Tuesday 20th January 2015

[Tizme1]

End of the badger cull for a nailed on certainty.

Continued ban on fox hunting.

A firm commitment to taking global warming seriously, and not appointing climate change deniers as environment minister.

An increased emphasis on renewable energy.

A ban on Fracking anywhere near water resources.

Actually I wonder if Labour will ban Fracking as a manifesto commitment, let some other European country take the risk.

All good suggestions. A total ban on fracking would certainly be a major thing.

Since Fracking is:

Environmentally hideous
A blight on house prices in fracked areas.
Of no economic value to the fracked people.
Of limited value to the country.
A technology that you want to avoid for as long as possible (preferably forever)
An economic basket case.

Surely announcing a ban would be an absolute nailed on winner, worth a few votes in marginal seats as well.

Why wouldn't you do it? (And announce it in front of cheering residents a week into the campaign).

I'd be bloody furious if Labour announced it a week into the campaign! Why? Because if they announced it now, it would I think be a factor in our discussions/decisions as to whether to stand a candidate in Watford. And trust me, it is causing me a major headache. From a tactical point of view [for Labour] I think it would be a huge thing and gain them quite a lot of votes. Though I'm not sure leaving it that late to announce would necessarily be a good idea [and not just for my own selfish concerns].

You know what though, you have given me an idea....................

[Tizme1]

Good-evening, everyone. I discovered I've lately been writing angrily & hard towards Tories & Tory supporters below the line. I regret I've 'othered' Tories in several posts I've written recently. I think it's healthy & normal to express anger in writing, in words said. Abusing others in words or actions is never okay. I don't think my posts were abusive. However, I wrote my words not mindful of how angry I was when writing them. It would have been best for me to put my words away for a time in order to write about my anger over Tory policy with clarity.

Tories are people too. I don't like Tory policies. Fine. But I mustn't forget what is human in me is human in another.

To blame everyone sharing a spiritual belief system without regard to each as a human being independent of their religion & conduct is wrong.

Dear Eric Pickles – why single out Islam for this patronising treatment?
You question our loyalty for no reason other than our spiritual beliefs. Will you ever sit down with the diverse peoples who make up Britain and really listen to us?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... -treatment

"In a letter sent to more than 1,000 Islamic leaders (pdf),[Eric] Pickles stressed that he was proud of the way Muslims in Britain had responded to the Paris terror attacks, but said there was more work to do in rooting out extremists and preventing young people from being radicalised."

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... es_PDF.pdf

I question the wisdom of Pickles sending this letter to Islamic leaders. I don't think it appropriate & I think it's divisive.

I've been away from my desk today examining my thoughts while getting some work done. I wanted to write here I'm uncomfortable with the posts below the line on that CIF article. Not all followers of Islam are violent. Not all followers of Islam advocate or condone violence.

I just thanked you for that post JA. And then I decided 'thanking you' wasn't enough. Do you realise how wise you actually are?

[citizenJA]

Sorry, this is @Tizme, my browser is making it very difficult for me to edit in post so I can't quote. You ask what makes us think Labour will be different next time after 13 years following the neoliberal agenda. It's one thing, really - Ed Miliband. There's a reason the neoliberal Blairite dinosaurs like Mandelson and Milburn, as well as the likes of DFH and Rentoul, not to mention Blair himself hate him and attack him every chance they get, it's because he represents a significant difference. He genuinely believes in fair and redistributive taxation and publicly owned and run public services, and that markets must be regulated so society can benefit from them and be spared their worst excesses. The fact that he believes the market has limits and needs to be controlled by the state marks him out as some way back from neoliberalism, and even Blairism.

Again, this is just my view - a question was put and I'm putting my response. I know this is just degrees of the same thing for many people, but to me it represents a small but important break with the direction of travel.

I am that rare oddity, a person that thinks Milband is a positive attribute for the Labour party!

I've never thought you odd. Anyone with their eyes open paying attention knows Ed Miliband is good for Labour, the party, the country.

[TechnicalEphemera]

All good suggestions. A total ban on fracking would certainly be a major thing.

Since Fracking is:

Environmentally hideous
A blight on house prices in fracked areas.
Of no economic value to the fracked people.
Of limited value to the country.
A technology that you want to avoid for as long as possible (preferably forever)
An economic basket case.

Surely announcing a ban would be an absolute nailed on winner, worth a few votes in marginal seats as well.

Why wouldn't you do it? (And announce it in front of cheering residents a week into the campaign).

I'd be bloody furious if Labour announced it a week into the campaign! Why? Because if they announced it now, it would I think be a factor in our discussions/decisions as to whether to stand a candidate in Watford. And trust me, it is causing me a major headache. From a tactical point of view [for Labour] I think it would be a huge thing and gain them quite a lot of votes. Though I'm not sure leaving it that late to announce would necessarily be a good idea [and not just for my own selfish concerns].

You know what though, you have given me an idea....................

The problem is - if Miliband announced it now all those Fracking companies will start promising free gold plated schools with every fracked well.

However I tend to agree, if Ed wants to make a pitch to Green voters he needs a big thing, this might be it. As a minimum a guarantee no Fracking before the 2020 election.

[HindleA]

Article about sanctions by Patrick Butler.


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... ers-reduce" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Sanctions applied to the sick/disabled and those with caring responsibilities are immoral IMHO.

[citizenJA]

End of the badger cull for a nailed on certainty.

Continued ban on fox hunting.

A firm commitment to taking global warming seriously, and not appointing climate change deniers as environment minister.

An increased emphasis on renewable energy.

A ban on Fracking anywhere near water resources.

Actually I wonder if Labour will ban Fracking as a manifesto commitment, let some other European country take the risk.

All good suggestions. A total ban on fracking would certainly be a major thing.

Since Fracking is:

Environmentally hideous
A blight on house prices in fracked areas.
Of no economic value to the fracked people.
Of limited value to the country.
A technology that you want to avoid for as long as possible (preferably forever)
An economic basket case.

Surely announcing a ban would be an absolute nailed on winner, worth a few votes in marginal seats as well.

Why wouldn't you do it? (And announce it in front of cheering residents a week into the campaign).

Of course, it's exactly what's going to happen. Hydraulic fracturing in the UK hasn't anything to recommend it. It's not even a sure thing there's CH4.

[ErnstRemarx]

@Tizme ''Many Greens want their votes counting in the final % for the Greens so in 2020 we won't be shut out yet again by the Broadcasters and Ofcom.''

Do you think for many Green voters having a surge in voting %, and the chance to push themselves forward in 2020 would be more important than living with the havoc another five years of a Tory government would cause ?

I know some on the extreme left almost want to be living under the cosh, in order to foment [ferment ?, suppose both could apply] a change in class conciousness.

Maybe it's because I'm getting old, at 58 I want anti-Tory jam today, not pie in the sky tomorrow.

Yahyah, OK, we vote for Labour even though we don't agree with their policies, so the next 5 years won't be quite as bad as being under a Tory government. And then in 2020 we'll hear the same arguments. And won't be on an even playing field to put forward our views. And 5 years after that in 2025 we'll hear the same arguments, and five years after that...........

Greens think beyond the next five years. You see we aren't just thinking of the people alive today, we're thinking of future generations too. We'd kind of like there to be a viable planet for them. Not to mention we think our social policies are much fairer than Labours. And age has nothing to do with it - I'm 54. Nor does wanting to effect a change in class conciousness.

i can assure you that there are plenty of us in Labour (who, as we know are exactly like the Tories) who want the same as you - we just have a different route. That's why I'm a Labour councillor. You push from without, I'll push from within. The enemy is the same.

My only real problems with the Greens are these: they try to paint Labour as being just like the Tories, when we both know that isn't the case, and the other is the execrable attitude and activities of the Greens in Bury who apparently have their heads rammed so far up their chuffs that they are absolutely immune to reason.

Example: we have had devastating cuts visited upon us by the Tories and FibDems. Their response? Refuse to cut anything and pass an illegal budget! Great one, Einstein, and when we're all surcharged and disqualified and the budget's then set by Jabba and his acolytes, what are local people to make of that? It's so fucking childish that I do not understand the thinking. I'm sure a few tankies are now Greens but it's utterly irresponsible and, I would say, disqualifies them from having any input into political debate locally.

If they can't se the self-defeating nature of what they propose, then they and I can have no conversation, as they're clearly bereft of any reason.

[citizenJA]

@Tizme1

Thank you for seeing it too - it hurt like hell inside me but I apologised from my heart.

xx
JA

[Tizme1]

Since Fracking is:

Environmentally hideous
A blight on house prices in fracked areas.
Of no economic value to the fracked people.
Of limited value to the country.
A technology that you want to avoid for as long as possible (preferably forever)
An economic basket case.

Surely announcing a ban would be an absolute nailed on winner, worth a few votes in marginal seats as well.

Why wouldn't you do it? (And announce it in front of cheering residents a week into the campaign).

I'd be bloody furious if Labour announced it a week into the campaign! Why? Because if they announced it now, it would I think be a factor in our discussions/decisions as to whether to stand a candidate in Watford. And trust me, it is causing me a major headache. From a tactical point of view [for Labour] I think it would be a huge thing and gain them quite a lot of votes. Though I'm not sure leaving it that late to announce would necessarily be a good idea [and not just for my own selfish concerns].

You know what though, you have given me an idea....................

The problem is - if Miliband announced it now all those Fracking companies will start promising free gold plated schools with every fracked well.

However I tend to agree, if Ed wants to make a pitch to Green voters he needs a big thing, this might be it. As a minimum a guarantee no Fracking before the 2020 election.

Yes but Me Me Me Me Me. It would help Me Me Me Me Me if he/they clarified their position on fracking now. Setting aside Me Me Me Me Me though, I do think it would be a vote winner. And tactically speaking, it probably wouldn't be wise to announce it yet. But I don't think leaving it until a week into the campaign would be good either. Cameron is currently trying to speed up fracking legislation. If I was directing the Labour campaign, I think I'd let the Tories really nail their colours to the mast [for everyone to see - not just us followers of politics], then I'd have Miliband come out strongly against fracking in a big way. Assuming of course that he is against fracking. I like to think so.

Looking at it beyond the Labour/Green prism though, I've talked with voters here in Watford who's major concerns are Immigration, the NHS, and Fracking. Labour can't and shouldn't try to out UKIP UKIP on immigration. They do need to acknowledge peoples concerns and fears but tbh, my take on the recent contentious briefing was that they were being advised to do exactly that. Labour are more trusted with the NHS than the Tories so they are rightly going on that. If they came out strongly on fracking, I think that could tip things.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RogerOThornhill]

So...no Chilcott until after the election?

Well, at least that's one thing they can't pin on Ed...

[ErnstRemarx]

And another reason to hate the scum in government:

http://leftfootforward.org/2015/01/the- ... oks-bleak/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[adam]

Sun tweets "quite striking numbers in our YouGov poll tonight" due any time now.

2 point tory lead and "Labour at 5 year low as greens surge" headline

con 32
lab 30
ukip 15
green 10
libdem 8

Multiple edits to post, bad form, but put those figures into UK Polling report's basic predictor and you get

Labour - 305
Con - 290
Lib Dem - 25
others 12
NI - 18

[Tubby Isaacs]

The two Inadequate schools in the North East share a bursar, I'm told.

[pk1]

I don't actually believe the yougov poll but it does highlight the reality of a high Green vote having an adverse effect on the Labour vote.


Britain Elects ?@britainelects · 59 secs59 seconds ago
Latest YouGov Poll (19 – 20 Jan):
CON – 32% (-)
LAB – 30% (-2)
UKIP – 15% (-)
GRN – 10% (+3)
LDEM – 8% (-)

Bugger, now I see Adam has already posted it

On the point about UKPR & seats shown - that assumes an even swing & doesn't take account of the seats undoubtedly lost to the SNP.

[55DegreesNorth]

I just inadvertently strayed onto Newsnight, to find some grotesque parody of a potential election scenario. Deeply unfunny, bum-clenchingly puerile and a staggering illustration of how low this programme has sunk.
I've not watched it much in the last few months, and it doesn't look like I'll be hurrying back anytime soon.

[Willow904]

And another reason to hate the scum in government:

http://leftfootforward.org/2015/01/the- ... oks-bleak/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I actually live quite near Shepton Mallet, mentioned in the article as losing all its weekend services later this year. It recently featured in a BBC programme about towns during the decades. They made up the centre like it would have been during the first world war and then slowly showed how shopping and town centres changed over time. It's a lovely little place, completely shattered by an 'out of town' Tescos/retail park. ('Out of town' is in quotes because it's within easy walking distance of the town centre, in fact, but the effect's just the same).

Somerset is a Tory council, of course, but what has surprised me is how many bus routes they have cut - as in how many were being paid for by taxpayers in the first place. Weird kind of privatisation where most of it remains public, albeit outsourced. Meanwhile private companies line their pockets doing park and ride - money that could subsidise rural routes, but the Tories deemed more 'efficient' to hand over to foreign shareholders instead.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Where did this come from.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/tes ... 91283.html

Tessa goes all socialist on London's ass.

[ErnstRemarx]

Where did this come from.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/tes ... 91283.html

Tessa goes all socialist on London's ass.

Needed saying. Expect the right wing press to go fucking mental at her by breakfast time tomorrow, for daring to state some pretty commonsense views (and we all know they will).

[WelshIan]

Article about sanctions by Patrick Butler.


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... ers-reduce" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Sanctions applied to the sick/disabled and those with caring responsibilities are immoral IMHO.

The Work and Pensions Committee is meeting tomorrow to hear evidence on benefit sanctions:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... nctions-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are a couple of other Guardian articles on this:
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... -allowance" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... -sanctions" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ErnstRemarx]

I don't actually believe the yougov poll but it does highlight the reality of a high Green vote having an adverse effect on the Labour vote.


Britain Elects ?@britainelects · 59 secs59 seconds ago
Latest YouGov Poll (19 – 20 Jan):
CON – 32% (-)
LAB – 30% (-2)
UKIP – 15% (-)
GRN – 10% (+3)
LDEM – 8% (-)

Bugger, now I see Adam has already posted it

On the point about UKPR & seats shown - that assumes an even swing & doesn't take account of the seats undoubtedly lost to the SNP.

Looks lke an outlier to me, which is to say, bollocks.

[StephenDolan]

Since Fracking is:

Environmentally hideous
A blight on house prices in fracked areas.
Of no economic value to the fracked people.
Of limited value to the country.
A technology that you want to avoid for as long as possible (preferably forever)
An economic basket case.

Surely announcing a ban would be an absolute nailed on winner, worth a few votes in marginal seats as well.

Why wouldn't you do it? (And announce it in front of cheering residents a week into the campaign).

I'd be bloody furious if Labour announced it a week into the campaign! Why? Because if they announced it now, it would I think be a factor in our discussions/decisions as to whether to stand a candidate in Watford. And trust me, it is causing me a major headache. From a tactical point of view [for Labour] I think it would be a huge thing and gain them quite a lot of votes. Though I'm not sure leaving it that late to announce would necessarily be a good idea [and not just for my own selfish concerns].

You know what though, you have given me an idea....................

The problem is - if Miliband announced it now all those Fracking companies will start promising free gold plated schools with every fracked well.

However I tend to agree, if Ed wants to make a pitch to Green voters he needs a big thing, this might be it. As a minimum a guarantee no Fracking before the 2020 election.

Oh please do this sort of announcement at the debate. Cue a zoom in on Cameron for his facial reaction.

[diGriz]

Sun tweets "quite striking numbers in our YouGov poll tonight" due any time now.

2 point tory lead and "Labour at 5 year low as greens surge" headline

con 32
lab 30
ukip 15
green 10
libdem 8

Multiple edits to post, bad form, but put those figures into UK Polling report's basic predictor and you get

Labour - 305
Con - 290
Lib Dem - 25
others 12
NI - 18

A year ago I would have said Yougov were pretty accurate, looking at the general feeling/overview, it sort of tallied. Now it's just bullshit. All over the place. In the last couple of months (and I'm not speaking tribally, I can appreciate the anti-Ed press narrative has put off some folk) the polls are just gibberish jumping this way and that for no reason.

We keep posting the results here but quite frankly I don't think they mean anything.

[ErnstRemarx]

Is it just me, or is the "Labour lead absolutely dreadful, isn't Miliband a weird looking Jew" article not moving in the way that articles usually slide down the page at the Graun's politics page?

Those knowing no better might even posit that Rubbisher and the pile of shite he calls his editorial team have decided to pin it up there, if only to make the point that Jew Miliband simply looks too odd to vote for, and they have the figures to prove it (even if they don't).

[RogerOThornhill]

I've just noticed that the DfE has produced a half year report...and I know I keep banking on about new academies that aren't called free schools...but it's as if the DfE don't want to admit that they exist.

In addition, the department has continued to expand the quality and scope of the supply of schools and places. April to September 2014 saw the opening of 78 free schools, 205 sponsored academies, 281 converter academies, 13 University Technical Colleges and 12 Studio Schools.

OK, most of those academies "opened" were actually open before but just converted or newly sponsored. But wait...

103 new schools opened – 78 free schools, 12 studio schools and 13 University Technical Colleges (UTCs). In September 2014, 35 new free school applications were approved.

So according to the DfE, no new academies were opened. But according to the list - also from the DfE, there were 25 new academies opened. When I say opened, I mean really opened.

Like this one - on the academies list:

TADPOLE Farm CE Primary Academy is the official name for the new primary school due to be created in September as part of the 1,700-home development at the farm site in North Swindon.

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

We are a brand new school that opened in September 2014 to meet the demand from local families for new, high-quality places in South Croydon. We are part of the Harris Federation, a local charity chosen by Croydon Council to run our Academy.

http://www.harrisprimaryhalingpark.org.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Harris also opened 6 other schools in Sept 2014...and they're counted in the free school total.

Depends on one's definition of "opened" and ...er..."opened" I guess.

[Tubby Isaacs]

So Cameron after a week of being laughed at for not wanting to debate now leads?

Sure it's down to Green progress, but how can he have kept the same share or even nudged up?

[TechnicalEphemera]

Above,

I think polls are irrelevant (at this level of polling). The key battlegrounds are the marginals and Scotland. But I think Miliband needs to make a clear offer to the Green voters sooner rather than later.

Arguments about economic policy are complex but it is easier to provide clear green water between Labour and the Tory party.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Where did this come from.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/tes ... 91283.html

Tessa goes all socialist on London's ass.

Needed saying. Expect the right wing press to go fucking mental at her by breakfast time tomorrow, for daring to state some pretty commonsense views (and we all know they will).

She wants to be London Mayor.

[HindleA]

Cheers WelshIan

A couple of press releases tonight regarding A and E (debate tomorrow)and Social Care

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1086792 ... ster-under" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1086791 ... l-care-liz" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I do wish they would link to cited research.

[citizenJA]

The 1.9m benefit removals between June 2011 and March 2014 represent a 40% increase compared with the previous seven years. The figures are based on official monthly and quarterly data from databases covering UK local authorities between 2005 and 2014.

Study author Dr Rachel Loopstra, from Oxford University, said: “The data did not give us the full picture of why sanctioned people have stopped claiming unemployment benefit. We can say, however, that there was a large rise in the number of people leaving JSA for reasons that were not linked to employment in association with sanctioning. On this basis, it appears that the punitive use of sanctions is driving people away from social support.”

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... -allowance

Apologies - this link was posted earlier - I'm beside myself with this information above. This isn't okay.

[TechnicalEphemera]

So Cameron after a week of being laughed at for not wanting to debate now leads?

Sure it's down to Green progress, but how can he have kept the same share or even nudged up?

Well he leads in YouGov not in ICM.