.
With the Lib Dems national support down since the last election, and the Tories up, that looks feasible.
But in the past, many Lib Dem (and previously Liberal) MPs have managed to build up a personal following that has provided them with some protection against adverse national trends.
I believe the Tories would be doing well to unseat more than 10 Lib Dem MPs.
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/analysis+tories+short+of+overall+majority/3569147
BBCLauraK
MP s have approved all the reforms to the Commons - could be a big shift from power of govt to backbenchers
597. I’ve always said a Con majority between 20-40 on vote shares of 40/30/20/10.
Its certainly the dirtiest election I have ever known and thats before its even started.
586: It won’t take much swing to make that 11 seats off a majority into one. Not to mention the extra GTVO campaigning which the tories will do, or the improvement under election rules in the media.
584 - is that confirmed?
Definitely something fishy with Yougov, they can’t seem to find enough Labour respondents, that should clearly be a signal that they polls are better for the Tories than they seem to say.
Most of the narrative about polls closing has come from Yougov polls and while I agree that the Tories aren’t doing well, I just don’t see it being as bad as is reflected in the Yougov polls. I can’t see evidence for it anywhere, not as bad as Yougov are saying anyway.
591. I think you will find that is more name recognition than anything and the BBC’s predeliction to get Cable’s view on everything from whether the BBC interviewer should scracth their arse or not to whether the latest GDP figures are good or not.
597
In which case I apologise to you personally, but I tell you, this site at times was mental in its group think. I am sure won £100 of a poster who didn’t think Labour would get within 10 points in any poll before the election.
We won’t have the most seats after the election and David Cameron will be the next Prime Minister, but you ai’nt gonna give us a 97 style hiding, never in a million years!
592 - Thatcher only won a small victory in 1979. She was in power for 11.5 years. Be careful when thinking that a modest defeat now means you will be back quickly. It may not.
This latest C4/YouGov poll is absolutely disastrous for the Tories. Just last week William Hague was indicating polling in marginal seats suggested the Tories would win a majority. Not even close Mr 14 pints of beer.
New Labour didn’t just steal all the Tories policies when they won in 1997. They also stole the secrets to winning elections using whatever ruthless methods possible.
601 MTF - yes and Labour are using tax payers money to fight dirty.
587 - Gordon Brown does have a three point lead over David Cameron in the question which party leader is best equipped to lead Britain out of its current economic difficulties, on 31 per cent.
That figure is important as it has been narrowing for a while, down to a 1% lead for Cameron in the last poll, so its not particularly surprising.
600: Exactly, one cannot underestimate the hill which Cameron has to climb to get a swing from a large labour majority to a small tory one. In 2005 most people thought it would still take more than 1 election.
598. So that’s pure finger in the air stuff from Kellner there, not particularly scientific.
602 Problem is, slackbladder, is that the momentum is going the wrong way. The Conservative’s need to do something to shift or at least stop that momentum and then they can look at turning that 11 seat shortfall into a majority.
586. oldnat - “Which is why I was seeking your opinion on it.”
You will not get her to state any opinions oldnat. She thinks what Dave thinks. Nothing more. Nothing less.
If Dave does not have an opinion on Scottish council tax, then neither does Chris.
611: Remember though tim, thats only marginal labour seats…one cannot take those figures and apply them to the country.
Detail of the previous marginals poll:
http://www.yougov.co.uk/archives/pdf/C4results03-Feb.pdf
Nope, top ten most read stories on BBC don’t include Ashcroft. FAIL.
609 - “Not even close Mr 14 pints of beer.”
Erm 11 seats short is close, in fact when you factor in the margin of error it could well be that the situation is a Conservative majority.
What will encourage the Tories in this poll is that 58% agree it’s time for a change of government, and only 31% disagree. That is the trump card and why they will probably ultimately do it.
But to trail by a big margin on measures like who understands the problems faced by ordinary people best is just astonishing. They have become totally side tracked when they should have been hammering “It’s the economy stupid” relentlessly for the past few months. They sometimes seem to be trying to blow it.
Xenon - all very true, you seem like a resonable enough person and my hubris etc is not aimed then at yourself.
like I say - we ain’t gonna win this, but there was a great degree of stupid group thinking going on in the past.
Even our genial host has in my opinion, a slight habit of always looking at how something can be a negative for Brown
615.Playing the girl rather than the ball again I see. Or should I say bitchslapping about the messenger rather than the message.
Mandleson on sky in full hypocrite mode no mention of liebour non dom donors.
Have we lost a load of posts?
On the weightings, there was a small tweak last time this poll ran, whereas there is a larger shift this time. But before everyone jumps on this, the question is, do the other pollsters pick this up? Also, this marginals does include Scotland. It would be really useful if someone could do one each for England, Scotland & Wales.
614 Yes - this election looks more and more like 1992. The government is not liked and there is a desire for a change but there is nervousness about exactly what kind of change the opposition would bring.
605 This YouGov business is very odd.
In 2009, they found 689 Conservative supporters and 503 Labour, which they weighted to 662 and 564.
In 2010, 1215 Con 861 Lab was weighted to 1070 and 1015.
So they are actually finding a substantially higher proportion of Conservative supporters in their sample, which they’ve reported as a lower proportion. So their sample seems to have shifted in some way.
Details here:
http://www.channel4.com/news/media/2010/03/day04/04_poll.xls
http://www.channel4.com/news/media/2009/02/day04/full_results.xls
617. Is it me or does the weighting scheme look a bit different in that previous poll?
620. SNP - I agree. Another notable detail is that only 18% think they have got better off under this government, 46% think worse off.
A smart delicatessen that caters only for window shoppers has sprung up in a Tyneside town after the council decided to put up fake shop fronts to cover empty units. Skip related content
Can they put up fake steel works , chocolate makers and car factories as well??
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100304/tuk-smart-new-tyneside-shop-is-just-a-fr-45dbed5.htmlabour Britain can they put up fake steel works as well?
Just been listening to Mandelson being interviewed by Jon Sopel on BBC News. Mandelson smeared AShcroft and David Cameron from start to finish. Indeed as someone qualified in the law I would go so far as to say Mandelson libelled both of them.
Jon Sopel questioned Mandelson closely and accused him of trying to spin the issue for political gain and even asked where was the difference to Lord Paul. Among all the ranting by Mandelson what became clear was that the only difference was Lord Paul was not asked to give any guarantee about his residence.
Labour and the LibDems are going to regret making up this nonsense in due course. I would expect a stunning story to come out about a Labour figure in early course. Either that or Michael AShcroft will set his lawyers on them. Would be wonderful to see AShcrofts lawyers serve writs on Mandelson, Huhne and others in front of the TV cameras.
603. MTF - “Its certainly the dirtiest election I have ever known and thats before its even started.”
It is so dirty cos Gordon Brown is a Mafia boss: he comes from the Scottish Labour Party, where they do not know how to fight clean.
Mandy is Gabble, same answers which essentially say “no case to answer doesnt mean innocent” on Sky news and is still making wild claims on subjects that are very, very specific.
These are contradictory…
krishgm
Key findings 1 : Brown ahead of Cameron on “best equipped to lead Britain out of current economic difficulties”
krishgm
Key findings 2 : Cameron ahead of Brown on “who do you think is most honest about economic problems”
Hehe, Sky news lady asks a question and Mandy answers like Gabble again. Oddly enough he stopped posting an hour ago, enough time to get into makeup?
Lord Mandelson now wading in on Sky news because the Labour attack on the ropes, doing a Prescott. Expect the hysteria levels to raise even further.
627: In a single poll one can’t make a judgement on it. However when every data collection requires that weighting…well it’s interesting.
533 - so people know Brown is bullshitting on the economy but don’t appear to care? It wouldn’t suprise me to learn that the public can be that stupid, but you’re right - it just doesn’t make sense.
The Tories problem on the economy is that Labour have had the same basic message for months: we are supporting UK through the economy, don’t cut now its too early. Positive and simple on one hand and dire and understanable warning about what the other side will do. One can argue about the economic sense of Labour’s position, but it is a strong political position.
The Tory message has been less clear, partly because I think they have tried to be more honest about the state of things. They have talked of deficits, gilt strikes and money markets which, frankly, most people dont really understand. They have talked about needing to cut now but not in terms that people understand and the amount of cutting they support has been confused.
What they need to do is encapsulate their position clearly, simply and repeatedly, like Labour do. Government is borrowing far more than it earns. We must cut sensibly now under the Tories or we will have to cut much more later on under Labour.
Until the Tories distill their economic message, Labour’s narrative will have the field to itself.
Sky useless as ever questioning madleson about lord paul and other labour non doms.
595
I know, the running dogs of leftist propaganda have infiltrated every facet of the media. It’s all just one enormous inter-galactic plot to deny the Tory Party its rightful place in government. Wht even my local newsagent has indicated he may vote Labour! It’s an absolute disgrace! I intend to block up my letterbox this evening to prevent any possible Labourite contamination from the so-called “newspapers” and to cover my TV screen with a large poster of Lord Ashcroft while listening to the “Great Cameron Speeches of Our Time” on my headphones (I have a couple of minutes to spare). It is all quite frankly beyond belief what is happening to this country under the tyrannical rule of … etc,etc.
639 - Sky are so up to their necks with the BBC in the whole anti-Tory conspiracy. Grrr. Them and you gov. Grrr.
Looking at the polling headline figures, this is still a case of Tory support down and Labour not recovering. Disappointing, but lets see plenty of other pollsters in the field please!!! Will Populus still be working for The Times?
633. “These are contradictory…”M/i>
You can be more honest than a fireman about the fact that your house is on fire, without necessarily being more qualified to remedy the problem.
627. YouGov need to explain themselves on this, which Peter Kellner signally failed to do in our Q&A session. They are in danger of damaging their reputation.
630.”Among all the ranting by Mandelson what became clear was that the only difference was Lord Paul was not asked to give any guarantee about his residence.”
Easterross, Mandelson making the same point on Skynews too. Wonder when someone will ask him to clarify why Lord Ashcroft was being singled out?
636 Slackbladder - I’m not saying it is wrong, but it does look very odd. Same pollster, same methodology, same time of year: you’d expect the adjustments to be fairly similar. It certainly means the headline lead figure is incredibly sensitive to how accurate their weighting scheme is.
593 - The problem is not just Osborne.
Who Do You think would make the best PM
Camerons Lead down from 18 points in Feb 2008 to 5 today.
628 - “Another notable detail is that only 18% think they have got better off under this government, 46% think worse off.”
But the trouble is that when then asked which party is better for the economy, Labour only trail by 2%. And Brown leads Cameron by 3% on who’s best placed to get us out.
In the light of the stark figure you quote, it’s unforgivably bad from the Tories not to convert that level of disillusionment into support for them. And it’s why they were so wrong to get sidetracked.
627. Richard Nabavi
Indeed it seems to be Conservatives up, Libdems up, Labour no change in unweighted numbers. Consequently, one can only think that this is almost all due to the weightings. It really is bizarre…
605: The YouGov with the 7% lead didn’t need any adjustment at all. There may be some weighting question but I wouldn’t think it’s shifting more than 1% in the outcomes.
601: Yes, BOTH front benches were crushed in today’s rebellion - a pretty decisive shift towards more backbench power. Secret ballot election of selecto committees removes a major whips’ carrot and the elected committee on House business gives backbenchers significant power over Commons business for the first time. We also had a moment of farce as 90 Tories pushed an amendment to replace the word “chair” with “chairman” - dinosaurs ahoy…
Surely there’s a flaw in this YouGov marginals poll?
What they’re saying is that the Tories will win 52 out of 60 marginals seats with Labour majorities between 6% and 14%, and then you assume they’ll win the 43 Labour seats with majorities less than 6%, and this means the Tories will only win 95 seats and be short of a majority.
But even if they were to win all of the 60 seats that would still only give a total of 103 seats, short of the 117 needed for a majority.
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/exclusive+tory+lead+shrinks+in+key+marginals/3569462
ANYONE
For someone who knows andy cookes excellent seat calculator.
Does this poll validate it in anyway, ie would his seat calculator predict the tories would be 2% lead, as i must confess i don’t fully understand it.
This one should also make the tories think.
“Which of the party leaders do you think best understands the problems ordinary people face in difficult economic times”
Brown 27
Cameron 18
650 Nick P - Have a look at the 2009/2010 comparison (links at 627). Do you understand what is going on?
“C4 poll is amazing for Labour”
I take it you didn’t actually look beyond the words ‘Tories two points ahead’ before typing that one-handed?
651: I’m thinking that they work out the swing in those 60 seats, and apply it.
538- Being perfectly blunt and honest about a country’s problems is a luxury in which unelectable third parties can indulge, but not major parties that actually expect to win seats. Good politics dictates that the Tories (or any party, for that matter) tell the truth only to the extent it doesn’t undermine the argument that the Tories can and will improve people’s lives, that they’ll be better off under a Tory government. If the rallying cry of “we’re all screwed” ever worked, I haven’t seen it.
The last thing the Tories need to do is to repeat Walter Mondale’s mistakes. He famously said, to paraphrase, ‘I will raise your taxes. So will Mr. Reagan, but he won’t be honest with you about it.’ Honesty won him Minnesota and the District of Columbia. Honesty for its own sake just doesn’t sell.
550 I think it’s credible. The narrative coming out of the 6 o’ clock news for months has been: cuts = double dip reccession. It’s done just enough to outweigh McDoom’s child-catcher personality with say 5-6% of people.
From my personal little bubble my guess would be YouGov’s problem isn’t deliberate dodginess it’s them trying to get an accurate picture in a situation where the Labour vote has got stronger in some areas while completely evaporating in others.
627 - Very, very odd.
I wonder if Mike can email Peter Kellner in private since he was unable to find the time to answer the specific points when he came on here.
658. “Honesty for its own sake just doesn’t sell.”
Blair’s Iraq strategy in a nutshell.
Had a look at this poll. So Labour up to just 1% below 2005, I dont think so.
In Scotland the poll has Labour 39, Tories 23, SNP 21 and LibDems 14. Again there is no way Scottish Labour is going to achieve the level of support it got in 2005.
Peter Kellner dodged the questions about weighting on Tuesday afternoon. Sorry but unless we get a very clear and straighrforward explanation from YouGov, I will now consider all their polls dodgy due to questionable weighting of party support. 1992 here YouGov comes.
New thread up.
What this week has proved and today in particular is just how the media is stacked against the Conservatives. They really do have an uphill struggle and they could well do without some of their own ’sniping’ from the sidelines. If Labour win as a result of their vicious, nasty spin machine then this country has really gone to the dogs.
562
It’s all lies, ..lies, I tell you!(exit pursued by a YouGov poll)
NEW THREAD UP
650 - Hmm, I hear the election in Broxtowe is going to be pretty close, lets hope Anna Soubry does well. I mean it’s always been Labour saying we need more women in Parliament. Not doing of course, Dromey being parachuted in ahead of an all-women shortlist where Harperson was notably absent from the selection panel was very telling of how Labour are always do as we say, rather than do as we do.
564
Ditto
The YouGov marginals poll gives a swing from Lab to Con of 6.5%, which would turn 95 Labour seats blue. The Tories would then need 22 gains from the LDs to win an overall majority.
Peter Kellner then says that he thinks the Tories will be “doing well” to unseat more than 10 LD MPs.
Tory targets 1-10 from the LDs involve seats with majorities going up to 4.7% = swing of 2.4%.
Tory targets 11-22 from the LDs involve seats with majorities from 6.0% to 10.5% = swing of 5.3%.
So the analysis of the Tories being short of an overall majority isn’t based on the scientific poll of Lab/Con marginals, but rather Peter Kellner’s opinion regarding whether the Tories can win numbers 11-22 on their target list of LD seats.
647. I would forget both Osborne and Cameron. The economy is the Tories biggest problem. The more people feel the economy is improving, the more the gap closes between Labour and Conservatives in the polls.
It’s a phony recovery but I fear it’s going to be enough to allow Labour to form a minority government.
What on earth is going on with the electorate? Assuming these opinion polls are to be believed and there hasn’t somehow been an effort to compromise the results it’s really hard to understand. I’m starting to come round to the view that a friend of mine espoused that the public want to believe in all this insane spending beyond our means because if the government gets away with it then they will do so too.
The budget date/election date issue baffles me at the moment too. For all the world it looks like June - but how are they going to deal with the local elections - can they just move them for convenience?
These are very odd times. Quite good for betting though.
640 BriBrad
I know, the running dogs of leftist propaganda have infiltrated every facet of the media.
Please let us know when you first posted on pb.com?
658 The problem is cuts. Cuts, to most people, are a BAD THING. Cuts means fewer police, lost jobs, fewer university places, lost contracts for private sector companies that rely on public sector work and so on.
The Tories have given the impression that they want bigger cuts than Labour but they haven’t said where. This is not surprising - Labour haven’t said how big their cuts will be or where they will fall. So it’s hardly surprising that the Tories haven’t been specific either. But they have been specific about wanting bigger cuts than Labour.
Unless you believe that bigger cuts can all be achieved by efficiency gains (and I am not aware of any economists who support that view) then bigger cuts simply means more pain. The Tories offer more pain than Labour - your job (if you work in the public sector), your company’s public sector work (if you work in the private sector), are more likely to be cut by the Tories than Labour. The idea that somewhow more pain sooner will mean less pain later through a quicker reduction in the fiscal deficit is counter-intuitive and not likely to be attractive to someone faced with the possibility of immediate redundancy.
This is the dilemma into which Tory economic policy has got itself.
507. that explains skynews and murdoch press, ugov polls perhaps? clash of the big guns, both supporting the conservatives? mmm
ot. conversation with a close friend (very leftwing, proper pc etc) who works for tower hamlets council, my friend found themself with a dilema, a labour voter throu and through, though not impressed with brown (i have tried my best to explain how cr*p labour have been on the economy,etc, only to be told “thats not what is important” ..heyho) anyway,
my friend said “i dont have anyone to vote for”
(i was shocked) “i cant vote labour” i was all gleeful, vote conservative then, i said hopefully, the look i got said it all, worth a try hehe, went through the the other parties, all a fat no, i hold my nose and ask “why cant you vote labour”
apparently there was a dispatches program on 4 this week re extreme islam infiltration through labour party, my friend said that there had been internal emails pre showing of program and after, one of which asking for resignations within towerhamlets council, sadly i did not watched show, nor fully understood the link with emails, but, something has really spooked/un-nerved a life long labour supporter… we then got into a heated debate re moderate islam, my fault i suggested they should be doing more to out these extremist, im like a red rag to this lefty hehe, so im still very puzzled as to why ? very puzzled.
527 if we are in 1992 terratory could we be looking at “Shy Labour” voters rather than the “shy tory” voters?
In the past it has always been the voters who said they wanted better services but voted for tax cuts who caught the Pollsters out.
Could we now have people who say we should act on the deficit but when it comes to voting try and put things off - or save their own jobs or the services they use?
Re Ashcroft Did`nt he save Watford football club by donating several million
new thread