Tuesday 13th September 2016

[StephenDolan]

"Andrew's got it spot on. The lead is indeed down one purely because the Labour share has risen 1% while the Tory share has remained unchanged"

Pk from yesterday.

AS had said the Conservatives lead was unchanged,yet Labour had increased their polling and the Conservatives had stayed the same. That was the contradiction.


Morning all btw. Dark, dark dark this morning. Maybe my clock is wrong. "Go back to sleep", says my comfy, warm bed.

[Willow904]

I don't see where Andrew Sparrow says the Tory lead is unchanged, in the clip quoted he says it's down one, but still big. If margin of error is 3 points either way, the Tories are well ahead at the moment. People inexplicably like them, which is a huge problem regardless of what Labour are up to, imo, because it means people are unaware or do not care about those who have suffered under them for the last 6 years of austerity.

[Willow904]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... al-shakeup" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jeremy Corbyn, Boris Johnson and George Osborne among MPs hit by electoral shakeup

Quite a coincidence that two of May's biggest rival's constituencies are for the chop. Everything keeps falling into her lap, doesn't it?

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I don't see where Andrew Sparrow says the Tory lead is unchanged, in the clip quoted he says it's down one, but still big. If margin of error is 3 points either way, the Tories are well ahead at the moment. People inexplicably like them, which is a huge problem regardless of what Labour are up to, imo, because it means people are unaware or do not care about those who have suffered under them for the last 6 years of austerity.

Morning!

The good news for Labour is that the Tory lead is down one compared to when ICM last polled for the Guardian two weeks ago. The bad news; the Tories are still 13 points ahead.

In no world I can imagine does that make any sense But it's also not worth arguing about.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I don't see where Andrew Sparrow says the Tory lead is unchanged, in the clip quoted he says it's down one, but still big. If margin of error is 3 points either way, the Tories are well ahead at the moment. People inexplicably like them, which is a huge problem regardless of what Labour are up to, imo, because it means people are unaware or do not care about those who have suffered under them for the last 6 years of austerity.

Morning!

The good news for Labour is that the Tory lead is down one compared to when ICM last polled for the Guardian two weeks ago. The bad news; the Tories are still 13 points ahead.

In no world I can imagine does that make any sense But it's also not worth arguing about.

Aah I've got it now. He's used "still" in an ambiguous way. He should have said "the Tories still have a huge lead of 13 points".

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I don't see where Andrew Sparrow says the Tory lead is unchanged, in the clip quoted he says it's down one, but still big. If margin of error is 3 points either way, the Tories are well ahead at the moment. People inexplicably like them, which is a huge problem regardless of what Labour are up to, imo, because it means people are unaware or do not care about those who have suffered under them for the last 6 years of austerity.

Morning!

The good news for Labour is that the Tory lead is down one compared to when ICM last polled for the Guardian two weeks ago. The bad news; the Tories are still 13 points ahead.

In no world I can imagine does that make any sense But it's also not worth arguing about.

Aah I've got it now. He's used "still" in an ambiguous way. He should have said "the Tories still have a huge lead of 13 points".

Though that still doesn't quite do it. I think "still" is a poor choice here. Full stop

[SpinningHugo]

With polls it is usually best to look at rolling averages,

Labour is on average 11 points behind. Historically its worst performance in opposition.

In a campaign I'd expect the lead to widen as traditional Labour voters who ignore politics start to pay attention. The Milne media machine is also incompetent.

The long term problem is that Labour's ceiling (ie the best it can do in good times) is also being lowered. I'd judge by 3+ points. Enough to prevent any return for a very long time.

Part of the problem is Labour is neither fish nor fowl at the moment. Last year Corbyn promised lots of radical policies. But in reality there have hardly been any. He may as well accept Labour has no prospect of power and start operating as a radical protest movement.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

With polls it is usually best to look at rolling averages,

Labour is on average 11 points behind. Historically its worst performance in opposition.

In a campaign I'd expect the lead to widen as traditional Labour voters who ignore politics start to pay attention. The Milne media machine is also incompetent.

The long term problem is that Labour's ceiling (ie the best it can do in good times) is also being lowered. I'd judge by 3+ points. Enough to prevent any return for a very long time.

Part of the problem is Labour is neither fish nor fowl at the moment. Last year Corbyn promised lots of radical policies. But in reality there have hardly been any. He may as well accept Labour has no prospect of power and start operating as a radical protest movement.

If you added that a shambolic "coup" attempt hardly helped, I would largely agree with this analysis. It's a mess.

[SpinningHugo]

I see Corbyn's seat is going to be abolished.
Cue nowhere to sit jokes.

[Willow904]

I don't see where Andrew Sparrow says the Tory lead is unchanged, in the clip quoted he says it's down one, but still big. If margin of error is 3 points either way, the Tories are well ahead at the moment. People inexplicably like them, which is a huge problem regardless of what Labour are up to, imo, because it means people are unaware or do not care about those who have suffered under them for the last 6 years of austerity.

Morning!

The good news for Labour is that the Tory lead is down one compared to when ICM last polled for the Guardian two weeks ago. The bad news; the Tories are still 13 points ahead.

In no world I can imagine does that make any sense But it's also not worth arguing about.

Aah I've got it now. He's used "still" in an ambiguous way. He should have said "the Tories still have a huge lead of 13 points".

I wasn't arguing, honest, just couldn't see what was incorrect, so thought it was me. Now I understand what was confusing you, I completely agree, it was poorly put.

[yahyah]

It just goes to show that not everyone sees/reads things in the same way.

[tinybgoat]

At what point in a parliament, would Labour be expected to produce a list of policies, let alone supposedly 'radical' ones, which may never get to see the light of day ?
Surely at the moment they should mainly be opposing the Governments actual radical policies,
a role which they didn't always seem to do last parliament.

[pk1]

With polls it is usually best to look at rolling averages,

Labour is on average 11 points behind. Historically its worst performance in opposition.

In a campaign I'd expect the lead to widen as traditional Labour voters who ignore politics start to pay attention. The Milne media machine is also incompetent.

The long term problem is that Labour's ceiling (ie the best it can do in good times) is also being lowered. I'd judge by 3+ points. Enough to prevent any return for a very long time.

Part of the problem is Labour is neither fish nor fowl at the moment. Last year Corbyn promised lots of radical policies. But in reality there have hardly been any. He may as well accept Labour has no prospect of power and start operating as a radical protest movement.

The Milne media machine is truly incompetent.

Matt Chorley wrote a long read at the weekend to mark Corbyn's year as leader & he approached Milne to say what they thought JCs best results had been.

Milne didn't get the list to Chorley by the print deadline !

Our subs are used to pay this incompetent buffoon his generous £70k annual salary. It's time he was ousted & a competent replacement installed but we all know Corbyn won't ever do that. He prefers to surround himself with believers of his type of politics no matter what that does to the party's hopes of ever being reelected.

[StephenDolan]

At what point in a parliament, would Labour be expected to produce a list of policies, let alone supposedly 'radical' ones, which may never get to see the light of day ?
Surely at the moment they should mainly be opposing the Governments actual radical policies,
a role which they didn't always seem to do last parliament.

Absolutely. There's plenty to attack. When asked well what would you do differently there's no need to provide detailed funding plans, instead reply along the lines of we will as as a party provide our nextgeneral election manifesto at the same time as the Conservatives do. In the meantime, let's talk about what this Government *is* doing.

[Willow904]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 39266.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Theresa May’s MPs were said to be “shocked” by potential Conservative losses which could rise to 17 – the exact number of her Commons majority.

Do the new plans have a bigger impact on Tory seats than the abandoned plans under the Coalition? Could be a rocky ride getting them through the Commons.

[SpinningHugo]

At what point in a parliament, would Labour be expected to produce a list of policies, let alone supposedly 'radical' ones, which may never get to see the light of day ?
Surely at the moment they should mainly be opposing the Governments actual radical policies,
a role which they didn't always seem to do last parliament.

the answer is that you need them in outline right from the start so that you have an alternative set of proposals to the government. Just saying "we wouldn't do that" is not an adequate response. That is how all oppositions (util this one) have operated in my lifetime.

As for Labour's not fulfilling its role as opposition in the last Parliament, compared to what? At least we used to have what was recognisably an opposition party. Now we have the end of the pier show.

And yes, we can take as read "It is all the Blairite's fault" responses. All down to the machinations of Chukka Umunna and Tristram Hunt, no doubt.

[SpinningHugo]

At what point in a parliament, would Labour be expected to produce a list of policies, let alone supposedly 'radical' ones, which may never get to see the light of day ?
Surely at the moment they should mainly be opposing the Governments actual radical policies,
a role which they didn't always seem to do last parliament.

Absolutely. There's plenty to attack. When asked well what would you do differently there's no need to provide detailed funding plans, instead reply along the lines of we will as as a party provide our nextgeneral election manifesto at the same time as the Conservatives do. In the meantime, let's talk about what this Government *is* doing.

Actually one thing Labour *has* done is provide detailed funding plans. McDonnell's fiscal policy is absolutely excellent. Precisely what I would want.

Unfortunately it is almost indistinguishable from Balls', and doesn't in reality permit the fantasy policies Corbyn's campaign in 2015 promised (and that his supporters seem to believe can be delivered.)

now we have had a return to unreality during this campaign, with the promise of investment spending of £500bn (why not go the full trillion? Just as implausible.)

The authors of McDonnell's policy have of course all now withdrawn their assistance, the person most responsible writing almost daily about what a disaster Corbyn is

https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2016 ... ision.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[tinybgoat]

At what point in a parliament, would Labour be expected to produce a list of policies, let alone supposedly 'radical' ones, which may never get to see the light of day ?
Surely at the moment they should mainly be opposing the Governments actual radical policies,
a role which they didn't always seem to do last parliament.

the answer is that you need them in outline right from the start so that you have an alternative set of proposals to the government. Just saying "we wouldn't do that" is not an adequate response. That is how all oppositions (util this one) have operated in my lifetime.

As for Labour's not fulfilling its role as opposition in the last Parliament, compared to what? At least we used to have what was recognisably an opposition party. Now we have the end of the pier show.

And yes, we can take as read "It is all the Blairite's fault" responses. All down to the machinations of Chukka Umunna and Tristram Hunt, no doubt.

Thanks, I'll take that as 'an answer'.

[SpinningHugo]

Boundary review

May has a small majority and may not be able to push this through the current Parliament.

Early General Election?

[Willow904]

Good stuff on Concentrix, the private company employed by HMRC to reduce tax credit fraud, on Victoria Derbyshire on BBC News 24 this morning.

They are accusing single tax credit claimants of living with people who used to live at their address and denying their tax credits. In one case the previous tenant they were supposed to be married to was dead. In another case two sisters were accused of being in a relationship with each other. At least in that case they were eventually able to prove their relationship was platonic with birth certificates etc. If you don't know your deceased former tenant and have no access to their death certificate, how do you prove they no longer live at your address?

A Tory MP did appear on the show and made no attempt to excuse Concentrix's poor performance, admitting he had been contacted by a number of constituents with similar issues. He mentioned that Concentrix and HMRC don't have linked records (too right, you can't give private companies unfettered access to personal tax data) and it seems that even when a claimant proves to Concentrix that they are single, this information isn't being passed on to HMRC so tax credit cuts aren't being re-instated which seems pretty inexcusable to me.

[SpinningHugo]

Interactive map of Coundary changes

http://election-data.co.uk/boundary-com ... -proposals" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HindleA]

Fiona MacTaggart is seeking to get permission to get debate on issue of Tax Credits/Concentrix.

[PorFavor]

Good morfternoon.

This is what Patrick McLoughlin, the Conservative party chairman, is saying about the boundary review.

We will work with our MPs, councillors and local associations in our response to the consultation process. The Conservative party will be following a policy of ‘no colleague left behind’ to minimise the disruption that boundary restructuring can sometimes cause in the short term.

I’ve asked the Conservatives for some guidance as to what “no colleague left behind” actually means. I will let you know when they get back to me. (Politics Live, Guardian - my emphasis)

Er - does it mean"Brexit"?

[StephenDolan]

Just seen the plan for the Wirral.

Goodbye 4 Labour MPs, hello 1 Conservative and 2 Labour.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Boundary review

May has a small majority and may not be able to push this through the current Parliament.

Early General Election?

She probably will, and no.

(amazing how people like you notice whenever Corbyn puts a syllable out of place, but have missed that she has unequivocally ruled one out - again and again and again)

[danesclose]

He prefers to surround himself with believers of his type of politics no matter what that does to the party's hopes of ever being reelected.

What, people like Hilary Benn, Heidi Alexander, Chris Bryant and all of the others who resigned from the Shadow Cabinet?
Or the people who refused to serve in the Shadow Cabinet when asked by Corbyn when he became leader?

Those "believers of his type of politics"?

[AnatolyKasparov]

At least the proposals for Cumbria are not as monstrous as in the original "zombie" review.

But again, this shows the downside of imposing an inappropriately rigid limit on electorate variation in seats for transparently partisan purposes.

[tinybgoat]

Good morfternoon.

This is what Patrick McLoughlin, the Conservative party chairman, is saying about the boundary review.

We will work with our MPs, councillors and local associations in our response to the consultation process. The Conservative party will be following a policy of ‘no colleague left behind’ to minimise the disruption that boundary restructuring can sometimes cause in the short term.

I’ve asked the Conservatives for some guidance as to what “no colleague left behind” actually means. I will let you know when they get back to me. (Politics Live, Guardian - my emphasis)

Er - does it mean"Brexit"?

It could be interpreted as in "no survivors", so possibly.

[SpinningHugo]

AK

Of course I have noticed.

But she is

1 A Tory

And

2. A politician who is interested in power

I don't believe her.

She is trying to avoid Brown's idiotic mistake of fueling speculation only to have to back down.

[StephenDolan]

AK

Of course I have noticed.

But she is

1 A Tory

And

2. A politician who is interested in power

I don't believe her.

She is trying to avoid Brown's idiotic mistake of fueling speculation only to have to back down.

You're speculating on something that you say she has avoided speculation on. Got it.

[SpinningHugo]

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9759" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fascinating on boundary changes.

Summary

Conservatives would lose 10 seats, Labour would lose 28 seats, the Liberal Democrats would lose 4 and the Greens would lose one

With just 10 losses, can the Tories manage dissent through retirements and peerages? (And through the carrot of some of the Labour marginals now being winnable for them because of Corbyn).

My guess is that may be possible, and so they may just be able to squeak it through.

[AnatolyKasparov]

AK

Of course I have noticed.

But she is

1 A Tory

And

2. A politician who is interested in power

I don't believe her.

She is trying to avoid Brown's idiotic mistake of fueling speculation only to have to back down.

You're speculating on something that you say she has avoided speculation on. Got it.

The way to do it is to *appear* to be ruling such a thing out, but leave some "wriggle room" in the small print.

May has not done that, she has unequivocally said it will not happen. And in this instance, to give her some credit, she may actually mean it.

What happened in 2007 was not the same thing at all - possibly intoxicated by some (suspiciously?) favourable polls, Brown allowed speculation about a snap election to run wild at the Labour conference that year; until then he had done a pretty good job of damping it down. Let's not forget one of the chief culprits in this, btw, was one Ed Balls - another black mark against him, his supposed reinvention as a "national treasure" notwithstanding

[SpinningHugo]

Balls looks better by the day.
Sheeesh, even Ed Miliband looks able now.

If May can get the boundary changes through there won't be any need for an early election.

Not that there is any need now. She hardly has to worry about Labour sorting itself out anytime soon.

[AnatolyKasparov]

As I predicted the day after the GE, Ed Miliband is in the process of being proved right about pretty much everything.

Shame his long term detractors within Labour have done everything they can to wreck the party (and before anybody mentions Corbyn, they are basically responsible for him as well)

[HindleA]

http://www.housinglin.org.uk/Topics/typ ... 0258&msg=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Future proofing our homes and neighbourhoods: time to get back to basics

[HindleA]

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... 50-report/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



LORDS

Parliament should 'play a central role' in triggering Article 50


The House of Lords Constitution Committee today publishes a report, The invoking of Article 50, in which it states that Government should not trigger Article 50 without consulting Parliament. The Committee says it would be 'constitutionally inappropriate' and would set 'a disturbing precedent' for the Government to act on the referendum without explicit parliamentary approval.

[Willow904]

From the G live blog:

12:52
The Conservative MP Philip Davies has spoken out against the proposed boundary commission changes. He told BBC News:

My main concern is that we are reducing the number of MPs. At the same time we aren’t committing to cut the number of government minister, and that will mean that the government will have more control over the House of Commons and it will be harder for the House of Commons to hold the government to account.

I still think May could face a rocky road getting this through. She'll go for it, I'm sure, but whether she'll pull it off....? I wouldn't like to bet on it, either way.

[TR'sGhost]

AK

Of course I have noticed.

But she is

1 A Tory

And

2. A politician who is interested in power

I don't believe her.

She is trying to avoid Brown's idiotic mistake of fueling speculation only to have to back down.

Ever thought of standing for parliament yourself?

You should do well. After all, everyone but Blair, Liz Kendall and the entire Tory party is an idiot according to you. I would think the Tories might offer you a seat, after all you've been busily doing their work for them across the internet for years.

[PorFavor]

http://www.housinglin.org.uk/Topics/typ ... 0258&msg=0


Future proofing our homes and neighbourhoods: time to get back to basics

Good article. Thanks. Avoiding "institutions" whilst spending a fortune on stuff that makes your home look, and feel, like an "institution" has long been a bugbear of mine. Wide doorways should be standard, too. I'm lucky as far as that goes as my house is Edwardian and has nice wide doorways - but those trip-hazard thresholds are a problem. Just make the doors a little longer, why don't they?





Edited - typo

[AnatolyKasparov]

Actually the "we are reducing the number of MPs but not the payroll vote along with it" is a very powerful one.

Its true only a handful of Tory MPs voted against the last review, but they knew then the LibDems were going to sink it anyway.

[SpinningHugo]

AK

Of course I have noticed.

But she is

1 A Tory

And

2. A politician who is interested in power

I don't believe her.

She is trying to avoid Brown's idiotic mistake of fueling speculation only to have to back down.

Ever thought of standing for parliament yourself?

You should do well. After all, everyone but Blair, Liz Kendall and the entire Tory party is an idiot according to you. I would think the Tories might offer you a seat, after all you've been busily doing their work for them across the internet for years.

You think flythenest is populated by potential Tory voters?

Have you ever met any?

[SpinningHugo]

As I predicted the day after the GE, Ed Miliband is in the process of being proved right about pretty much everything.

Shame his long term detractors within Labour have done everything they can to wreck the party (and before anybody mentions Corbyn, they are basically responsible for him as well)

1. Hardly. he was observably wrong about the best strategy to lead Labour to victory, as he lost. Badly. When he should not have done. being wrong about that means it doesn't matter what else he was right about.

2. Miliband's failure led to Corbyn. Why bother to compromise when you still lose when you compromise was the lesson learned.

3. Yes yes, it is all the fault of those evil Blairites like Caroline Flint and Margaret Hodge. Everyone knows that. We can take that as a given as a stock reply, however far-fetched.

[StephenDolan]

As I predicted the day after the GE, Ed Miliband is in the process of being proved right about pretty much everything.

Shame his long term detractors within Labour have done everything they can to wreck the party (and before anybody mentions Corbyn, they are basically responsible for him as well)

1. Hardly. he was observably wrong about the best strategy to lead Labour to victory, as he lost. Badly. When he should not have done. being wrong about that means it doesn't matter what else he was right about.

2. Miliband's failure led to Corbyn. Why bother to compromise when you still lose when you compromise was the lesson learned.

3. Yes yes, it is all the fault of those evil Blairites like Caroline Flint and Margaret Hodge. Everyone knows that. We can take that as a given as a stock reply, however far-fetched.

The PLP collective heads in the sand regarding what the membership thought should be the direction of the Labour Party led to Corbyn becoming leader. Not Miliband.

[StephenDolan]

Corbyn and Smith's pledges starkly contrast with Kendall's 2015 pledges.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Yes, let's never forget that post-GE a significant part of the PLP "thought" Labour needed to go further to the right than ever before (*much* further right than Blair in the 1994-97 period) if they were to win elections. Many of them still do, indeed some have been loudly demanding "out UKIPing-UKIP" on immigration since June 23 (though the futility of that should be obvious to anybody with basic thinking faculties, and doesn't sit terribly well with the uncritical pro-EUism they were equally loudly demanding from Corbyn before then)

A significant minority of Labour MPs are not fit for purpose. They would genuinely be happier as lobbyists, or on quangoes, or in the "charity" sector. Let them go and do those things.

[StephenDolan]

Mel and Sue standing down.

*That* was worth a "breaking news" alert on the BBC news app. Sigh.

[HindleA]

http://historyof.place/a-place-in-socie ... nt-living/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


A place in society: Maggie Davis and the birth of independent living

"Ken and Maggie were told time and time again by ‘the professionals’ that they couldn’t do it and it wouldn’t work. It was a hard one battle to prove them wrong. At this moment in time when we are hearing the Paralympic slogan ‘yes I can’ perhaps we need to reflect more widely and think about the daily battles for rights that disabled people have spearheaded over the last 40 years. Ken and Maggie paved the way for me to live in my own home, but I am one of the disabled people who used to receive Independent Living Fund money to pay for support in my home. I cherish my independence. Let’s learn from history and ensure that the fight Ken and Maggie led was not in vain and our rights to equal treatment and opportunities are protected for the next 40 years."

[howsillyofme1]

Ho hum


Just when things seemed to be getting a bit better here with some good debate and posting, even over something that could easily be negative such as the ICM poll yesterday

Then today we have one intermittent poster coming in, slagging off Corbyn and then disappearing again, followed by the normal relentless negative posting about Labour that adds no value but just turns people off and makes me realise why this is no longer my first place to come when I am on-line

[HindleA]

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1503581 ... ds-further" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Labour Press
This is a slippery slope towards further outsourcing of a social security system - Debbie Abrahams

Debbie Abrahams MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, commenting on the Second Reading of the Digital Economy Bill, said:

“The state has always been the guardian of our social security system, ensuring that it remains accountable to the electorate. By transferring responsibility for the payment of TV licenses for over-75s from the Department of Work and Pensions to the BBC, this Bill creates a dangerous, new precedent.“

"Who will be able to guarantee that this budget will be protected in the future? This is a slippery slope towards further outsourcing of a social security system under siege.”

[HindleA]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/c ... k-politics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Council Tenants Face ‘80% Tax Rates’ Under Pay-To-Stay Plans