Wednesday 8th April 2015

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 6:25 am

Morning all.

So good luck to the Tories portraying Miliband as weak.

Murdoch, energy companies, Syria vote and now non-dom status.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 7:12 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

So good luck to the Tories portraying Miliband as weak.

Murdoch, energy companies, Syria vote and now non-dom status.

It won't stop them doing it, if the only tool you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. However it has exploded a political bomb under the Tory campaign. I have heard it said election campaigns are about values rather than policy, but this is the perfect policy if your central value is an economy that works for everybody not just a few.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 7:52 am

Morning.

Great to hear Labour saying they will scrap non-dom status.
Those who whine 'Can't get a fag paper between Labour & the Tories, they are both the same' can stick that in their pipes and smoke it.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 7:59 am

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

So good luck to the Tories portraying Miliband as weak.

Murdoch, energy companies, Syria vote and now non-dom status.
It won't stop them doing it, if the only tool you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. However it has exploded a political bomb under the Tory campaign. I have heard it said election campaigns are about values rather than policy, but this is the perfect policy if your central value is an economy that works for everybody not just a few.

I think the word for this bold move / policy might be, please forgive the cliche, 'totemic'. In the same way that the reduction of the 50p tax for the highest earners is totemic for the Tories .... It's going to be a good compare and contrast item.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:02 am

Re posting this from PK late last night because I want to be able to reply to her.

LDV bragging that the Mayor of Deal has defected from Labour to the LDs.

They should have read this change.org page before accepting him:

https://www.change.org/p/deal-town-coun" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... or-2014-15

It's that south coast sea air again. I don't know what's in it ... but it's responsible for some very rum elected representatives. He sounds vile from that link btw. Glad he's gone over tother side.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:08 am

Daily Mail U.K. ‏@DailyMailUK 18m18 minutes ago
Nicola Sturgeon booed when she hints at ANOTHER independence referendum http://dailym.ai/1HPctuF" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've just heard BBC Radio 4 rebrand the boos as audience 'groans'.

Either way - good. Shows people don't want another re run of that hyper testy and hyper everything else activity for quite some time.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:14 am

Morning all. I see the 100 doctors' letter is getting the same coverage from our balanced BBC as they gave to the 100 spivs' letter.[/sarcasm]

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:15 am

Radio 4 news had the letter from Tory business people running as a top headline for nearly a day.
Today, no Radio 4 news headline about the NHS letter to the Guardian.

No point in complaining.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:23 am

yahyah wrote:Radio 4 news had the letter from Tory business people running as a top headline for nearly a day.
Today, no Radio 4 news headline about the NHS letter to the Guardian.

No point in complaining.

I'm going to.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:30 am

How much might we raise if we restrict non-dom status ?
http://waitingfortax.com/2015/04/08/how ... om-status/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:38 am

Wow....some real stuff yesterday then...colour me shocked that Labour seem to be prepared for the election - it's almost as though they knew when it was going to happen, worked specifically towards that date and are ramping up their message as the days go by (whilst, if the rumours are correct, UKIP and the Tories haven't finished writing their manifestos yet, with last minute changes to try to 'look more caring')

Scrap non-dom status? Dacre will be extra-foamy this morning I suspect....it'll mean that Harold Jonathan Esmond Vere Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere might have to change his arrangements (He has non-domicile tax status and owns his media businesses through a complex structure of offshore holdings and trusts which entail him paying almost no UK tax on his income, investments or wealth).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_H ... Rothermere

I know Mr Ed is far too sensible and decent for this sort of thing, but I can't help feeling a sense of 'if you attack the memory of my Dad, I'll kick your a***!'

Profit sharing? An example of 'pre-distribution', I believe(TM)...something the 2 Eds were talking about 3 years ago...

Predistribution is about saying:
We cannot allow ourselves to be stuck with permanently being a low-wage economy.
It is neither just, nor does it enable us to pay our way in the world.
Our aim must be to transform our economy so it is a much higher skill, higher wage economy.
Think about somebody working in a call centre, a supermarket, or in an old peoples' home.
Redistribution offers a top-up to their wages.
Predistribution seeks to offer them more:
Higher skills.
With higher wages.
An economy that works for working people.

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analy ... ch-in-full

A bit like the John Lewis Partnership (as was noted yesterday)...who have, if staff at our local branch are to be believed, shipped in 'specialist managers' (that's not what they call them) who have the sole purpose of discrediting the partnership model, as the neo-liberal hoover-up system (as opposed to 'trickle-down) is best and everyone's doing it and you can't give workers money and look, over there....but now we can be optimistic that it won't happen as we'll have been 'caught beneath the Landslide' (in 4 (four) weeks time).

...and more brightness...I've been impressed by some of Ms Sturgeons appearances - left-leaning and sensible - but then, when you read/listen to what the SNP actually do (apart from the indictment of the Scottish education system, where at least 45% of the population believe(TM) that the number 45 is bigger than the number 55) it becomes clear that, as with all those in thrall to Murkydochia, the 'style' (what they say) is not in any way connected to the 'substance' (what they do) and without the media control prevalent at past elections (anyone disagreeing with the MSM consensus will be personally destroyed) this is becoming clearer.

...and, IMHO, this needs a re-link from yesterday (and not just because it has 'hope' in the title)...

LABOUR predicted a shock victory in South Thanet yesterday after it was revealed that Ukip had suppressed a poll showing Nigel Farage’s popularity falling.
The poll commissioned by a wealthy Ukip donor was covered-up when it showed Mr Farage (29 per cent) trailing the Tory candidate Craig Mackinlay by 1 percentage point and leading Labour’s Will Scobie by 1 percentage point, the Daily Mail revealed yesterday.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-4a ... STNluFsztd

(I know it's unlikely, but the assessment of Farridge/UKIP is heartening)

Manners Wolfie....and evetimornington all!

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:39 am

Just listening to Nicky Morgan.
Ignoring her tripe, she, Gove, Clegg, Cameron, Osborne & Beaker all spiel in exactly the same way, They must all use the same [expensive] media coach. Or maybe they are just all morphing into each other.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:42 am

Wolfie, if you have time could you PM me with more on the John Lewis thing.
Will explain in reply, some stuff I don't want to share on a public forum which chimes with that.
[it involves a relative].

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:45 am

Nicky Morgan uses gabbling at the fastest rate possible as her tactic to avoid proper intervention by Jim Naughtie ... but she's been caught out by him on non dom status. She gabbled too far and skewered herself with no one disagrees with non doms paying tax .... or words to that effect. Cue Naughtie with - why haven't you taxed them then?

Apparently she's the only Conservative spokesperson on Radio 4 this morning. Michael Gove might be in bed with a cold flannel over his face after his outing on Newsnight last night. No doubt Sarah Vine is telling him how wonderful he was and how all the people love him really.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:56 am

Latest YouGov
England & Wales only
CON 35
LAB 35
LD 9
UKIP 14
GN 5
5.1% CON to LAB swing since 2010

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 8:57 am

Anyway the reason I'm posting is that I've just remembered that last night I may have offended Brian and didn't go back and correct my mistake at the time. No we're not on first name terms but I wanted to make a heart-felt apology nonetheless. Lord Justice Leveson otherwise known as Sir Brian Leveson has only one 'N' in his surname. It upsets me to see names incorrectly spelt and I have no excuse whatsoever. Nevertheless shall still make one; perhaps I've seen his name misspelt far too often and haven't thought of him recently. It does make me think I may reexamine some of his inquiry however.

Do you think I could have been a little more succinct? I must have forgotten much that I taught at the Open University.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:04 am

Morning all.

Fir what was the lead story on the front of the DT this morning, the "kids to retake SATs in year 7" has been relegated to a single line on the website.

Maybe someone overnight has looked at Twitter reaction and realised that it's a dud.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:06 am

Apparently Duncan Bannatyne had a piece up on the Telegraph blogs explaining non dom status and cheering Labour's announcement.

It was hastily taken down.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:16 am

Yes, four weeks is a long time, but this will do nicely for today:

''The poll of pollsters: with a month to go, it could be Miliband by a whisker.
We asked leading pollsters at every major polling company to give their predictions for the election – and most say Labour currently has the better hand''

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

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:19 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

Fir what was the lead story on the front of the DT this morning, the "kids to retake SATs in year 7" has been relegated to a single line on the website.

Maybe someone overnight has looked at Twitter reaction and realised that it's a dud.

I am incorrigible, Roger, I refrained from commenting on this yesterday. What I felt however was how would such things apply to the likes of my daughter with Downs Syndrome. I didn't bother because obviously it shouldn't, which reminds me... One of the niceties of political correctness is treating those with learning difficulties or other disabilities the same as everybody else, but there are limits. I found myself being rather concerned with her being taught French, whereas I felt that the time would be far better spent giving her the extra tuition she needed with her mother tongue. I could have been wrong of course because aside of anything else there is the small matter of funding regardless of any issues of inclusion.

Enough already, I'm really posing a question I made last night about school deeds because you may know of such things. I know for example that after transference of school deeds, for which taxpayers covered the legal fees, any future change of use or disposal of such land or premises was subject to some adjudicator's (can't remember the official position) decision as to compensation to the local authority. Nevertheless with the passage of time such that it drops out of media attention, not that our right-wing media ever gave it much, and the fact that LEAs have been somewhat pushed to the margins, do you know how things stand today?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:20 am

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Apparently Duncan Bannatyne had a piece up on the Telegraph blogs explaining non dom status and cheering Labour's announcement.

It was hastily taken down.

Bannatyne schmannatyne......he needs to make up his mind. He's for Labour one minute, Tories the next - maybe people shouldn't listen to him until he knows what he actually wants.

I am liking your new avatar.

We have something just like it but bigger in every window of our flat.

Show has volunteered to put up the big ones on sticks all over the town.
(He'll be busy - Matthew told me how many there are. I haven't told Show yet.....)

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:20 am

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Apparently Duncan Bannatyne had a piece up on the Telegraph blogs explaining non dom status and cheering Labour's announcement.

It was hastily taken down.

Maybe he would like to repeat his views on television, letsskiptotheleft.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:29 am

ephemerid wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Apparently Duncan Bannatyne had a piece up on the Telegraph blogs explaining non dom status and cheering Labour's announcement.

It was hastily taken down.

Bannatyne schmannatyne......he needs to make up his mind. He's for Labour one minute, Tories the next - maybe people shouldn't listen to him until he knows what he actually wants.

I am liking your new avatar.

We have something just like it but bigger in every window of our flat.

Show has volunteered to put up the big ones on sticks all over the town.
(He'll be busy - Matthew told me how many there are. I haven't told Show yet.....)

Haven't been out to the nearest town since Friday, but there was a noticeable lack of Lib Dem posters. The owners of the nearby big house and estate usually plaster their field edges with orange propaganda, and usually do it early on, but none so far.
One Plaid one in the village, but think that's there since last year's Euro elections.

A neighbour's spotted a lot of UKIP posters near Aberystwyth, disappointing to see them on the rise here.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:34 am

ephemerid wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Apparently Duncan Bannatyne had a piece up on the Telegraph blogs explaining non dom status and cheering Labour's announcement.

It was hastily taken down.

Bannatyne schmannatyne......he needs to make up his mind. He's for Labour one minute, Tories the next - maybe people shouldn't listen to him until he knows what he actually wants.

I am liking your new avatar.

We have something just like it but bigger in every window of our flat.

Show has volunteered to put up the big ones on sticks all over the town.
(He'll be busy - Matthew told me how many there are. I haven't told Show yet.....)

You take what you can get Ephe. Bannantyne seems genuinely impressed by this and was defending the move vigorously on Twitter last night; he claims (and probably did, but I can't confirm it) that he wrote a piece for the FT about 10 years ago calling for this. Any road up, it means the "100 spivs letter" is now the "96 spivs letter", which has to be worth a wry grin.

Laura Kuenssberg was also on Twitter after the non dom announcement, she suggested that Labour had been talking about this at around the same time they were discussing the energy price freeze. As I said more than once at the Other Place, when the usual suspects bemoaned Labour's lack of policies (largely because they had their heads so far up their own anatomy they couldn't/wouldn't see the ones that were out there), you keep your powder dry; if this one had been announced back in 2013 it would have been leapt on, and an emasculated version rolled out, by the Tories in exactly the same way they did with energy.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:43 am

Bit of row kicking off here about past comments by our Plaid candidate [himself an English incomer], and calls for him to stand down.

Election 2015: Plaid Cymru candidate in Nazi slur row
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-wales-32215894" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BBC Wales Politics @WalesPolitics · 10 hrs 10 hours ago
Labour say Mr Parker should be removed as the candidate in Ceredigion; Lib Dems say it's 'disgraceful'.

BBC Wales Politics @WalesPolitics · 10 hrs 10 hours ago
Plaid Cymru candidate @mikeparkerwales tells @CambrianNews he was 'younger and angrier' when he compared incomers to Nazis in a 2001 article

Welsh Labour say ''There can be no justification for this - this language is incendiary and divisive he should be ashamed of himself.''

Scratch a Nat....even an English born one.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:43 am

utopiandreams wrote:
Enough already, I'm really posing a question I made last night about school deeds because you may know of such things. I know for example that after transference of school deeds, for which taxpayers covered the legal fees, any future change of use or disposal of such land or premises was subject to some adjudicator's (can't remember the official position) decision as to compensation to the local authority. Nevertheless with the passage of time such that it drops out of media attention, not that our right-wing media ever gave it much, and the fact that LEAs have been somewhat pushed to the margins, do you know how things stand today?

It's...complicated and I don't think there's a rule that fits every academy trust. In a lot of cases the land stays with the LA and they get to charge a peppercorn rent.

When the principal of Durand was before the select committee the other week he and the DfE officials disputed who had the final say on what happened to the land that Durand had - it was very amusing to see and Graham Stuart told them to go and sort it out - and be quick about it too.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:43 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
ephemerid wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Apparently Duncan Bannatyne had a piece up on the Telegraph blogs explaining non dom status and cheering Labour's announcement.

It was hastily taken down.

Bannatyne schmannatyne......he needs to make up his mind. He's for Labour one minute, Tories the next - maybe people shouldn't listen to him until he knows what he actually wants.

I am liking your new avatar.

We have something just like it but bigger in every window of our flat.

Show has volunteered to put up the big ones on sticks all over the town.
(He'll be busy - Matthew told me how many there are. I haven't told Show yet.....)
You take what you can get Ephe. Bannantyne seems genuinely impressed by this and was defending the move vigorously on Twitter last night; he claims (and probably did, but I can't confirm it) that he wrote a piece for the FT about 10 years ago calling for this. Any road up, it means the "100 spivs letter" is now the "96 spivs letter", which has to be worth a wry grin.

Laura Kuenssberg was also on Twitter after the non dom announcement, she suggested that Labour had been talking about this at around the same time they were discussing the energy price freeze. As I said more than once at the Other Place, when the usual suspects bemoaned Labour's lack of policies (largely because they had their heads so far up their own anatomy they couldn't/wouldn't see the ones that were out there), you keep your powder dry; if this one had been announced back in 2013 it would have been leapt on, and an emasculated version rolled out, by the Tories in exactly the same way they did with energy.

This is from five years ago:

http://www.bmmagazine.co.uk/news/duncan ... -business/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I am cautiously optimistic this morning, Labour's campaign seems to be picking up a bit of momentum, while the Tories appear clapped out.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:43 am

Good morfternoon.

Of course, Labour should have followed all that helpful advice they were getting over the last couple of years\eighteen months about announcing all their policies at once and much, much earlier . . . . . .

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:44 am

Got the front page of the Cambrian News [they are Liberal leaning].

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:51 am

Ed Miliband exclusive: Labour leader talks candidly about Bedroom Tax, "hell, yes" and Easter eggs

4 April 2015 By Nigel Nelson

When Sunday People political editor Nigel Nelson asked for interviews with Ed Miliband and David Cameron the Labour leader readily took his seat. But the PM had to be empty chaired.

Mr Miliband was speaking to the Sunday People in his Doncaster North, South Yorks constituency after a campaign tour of the North West with his family. But his two children Daniel and Samuel insist that today he makes time for an Easter egg hunt at their Doncaster home.

He said: “If the Miliband Easter egg hunt didn’t happen then I really would have questions to answer!”

But David Cameron refuses to be interviewed by the Sunday People.

Mr Miliband said: “He’s run away from a head-to-head debate with me.

“And now he’s running away from an interview with you.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed ... er-5461120" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Y'all - I don't know if this has already been posted - I stumbled across the Mirror interview last night while looking for the policy page Miliband I thought I'd bookmarked on abolishing the House of Lords to replace it with an elected Senate. The article contains video clips of Ed Miliband being interviewed by the Sunday People political editor Nigel Nelson. I can't stay long - CitizenPMJR & I are going to enjoy a hike today.

I love you all & look forward to reading your posts.
Please have a beautiful day, my friends.
xx
cJA

P.S. I'm going to read a bit more here prior to donning hiking gear

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:52 am

Good-morning!

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:53 am

yahyah wrote:Yes, four weeks is a long time, but this will do nicely for today:

''The poll of pollsters: with a month to go, it could be Miliband by a whisker.
We asked leading pollsters at every major polling company to give their predictions for the election – and most say Labour currently has the better hand''

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

The presidential election narrative is still being pushed in that piece. Economy mentioned multiple times. NHS? Erm......

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 9:58 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:... It's...complicated and I don't think there's a rule that fits every academy trust. In a lot of cases the land stays with the LA and they get to charge a peppercorn rent.

When the principal of Durand was before the select committee the other week he and the DfE officials disputed who had the final say on what happened to the land that Durand had - it was very amusing to see and Graham Stuart told them to go and sort it out - and be quick about it too.

Thanks for the reply, Roger. It's not something I know much about but I had gotten into an argument about such with OpenSeas, I think. His stance was that the public furore over such handing over of deeds without safeguards would be tremendous and to honest there were many rightly concerned, whereas I had started with the caveat that some ombudsman or other was responsible for protecting LAs interests should there be a later change of use. Nevertheless I do not trust this government one iota and cannot help but feel that so many deeds taken out of public ownership shall be taken advantage of. Personally I don't understand why they needed transference anyway, and at taxpayer expense too, it was something that Labour did in 2006 (?) with the introduction of academies.

Which reminds me, something that onebuttonmonkey often refers to, and that is use of language. This government seems to have seized terms for their own use by giving them new meaning. Like academies, apprenticeships are no longer what once they were. They may sound good when making announcements of course.

Edit: just logged in to insert 'without safeguards'

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 10:01 am

Lonewolfie said

"...colour me shocked that Labour seem to be prepared for the election - it's almost as though they knew when it was going to happen, worked specifically towards that date and are ramping up their message as the days go by..."

Exactly! Every meeting I've attended or speech I've gone to hear with questions & answers I noticed the most remarkable thing - 'hey, these people have a real plan here...they've been working years going by the documentation...whoa...that's coordination!', I often said to myself or another friend.

'Course, the yourbritain website needs work.
The response there was, 'Thank you, kindly, Citizen, get on it, Missy...'

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 10:10 am

Guardian top piece. Could it be Wintour and what Miliband is going to say regarding non-doms?

Nah, let's have a Watt piece on Osborne's verdict (gee I wonder what it could be?).

Left leaning editors my arse.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 10:43 am

@TheGrimSqueaker

I've just been through and reread (as is my wont) all the earlier of today's posts. And I've just realised that my first post says more or less what your preceding post says. So sorry! I should pay better attention - I'm getting sloppy.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 10:47 am

PorFavor wrote:@TheGrimSqueaker

I've just been through and reread (as is my wont) all the earlier of today's posts. And I've just realised that my first post says more or less what your preceding post says. So sorry! I should pay better attention - I'm getting sloppy.

But you said it so much more succinctly!

No problem, it was a point worth making more than once.

rearofthestore · Post by **rearofthestore** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 11:00 am

The BBC have tweeted at least four times in quick succession about the new Labour Non-Dom policy contradicting what Ed Balls said in January. Jonny Dymond the BBC correspondent following Cameron has even said this.

BBC Politics retweeted
Jonny Dymond ‏@JonnyDymond 43m43 minutes ago

Gosh. This not-very-radical tax policy seems to unravel quite quickly.

Sounds like opinion not balanced reporting to me but ...hey... what do you expect.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 11:11 am

Richard Murphy, the tax campaigner, says on his blog that it is absurd for George Osborne to argue that Labour is not really abolishing non-dom status.

This suggestion by George Osborne is the action of a desperate man. He knows he cannot abandon the non-dom rule because far too many of his party donors rely on it. But it’s the claim that Labour is not abolishing the rule that is absurd. (Guardian Politics Blog)

Unravelling?

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 11:13 am

Thanks for the birthday wishes yesterday. Love you all.

I'd like to report that I was on a special day out in the sunshine, away from the laptop, but in fact the broadband was down, as it was most of Monday.
It's on now but for how long? It's only a few weeks since they fitted a new cable outside.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 11:27 am

gilsey wrote:Thanks for the birthday wishes yesterday. Love you all.

I'd like to report that I was on a special day out in the sunshine, away from the laptop, but in fact the broadband was down, as it was most of Monday.
It's on now but for how long? It's only a few weeks since they fitted a new cable outside.

Hello! Glad you enjoyed your day - and sorry for putting a capital letter at the beginning of your name yesterday. In common with utopiandreams, getting names wrong bothers me. As you can probably tell, it's been nagging away at me since I typed my message to you. Better now . . .

Edited to add

Well, I assume you enjoyed your day . . . .

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 11:28 am

YouGov will now be doing daily polls until the GE (rather than 5 a week, as is usual) and have also altered their methodology slightly.

(the effect of this seems to be broadly neutral at least as far as Lab/Con are concerned)

Intriguingly, their latest claimed that 69% of respondents were "certain to vote". Based on previous experience this slightly understates the actual turnout on the day, so we could certainly be in for the highest GE poll since 1997 and possibly since 1992. Not good for the Tories?

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 11:30 am

My complaint to the BBC:

Last week 100 businessmen sent a letter to the Daily Telegraph supporting the Tories' plans for the economy. It received widespread coverage for more than 24 hours across the BBC news outlets. Whilst one might query why the opinions of businessmen on the subject of economics are of any great value given that businessman =/= economist, there is some justification for giving it air time even if only to inform your viewers and listeners about which companies they may wish to boycott. A similar letter, (which reached a different conclusion), from a group of academic economists was noted but given much less prominence despite them presumably knowing something about economics.

Yesterday a letter was published in the Guardian from more than 100 heath care professionals which strongly criticised the Coalition's record on the NHS. Again we must presume that this is a subject about which they are very well informed and which is regarded as very important by voters. I can find no mention of this letter anywhere on the BBC's sites. Nor did it make the radio bulletins I listened to - R4 and R5.

I find it difficult to determine why this would be the case unless there was a systematic bias at play in the BBC, a partisanship in favour of the Conservative Party. I realise that Lynton Crosby must be a hard taskmaster for you all to work for but I would remind you that you have a public duty to be impartial during an election campaign. I no longer buy a TV licence because of this bias.

I expect I'll get the usual guff off some public school/Oxbridge-educated intern in a couple of weeks telling me why I don't understand..

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 11:45 am

frightful_oik wrote:My complaint to the BBC:
Last week 100 businessmen sent a letter to the Daily Telegraph supporting the Tories' plans for the economy. It received widespread coverage for more than 24 hours across the BBC news outlets. Whilst one might query why the opinions of businessmen on the subject of economics are of any great value given that businessman =/= economist, there is some justification for giving it air time even if only to inform your viewers and listeners about which companies they may wish to boycott. A similar letter, (which reached a different conclusion), from a group of academic economists was noted but given much less prominence despite them presumably knowing something about economics.

Yesterday a letter was published in the Guardian from more than 100 heath care professionals which strongly criticised the Coalition's record on the NHS. Again we must presume that this is a subject about which they are very well informed and which is regarded as very important by voters. I can find no mention of this letter anywhere on the BBC's sites. Nor did it make the radio bulletins I listened to - R4 and R5.

I find it difficult to determine why this would be the case unless there was a systematic bias at play in the BBC, a partisanship in favour of the Conservative Party. I realise that Lynton Crosby must be a hard taskmaster for you all to work for but I would remind you that you have a public duty to be impartial during an election campaign. I no longer buy a TV licence because of this bias.
I expect I'll get the usual guff off some public school/Oxbridge-educated intern in a couple of weeks telling me why I don't understand..

Good job

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 11:47 am

rearofthestore wrote:The BBC have tweeted at least four times in quick succession about the new Labour Non-Dom policy contradicting what Ed Balls said in January. Jonny Dymond the BBC correspondent following Cameron has even said this.
BBC Politics retweeted
Jonny Dymond ‏@JonnyDymond 43m43 minutes ago

Gosh. This not-very-radical tax policy seems to unravel quite quickly.

Sounds like opinion not balanced reporting to me but ...hey... what do you expect.

Bless, Mr Dymond has just made himself look very foolish. It seems the transcript of Ed Balls statement in January was, erm, 'editorialised' by the Tories and omitted something pretty significant; what CCHQ released was:

I think that it is important that you make sure the non-dom rules work in a fair way. I think they were too lax in the past. Both the last Labour government and this Conservative government have tightened them up. That is something I will continue to look at. I think if you abolish the whole status then probably it ends up costing Britain money because there will be some people who will then leave the country.

but they missed off the final line:

But I think we can be tougher and we should be and we will.

So if there is any unravelling going on here it is the Tories feeble attempt at spin; they still haven't got the message that, in these days of social media, you can't get away with those kinds of shenanigans.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 12:05 pm

I feel I should explain the reason for my excessive flakiness hereabouts. As I said a little while ago - 'phone canvassing. I warned you all that I'd be a bit disconnected. My mind is in two (if not more) places at once. Bear with me (how I hate that expression).

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 12:07 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:... So if there is any unravelling going on here it is the Tories feeble attempt at spin; they still haven't got the message that, in these days of social media, you can't get away with those kinds of shenanigans.

Wishful thinking on your part, TheGrimSqueaker, I'm afraid. Whilst there is some truth in what you claim, unfortunately they can and do get away with it time and time again, with the bulk of the population that is.Many others are simply turned off by such shenanigans, thereby losing votes for all parties.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 12:10 pm

' No amount of misleading editing can hide the fact that the Tories are defending a system which means very wealthy people can avoid tax and play by different rules to everyone else. '
http://www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=5908" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 12:12 pm

I am nowhere near as pessimistic.

Of course *some* people - quite a large number - still uncritically consume what the MSM feeds them, but it is way down on what it used to be.

Not only is newspaper circulation, in particular, massively less than what it was - but surveys repeatedly show people far less ready to believe them as well.

Tories believe they can re-run the 1992 campaign this time round - they can't.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Apr, 2015 12:25 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I am nowhere near as pessimistic.

Of course *some* people - quite a large number - still uncritically consume what the MSM feeds them, but it is way down on what it used to be.

Not only is newspaper circulation, in particular, massively less than what it was - but surveys repeatedly show people far less ready to believe them as well.

Tories believe they can re-run the 1992 campaign this time round - they can't.

Demographics on who access news via BBC only would be interesting.

Piennar and Norman Smith can take a running jump with their automatic repeating of Tory press releases. Even if Ed Balls had said "no" in January (which he didn't) why would this mean the policy is wrong? The public like it as a demonstration of fairness, what has changed? Erm, nothing.