Thursday 27th November 2014

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 7:15 am

East Coast Mainline franchise has been taken out of Public Ownership and the franchise awarded to a consortium of Stagecoach and Virgin. (Today prog, just now...)

Bastards! Edit to add: this Govt. not the new franchisee... I think...

Post by **refitman** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 7:26 am

Morning. Tories lead at 1 point on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 26th November -

Con 33%, (+1)
Lab 32%, (-1)
LD 6%, (-1)
UKIP 16%; (no change)
Grn 7%, (+1)

APP -26 (-4)

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 7:26 am

LadyCentauria wrote:East Coast Mainline franchise has been taken out of Public Ownership and the franchise awarded to a consortium of Stagecoach and Virgin. (Today prog, just now...)

Bastards! Edit to add: this Govt. not the new franchisee... I think...

Motherfkers. They're determined to asset strip as much as possible prior to May.

There goes another yearly profit to go with the Royal Mail's.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 7:57 am

Morning!

Oh come on market competition is bound to improve the trains. I mean you can now choose to travel from London to the Scotland by Virgin or, err, Virgin.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 8:41 am

Morning.

Don't like the look of this:

Lord Ashcroft ✔ @LordAshcroft
Released tomorrow polling in Doncaster North showing UKIP 2nd so if Tories tactically vote for UKIP Miliband loses #votetorygetlabour!

That'll be the media's anti-Ed story for the next week or two, and it is worrying if the polling is correct.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 8:43 am

yahyah wrote:Morning.

Don't like the look of this:

Lord Ashcroft ✔ @LordAshcroft
Released tomorrow polling in Doncaster North showing UKIP 2nd so if Tories tactically vote for UKIP Miliband loses #votetorygetlabour!

Morning yahyah

Don't worry we looked at this yesterday and it's a flight of fancy. Anatoly pointed out Ed got 47% of the votes there last time and that's probably unlikely to drop (hopefully) given his higher profile now.

Also, I pointed out that it doesn't take into account the reasonable Tory voters who will tactically vote for Ed to stop UKIP.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 8:46 am

In other non-news the awful @MeltonBlue and Louise Mensch are promoting a totally puerile new hashtag #VoteLabourGetMiliband which is giving me and others a good deal of pleasure on Twitter

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 8:48 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
yahyah wrote:Morning.

Don't like the look of this:

Lord Ashcroft ✔ @LordAshcroft
Released tomorrow polling in Doncaster North showing UKIP 2nd so if Tories tactically vote for UKIP Miliband loses #votetorygetlabour!
Morning yahyah

Don't worry we looked at this yesterday and it's a flight of fancy. Anatoly pointed out Ed got 47% of the votes there last time and that's probably unlikely to drop (hopefully) given his higher profile now.

Also, I pointed out that it doesn't take into account the reasonable Tory voters who will tactically vote for Ed to stop UKIP.

Thanks Paul. Feel a little relieved.

I thought I'd read all yesterday's posts but must have missed some out when I went back to finish the thread. Will start noting the time/poster of the last comment I read before logging off in future.

But when we laugh at Beaker or Clegg and the prospect of Portillo moments suppose we mustn't forget it could happen to people we rate.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 8:52 am

yahyah wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
yahyah wrote:Morning.

Don't like the look of this:

Lord Ashcroft ✔ @LordAshcroft
Released tomorrow polling in Doncaster North showing UKIP 2nd so if Tories tactically vote for UKIP Miliband loses #votetorygetlabour!
Morning yahyah

Don't worry we looked at this yesterday and it's a flight of fancy. Anatoly pointed out Ed got 47% of the votes there last time and that's probably unlikely to drop (hopefully) given his higher profile now.

Also, I pointed out that it doesn't take into account the reasonable Tory voters who will tactically vote for Ed to stop UKIP.

Thanks Paul. Feel a little relieved.

I thought I'd read all yesterday's posts but must have missed some out when I went back to finish the thread. Will start noting the time/poster of the last comment I read before logging off in future.

But when we laugh at Beaker or Clegg and the prospect of Portillo moments suppose we mustn't forget it could happen to people we rate.

Or even to Ed Balls.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 8:53 am

Paul Lewis ‏@paullewismoney 26m26 minutes ago
Single parents have benefits cut or stopped by sanctions even though 4/10 should never have been imposed http://goo.gl/iNuDnq" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Morning all. Links to a press release from Gingerbread re a new report released by them showing ... 41% of sanctions applied to this group are overturned and reversed on appeal ... that sanctions make no positive impact on the prospects of someone finding work ... rather the reverse as it wastes time, energy and resources that could be used to support people get into work ... quite apart from the awful hardship caused to these people and their children.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 8:54 am

yahyah wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
yahyah wrote:Morning.

Don't like the look of this:

Lord Ashcroft ✔ @LordAshcroft
Released tomorrow polling in Doncaster North showing UKIP 2nd so if Tories tactically vote for UKIP Miliband loses #votetorygetlabour!
Morning yahyah

Don't worry we looked at this yesterday and it's a flight of fancy. Anatoly pointed out Ed got 47% of the votes there last time and that's probably unlikely to drop (hopefully) given his higher profile now.

Also, I pointed out that it doesn't take into account the reasonable Tory voters who will tactically vote for Ed to stop UKIP.

Thanks Paul. Feel a little relieved.

I thought I'd read all yesterday's posts but must have missed some out when I went back to finish the thread. Will start noting the time/poster of the last comment I read before logging off in future.

But when we laugh at Beaker or Clegg and the prospect of Portillo moments suppose we mustn't forget it could happen to people we rate.

That's true and quite likely. I do agree with Ashcroft with his "all bets are off" comment. It's not going to be a "normal" UK election is it?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 8:55 am

StephenDolan wrote:
yahyah wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote: Morning yahyah

Don't worry we looked at this yesterday and it's a flight of fancy. Anatoly pointed out Ed got 47% of the votes there last time and that's probably unlikely to drop (hopefully) given his higher profile now.

Also, I pointed out that it doesn't take into account the reasonable Tory voters who will tactically vote for Ed to stop UKIP.

Thanks Paul. Feel a little relieved.

I thought I'd read all yesterday's posts but must have missed some out when I went back to finish the thread. Will start noting the time/poster of the last comment I read before logging off in future.

But when we laugh at Beaker or Clegg and the prospect of Portillo moments suppose we mustn't forget it could happen to people we rate.
Or even to Ed Balls.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:04 am

Michael Dugher ‏@MichaelDugherMP 2m2 minutes ago
"The taxpayer & the travelling public have been sold down the river". My reaction to the East Coast decision http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30222458" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:07 am

Tim Montgomerie ن @montie · 3m 3 minutes ago
People think benefits are too high and pay is too low. Clear support for a higher minimum wage http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/c ... 244797.ece" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:09 am

George Eaton @georgeeaton · 49m 49 minutes ago
Looks like Labour has avoided "the Tory trap" Brown warned of: Scottish MPs will retain full voting rights on UK Budget.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:11 am

norman smith @BBCNormanS · 58s 58 seconds ago
Scottish Parliament will be given power to allow 16 and 17 year olds the vote

Anyone else think that this is going to be an imbalance too far if 16 and 17 year olds in the UK as a whole aren't going to get the vote?

Post by **refitman** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:16 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
norman smith @BBCNormanS · 58s 58 seconds ago
Scottish Parliament will be given power to allow 16 and 17 year olds the vote
Anyone else think that this is going to be an imbalance too far if 16 and 17 year olds in the UK as a whole aren't going to get the vote?

I believe that it is just for Scottish Parliament elections (MSPs etc) rather than in UK elections. Kind of like for the referendum.

Bear in mind, Miliband has been talking about lowering the voting age for the UK as a whole.

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:21 am

Morning all!

I'm finding #cameronmustgo very cathartic - just watching the entries come in is heartening in itself without the added bonus of being able to metaphorically shout at OGRFG - nice to see that the majority of so-called 'public opinion' relied upon by the MSM is whatever the elite decide it is....and doesn't have any relation to real opinion. After the despair of the last couple of weeks (Eds' Leadership 'plot'/Thornberry tweet) it does feel like a vent for anger and frustration which is most welcome.

I'm afraid my view wrt trains/privatisation is the same as it's always been - buses, trains (OK - public transport) should be organised nationally with service and access being the key, not profit (as with Post Office/Royal Mail, a cost of 50p per year per person to keep all those people in jobs and support a service doesn't seem a bad deal really - but then I'm a lefty bully so what do I know

)...as a mass transportation system - other countries seem to be able to organise such things, with contribution from private companies but an overarching public control - it's not really surprising that the Creche of Incompetence can't imagine a 'different way'. (...I know some here think HS2 is a good idea, but from my point of view it's a big fat money pit and there are better ways to spend that amount of money)

Osborne? Looked to me like someone who was extremely late for something very important and had to dress hastily and run to where he needed to be...he looked distinctly (to me, at least) like someone trying to hide his breathlessness. I also wondered whether perhaps he'd seen or heard something that had shocked him - can't think what it could be (so many to choose from). Happy to be proved wrong by a urine test though

Also, not long ago, I saw some figures relating to the number of SpAds working in PR for various Government Depts - I think/hope it was in here - does anyone have a link/the info?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:25 am

Poundland profits rise as Brits’ thrifty habits continue
Company, which prepares for its first Christmas as a public company, increased its profits by nearly 12% to £9.3m
http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... CMP=twt_gu

How much of that increased profit has been helped by getting free workers through the work programmes?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:30 am

This is just to say I realised late last night that we have been on this new site for a while now ... and I wanted to say another thank you to those who set this one up for us. So far (fingers crossed) it has been relatively free of problems (I haven't seen any of the Russian viagra or dominatrix spam ...!) and a pleasure to use. A great improvement on the previous site. Hope it has been relatively problem free for others too.

So thank you refit, PfY, Ernst and anyone else involved for your sterling efforts and achievements for FTN.

WelshIan · Post by **WelshIan** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:41 am

yahyah wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
yahyah wrote:Morning.

Don't like the look of this:

Lord Ashcroft ✔ @LordAshcroft
Released tomorrow polling in Doncaster North showing UKIP 2nd so if Tories tactically vote for UKIP Miliband loses #votetorygetlabour!
Morning yahyah

Don't worry we looked at this yesterday and it's a flight of fancy. Anatoly pointed out Ed got 47% of the votes there last time and that's probably unlikely to drop (hopefully) given his higher profile now.

Also, I pointed out that it doesn't take into account the reasonable Tory voters who will tactically vote for Ed to stop UKIP.

Thanks Paul. Feel a little relieved.

I thought I'd read all yesterday's posts but must have missed some out when I went back to finish the thread. Will start noting the time/poster of the last comment I read before logging off in future.

But when we laugh at Beaker or Clegg and the prospect of Portillo moments suppose we mustn't forget it could happen to people we rate.

The turnout in Doncaster North was also quite low in 2010 - about 57%. I think a lot of people decided not to vote rather than support one of the other parties. As others have said, his higher profile now, combined with the need to get rid of this government, should see a rather comfortable majority.

I'm a little surprised that respected pollsters are publicising this - not all Tories want to get out of the EU and Cameron can't be the only Tory who thinks UKIP are full of 'fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists'.
This type of story, this far from the election, gives Labour time to organise and make sure they get the vote out in the constituency.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:41 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Tim Montgomerie ن @montie · 3m 3 minutes ago
People think benefits are too high and pay is too low. Clear support for a higher minimum wage http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/c ... 244797.ece" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Most people are wrong about the first bit, though...

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 9:59 am

The Smith Commission Report is here:
https://www.smith-commission.scot/wp-co ... port-1.pdf

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:00 am

Ashcroft does like to tease - apart from UKIP being second in Ed's seat (no surprise) I highly doubt if the figures are that dramatic.

And even if by some chance they are, there is no chance Miliband will be in any trouble on the day. He will get increased exposure during the GE campaign, and that MPs get a boost in the first election after becoming leader is a virtually universal rule (Labour's vote even went up in Foot's seat in 1983)

(as for Balls, if he was ever going to lose 2010 was the time - by all accounts he was genuinely worried)

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:01 am

Morning all.
New Statesman has just tweeted:

Net migration to UK now 260,000 - higher than in Labour's last year in office. Cameron previously pledged to cut it to "tens of thousands".

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:09 am

danesclose wrote:Morning all.
New Statesman has just tweeted:
Net migration to UK now 260,000 - higher than in Labour's last year in office. Cameron previously pledged to cut it to "tens of thousands".

Oh dear, Cameron should have made his big speech before this came out...watch for the "Yeah, but it wasn't really a promise...and did we mention the EU?"

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:37 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Tim Montgomerie ن @montie · 3m 3 minutes ago
People think benefits are too high and pay is too low. Clear support for a higher minimum wage http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/c ... 244797.ece" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

So, exclusively for Red Box, YouGov asked the nation: "Do you think there should be more or less government redistribution of income from the better-off to the less well-off?"

55 per cent said "more"
22 per cent thought the current balance "about right"
9 per cent who thought there should be "less" redistribution

We also discovered that 71 per cent think the minimum wage is "too low" versus 20 per cent who thought it was "about right", 2 per cent who thought it "slightly too high" and just 1 per cent who said "there should be no minimum wage". 54 per cent think the top rate of tax for those earning £150,000 should be 50p or higher; but while redistribution from top to middle is popular, there is less enthusiasm about middle to bottom: 46 per cent think benefits are too high, and only 23 per cent think them too low.

http://times-deck.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaw ... 802f5.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Times Red Box (free) daily email has the details & the poll was from the 'yougov daily' app, also free & has 3 questions daily so for those with a smart phone, ipad etc it's quick & easy to download & play a part in these polls.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:42 am

refitman wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
norman smith @BBCNormanS · 58s 58 seconds ago
Scottish Parliament will be given power to allow 16 and 17 year olds the vote
Anyone else think that this is going to be an imbalance too far if 16 and 17 year olds in the UK as a whole aren't going to get the vote?
I believe that it is just for Scottish Parliament elections (MSPs etc) rather than in UK elections. Kind of like for the referendum.

Bear in mind, Miliband has been talking about lowering the voting age for the UK as a whole.

I hope he brings that in. Young people are interested in what is going on around them & it's down to the politicians to engage with them instead of brushing them off as irrelevant because they can't vote.

The youth parliament is a pleasure to watch & BBC 3's Free Speech is another that shows when debating things that matter to them, young people will engage & will take an active part. They need to be enthused & that takes effort by the politicians - maybe that's why many (most ?) politicians don't bother with them.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:43 am

LadyCentauria wrote:The Smith Commission Report is here:
https://www.smith-commission.scot/wp-co ... port-1.pdf

Morning all.

Haven't read the report yet but there's (imo) a fundamental error in logic in the second paragraph.

Scotland voted ‘No’, but it did so with each of the three main UK parties promising more powers for the Scottish Parliament.

The outcome of the vote is, of course, irrefutable but the idea that the promise of more powers in some way influenced the result is, as far as I am aware, unproven. The only conclusion that can be drawn from the referendum is that the majority of Scottish residents wish to remain in the UK - nothing more or less.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:45 am

danesclose wrote:Morning all.
New Statesman has just tweeted:
Net migration to UK now 260,000 - higher than in Labour's last year in office. Cameron previously pledged to cut it to "tens of thousands".

Blimey, that's a huge increase on the last set of figures isn't it ? IIRC the last set said 243,000.

Oh dear, Dave

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:45 am

Lonewolfie wrote:Morning all!

Also, not long ago, I saw some figures relating to the number of SpAds working in PR for various Government Depts - I think/hope it was in here - does anyone have a link/the info?

It was an article in the Press Gazette last week - http://www.pressgazette.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

1,514 while-time-equivalent staff working in "communications" for central government; it isn't clear if any of them are SPADs or people who are not civil servants, they're just described as "staff".

There are civil service regulations about special advisers and what they can and cannot do; but they are very influential in some departments like DWP, and they are often given "casual" civil service contracts. Some of them are paid out of the individual department's budget for other things, eg. DWP has 170 communications staff, but it's not known how many of them are proper civil service staff, but there are two SPADs from the Centre for Social Justice working with IDS on salaries of £60K-plus.
They can be paid up to £142,000 - that's what Coulson got; and the severance is quite generous.

The high salaries are "justified" because the SPAD is not considered permanent and if the minister goes so do they; plus there is an assumption that the well-paid ones are experts in their field and thus worth a lot of money.
The Committee for Standards in Public Life recommends that the Cabinet Office releases the figures of SPADs and their pay every year.
It was also suggested that a cap be put on the number allowed - but that was rejected by the Labour government; at the time, it was thought that as long as the employment of SPADs was transparent, it was OK.

In October 2010, there were 69 SPADs altogether; Cameron had 19 of those, and 3 of them on salaries higher than £100K.
The last release from the Cabinet Office was in July of this year - Cameron still has 19 SPADs, with 4 of them on £100K or more; there are 72 in total, but some have changed (Cummings being a case in point) as ministers have gone. It all costs £6.2 Million.

These people are purely political appointments, and their only loyalty is to the minister who gave them the job. I suspect that they are responsible for a lot of the content of the various press briefings from No.10, as quite a few of them are hacks.

We have a perfectly decent civil service, and it's my view that if government needs specialist advice it should buy it in on an ad-hoc basis; part of the reason why ministers fuck up so spectacularly, IMHO, is because they are not listening to the well-qualified and experienced civil servants there to advise them (and tell them what's actually do-able/legal) but prefer to use their SPADs to give them policy ideas which often turn out to be unworkable because the SPADs don't know how governing actually works.

I also think that appointees like Coulson, or anyone employed solely for PR purposes, should be paid for by the minster concerned or the party he belongs to. I do not think that the taxpayer should be funding government spin - that goes for Labour too

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:48 am

Lonewolfie wrote:Morning all!

Also, not long ago, I saw some figures relating to the number of SpAds working in PR for various Government Depts - I think/hope it was in here - does anyone have a link/the info?

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/central-g ... wers-until

Central Government has more than 1,500 communications staff: 'And it's still impossible to get answers until after deadline'

William Turvill
20 November 2014

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/central-g ... wers-until" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:49 am

Peter Oborne's latest article on our beloved chancellor:

Mr Osborne’s cunning plan can be spotted a mile off, and makes Baldrick in Blackadder look like a master of concealment.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/autu ... Brown.html

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:52 am

Good-morning, everyone.

Ephemerid, thank you for supplying me with the answer to Lonewolfie's question originally. I'm going to read the rest of your post now.

Please be keeping well, my friend.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 10:53 am

And George Eaton has a good article in the New Statesman:

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... -own-terms" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 11:06 am

danesclose wrote:Peter Oborne's latest article on our beloved chancellor:

Mr Osborne’s cunning plan can be spotted a mile off, and makes Baldrick in Blackadder look like a master of concealment.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/autu ... Brown.html

The FT's leader is quite scathing about this gimmick too:

The UK’s coalition government was formed with one overriding purpose: to bring down record levels of public borrowing. Taxes were raised and the growth of spending sharply curtailed. In his first budget George Osborne, the chancellor, predicted that this would achieve fiscal sustainability by the current financial year.

The results are not as Mr Osborne had hoped. On the Treasury’s preferred measure, annual borrowing may reach £90bn, three times larger than first forecast. Weak tax receipts look likely to leave the deficit no smaller than in 2013. Whoever governs after next year’s election has much left to do. But far from addressing this, the political response has been to make the problem worse.
.....

It is not economic necessity that has led to such fiscal machismo but political calculation: a plan to force the Labour opposition into showing its hand. The latest manoeuvre – also approved by the governing Liberal Democrats – is a proposed law binding the next government into eliminating the current structural deficit by 2017/18. This bears a striking resemblance to the sort of trick played by former prime minister Gordon Brown. Mr Brown passed a Fiscal Responsibility Act in 2010, requiring the next government to halve the rate of borrowing within four years. On assuming power, Mr Osborne repealed the law, having previously agreed that it was “vacuous and irrelevant”. Had he not, it would have forced him into further steep austerity last year.
.....

The past four years have shown how politicians have limited control over their fiscal destiny. There is little the coalition could have done about stagnant wages, a spike in commodity prices or the eurozone crisis, all of which impeded deficit reduction. But deliberate choices also played a part. Freezes of fuel duty and generous cuts to corporate and income taxes increased by billions of pounds the scale of the cuts now needed.

Britain has no need for a balanced budget law. What would really bolster Mr Osborne’s credibility is an admission that taxes will have to rise.

I have C&P the most interesting bits but the full article can be found here:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/de8d5a14-7574 ... z3KGPe7wOQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 11:09 am

Thank you both, Ephie and Citizen JA - this (I believeTM) is what is so fantastic about this place.

What a week for Dodgy Dave

There's the debate re the CSA Inquiry this afternoon, too...

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... e-inquiry/

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 11:23 am

pk1 wrote:
refitman wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote: Anyone else think that this is going to be an imbalance too far if 16 and 17 year olds in the UK as a whole aren't going to get the vote?
I believe that it is just for Scottish Parliament elections (MSPs etc) rather than in UK elections. Kind of like for the referendum.

Bear in mind, Miliband has been talking about lowering the voting age for the UK as a whole.
I hope he brings that in. Young people are interested in what is going on around them & it's down to the politicians to engage with them instead of brushing them off as irrelevant because they can't vote.

The youth parliament is a pleasure to watch & BBC 3's Free Speech is another that shows when debating things that matter to them, young people will engage & will take an active part. They need to be enthused & that takes effort by the politicians - maybe that's why many (most ?) politicians don't bother with them.

Labour Party adopts votes for 16-year-olds
A commitment to lower the voting age from 18 to 16 will be included in the next Labour manifesto, the shadow Justice Secretary signalled today.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 73407.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Morning all

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 11:58 am

pk1 wrote:
danesclose wrote:Morning all.
New Statesman has just tweeted:
Net migration to UK now 260,000 - higher than in Labour's last year in office. Cameron previously pledged to cut it to "tens of thousands".
Blimey, that's a huge increase on the last set of figures isn't it ? IIRC the last set said 243,000.

Oh dear, Dave

Worth remembering next time one of the usual suspects trots out the "Labour's open door policy" line.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 12:14 pm

What Ho, Peasants!

Lady Jacobia here, and I will spare some of my very valuable time before luncheon to instruct you on the politics of the day.

Those of you who are cross about Princess Theresa of the May and her splendid ideas really need to get a jolly old grip!
A lady of her seniority does not have to answer to the likes of you; the reports that silly little man Vine sent to her haven't been opened by the servants yet, and no wonder - they have much more important things to do. Who else will go out to buy her Vogues and Tatlers?

For some odd reason, the Reds are droning on about bringing in servants from overseas. How else can one get decent punkah-wallahs on a budget? Honestly - the Reds really need to accept some responsibility for this. After all, they only let in a piffling 192,000 a year; and Dear Theresa has sent us 260,000 which is much more the thing. Anyway, the Reds want the likes of me to pay wages. Horrors!

I must say, I am deeply deeply disappointed in some of you.

Now it appears that one's Ghillies on ones' Scottish estates are seriously expecting to tax themselves. I have no idea how they propose to do that.
They really need to leave these things to PLU as we know best. They'll be wanting us to stop paying them in kitchen scraps next. Ingrates.
After all, we let them live in our cottages for next to nothing - they only have to work for 60 hours a week What more do they want? Heating?

In my grandpapa's day, we had none of this nonsense. Ghillies and their ilk need PLU to keep them in their place. It's the natural order of things.

Now some of you little people here seem to think you should vote for the Reds, or even the Greens (whatever they are) and I can tell you now that you are dreadfully misguided. There is no excuse for not voting for the correct and proper party, and you all know perfectly well that you must vote Conservative. I warn you now, we'll never get the Hunt back if you don't!

I appreciate that there are a few odd people in the ranks who aren't related to royalty and only have minor titles, but every regiment needs its cannon-fodder, I'm sure you'll agree. Salt of the earth, those chaps. And luckily for them, they have Sir King God Cameron to sort them out.

Now off you go, peasants, and do as you're told. The proper order must be maintained, and now you know what is expected of you, I will expect the right subservience in future.

Don't grovel! I don't need your thanks. Noblesse Oblige, and all that.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 12:54 pm

In her usual drearily cynical Graun offering today, Suzanne Moore refers to "polling" that supposedly shows "UKIP now has more working class support than Labour".

Does any such survey(s) actually exist? Or is she just gobbing off about the Sun reader subsample voodoo poll the Express splashed with at the start of the week??

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 1:04 pm

Lonewolfie wrote:Thank you both, Ephie and Citizen JA - this (I believeTM) is what is so fantastic about this place.

What a week for Dodgy Dave

There's the debate re the CSA Inquiry this afternoon, too...

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... e-inquiry/

It hasn't been a good week for Dodgy Dave, has it? It does feel like the tide is finally turning. Labour and Ed don't seem to be on the ropes quite as they were and attention is finally being given to Cameron and the Coalition government's record. Of course I've recently joined twitter like you (that's me following you, in case you were wondering, I use my real name on twitter but use the same picture) so I don't know if I just feel more positive because I'm following people on twitter who support Labour! I've certainly found it a very useful way to find out what the local Labour team are up to. I guess I should follow the enemy as well, but I haven't been able to bring myself to do that, so far. I'm not sure Rees-Mogg is even on twitter anyway! Danny Blanchflower's quite good to follow for a more leftwing view on the economy, especially as economic reality is moving further away from the picture the Tories and MSM would like to paint 6 months out from the election.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 1:43 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:In her usual drearily cynical Graun offering today, Suzanne Moore refers to "polling" that supposedly shows "UKIP now has more working class support than Labour".

Does any such survey(s) actually exist? Or is she just gobbing off about the Sun reader subsample voodoo poll the Express splashed with at the start of the week??

If you aren't aware of any poll then I doubt it exists. Par for the course that Moore would use that one, she is the epitome of lazy journalism; I've not paid her any minds since her 'trans'gression (and the Burchill follow up).

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 1:44 pm

I don't know if anyone's posted this before, apols if so.

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2014 ... you-to-see" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; from Richard Murphy.

It's got a lovely colourful pie chart, all split up with the (real) categories in detail. With a written explanation of how he worked it all out.

The truth - pensions: 12.2%; specific non-unemployment benefits: 14.2%; unemployment benefits; 0.6% - of total spending of our tax.

I've Tweeted this, but I'd be grateful if a few more of you did the same. It would be nice to have an alternative pie to enjoy!

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 2:33 pm

"But while the Labour leader has little reason to fear losing his seat (12 points is a comfortable lead), the same cannot be said of Clegg. Ashcroft's poll found him just three points ahead of Labour in Sheffield, a margin too close for comfort. Clegg's seat, in which he had a lead of 19,096 over Miliband's party in 2010, is not one of the 106 seats targeted by the opposition at the election, but with the race this tight, plenty of MPs will be offering their help. Tom Watson tweeted: "Clearing my diary and heading to Sheffield". Defeating Clegg in Sheffield would, after all, be the easiest way for Labour to avoid having to mark with him in the likely event of another hung parliament. This said, given that he's ahead even before any swingback effect, Clegg will almost certainly retain his seat."
....Or will he? we shall see......

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... poll-shows" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 2:35 pm

Maria Eagle MP ‏@meaglemp · 5 hrs5 hours ago
25 years after water privatisation, firms make £2b profit, pay £1.8b to shareholders & 7 paid NO tax #ripoff http://tinyurl.com/ne8kfqs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 2:37 pm

Interesting.....

Rupert Myers ‏@RupertMyers · 14 secs15 seconds ago
Judge has found Mitchell's evidence "inconsistent" and PC Rowland's "consistent" with the "objective" evidence #plebgate looking bad for AM

minch · Post by **minch** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 2:48 pm

OpenSeas has just posted this on AS

Incredible to see the FlyTheNest brigade 'rolling on the floor laughing' at the net migration figures of +260,000 while the official Labour party is trying to tackle their vote leakage to UKIP with a series of (admittedly lip service) measures, to discourage EU migration to the UK.

FlyTheNest is turning into the epitome of that old phrase 'when the mask slips'.

Can you imagine if any floating voters wander on to that site? I can't imagine it would do Labour any favours.

I will leave it to others to comment!

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 2:50 pm

Interesting piece in the Indy from Boyd Tonkin asking the question that has been posed here a few times, is the criticism of Ed driven by anti-Semitism.

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

Just as interesting is the response elsewhere to the article. Havisham Dan is using the unsubtle "oh of course we are, we're all anti-Semites" approach, poor even by his standards; mind you, the people replying to him hinting that this is all Axelrod's doing, Labour reduced to playing the race card, are even more desperate in my opinion - I challenged one of them to confirm that he was claiming the Indy were in cahoots with Labour, oddly (after 4 hours) he has declined to reply.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 27 Nov, 2014 2:51 pm

minch wrote:OpenSeas has just posted this on AS

Incredible to see the FlyTheNest brigade 'rolling on the floor laughing' at the net migration figures of +260,000 while the official Labour party is trying to tackle their vote leakage to UKIP with a series of (admittedly lip service) measures, to discourage EU migration to the UK.

FlyTheNest is turning into the epitome of that old phrase 'when the mask slips'.

Can you imagine if any floating voters wander on to that site? I can't imagine it would do Labour any favours.
I will leave it to others to comment!

Still boring for England is he? Meh.