Wednesday 14th January 2015

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 1:55 pm

ohsocynical wrote:On Twitter someone said Osborne looked 'ill' again but the cameras were kept off him.

Poor lamb probably up half the night at the Exchequer working on South American exports.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:03 pm

giselle97 wrote:However, in between moving from one channel showing NCIS and another channel showing NCIS,

It isn't only mr gilsey who does that then?

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:08 pm

ohsocynical wrote:On Twitter someone said Osborne looked 'ill' again but the cameras were kept off him.

On Sparrow's blog there's a picture of Cameron at PMQs with Osborne beside him and he does look a bit freaky. His eyes are big black pools and with that wide grin he does look a bit manic, but maybe he's just got that kind of face. I don't know. I'm more worried that he thinks low inflation is A GOOD THING. If it's such a good thing why don't you make 0.5% the target then, you moron!

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:08 pm

yahyah wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:On Twitter someone said Osborne looked 'ill' again but the cameras were kept off him.

Poor lamb probably up half the night at the Exchequer working on South American exports.

Either that or was up half the night reading Natalie Rowes twitter page

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:09 pm

ohsocynical wrote:On Twitter someone said Osborne looked 'ill' again but the cameras were kept off him.

Yeah, but will they be able to keep the camera's off him all the way to May!

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:14 pm

Anyone heard from PorFavor? She doesn't seem to post as often as she used to.

*Waves* at PF, just in case she's lurking.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:18 pm

Think that was just in the Euro elections - much good that it did them

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:18 pm

PMQ's here at 12:00, in which Ron Seal blusters and wise cracks in the manner we have all become accustomed to. What a total waste of skin & oxygen that bloke is. A disgraceful man,

Gideon most of the time looks gazingly into the ether in between guffawing 'hear hear ya boo' while at the same time playing Interstellar Overdrive on a loop in what remains of his grey cells

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/main/Playe ... yer=smooth" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:38 pm

GENERAL ELECTION PREDICTIONS 66: GREATER MANCHESTER A-E
http://www.iaindale.com/posts/2015/01/1 ... um=twitter
Seats: 10
Current Political Makeup: Con 2, Lab 7, LibDem 1
Predicted Political Makeup after May 7: Con 2, Lab 8
Labour gaining Bury North from Conservatives, Conservatives gaining Cheadle from Lib Dems.

GENERAL ELECTION PREDICTIONS 67: GREATER MANCHESTER F-M
http://www.iaindale.com/posts/2015/01/1 ... um=twitter
Seats: 7
Current Political Makeup: Lab 5, LibDem 2
Predicted Political Makeup after May 7: Con 1, Lab 5, UKIP 1
Predicting:
UKIP gain Heywood & Middleton from Labour
Labour gain Manchester Withington from Lib Dems
Conservative gain Hazel Grove from Lib Dems

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:41 pm

AndrewSparrow @AndrewSparrow · 5h 5 hours ago
Douglas Alexander has best soundbite on debates. Says ppl expect Cameron to turn up for the "job interview" - http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... log#block-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

George Eaton @georgeeaton · 2h 2 hours ago
Broadcasters should have included Greens from the start. But damaging for independence if they now do so merely to appease Cameron. #PMQs

Adam Boulton @adamboultonSKY · 2h 2 hours ago
This DC Green point doesn't wash. EM said clearly he would debate Greens if broadcasters invited them. Greens are a Con red herring!

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:46 pm

Well, some of those predictions are risible.

No way will the Tories take *both* Cheadle and Hazel Grove, indeed they might not win either of them (also, the LibDems will be chucking the proverbial kitchen sink at HG because they are desperate to avoid being left with no women MPs - and this is one of their best prospects of doing so)

As for H&M, what to say?? The last time any party won a seat at a GE after missing out on it (however narrowly) at a previous byelection was the SNP at Dundee East in 1972/74 - four decades ago. UKIP last year made an explicit "protest vote" appeal to Labour people, saying that they only had to "lend" them their support until the GE; in addition a major part of the result (and why the polls were wrong) was Labourites just not turning up.

Its not even their best prospect of a gain from Labour this May, tbh.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:48 pm

How interesting.

Petrol prices: How does the fuel stabiliser work?

This is how Mr Osborne explained it in a consultation document in 2008: 'Under a fair fuel stabiliser, when fuel prices go up, fuel duty would fall. And when fuel prices go down, fuel duty would rise.'

That wouldn't be the Mr Osborne who is currently Chancellor of the Exchequer and this in a position to increase fuel duty would it?

I believe it is...wouldn't do any harm to the public finances either but I guess rubbishing the 'cost of living crisis' line is more important now.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 2:52 pm

Stephen Bush @stephenkb · 3h 3 hours ago
"You're scared." "No, you're scared." "Well, you're fat. Good luck with the bread." #pmqs

James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers · 3h 3 hours ago
Labour MPs greet Cameron with a chorus of chicken clucks as Miliband raises TV debates #pmqs

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:02 pm

Toby Latimer wrote:PMQ's here at 12:00, in which Ron Seal blusters and wise cracks in the manner we have all become accustomed to. What a total waste of skin & oxygen that bloke is. A disgraceful man,

Gideon most of the time looks gazingly into the ether in between guffawing 'hear hear ya boo' while at the same time playing Interstellar Overdrive on a loop in what remains of his grey cells

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/main/Playe ... yer=smooth" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He can't even look at Ed even when he's roughly in agreement with him (first two questions). Shows how ill mannered and dismissive he is.

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:27 pm

A leaders' debate without David Cameron would be 'really interesting', says BBC Director-General

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media ... 77849.html

In a rallying call to staff, Mr Hall also warned that the BBC would not be intimidated by politicians during the election campaign.

- said Mr Hall, Director General of the Bullingdon Broadcasting Corporation.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:28 pm

Mark Ferguson ‏@Markfergusonuk 3h3 hours ago
Tell me more about free speech and the democratic system Dave. Then tell me about the Gagging Law again. #PMQs

The nerve of the man is astounding. I want most of the Condems legislation abolished as fast as possible - the Gagging Law should be one of the first. We've already seen how it is being used to restrict political bloggers - disgusting.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:34 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Mark Ferguson ‏@Markfergusonuk 3h3 hours ago
Tell me more about free speech and the democratic system Dave. Then tell me about the Gagging Law again. #PMQs
The nerve of the man is astounding. I want most of the Condems legislation abolished as fast as possible - the Gagging Law should be one of the first. We've already seen how it is being used to restrict political bloggers - disgusting.

There'll need to be a full 5 year parliament to undo all the awful legislation introduced by the coalition. Add in the replacing of the HoL with a senate equivalent etc and it's going to be interesting. Chief whip may be rather busy with a small majority.

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:34 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Mark Ferguson ‏@Markfergusonuk 3h3 hours ago
Tell me more about free speech and the democratic system Dave. Then tell me about the Gagging Law again. #PMQs
The nerve of the man is astounding. I want most of the Condems legislation abolished as fast as possible - the Gagging Law should be one of the first. We've already seen how it is being used to restrict political bloggers - disgusting.

Absolutely Rebecca. Labour I think have promised to repeal it, so hopefully they do so at the first opportunity, if elected. Talking of protecting our right to free speech look at his quote from IDS.

Meeting security chiefs to discuss increasing email and phone intercept protocols before heading to France to support free speech.
— Iain Duncan Smith MP - 10th January 2015.

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:37 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
Mark Ferguson ‏@Markfergusonuk 3h3 hours ago
Tell me more about free speech and the democratic system Dave. Then tell me about the Gagging Law again. #PMQs
The nerve of the man is astounding. I want most of the Condems legislation abolished as fast as possible - the Gagging Law should be one of the first. We've already seen how it is being used to restrict political bloggers - disgusting.
There'll need to be a full 5 year parliament to undo all the awful legislation introduced by the coalition. Add in the replacing of the HoL with a senate equivalent etc and it's going to be interesting. Chief whip may be rather busy with a small majority.

Unfortunately, I rather think it'll take more than 5 years to undo 35+ years of neoliberalism.

Still, hopefully some damage can be undone if Labour get some kind of working majority.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:40 pm

Theresa May: we must deny terrorists safe spaces to communicate
Home secretary says security services should be able to find out the who, where, when and how of communications

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... f-comments

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:46 pm

Mark Ferguson @Markfergusonuk · 4h 4 hours ago
That’s two clear wins for Miliband in a row now at #PMQs. No wonder Cameron doesn’t want the TV debates

Mark Ferguson retweeted
Adam Bienkov @AdamBienkov · 4h 4 hours ago
That was Cameron's worst ever #PMQs performance. No wonder he doesn't want election debates.

Mark Ferguson retweeted
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound · 4h 4 hours ago
That was one of the clearer 6-0 wins we have seen from Miliband. All pointless of course, but Labour tails very much up.

Well that's quite a spectrum of political commentators giving Miliband a good review ... nice to see.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:53 pm

: No Social Housing Boast.jpg (46.96 KiB) Viewed 8789 times

The Guardian ‏@guardian 5m5 minutes ago
'No social housing' boasts luxury London flat advert for foreign investors http://trib.al/eVWcSoP" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 3:58 pm

Mark Ferguson @Markfergusonuk · 6h 6 hours ago
A Labour deal with the SNP would be a diabolically bad idea. It’d damage the Union and hurt Labour EVERYWHERE http://labli.st/150jVW0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I agree with just about everything he says here. Plus - it would hand a gift to those who are clamouring about wanting a quick fix re EVEL - if it looked as though SNP MPs were going to influence votes on mostly English matters.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:07 pm

So Cameron is pushing for two debates, 1 v 1 and a free for all. Once again, when did he get a veto over the formats?

4/3/2 is what the broadcasters have provisionally agreed, are you willing to take part. It's a simple yes or no.

Has there been any announcements on the Guardian, Telegraph and YouTube format btw?

And then there's bite the ballot.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:21 pm

So Al Murray to contest Thanet vs Farage under his alter ego Pub Landlord but ... can people stand in elections under an alias ? [youtube]tADgYkAfXro[/youtube]

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:26 pm

Sorry, I'm deserting Labour, this man has just won my vote - common sense, innit.

[youtube]tADgYkAfXro[/youtube]

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:27 pm

Toby Latimer wrote:So Al Murray to contest Thanet vs Farage under his alter ego Pub Landlord but ... can people stand in elections under an alias ? [youtube]tADgYkAfXro[/youtube]

Gah!! Snap.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:32 pm

Farage fans may get confused.

martinson · Post by **martinson** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:32 pm

Good afternoon everyone, it's a long time since I last posted (before the move) but I'm still a daily follower and would like to say how grateful I am for all your considered and often expert opinions on many topics. I decided to re-register as the number of guests seems to have increased significantly and I didn't want to be judged as a potential fifth columnist!

Just a couple of small observations in acknowledging Daydreamer's comment about David Cameron not looking at the opposition front bench when speaking to them. I have noticed that he definitely will not look them in the eye when speaking until he makes his final point, he generally looks towards the bench of officials below the Speaker's chair. It looks a bit shifty to me. I have also noticed that when speaking at a podium he has a habit of wiping his left nostril with his left thumb - some of you will remember when the pen he was holding leaked and he smeared ink onto his nose, I wonder why he developed this habit? Is there anyone with some body language skills that may be able to enlighten me?

I wish you all well.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:33 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
Toby Latimer wrote:So A Murray to contest Thanet vs Farage but ... can people stand in elections under an alias ?
I presume they can stand under whatever name they like. Screaming Lord Sutch, Lord Bucket Head etc. I seem to recall that the Tories wanted Anunciata Rees-Mogg to stand under the name of Nancy Mogg in 2010 as it sounded less patrician.

Kevin Phillips-Bong, Jethro Q. Walrustitty, & Tarquin Fin-tim-lin-bin-whin-bim-lim-bus-stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuitbarrel come to mind

[youtube]31FFTx6AKmU[/youtube]

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:36 pm

Kevin Schofield @schofieldkevin
· 50m 50 minutes ago
Ladbrokes make @almurray 66/1 to win in South Thanet - ahead of the Lib Dems on 100/1.

David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen
· 56m 56 minutes ago
@chockeyboy If @almurray is excluded from the leaders' debate, he should in turn debate with four empty bar-stools.

And it has made the BBC News far quicker than any Labour initiative!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-30819779" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:36 pm

martinson wrote:Good afternoon everyone, it's a long time since I last posted (before the move) but I'm still a daily follower and would like to say how grateful I am for all your considered and often expert opinions on many topics. I decided to re-register as the number of guests seems to have increased significantly and I didn't want to be judged as a potential fifth columnist!

Just a couple of small observations in acknowledging Daydreamer's comment about David Cameron not looking at the opposition front bench when speaking to them. I have noticed that he definitely will not look them in the eye when speaking until he makes his final point, he generally looks towards the bench of officials below the Speaker's chair. It looks a bit shifty to me. I have also noticed that when speaking at a podium he has a habit of wiping his left nostril with his left thumb - some of you will remember when the pen he was holding leaked and he smeared ink onto his nose, I wonder why he developed this habit? Is there anyone with some body language skills that may be able to enlighten me?

I wish you all well.

Hi Martinson

Thanks for the good wishes.

Touching the nose is sometimes thought to be a sign of lying, but maybe that's just an urban myth.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:39 pm

I am officially furious. Raging, even.

DWP continues, on a regular basis, frequently on the hour, to advertise its wares and describe fictitious people who have nice new jobs.

The latest is one which describes "the support and care" the Work Programme gave to someone called Nicky who "was an alcoholic".

Thanks to the WP, apparently, the mother-of-four is now employed and happy and sober and it's all just fabulous.

Since when was DWP involved in clinical diagnostics? Since when did the WP supply treatment for addiction?

AAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 4:42 pm

I do hope the jackass absurd comments found below the line elsewhere don't make their way onto this website.
Wait - no - I take that back.
I know my friends here respond deftly to jackass absurd.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:09 pm

Can you all get in touch with Lucas again, please? This Daily Mail link has fuller quotes and is not paywall.

We really need to get this changed. Try the SNP too.

Mr Johnson said: " Under autumn statement plans, Conservatives could be cutting unprotected budgets by 26% after 2015-16, or an extraordinary 41% over the whole period from 2010.
"Even merely to meet their more modest fiscal target, these budgets would need to be cut by more than 15% after 2015-16. Labour would need to implement cuts of only 3%.
"All of this, of course, points to another big difference. If Labour is spending more - and if it doesn't raise taxes - it will be borrowing more and, perhaps more important, presiding over a greater burden of debt.
"The effect of this might be relatively modest in the short term, but borrowing as much as their rule would allow beyond 2020 would mean national debt about £170 billion higher (in today's terms) by the end of the 2020s than would be achieved through a balanced budget.
"So, even if Labour does keep spending cuts to a minimum over the next parliament, further tax increases or spending cuts might prove necessary down the line to reduce risks with the long-term state of the public finances further."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/art ... z3OoeSANsM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:17 pm

martinson wrote:Good afternoon everyone, it's a long time since I last posted (before the move) but I'm still a daily follower and would like to say how grateful I am for all your considered and often expert opinions on many topics. I decided to re-register as the number of guests seems to have increased significantly and I didn't want to be judged as a potential fifth columnist!

Just a couple of small observations in acknowledging Daydreamer's comment about David Cameron not looking at the opposition front bench when speaking to them. I have noticed that he definitely will not look them in the eye when speaking until he makes his final point, he generally looks towards the bench of officials below the Speaker's chair. It looks a bit shifty to me. I have also noticed that when speaking at a podium he has a habit of wiping his left nostril with his left thumb - some of you will remember when the pen he was holding leaked and he smeared ink onto his nose, I wonder why he developed this habit? Is there anyone with some body language skills that may be able to enlighten me?

I wish you all well.

Hello martinson.

Body language - I studied this (not in depth) many years ago. There are some good websites about it.

According to changingminds.org touching the nose has particular relevance to lying - touching the nose can be a signal that someone is not telling the truth; rubbing the side of the nose can be a sort of suppressed scratch, which is a well-known "tell" or indicator if someone is lying or bluffing.

Hope that helps.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:19 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Can you all get in touch with Lucas again, please? This Daily Mail link has fuller quotes and is not paywall.

We really need to get this changed. Try the SNP too.

Mr Johnson said: " Under autumn statement plans, Conservatives could be cutting unprotected budgets by 26% after 2015-16, or an extraordinary 41% over the whole period from 2010.
"Even merely to meet their more modest fiscal target, these budgets would need to be cut by more than 15% after 2015-16. Labour would need to implement cuts of only 3%.
"All of this, of course, points to another big difference. If Labour is spending more - and if it doesn't raise taxes - it will be borrowing more and, perhaps more important, presiding over a greater burden of debt.
"The effect of this might be relatively modest in the short term, but borrowing as much as their rule would allow beyond 2020 would mean national debt about £170 billion higher (in today's terms) by the end of the 2020s than would be achieved through a balanced budget.
"So, even if Labour does keep spending cuts to a minimum over the next parliament, further tax increases or spending cuts might prove necessary down the line to reduce risks with the long-term state of the public finances further."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/art ... z3OoeSANsM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The entire article from Paul Johnson linked below.
"I don’t like to make predictions."

- Comparing the parties' spending plans
Date: 13 January 2015
Authors: Paul Johnson
Publisher: News International
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/7525

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:22 pm

Sometimes people have something up their nose.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:23 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Can you all get in touch with Lucas again, please? This Daily Mail link has fuller quotes and is not paywall.

We really need to get this changed. Try the SNP too.

Mr Johnson said: " Under autumn statement plans, Conservatives could be cutting unprotected budgets by 26% after 2015-16, or an extraordinary 41% over the whole period from 2010.
"Even merely to meet their more modest fiscal target, these budgets would need to be cut by more than 15% after 2015-16. Labour would need to implement cuts of only 3%.
"All of this, of course, points to another big difference. If Labour is spending more - and if it doesn't raise taxes - it will be borrowing more and, perhaps more important, presiding over a greater burden of debt.
"The effect of this might be relatively modest in the short term, but borrowing as much as their rule would allow beyond 2020 would mean national debt about £170 billion higher (in today's terms) by the end of the 2020s than would be achieved through a balanced budget.
"So, even if Labour does keep spending cuts to a minimum over the next parliament, further tax increases or spending cuts might prove necessary down the line to reduce risks with the long-term state of the public finances further."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/art ... z3OoeSANsM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

That sums up what Lucas has fallen to.

Less truthful than the Daily Mail.

I am depressed.

Please note: anybody emoji hugging me will get slapped.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:26 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:Can you all get in touch with Lucas again, please? This Daily Mail link has fuller quotes and is not paywall.

We really need to get this changed. Try the SNP too.

Mr Johnson said: " Under autumn statement plans, Conservatives could be cutting unprotected budgets by 26% after 2015-16, or an extraordinary 41% over the whole period from 2010.
"Even merely to meet their more modest fiscal target, these budgets would need to be cut by more than 15% after 2015-16. Labour would need to implement cuts of only 3%.
"All of this, of course, points to another big difference. If Labour is spending more - and if it doesn't raise taxes - it will be borrowing more and, perhaps more important, presiding over a greater burden of debt.
"The effect of this might be relatively modest in the short term, but borrowing as much as their rule would allow beyond 2020 would mean national debt about £170 billion higher (in today's terms) by the end of the 2020s than would be achieved through a balanced budget.
"So, even if Labour does keep spending cuts to a minimum over the next parliament, further tax increases or spending cuts might prove necessary down the line to reduce risks with the long-term state of the public finances further."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/art ... z3OoeSANsM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
That sums up what Lucas has fallen to.

Less truthful than the Daily Mail.

I am depressed.

Please note: anybody emoji hugging me will get slapped.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:28 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:Can you all get in touch with Lucas again, please? This Daily Mail link has fuller quotes and is not paywall.

We really need to get this changed. Try the SNP too.

Mr Johnson said: " Under autumn statement plans, Conservatives could be cutting unprotected budgets by 26% after 2015-16, or an extraordinary 41% over the whole period from 2010.
"Even merely to meet their more modest fiscal target, these budgets would need to be cut by more than 15% after 2015-16. Labour would need to implement cuts of only 3%.
"All of this, of course, points to another big difference. If Labour is spending more - and if it doesn't raise taxes - it will be borrowing more and, perhaps more important, presiding over a greater burden of debt.
"The effect of this might be relatively modest in the short term, but borrowing as much as their rule would allow beyond 2020 would mean national debt about £170 billion higher (in today's terms) by the end of the 2020s than would be achieved through a balanced budget.
"So, even if Labour does keep spending cuts to a minimum over the next parliament, further tax increases or spending cuts might prove necessary down the line to reduce risks with the long-term state of the public finances further."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/art ... z3OoeSANsM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
That sums up what Lucas has fallen to.

Less truthful than the Daily Mail.

I am depressed.

Please note: anybody emoji hugging me will get slapped.

Oh, way to go you! Frightened off half the lurkers.

Tonibel · Post by **Tonibel** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:29 pm

Don't know if this has been mentioned but today's Independent implies that TTIP is in trouble. (Sorry must practice inserting links.)

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:33 pm

Aaaargghhh help, anybody got an emoji offering a slap.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:33 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Can you all get in touch with Lucas again, please? This Daily Mail link has fuller quotes and is not paywall.

We really need to get this changed. Try the SNP too.

Mr Johnson said: " Under autumn statement plans, Conservatives could be cutting unprotected budgets by 26% after 2015-16, or an extraordinary 41% over the whole period from 2010.
"Even merely to meet their more modest fiscal target, these budgets would need to be cut by more than 15% after 2015-16. Labour would need to implement cuts of only 3%.
"All of this, of course, points to another big difference. If Labour is spending more - and if it doesn't raise taxes - it will be borrowing more and, perhaps more important, presiding over a greater burden of debt.
"The effect of this might be relatively modest in the short term, but borrowing as much as their rule would allow beyond 2020 would mean national debt about £170 billion higher (in today's terms) by the end of the 2020s than would be achieved through a balanced budget.
"So, even if Labour does keep spending cuts to a minimum over the next parliament, further tax increases or spending cuts might prove necessary down the line to reduce risks with the long-term state of the public finances further."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/art ... z3OoeSANsM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

This false binary choice is making me mad.

Growth. Growth! GROWTH!!

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:36 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:Aaaargghhh help, anybody got an emoji offering a slap.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:37 pm

@Martinson

he has a habit of wiping his left nostril with his left thumb

Runny nose? Ooooh-er

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:38 pm

I really really really want Al Murray to refer to Nigel Farage as one of the Unquenchables (a Pub Landlord term for alcoholics).

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:43 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:Aaaargghhh help, anybody got an emoji offering a slap.

Like it

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:46 pm

A Kipper on Radio 4 claiming up to five Labour MPs are talking to them.

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Wed 14 Jan, 2015 5:50 pm

Tonibel wrote:Don't know if this has been mentioned but today's Independent implies that TTIP is in trouble. (Sorry must practice inserting links.)

Welcome Tonibel!

Is this the link you were thinking about?

TTIP: Activists triumph as contentious US free trade deal clause suspended
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 76090.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“The consultation clearly shows that there is a huge scepticism about the ISDS instrument,” Cecilia Malmstrom, the EU Trade Commissioner, admitted yesterday. “We need to have an open and frank discussion about investment protection and ISDS in TTIP with EU governments, the European Parliament and civil society before launching any policy recommendations.”

How do you have an open and frank discussion about something that is being negotiated secretly?