Thursday 23rd April 2015

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:22 pm

Bit of a poll dearth the last few days. I really need some polls.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:24 pm

A sensible look at the election North of the Border.

http://may2015.com/featured/election-20 ... le-to-win/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:25 pm

You are not allowed to publish information about how somebody has voted until polls have closed.

How somebody else has voted, surely? It can hardly be a surprise if Creasy votes for herself and there is nothing wrong with telling people how you have voted. People have already been on the blogs publishing how they voted with postal ballots.

If it is 'illegal' to tell people how you vote, the law is an ass.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:30 pm

mikems wrote:
You are not allowed to publish information about how somebody has voted until polls have closed.
How somebody else has voted, surely? It can hardly be a surprise if Creasy votes for herself and there is nothing wrong with telling people how you have voted. People have already been on the blogs publishing how they voted with postal ballots.

If it is 'illegal' to tell people how you vote, the law is an ass.

I agree.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:32 pm

Oops.

Dan Hodges retweeted
Chris Terry @CJTerry · 22m 22 minutes ago
Chris Terry retweeted BuzzFeed UK Politics
@DPJHodges @MarkReckless " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … Fear the Electoral Commission might have ruined his big moment.

Chris Terry added,
BuzzFeed UK Politics @BuzzFeedUKPol
"A postal voter may take a picture of their own ballot paper and publicise it on social media as they wish." – Electoral Commission tell us.

Reckless left looking like an idiot.

Oh and Claire Perry tweeted hers too...complete with pic.

Claire Perry Verified account
‏@claire4devizes
That's one in the bag! Now off to win the rest.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:33 pm

I genuinely didn't know that - interesting clarification from the EC there!

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:34 pm

mikems wrote:
You are not allowed to publish information about how somebody has voted until polls have closed.
How somebody else has voted, surely? It can hardly be a surprise if Creasy votes for herself and there is nothing wrong with telling people how you have voted. People have already been on the blogs publishing how they voted with postal ballots.

If it is 'illegal' to tell people how you vote, the law is an ass.

Are people perhaps being muddled because you're not allowed to take photographs in a polling station because of the obvious potential for compromising other peoples' right to a secret ballot? In the past there have been photos posted on the web of peoples' ballot from the booth and people encouraging others to post their vote, all of which is illegal, I think. The postal ballot is different and you can tell people who you have voted for yourself, but not publish what other people have voted because of rules to stop media influencing the election while it is running with exit polls and the like. The electoral commission will have the details of what is and isn't permissible posted on their website I'm sure.

Edited to add I appear to be a little late to the party with my interpretation of the rules! Oh well...

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:42 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Oops.

Dan Hodges retweeted
Chris Terry @CJTerry · 22m 22 minutes ago
Chris Terry retweeted BuzzFeed UK Politics
@DPJHodges @MarkReckless " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … Fear the Electoral Commission might have ruined his big moment.

Chris Terry added,
BuzzFeed UK Politics @BuzzFeedUKPol
"A postal voter may take a picture of their own ballot paper and publicise it on social media as they wish." – Electoral Commission tell us.
Reckless left looking like an idiot.

Oh and Claire Perry tweeted hers too...complete with pic.

Claire Perry Verified account
‏@claire4devizes
That's one in the bag! Now off to win the rest.

I'm delighted!

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 12:56 pm

stellacreasy @stellacreasy
· 2h 2 hours ago
@MarkReckless @GreavsieE17 oh mark, would it help if we got you a dictionary and looked up the word induce hun? You seem a bit confused…

stellacreasy @stellacreasy
· 1h 1 hour ago
@MarkReckless @IainDale @DPJHodges well I intend to be in Medway by then campaigning for labour so…and it’s not illegal as postal ballot..

I think Stella is having fun!

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:05 pm

citizenJA wrote: I'm grieving over the Rahman case. I feel like all my energy just left me.

Why ? I don't understand what you're grieving over.

I'm delighted that Rahman has been de-throned if he & his party are guilty of subverting democracy by bullying & intimidating the electorate ! It's the 21st century & we deserve clean politics & clean politicians.

mbc1955 · Post by **mbc1955** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:12 pm

pk1 wrote:
citizenJA wrote: I'm grieving over the Rahman case. I feel like all my energy just left me.
Why ? I don't understand what you're grieving over.

I'm delighted that Rahman has been de-throned if he & his party are guilty of subverting democracy by bullying & intimidating the electorate ! It's the 21st century & we deserve clean politics & clean politicians.

Or is citizenJA grieving because the necessity of this case proves that British elections are vulnerable to electoral fraud, and that our system is provably little better than others?

For all we've suspected in the past, we now know it's possible. So, how trustworthy are the results going to be in two weeks time?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:14 pm

Tories have £30bn black hole in spending plans, says IFS

George Osborne faces a £30bn black hole in his spending plans if he is to pay for the Conservatives’ manifesto giveaways and meet his deficit-cutting targets over the next parliament, according to an analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

In its pre-election examination of the parties’ spending plans, the independent tax thinktank calculated that the Tory manifesto would involve a “net tax giveaway”, including a cut in inheritance tax on property.

The IFS also cast doubt on the Scottish National party’s anti-austerity rhetoric, saying that public spending under the SNP’s plans would be “essentially the same” as Labour.

In its analysis, published on Thursday, the IFS concludes that the Conservatives would have to slash another £30bn from government departments, even if they succeeded in raising £5bn from unspecified tax avoidance measures, and £10bn from welfare cuts.

The IFS calculates that once the Conservatives have protected the NHS, education and aid, cuts on this scale would result in a 30% total reduction in funding for other departments in the decade from 2010.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... s-says-ifs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Heather Stewart in the Guardian.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:14 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Oops.

Dan Hodges retweeted
Chris Terry @CJTerry · 22m 22 minutes ago
Chris Terry retweeted BuzzFeed UK Politics
@DPJHodges @MarkReckless " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … Fear the Electoral Commission might have ruined his big moment.

Chris Terry added,
BuzzFeed UK Politics @BuzzFeedUKPol
"A postal voter may take a picture of their own ballot paper and publicise it on social media as they wish." – Electoral Commission tell us.
Reckless left looking like an idiot.

Oh and Claire Perry tweeted hers too...complete with pic.

Claire Perry Verified account
‏@claire4devizes
That's one in the bag! Now off to win the rest.

I am not quite so sure Reckless has got this wrong. The section he quoted was the right one, subsection 66(3)(d) of the Representation of the People Act (ie not one of the ones about polling stations).

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/section/66" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It says it is an offence to

"directly or indirectly induce a voter to display his ballot paper after he has marked it so as to make known to any person the name of the candidate for whom he has or has not voted."

Creasy will say that by retweeting she wasn't inducing anyone to do this. Indeed, as the voter had already done it she could not have done so.

But, I think it is arguable that by tweeting pictures of completed postal ballots saying "isn't this great" you induce others to do the same (ie post pictures of their completed ballots). And that is an offence.

Not worth doing, is my advice.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:18 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Tories have £30bn black hole in spending plans, says IFS

George Osborne faces a £30bn black hole in his spending plans if he is to pay for the Conservatives’ manifesto giveaways and meet his deficit-cutting targets over the next parliament, according to an analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

In its pre-election examination of the parties’ spending plans, the independent tax thinktank calculated that the Tory manifesto would involve a “net tax giveaway”, including a cut in inheritance tax on property.

The IFS also cast doubt on the Scottish National party’s anti-austerity rhetoric, saying that public spending under the SNP’s plans would be “essentially the same” as Labour.

In its analysis, published on Thursday, the IFS concludes that the Conservatives would have to slash another £30bn from government departments, even if they succeeded in raising £5bn from unspecified tax avoidance measures, and £10bn from welfare cuts.

The IFS calculates that once the Conservatives have protected the NHS, education and aid, cuts on this scale would result in a 30% total reduction in funding for other departments in the decade from 2010.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... s-says-ifs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Heather Stewart in the Guardian.

That'll be lead story on BBC News then.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:32 pm

George Galloway has told Sky news that if he fails to retain his Parliamentary seat, he will run for London Mayor !

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:39 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Tories have £30bn black hole in spending plans, says IFS

George Osborne faces a £30bn black hole in his spending plans if he is to pay for the Conservatives’ manifesto giveaways and meet his deficit-cutting targets over the next parliament, according to an analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

In its pre-election examination of the parties’ spending plans, the independent tax thinktank calculated that the Tory manifesto would involve a “net tax giveaway”, including a cut in inheritance tax on property.

The IFS also cast doubt on the Scottish National party’s anti-austerity rhetoric, saying that public spending under the SNP’s plans would be “essentially the same” as Labour.

In its analysis, published on Thursday, the IFS concludes that the Conservatives would have to slash another £30bn from government departments, even if they succeeded in raising £5bn from unspecified tax avoidance measures, and £10bn from welfare cuts.

The IFS calculates that once the Conservatives have protected the NHS, education and aid, cuts on this scale would result in a 30% total reduction in funding for other departments in the decade from 2010.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... s-says-ifs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Heather Stewart in the Guardian.

From the Telegraph in 2012:

If the current weak growth and low tax receipts are permanent, the Chancellor will need another £23 billion of tax rises or spending cuts to be on course to meet his mandate by 2018, the report said.

The think-tank said this would be “roughly equivalent to increasing the main rate of VAT from 20 per cent to 25 per cent”, or imposing even deeper welfare cuts than announced so far.

I think I may have found a big chunk of your missing £30bn citizenJA! I honest to goodness can't believe the Tories won't put up VAT to 25% if they get re-elected. It's the only way they'll come anywhere close to being able to afford tax cuts for the better off, but of course they can't admit it because it's so obviously taxing the poorest more to pay for tax cuts for the richest and, with a couple of weeks left to go before the election, Cameron has suddenly remembered that he's "very angry" about being called the party of the rich!

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:39 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Eric_WLothian wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Whoops!!

http://labourlist.org/2015/04/snp-candi ... -to-nazis/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
He also seems to think you need a Scottish accent to be a Scot:

Neil Hay‏@NeilHaySNP
@AamerAnwar @E_ham01 @STVGlasgow very aware of that but my non Scots wife also commented on the disproportionate number of non Scots accents
What an inward-looking parochial bunch they are!
Thank goodness they are a minority, albeit a vocal one. All my Scottish friends and relatives * would have nothing but contempt for these fools.

* Does that make me MacRabbit?

The FM seems to have accepted that people who say "elderly voters barely know their own name” and call others with an opposing view "quislings" are perfectly acceptable as MPs.

Nicola Sturgeon has refused to sack an SNP election candidate exposed for posting online messages which branded No voters “traitors.”

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3751722

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:43 pm

"Labour received more than £1m in donations in second week of campaign
Labour received more than £1m in donations in the second week of the election campaign, more than twice as much as the Conservative party, the Press Association reports. The Lib Dems were given £50,000 and Ukip £8,000, according to figures from the Electoral Commission, while the Scottish Greens reported receiving £9,124 of public funds. Ukip also reported £63,000 worth of donations late, the commission said."
I really can't see how the polls are anything like accurate when this level of support is being given to Labour. Our local party put out an appeal for something like £111,000 (deleted e-mail so can't remember exact amount) to employ an organiser, within 24 hours they were delighted to have raised over half of it.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:48 pm

Re the polls - it may be worth mentioning that many of them often put Labour clearly ahead before weightings.

Said adjustments are often based on how voters behaved in previous GEs - which means they could be caught out by anything "unpredictable".

(the recent rush to register before the deadline being one obvious example - these people are highly likely to vote next month, and are just a tad unlikely to be pro-Tory)

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 1:58 pm

Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
Tories have £30bn black hole in spending plans, says IFS

George Osborne faces a £30bn black hole in his spending plans if he is to pay for the Conservatives’ manifesto giveaways and meet his deficit-cutting targets over the next parliament, according to an analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

In its pre-election examination of the parties’ spending plans, the independent tax thinktank calculated that the Tory manifesto would involve a “net tax giveaway”, including a cut in inheritance tax on property.

The IFS also cast doubt on the Scottish National party’s anti-austerity rhetoric, saying that public spending under the SNP’s plans would be “essentially the same” as Labour.

In its analysis, published on Thursday, the IFS concludes that the Conservatives would have to slash another £30bn from government departments, even if they succeeded in raising £5bn from unspecified tax avoidance measures, and £10bn from welfare cuts.

The IFS calculates that once the Conservatives have protected the NHS, education and aid, cuts on this scale would result in a 30% total reduction in funding for other departments in the decade from 2010.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... s-says-ifs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Heather Stewart in the Guardian.
From the Telegraph in 2012:
If the current weak growth and low tax receipts are permanent, the Chancellor will need another £23 billion of tax rises or spending cuts to be on course to meet his mandate by 2018, the report said.

The think-tank said this would be “roughly equivalent to increasing the main rate of VAT from 20 per cent to 25 per cent”, or imposing even deeper welfare cuts than announced so far.
I think I may have found a big chunk of your missing £30bn citizenJA! I honest to goodness can't believe the Tories won't put up VAT to 25% if they get re-elected. It's the only way they'll come anywhere close to being able to afford tax cuts for the better off, but of course they can't admit it because it's so obviously taxing the poorest more to pay for tax cuts for the richest and, with a couple of weeks left to go before the election, Cameron has suddenly remembered that he's "very angry" about being called the party of the rich!

It's the Tory way, increasing VAT.
Compare how current government raise revenue from the ONS data below.

VAT receipts £125.1 billion
Income-tax-related payments £169.7 billion
Social (national insurance) contributions £109.5 billion
Corporation Tax £42.3 billion
Stamp duties (on shares, land & property) £13.8 billion
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/psa/publi ... -borrowing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:03 pm

Why aren't Plaid Cymru surging, Stephen Bush asks in this NS piece, I don't know, maybe he should ask John Harris, he reckoned they were on course to rampage through Labour's valley heartlands..

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

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:08 pm

Over at the Guardian Election Blog there's a video of David Cameron's St George's Day greeting. The "lip-synch" is all out of kilter. So, if you're a bit of a child in these matters (as I am), go and have a look and a laugh. Why not? It's free and it's on "Dave".

Edited "D" for "d"

Oh - and the video's at 13.27

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:10 pm

pk1 wrote:George Galloway has told Sky news that if he fails to retain his Parliamentary seat, he will run for London Mayor !

Gawd...

Post by **refitman** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:16 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:Slightly bizarre sensation earlier hearing Expenses Cheat David Laws crowing about the transparency of the LibDems' figures, considering his track record with transparency of figures.

FIFY

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:18 pm

pk1 wrote:
citizenJA wrote: I'm grieving over the Rahman case. I feel like all my energy just left me.
Why ? I don't understand what you're grieving over.

I'm delighted that Rahman has been de-throned if he & his party are guilty of subverting democracy by bullying & intimidating the electorate ! It's the 21st century & we deserve clean politics & clean politicians.

I'm sorry Rahman did it, I'm sorry he's guilty. He's hurt people, betrayed their trust. Rahman has committed an offensive crime destroying all the trust placed in him. I'm sorry the bullying, intimidation & interfering with the democratic process of voting was true.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:26 pm

citizenJA wrote:
pk1 wrote:
citizenJA wrote: I'm grieving over the Rahman case. I feel like all my energy just left me.
Why ? I don't understand what you're grieving over.

I'm delighted that Rahman has been de-throned if he & his party are guilty of subverting democracy by bullying & intimidating the electorate ! It's the 21st century & we deserve clean politics & clean politicians.
I'm sorry Rahman did it, I'm sorry he's guilty. He's hurt people, betrayed their trust. Rahman has committed an offensive crime destroying all the trust placed in him. I'm sorry the bullying, intimidation & interfering with the democratic process of voting was true.

It will be interesting to hear Tubby's take on this.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:34 pm

Panelbase
Lab 34 Con 31 LD 7 UKIP 17 Green 4

At last!

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:39 pm

But, I think it is arguable that by tweeting pictures of completed postal ballots saying "isn't this great" you induce others to do the same (ie post pictures of their completed ballots). And that is an offence.

Equally, it could be argued that it is not inducement, so it is not an offence.

The law is about what is reasonable, above all else. And to be guilty of an offence such as this, you would have to be able to show mens rea, i.e. that Creasy was trying to induce people to break the law deliberately, rather than simply being naturally exuberant in a normal human sort of way.

I expect any sensible court would see such proceedings as time-wasting and vexatious.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:47 pm

citizenJA wrote:
pk1 wrote:
citizenJA wrote: I'm grieving over the Rahman case. I feel like all my energy just left me.
Why ? I don't understand what you're grieving over.

I'm delighted that Rahman has been de-throned if he & his party are guilty of subverting democracy by bullying & intimidating the electorate ! It's the 21st century & we deserve clean politics & clean politicians.
I'm sorry Rahman did it, I'm sorry he's guilty. He's hurt people, betrayed their trust. Rahman has committed an offensive crime destroying all the trust placed in him. I'm sorry the bullying, intimidation & interfering with the democratic process of voting was true.

Worth noting that he was found guilty of all but two of the charges against him.

The local elections that happened simultaneously were judged to have been tainted too.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:53 pm

Good piece on the press from Peter Jukes:
http://www.byline.com/column/2/article/5

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:53 pm

mikems wrote:
But, I think it is arguable that by tweeting pictures of completed postal ballots saying "isn't this great" you induce others to do the same (ie post pictures of their completed ballots). And that is an offence.
Equally, it could be argued that it is not inducement, so it is not an offence.

The law is about what is reasonable, above all else. And to be guilty of an offence such as this, you would have to be able to show mens rea, i.e. that Creasy was trying to induce people to break the law deliberately, rather than simply being naturally exuberant in a normal human sort of way.

I expect any sensible court would see such proceedings as time-wasting and vexatious.

I raised this a few days ago regarding social media. I wondered if (from a young voters perspective) friends or those you follow say they've voted that's more likely to make you vote, ditto the inverse and possibly if yes, who for.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:54 pm

Bonnie Greer ‏@Bonn1eGreer 19 mins19 minutes ago
Latest snapshot: @YouGov/@Spectator:

#Labour 34%
#Tories 33%
#Ukip 14%
#LD 7%
#Greens 5%
#SNP 44%-Scot.

Implies:LAB 296,
CON 268,
SNP 50

19 retweets 8 favourites
Reply Retweet19 Favourite8
More

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 2:55 pm

mikems wrote:
But, I think it is arguable that by tweeting pictures of completed postal ballots saying "isn't this great" you induce others to do the same (ie post pictures of their completed ballots). And that is an offence.
Equally, it could be argued that it is not inducement, so it is not an offence.

The law is about what is reasonable, above all else. And to be guilty of an offence such as this, you would have to be able to show mens rea, i.e. that Creasy was trying to induce people to break the law deliberately, rather than simply being naturally exuberant in a normal human sort of way.

I expect any sensible court would see such proceedings as time-wasting and vexatious.

That is wrong.

This is a statutory offence. The words mean what they mean. There is no mens rea requirement. It is an offence of strict liability (there are lots of them).

If you induce someone directly or indiretly to display their ballot paper after it is marked you commit the offence. It doesn't matter at all what your intention was. Nor is there any 'reasonableness' limitation.

Don't do it is my advice.

I notice that you can't see Creasy's retweet any longer as the original tweet is now protected.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:02 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
mikems wrote:
But, I think it is arguable that by tweeting pictures of completed postal ballots saying "isn't this great" you induce others to do the same (ie post pictures of their completed ballots). And that is an offence.
Equally, it could be argued that it is not inducement, so it is not an offence.

The law is about what is reasonable, above all else. And to be guilty of an offence such as this, you would have to be able to show mens rea, i.e. that Creasy was trying to induce people to break the law deliberately, rather than simply being naturally exuberant in a normal human sort of way.

I expect any sensible court would see such proceedings as time-wasting and vexatious.
That is wrong.

This is a statutory offence. The words mean what they mean. There is no mens rea requirement. It is an offence of strict liability (there are lots of them).

If you induce someone directly or indiretly to display their ballot paper after it is marked you commit the offence. It doesn't matter at all what your intention was. Nor is there any 'reasonableness' limitation.

Don't do it is my advice.

I notice that you can't see Creasy's retweet any longer as the original tweet is now protected.

Well, I'm in doubt about your take on this. Apart, that is, from your advice not to do it (just in case).

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:03 pm

frightful_oik wrote:Good piece on the press from Peter Jukes:
http://www.byline.com/column/2/article/5

Excellent...

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:04 pm

Apparently the SNP are talking about forcing a vote for the recognition of the Palestinian state when the new Parliament convenes; so another Labour policy they are adopting then.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:07 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
pk1 wrote: Why ? I don't understand what you're grieving over.

I'm delighted that Rahman has been de-throned if he & his party are guilty of subverting democracy by bullying & intimidating the electorate ! It's the 21st century & we deserve clean politics & clean politicians.
I'm sorry Rahman did it, I'm sorry he's guilty. He's hurt people, betrayed their trust. Rahman has committed an offensive crime destroying all the trust placed in him. I'm sorry the bullying, intimidation & interfering with the democratic process of voting was true.
Worth noting that he was found guilty of all but two of the charges against him.

The local elections that happened simultaneously were judged to have been tainted too.

Indeed - demoralises good people working locally, calls into question the legitimacy of a democratic process & there's a greater chance of more electorate apathy, dismay leading to people saying away from voting, perhaps. Those were some of the things going through me when I read the news. Political leadership is a huge responsibility. How could you do it, Rahman. I thought you might have cared about the people who trusted you. Look what you've done.

Tubby Isaacs, you & I had good exchanges together about Tower Hamlet's leadership - you helped me understand in a clear, totally non-partisan, non-prejudicial way & I'm grateful.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:15 pm

frightful_oik wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
pk1 wrote: Why ? I don't understand what you're grieving over.

I'm delighted that Rahman has been de-throned if he & his party are guilty of subverting democracy by bullying & intimidating the electorate ! It's the 21st century & we deserve clean politics & clean politicians.
I'm sorry Rahman did it, I'm sorry he's guilty. He's hurt people, betrayed their trust. Rahman has committed an offensive crime destroying all the trust placed in him. I'm sorry the bullying, intimidation & interfering with the democratic process of voting was true.
It will be interesting to hear Tubby's take on this.

I'm in Slovakia.

I liked what he did as mayor, while never feeling entirely comfortable with the stuff around him. I voted for him personally as mayor, but not for Tower Hamlets First who I didn't take seriously at all. They won all 3 seats in my ward, much to my surprise.

It looks like the intimidation wasn't proved. I never saw more than about 5 people standing by the school where the polling station was. The policewoman was inside the polling station, which was inside the gate and round a corner into a classroom. Would be a stretch to call that intimidation.

The grants were controversial, and probably could have done with some independent oversight. But the talk about how many Muslims got grants sounds a bit dubious to me- they're the poorest section of the population. Whatever the population of rich white people in Canary Wharf is, I don't know, but they shouldn't be getting grants.

It's going to cause a few ripples that he's been banned from office by a court. But local government seems much more circumscribed than central government.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:23 pm

It was hard to stomach David Cameron preaching austerity from a golden throne
As a waitress at the lord mayor's banquet, the contrast between what Cameron was saying and where he was saying it felt particularly chilling

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ector-cuts

Another 'lest we forget' moment from the last five years.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:31 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Apparently the SNP are talking about forcing a vote for the recognition of the Palestinian state when the new Parliament convenes; so another Labour policy they are adopting then.

Christ, talk about bigging up their ego's !

There was a backbench debate & vote on recognising Palestine on 13th October 2014. It was introduced in Jack Straw's name & moved by Grahame Morris. All but 12 voted in favour !!

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.p ... &number=54" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:34 pm

frightful_oik wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
Tories have £30bn black hole in spending plans, says IFS

George Osborne faces a £30bn black hole in his spending plans if he is to pay for the Conservatives’ manifesto giveaways and meet his deficit-cutting targets over the next parliament, according to an analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

In its pre-election examination of the parties’ spending plans, the independent tax thinktank calculated that the Tory manifesto would involve a “net tax giveaway”, including a cut in inheritance tax on property.

The IFS also cast doubt on the Scottish National party’s anti-austerity rhetoric, saying that public spending under the SNP’s plans would be “essentially the same” as Labour.

In its analysis, published on Thursday, the IFS concludes that the Conservatives would have to slash another £30bn from government departments, even if they succeeded in raising £5bn from unspecified tax avoidance measures, and £10bn from welfare cuts.

The IFS calculates that once the Conservatives have protected the NHS, education and aid, cuts on this scale would result in a 30% total reduction in funding for other departments in the decade from 2010.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... s-says-ifs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Heather Stewart in the Guardian.
That'll be lead story on BBC News then.

Either that or the Telegraph's main story

Election 2015: Only a Conservative government would balance books, IFS finds - live

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... liday.html

Which do you reckon it will be

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:37 pm

Erm, that not what the IFS actually says is it?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:39 pm

Afternoon all.

On the Tower Hamlets Lutfur Rahman judgement. As someone who worked in Tower Hamlets - very closely engaged with local communities and organisations and the grant giving sections of the council - all I can say is I'm not at all surprised. This has been a long time coming. I hope there is far more rigour and scrutiny applied in all the awarding and monitoring processes in future. That's all I'm saying.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:41 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Erm, that not what the IFS actually says is it?

I know - it's just lies!

Election 2015: Only a Conservative government would balance books, IFS finds - live
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... liday.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:48 pm

danesclose wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Heather Stewart in the Guardian.
That'll be lead story on BBC News then.
Either that or the Telegraph's main story
Election 2015: Only a Conservative government would balance books, IFS finds - live
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... liday.html

Which do you reckon it will be

I need to give that some thought. I think it's the latter.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:49 pm

Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB · 1h 1 hour ago
I'm expecting at least 3 further polls today

There you go whoever it was who was experiencing poll withdrawal - there's plenty on the way.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:51 pm

The Tories in the north-east: the new 'workers party' goes into battle – video

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

(edit to take the "LOL" out as I watch more....)

diGriz · Post by **diGriz** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 3:58 pm

frightful_oik wrote:Panelbase
Lab 34 Con 31 LD 7 UKIP 17 Green 4

At last!

Am I the only one that thinks about replacing my fences when I see the name Panelbase?

Hi all.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 4:03 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Erm, that not what the IFS actually says is it?

Its in the Torygraph - it must be true.

The headline is "Labour will heap 90bn more debt on UK & Increase taxes by £12 bn." which is apparently a direct quote from OGRFG himself.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 23 Apr, 2015 4:04 pm

diGriz wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Panelbase
Lab 34 Con 31 LD 7 UKIP 17 Green 4

At last!
Am I the only one that thinks about replacing my fences when I see the name Panelbase?

Hi all.

I keep reading it as "Panelbeater" in the same way as I always misread "Shopfitters" for "Shoplifters".