Thursday 16th October 2014

Post by **refitman** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 7:30 am

Morning all. Labour lead at 2 points on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 15th Oct -

Con 31%, (+1)
Lab 33%, (-1)
LD 7%, (-1)
UKIP 19%; (+1)

APP -26 (-1)

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 9:16 am

refitman wrote:Morning all. Labour lead at 2 points on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 15th Oct -

Con 31%, (+1)
Lab 33%, (-1)
LD 7%, (-1)
UKIP 19%; (+1)

APP -26 (-1)

Morning all.

I'm slightly troubled by the UKIP and Labour polling. The slight crumb of comfort I'm clinging on to is where that UKIP support is perceived to reside. Cutting heavily into Labour traditional supporting working class heartlands may severely reduce majorities, but allow either coalition partner through to claim? Unlikely.
My early 2p worth

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 9:36 am

Ashcroft has more marginal polling out today, 11am I believe?

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 9:42 am

Morning all...as a penance for linking disturbing photos yesterday I humbly offer this (but if you don't like cats they might be disturbing photos

)...

http://beckittns.tumblr.com/

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 9:47 am

Leave aside the ridiculous opening paragraphs this is an excoriating read, if you're a Tory, for the rest of us it quite enjoyable.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... iband.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 9:53 am

Lonewolfie wrote:Morning all...as a penance for linking disturbing photos yesterday I humbly offer this (but if you don't like cats they might be disturbing photos )...

http://beckittns.tumblr.com/

You are forgiven Wolfie - great pics

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 10:13 am

Morning all. Great cartoon from Steve Bell today:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... nimum-wage" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 10:46 am

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Leave aside the ridiculous opening paragraphs this is an excoriating read, if you're a Tory, for the rest of us it quite enjoyable.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... iband.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To prove Oborne's point, Cameron hasn't got the balls to sort his party out once and for all, and to think he accuses Miliband of being weak.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 10:55 am

Letter from Reeves to Cameron 're Freud.

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1001494 ... lord-freud" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:02 am

Damages claim by "Plebgate" officer Toby Rowland against former chief whip Andrew Mitchell reaches High Court today.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:04 am

Morning all.

Re. the comments about Labour not fighting Rochester and Strood seriously; now the writ has been passed campaigning can start properly. Yesterday I joined with other LP members doorstepping in support of Naushabah Khan; her Twitter profile tells you all you need to know, "Southeastern Commuter and Kickboxer. Born and raised in Medway." - she won't be the tallest MP in the House if she wins, but you certainly wouldn't argue with her! The local party have been working door to door since Reckless made his announcement and, to date, Naushabah is the only one of the candidates to get out their and talk to the constituents (although, granted, the Tories don't yet have a candidate).

We were supported by Gloria (of course, she is damn good at this, it is always a pleasure to work with her), Jon Ashworth and Chris Bryant, along with other PPCs from the South East. The campaign may not be the flashiest, or the most high profile, but it certainly doesn't mean we have abandoned all hope of taking this seat. My apologies if that was too partisan.

BTW has RingPiece mentioned that tweet by St Julie of the Flower Vase that PaulFromYorkshire posted about last night yet? Soon the only people posting on Sparrow's blog will be Rusty and his various sockpuppets.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:05 am

A 5% swing to Labour in Con/Lab marginals, out of 11 seats surveyed Labour would gain 9, not bad, but some of the figures are too tight to be too comfortable.

http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... lling.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:06 am

What is the standard procedure for handling of government documents like the NHS reorganisation risk register when there's a change of government. Are they deemed party independent and freely available for perusal by the new ministers? Do such documents have to be kept?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:13 am

letsskiptotheleft wrote:A 5% swing to Labour in Con/Lab marginals, out of 11 seats surveyed Labour would gain 9, not bad, but some of the figures are too tight to be too comfortable.

http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... lling.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

" Despite the Labour leads in voting intention less than three in ten (29 per cent) of all voters in these seats said they would rather see Ed Miliband as Prime Minister than David Cameron, including just two thirds (65 per cent) of Labour voters (and only 57 per cent of those switching to Labour from other parties). Only just over a fifth (22 per cent) of UKIP voters – and only 7 per cent of those switching to UKIP from the Tories – said they would rather see Miliband in Number 10. "

The drum keeps getting banged and yet an obvious point is never asked by political commentators. If Cameron is so much more" popular" why are his party relatively so far behind?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:18 am

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 7m7 minutes ago
According to new @LordAshcroft marginals polls
Brenford & Isl
Brighton Kemptown
Corby
Enfield N
Halesowen
Hove
Ipswich
Nuneaton
LAB gains

These are around 30-40 on Labour's target list so enough to make Labour the largest party.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:20 am

StephenDolan wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:A 5% swing to Labour in Con/Lab marginals, out of 11 seats surveyed Labour would gain 9, not bad, but some of the figures are too tight to be too comfortable.

http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... lling.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" Despite the Labour leads in voting intention less than three in ten (29 per cent) of all voters in these seats said they would rather see Ed Miliband as Prime Minister than David Cameron, including just two thirds (65 per cent) of Labour voters (and only 57 per cent of those switching to Labour from other parties). Only just over a fifth (22 per cent) of UKIP voters – and only 7 per cent of those switching to UKIP from the Tories – said they would rather see Miliband in Number 10. "

The drum keeps getting banged and yet an obvious point is never asked by political commentators. If Cameron is so much more" popular" why are his party relatively so far behind?

The beat of that drum is one thing that gives bell-ends like Hodges something to cling onto, not working too well is it?

DonutHingeParty · Post by **DonutHingeParty** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:23 am

StephenDolan wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:A 5% swing to Labour in Con/Lab marginals, out of 11 seats surveyed Labour would gain 9, not bad, but some of the figures are too tight to be too comfortable.

http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... lling.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" Despite the Labour leads in voting intention less than three in ten (29 per cent) of all voters in these seats said they would rather see Ed Miliband as Prime Minister than David Cameron, including just two thirds (65 per cent) of Labour voters (and only 57 per cent of those switching to Labour from other parties). Only just over a fifth (22 per cent) of UKIP voters – and only 7 per cent of those switching to UKIP from the Tories – said they would rather see Miliband in Number 10. "

The drum keeps getting banged and yet an obvious point is never asked by political commentators. If Cameron is so much more" popular" why are his party relatively so far behind?

Because he's (bizarrely) perceived as a soft liberal, which the majority of the country actually likes. Replace him with literally anyone else from the frontbench apart from Boris, and that goodwill would go. It's a source of constant frustration for those anti-EU frothers who are trying to drag the party back to the early 90's that the country doesn't agree with them; although paradoxically, Farage polls exceptionally well as a leader; or rather he tends to attract extreme opinions which might skew the figures (depending on whether they're using a three or weighted five point scale)

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:29 am

Labour gains, on the basis of Ashcroft's polling:

Brentford
Brighton Kemptown
Corby*
Enfield North
Halesowen
Hove
Ipswich
Nuneaton
Hastings & Rye

Pudsey, tied polling.
Gloucester, Tory hold.

* no idea why they have Corby as a Labour gain, supposedly based on the 2012 by-election?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:32 am

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Labour gains, on the basis of Ashcroft's polling:

Brentford
Brighton Kemptown
Corby*
Enfield North
Halesowen
Hove
Ipswich
Nuneaton
Hastings & Rye

Pudsey, tied polling.
Gloucester, Tory hold.

* no idea why they have Corby as a Labour gain, supposedly based on the 2012 by-election?

A bit of a worry if Labour can't take Pudsey :-S

Actually it makes sense to include Corby doesn't it? If it doesn't come out as a Labour gain he knows there's probably something wrong with his methods.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:45 am

DonutHingeParty wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:A 5% swing to Labour in Con/Lab marginals, out of 11 seats surveyed Labour would gain 9, not bad, but some of the figures are too tight to be too comfortable.

http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... lling.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" Despite the Labour leads in voting intention less than three in ten (29 per cent) of all voters in these seats said they would rather see Ed Miliband as Prime Minister than David Cameron, including just two thirds (65 per cent) of Labour voters (and only 57 per cent of those switching to Labour from other parties). Only just over a fifth (22 per cent) of UKIP voters – and only 7 per cent of those switching to UKIP from the Tories – said they would rather see Miliband in Number 10. "

The drum keeps getting banged and yet an obvious point is never asked by political commentators. If Cameron is so much more" popular" why are his party relatively so far behind?
Because he's (bizarrely) perceived as a soft liberal, which the majority of the country actually likes. Replace him with literally anyone else from the frontbench apart from Boris, and that goodwill would go. It's a source of constant frustration for those anti-EU frothers who are trying to drag the party back to the early 90's that the country doesn't agree with them; although paradoxically, Farage polls exceptionally well as a leader; or rather he tends to attract extreme opinions which might skew the figures (depending on whether they're using a three or weighted five point scale)

And yet there's little commentary on this. As though Cameron being the least unpopular tory is enough. Once you explain who they are/were, popularity polling on IDS, Gove, Lansley and Hunt would be interesting.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:46 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 7m7 minutes ago
According to new @LordAshcroft marginals polls
Brenford & Isl
Brighton Kemptown
Corby
Enfield N
Halesowen
Hove
Ipswich
Nuneaton
LAB gains

These are around 30-40 on Labour's target list so enough to make Labour the largest party.

Hove is interesting. Electoral Calculus have been suggesting for some time that Caroline Lucas could lose her seat to Labour, the Hove polling could support that suggestion; it would be a crying shame as Caroline is one of the most valuable voices in the House (her contribution to the Palestine debate the other night was excellent, as ever) but I think the less than stellar performance of the Greens on Brighton Council has hurt her personally, despite her criticisms of them.

In other news ..... Despite Osborne's promises to be tough on tax avoidance and evasion (apart from the multinationals, obviously) latest figures suggest that uncollected tax has gone up by £3 billion since 2010.

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1001507 ... ne-up-by-3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:46 am

Bit surprised by Pudsey myself, should be doing better there, the MP only has a 1,690ish majority, something wrong if that can't be overturned?

Why haven't I got the ''posts made while I waste my time writing out the marginal constituencies, because Paul has already done it?'' thingie

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:48 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Labour gains, on the basis of Ashcroft's polling:

Brentford
Brighton Kemptown
Corby*
Enfield North
Halesowen
Hove
Ipswich
Nuneaton
Hastings & Rye

Pudsey, tied polling.
Gloucester, Tory hold.

* no idea why they have Corby as a Labour gain, supposedly based on the 2012 by-election?
A bit of a worry if Labour can't take Pudsey :-S

Actually it makes sense to include Corby doesn't it? If it doesn't come out as a Labour gain he knows there's probably something wrong with his methods.

Gain on to 2010 General Election. Standard to ignore by-elections when you talk about gains.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:52 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 7m7 minutes ago
According to new @LordAshcroft marginals polls
Brenford & Isl
Brighton Kemptown
Corby
Enfield N
Halesowen
Hove
Ipswich
Nuneaton
LAB gains

These are around 30-40 on Labour's target list so enough to make Labour the largest party.
Hove is interesting. Electoral Calculus have been suggesting for some time that Caroline Lucas could lose her seat to Labour, the Hove polling could support that suggestion; it would be a crying shame as Caroline is one of the most valuable voices in the House (her contribution to the Palestine debate the other night was excellent, as ever) but I think the less than stellar performance of the Greens on Brighton Council has hurt her personally, despite her criticisms of them.

Kemptown is also supposed to be lost.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 11:53 am

Another stat from the polling is that Labour are polling higher in the marginal seats than what is being recorded nationally, could be a crumb of comfort that?

Jacob Rees-Twat say UKIP and the Tories are basically the same, he does like to state the obvious doesn't he?

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/mai ... 3U.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:00 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Hove is interesting.

Ha!

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:02 pm

Sorry -

Good afternoon.

(Also apologies to Hove and any Hovists.)

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:03 pm

Not bad polling when you consider it was done against the 177th media onslaught against Miliband's leadership?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:12 pm

David Cameron is chairing another COBRA meeting today (re ebola). The man is indefatigable.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:17 pm

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Labour gains, on the basis of Ashcroft's polling:

Brentford
Brighton Kemptown
Corby*
Enfield North
Halesowen
Hove
Ipswich
Nuneaton
Hastings & Rye

Pudsey, tied polling.
Gloucester, Tory hold.

* no idea why they have Corby as a Labour gain, supposedly based on the 2012 by-election?

Gloucester does not surprise me - Labour have been struggling for a while there in local elections.

Pudsey is more eye-raising - are the LibDems holding up there?

Post by **refitman** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:19 pm

PorFavor wrote:David Cameron is chairing another COBRA meeting today (re ebola). The man is indefatigable.

I think he's put on quite a bit of weight, myself.

I'll get my coat.

Post by **refitman** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:30 pm

Ukip's EFDD group in the European parliament has broken up

The Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (EFDD) group in the European parliament, set up by Ukip and other Eurosceptics parties after the European elections, has collapsed.

Jaume Duch ✔ @jduch
Follow

Latvian MEP Iveta Grigule left #EFDD group today. #EFDD no longer has members from at least 7 countries, so declared dissolved today. #EP
11:36 AM - 16 Oct 2014

(from Andrew)

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:33 pm

StephenDolan wrote:What is the standard procedure for handling of government documents like the NHS reorganisation risk register when there's a change of government. Are they deemed party independent and freely available for perusal by the new ministers? Do such documents have to be kept?

Off the top of my head, I'd say it's a Government/NHS/Public document - so as with a lot of things, national rather than party...I am guessing though. Mind you, I'd be surprised if it still exists - re-reading this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18071681, in light of this quote...

A former No 10 adviser also told The Times: “No one apart from Lansley had a clue what he was really embarking on, certainly not the Prime Minister". from here http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 90247.html

...I'd think they'd be desperately 'doing a Rebukakah' and trying to sweep some more under the by now very stretched carpet. On the plus side, they're so incompetent that they'll probably manage to make more mess(TM) to get all 'hissy-fitty' about.

So - just so that I've got this right - the biggest, most damaging and most under-reported changes to healthcare in Britain were understood by just one person? Lansley the Private Health Corporate Rep?...and the same is now being said of the Welfare Reforms, which again, will have proved to be the most damaging, expensive and under-reported - that the only person who is 'fully understands the whole shebang' is Lord Freud? He's currently being hammered on Twitter - except for the Spectator and the Adam Smith Institute, who feel Fraud has been treated 'shamefully' by...Ed the Bully

...and Guido, who's got into another spot of bother

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... -lies.html

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:36 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 7m7 minutes ago
According to new @LordAshcroft marginals polls
Brenford & Isl
Brighton Kemptown
Corby
Enfield N
Halesowen
Hove
Ipswich
Nuneaton
LAB gains

These are around 30-40 on Labour's target list so enough to make Labour the largest party.
Hove is interesting. Electoral Calculus have been suggesting for some time that Caroline Lucas could lose her seat to Labour, the Hove polling could support that suggestion; it would be a crying shame as Caroline is one of the most valuable voices in the House (her contribution to the Palestine debate the other night was excellent, as ever) but I think the less than stellar performance of the Greens on Brighton Council has hurt her personally, despite her criticisms of them.

In other news ..... Despite Osborne's promises to be tough on tax avoidance and evasion (apart from the multinationals, obviously) latest figures suggest that uncollected tax has gone up by £3 billion since 2010.

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1001507 ... ne-up-by-3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Hove MP, Mike Weatherley, is standing down & knowing the place fairly well, I'd be gobsmacked if it went back to Labour. It's a typical Con seat & only was Lab in the Blair years.

Dan Jarvis is campaigning in Brighton Kemptown, Brighton Pavilion & Hove today as part of the 3-seat challenge.

DonutHingeParty · Post by **DonutHingeParty** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:39 pm

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/d ... b-2103.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Let us remember the YouGov Feb 13 poll, where only 7% of those intending to vote UKIP voted for Labour in 2010.

Of the total UKIP voters (and there's no further cross tabs) 13% considered themselves somewhat left of centre (15% of total voted for the Lib Dems, so Bad Maths tells me that about half of the formerly Lib Dem voters went to UKIP.

The fact is that it's the Lib Dems who are losing voters to UKIP - as part of the "bloody nose" group. The danger, as I said yesterday, is that UKIP are galvanising people who haven't voted in ages, not that they're stealing votes from Labour.

DonutHingeParty · Post by **DonutHingeParty** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:44 pm

refitman wrote:
Ukip's EFDD group in the European parliament has broken up

The Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (EFDD) group in the European parliament, set up by Ukip and other Eurosceptics parties after the European elections, has collapsed.
Jaume Duch ✔ @jduch
Follow

Latvian MEP Iveta Grigule left #EFDD group today. #EFDD no longer has members from at least 7 countries, so declared dissolved today. #EP
11:36 AM - 16 Oct 2014
(from Andrew)

Do they have to give the money back?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... Parliament" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A Group is assumed to have a set of core principles ("affinities" or "complexion") to which the full members are expected to adhere. This throws up an anomaly: Groups get money and seats on Committees which Independent members do not get.

Rule 31 : Activities and legal situation of the political groups

1. The political groups shall carry out their duties as part of the activities of the Union, including the tasks allocated to them by the Rules of Procedure. The political groups shall be provided with a secretariat on the basis of the establishment plan of the Secretariat, administrative facilities and the appropriations entered for that purpose in Parliament's budget.

Edit: Apparently it depends on the Goodwill of the EU President, and Farage's lot have certainly been shoring that up, haven't they?

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/get ... ionBar=YES" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

3. Where a group falls below the required threshold, the President, with the agreement of the Conference of Presidents, may allow it to continue to exist until Parliament's next constitutive sitting, provided the following conditions are met:

- the members continue to represent at least one-fifth of the Member States;

- the group has been in existence for a period longer than one year.

The President shall not apply this derogation where there is sufficient evidence to suspect that it is being abused.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:44 pm

Hove's demographics are moving quite strongly against the Tories by all accounts (let's not forget Labour only narrowly lost it in 2010)

The B&H conurbation could easily be Lab 2/Green 1 next time as opposed to Tory 2/Green 1 at present......

(yes I expect Lucas to be re-elected there, even if the Greens - as is highly likely - get gubbed in the council elections on the same day)

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:50 pm

Judge blasts [Labour] Southwark Council for evicting Sudanese tenant and destroying all of his possessions (Independent)

I hope that's either:

a) not tribal;

b) not tribal enough.

(Delete where not applicable.)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 96994.html

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 12:56 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Judge blasts [Labour] Southwark Council for evicting Sudanese tenant and destroying all of his possessions (Independent)
I hope that's either:

a) not tribal;

b) not tribal enough.

(Delete where not applicable.)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 96994.html

This appears to be a couple of individuals operating off the reservation.

I assume prosecutions will follow.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 1:13 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
Judge blasts [Labour] Southwark Council for evicting Sudanese tenant and destroying all of his possessions (Independent)
I hope that's either:

a) not tribal;

b) not tribal enough.

(Delete where not applicable.)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 96994.html
It's a terrible story, whichever it is, but I'm not sure what point you're making. That this is Labour policy? Not going to defend the indefensible but was council officers not elected members that acted here, and everyone has accepted that they were completely out of line and they've been disciplined. Obviously the Cabinet Member and the Council have ultimate responsibility, but they are accountable to the electorate. What I'd hope to see from the elected Council is reinforcement that this behaviour is unacceptable - but it is anyway, so I'm not sure what else they can do. Task and finish group to investigate the housing department? The (usually cross-party) scrutiny committee has the role for this, so again, where's the tribalism?

Really just a touch of (possibly misplaced) levity arising from yesterday's to-ing and fro-ing,. I wasn't suggesting that it was party policy - but it's still the ultimate responsibility of the Labour Council. And there's this (from the article):

But the local authority refused to say whether three officials singled out for particular criticism - income officer Christiana Okwara, her line manager Brian Davis, and resident officer Johanna Ashley - were still employed. (Independent)

DonutHingeParty · Post by **DonutHingeParty** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 1:15 pm

Question: Can anyone see where people would tactically vote for UKIP to keep the Tories out? UKIP are only a threat when they're a minority, and although elected although they would obviously prefer to sit on the opposition benches, are unlikely to vote with any elected Labour government, they would be unlikely to have enough power to enforce their will against the government of the day. So politically no different to having a Tory in the same seat. Where it gets awkward is if Labour don't get a huge majority, and are dependent on support from other parties - you could literally have Labour in a Confidence and Supply arrangement with the Tories, which won't help their reputation with the radical left one iota.

I declared my intention to defenestrate Liam Fox yesterday, but take the personal out of it (and being honest, I wouldn't waste my once in a five year opportunity on a futile gesture) and I can't see whereby anyone on the left would vote UKIP tactically - which makes those weird 13% the same kind of people who voted for Boris because they thought he was "a laugh").

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 1:22 pm

Lord Rennard turned up on LDV. To stick up for Jeremy Browne who he tries to make out hasn't cacked all over his local party.

LibDem watchers will like the last bit. Taunton Deane is another Eastleigh!

That's 58, I make it.

And what a pompous arse. Who cares about a presentation he did in 1992?

Chris Rennard 15th Oct '14 - 2:51pm
The timing is of course unfortunate. But Jeremy’s contribution to the party should also be recognised, not least in winning Taunton back for us in 2005. He worked for Alan Beith for a long time and who released him to work with me in the 1994 Eastleigh parliamentary by-election. He also served the party very well as Head of Media in Cowley Street until leaving to seek nomination as a PPC. Taunton Lib Dems will of course be very disappointed. Whilst I am a strong supporter of selecting PPCs at the earliest point practical, the Taunton Lib dems should look to lessons from Bath in 1992. When our PPC stood down shortly before that General Election , Don Foster was selected with only nine weeks before polling day. I attended a campaign meeting immediately after Don’s selection to do a presentation on what was required to win a parliamentary by-election campaign in just over two months, and suggested to the members in Bath that that sort of campaign was what they needed to run. Don told the meeting that that was the agreed plan and they went on to win (defeating Chris Patten the Chair of the Conservative Party). So the Taunton Lib Dems need to get on with selecting a strong candidate, keep Jeremy working with them and attempt to fight the seat in the way that we fought all the parliamentary by-election campaigns that Liberal Democrats have won since Eastbourne 1990 to Eastleigh last year.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 1:24 pm

Rennard is ignored on that thread. Fantastic.

http://www.libdemvoice.org/jeremy-brown ... 42930.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 1:31 pm

Don't worry, the story is all over the front pages.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 1:40 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
Really just a touch of (possibly misplaced) levity arising from yesterday's to-ing and fro-ing,. I wasn't suggesting that it was party policy - but it's still the ultimate responsibility of the Labour Council. And there's this (from the article):

But the local authority refused to say whether three officials singled out for particular criticism - income officer Christiana Okwara, her line manager Brian Davis, and resident officer Johanna Ashley - were still employed. (Independent)
Fair enough - but it's not that easy to sack someone, proceedings might be underway in which case the council couldn't really comment

Yep. That "still employed" thing is what led to Ed Balls virtually sacking Sharon Shoesmith from Whitehall.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 1:42 pm

Should I presume that 'SignorFerrari' from the Graun is yet another reincarnation of Hugo ?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 1:49 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
Really just a touch of (possibly misplaced) levity arising from yesterday's to-ing and fro-ing,. I wasn't suggesting that it was party policy - but it's still the ultimate responsibility of the Labour Council. And there's this (from the article):

Fair enough - but it's not that easy to sack someone, proceedings might be underway in which case the council couldn't really comment
Yep. That "still employed" thing is what led to Ed Balls virtually sacking Sharon Shoesmith from Whitehall.

Yes - but the events in question date back to April last year. Long enough for the council to have formulated some sort of response\action plan\line, surely?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 2:03 pm

@pk1 yep sure looks like it

@letsskip Refitman has disabled the "these people have already posted" thing by popular request. I guess it will lead to a little more snapping

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 2:06 pm

Sorry if this has been mentioned, but on Twitter someone has said Jacob Rees-Mogg is in talks with a top UKIP official....Nanny must have said it's okay!

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 16 Oct, 2014 2:16 pm

Fair play to this lot. Needed saying.

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2014/10/d ... son-again/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

DAVID CAMERON INVOKES HIS DISABLED SON AS A POLITICAL SHIELD (AGAIN)

An MP needs to say this.