Are these numbers the killer for Mr. Brown?
December 27th, 2009
Is survival from this position nigh on impossible?
One of my best Christmas presents was a personal copy of the invaluable reference source - David Butler’s Twentieth-century British Political Facts, 1900-2000
As well as the outcomes of voting intention question the book also lists the PM and opposition leaders’ approval ratings which have been asked in a broadly standard way for all that time.
And looking back through the pages of detailed tables there is simply no precedent for a Prime Minister who has sunk to the position that Mr. Brown is now in going on to hold on to power at the following general election.
Of those PMs who lost ensuing general elections in 1964 the lowest Gallup approval rating that Alec Douglas-Home slumped to was 40%.
Six years later the Tories came to power with Harold Wilson on a 51% approval rating. Ahead of the February 1974 election the low point for Edward Heath was 34%. During 1978/78 “the winter of discontent” Jim Callaghan’s numbers slipped to 33% but had recovered to 43% by polling day. He still lost to Maggie Thatcher.
And we all know what happened to John Major in 1997.
Is it any wonder, then, that this morning the Mail on Sunday is reporting that Jack Straw is leading a group of five cabinet ministers who want Brown ousted before the election. It’s hard to argue with their analysis - with Mr. Brown remaining Labour is almost certainly doomed.
are among the on-line bookies that have Labour leadership markets.
UPDATE: There’s a good article by Dr Roger Mortimore, head of political research at Ipsos-MORI, on this broad point putting the focus on leader approval ratings from the last time that the Tories won back power in 1979. The firm has also published online for the first time polling data from the 1976 - 79 period.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
First!!!
It’s the economy. The plotters need some plausible mechanism for attracting back voters who have lost their jobs/savings/prospects.
Harman might attract new women voters, but Miliband? Johnson?
re 2. Tessa Jowell is the one who could have the biggest impacg. She’s just about the only senior Labour figure capable of communicating with middle England.
For comparison purposes, it would be useful to have some idea of Thatcher’s approval ratings in 1983 and 1987, along with Major’s in 1992.
It is exceptionally difficult for any party of whatever persuasion to win four GE victories on the bounce. Couple this fact with Gordon Brown’s performance over the past two years and his resulting unpopularity and it becomes virtually impossible - I was startled by Morus’ comments last night that he anticipates a really competitive election - maybe he sees things differently from his perspective in NY.
What is surprising, if true, are the reports that Jack Straw and his small gang are attempting to arrange Brown’s removal at this late, late hour - this story surely has to be worth a thread in its own right.
You have to wonder whether open warfare has broken out at the very top of Government or whether Happy Jack now senses that an opportunity has arisen belatedly as a result of the reported fall-out between Brown and Mandelson.
Of course, in this situation, Brown himself holds most of the aces, including the ultimate deterrent over the timing the General Election and on the betting markets and I expect this story to result in a shortening, at least temporarily, of the odds against a March polling date by around half a point.
The first few polls in the New Year may prove to be very interesting indeed.
Please see my postings of a few months ago on the strong correlations between approval ratings and the share of the vote the party wins in recent British general elections.
It is very hard to see how Brown and Labour can come back from this.
The end of the NuLab nightmare is coming soon, and a sensible government will inherit the disastrous mess the socialists have left.
“My friends in the polling industry tell me that no prime minister has been as unpopular as Gordon Brown and gone on to win the subsequent election.” Andrew Rawnsley
PS I know this point has been made many times on this site already, but who the hell are the 28% who are satisfied with this government? Apart from ruining the economy, bringing us into wars on a pack of lies, destroying our civil liberties, selling us out to the EU, vandalising the constitution, wasting hundreds of billions on inefficient public services, etc., etc., what else do they have to do to lose the remaining quarter of the electorate?
Don’t think the article’s got this bit right:
“Unless the contenders can agree on a successor, Labour would be plunged into a damaging leadership contest in the middle of the Election campaign.”
The scenario we’ve discussed here before is the Cabinet / NEC would take the view that it wasn’t practical to have a leadership election before the general election, in which case the Cabinet would get to make the pick. They’d then have a formal leadership election after the general election which, if Labour beaten the Tories, the new PM who’d brought them victory against the odds would presumably win.
PfP - I should clarify: I don’t think the election is necessarily close, I just think it is competitive compared to the last three. I only meant that the result is not assured for the first time since 1992.
Brown’s numbers are horrible, and it was always a better idea that he should be dethroned inperhaps February 2010 than last Autumn. I even wrote an article suggesting so: http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2009/05/31/wouldnt-a-delay-be-wiser/
If he does go, or if there is a Black Swan (the Linburgh baby found in David Cameron’s garage etc etc), then it is well within the realms of possibility that there could be a hung Parliament. It’s not likely, but it’s much more plausible than Michael Howard becoming PM in 2005.
I’m a huge believer in media boredom as a major contributing factor to political narrative. The media would love for this to be a knife-edge election, so anything that moves towards that meme will be chased, even by right-wing press. Boring elections don’t sell papers. If Cameron slips (the debates?) or if Labour change the leader, the media will play it for all it’s worth, and the odds will be all over the shop. That simply wasn’t plausible in 2001 and 2005, was it?
9 - That is the process: Cabinet and NEC jointly choose a leader, who is presumably then chosen by HM (though not necessarily of course).
I’ve always said that if that happened (when Labour are in Gvt) the party would turn its lonely eyes to Jack Straw. Mandelson is the political writer’s dream choice, but unless they’ve already chosen someone, it would surely be Straw ahead of Harman, Johnson, Miliband and Darling (at least, I really hope it would be Straw out of those 5).
9 Edmund - are you suggesting in your final comment that Straw himself would be the main beneficiary, rather than just the King maker?
If so, he’s available at a very tasty 25/1 to be the next Labour leader with both Ladbrokes and Stan James. He’s surely worth the price of a pint of Speckled Hen at those odds?
10 OK Morus, I take your point - of course it’s quite possible, some would say likely, that the outcome will be far more decisive than in 2005.
13 - I entirely agree Peter: the spread is wider this time, and I’d say there’s a 35% chance or so that Cameron gets a bigger majority than Blair did in 2005, but also a 10% chance he doesn’t get a majority at all). I think the markets suggesting a majority of about 54 have it right *for now*.
And re comment 12: I’ve already had some of that (more than a pint’s worth!) from a while ago (think I only got about 20/1 though…)
LTP on Brown/Cameron 1.19.LTP on Cameron for Next PM is 1.26. Both of these markets are very thin.
I still haven’t resolved my own position and what I have done is to engineer a huge win if Brown is deposed and suffer a small loss if he isn’t AND subsequently loses the GE.
At odds close to 20-1 I can live with this.
“I entirely agree Peter: the spread is wider this time, and I’d say there’s a 35% chance or so that Cameron gets a bigger majority than Blair did in 2005, but also a 10% chance he doesn’t get a majority at all). I think the markets suggesting a majority of about 54 have it right *for now*.”
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is what I wrote about ‘Overall Majority’ twenty four hours ago in another place.
“This remains by far the most vibrant market and on the whole a very friendly one.
The short-term moves are childishly predictable and the market contains a crazy anomaly.
It remains my view that the 15.0-16.0 (LTP 15.0) for a LAB MAJ is the worst bet on the boards.Everyone who is anyone is probably maxed out Laying this, so it is difficult to see a more realistic price emerging this side of an announcement….and even then, reality may not bite.
Therefore it follows that extreme caution has to be exercised in Laying a CON MAJ (1.44) or NOM (4.0), even though thereby you are Backing a LAB MAJ at close to 20.0.
The swings for NOM locally have been between 3.90 and 4.5 and the CON MAJ between 1.40 and 1.49.
If you have a very strong view on either option you are essentially playing in a benevolent field and if you wish to trade, that is also good…..but stay against a LAB MAJ.It isn’t going to happen.
In the coming months I will be looking for far more creative ways TO Back a LAB MAJ at double the price the ‘Overall Majority’ market offers.”
PfP @12: Not particularly - just that it would be up to the cabinet (”in consultation with the NEC”) to make the pick, and there’d be no need to have a proper leadership election.
Since the article seems to have got that fairly fundamental point wrong, you have to wonder how much of the rest of it is incorrect and/or made up. Not really inclined to believe a word of it to be honest, apart from the fairly emphatic denial by a “source close to Straw”.
To the extent that there is a possibility of a leadership change, I think it would come from a voluntary move by Brown, rather than a cabinet coup. Some time in the next couple of weeks, if it happens at all.
7/1 Ladbrokes Gordon Brown not to be leader at the next election might be a safer bet than trying to guess his successor.
i have money @ 3-1 on Obama’s approval rating to reach at least 50 on the RCP average before 2010. Will the last aborted terror attack give him a bounce?
A number of very interesting comments already this morning.
Having now seen the composition of the MoS’s supposed gang of five, it’s just about as powerful as one could imagine - lacking only Miliband Jnr. If true, W-O-W is what I say! It certainly makes the bet highlighted by John L in post #18 look interesting.
Obama’s approval on RCP actually stands @ 49.5…
17 “Some time in the next couple of weeks, if it happens at all.”
That’s interesting, Tim has long been going for New Year’s Eve. He’d certainly be worth the TOTY title on this forecast alone should he be proved correct!
btw the bet is now available on Intrade @2-1. Good value IMO.
23 Philippe - are you saying that Obama’s approval rating is currently within 0.5% of landing odds of 2/1? That sounds crazy.
Philippe Magnan @21, wouldn’t have thought the terror thing would do it - Obama’s been very low key about it these latest outbreak of Darwinist terrorism (Infidels, Retreat From The Holy Land Or We Will Set Our Own Groins On Fire!) and seems to have decided not to use it to try to stir up a load of demented leader-worship. Speaks very highly of Obama in my opinion, but probably not in the opinion of your swing-voting 0.6%.
If anything, I think it’s healthcare that will give Obama a boost. Until it (almost) passed, Obama had all the downside of trying to pass it but none of the upside. Now that it’s gone through the Senate, he should get a bit of credit.
That said, I think that what will really affect whether you win your bet is who polls next. Another CNN poll and you should be in the clear, and another Rasmussen one and you’re screwed - regardless of what actually happens to Obama’s ratings.
A good morning of betting comments so far - John L has a good point about the 7/1.
Philippe - that’s free money even if it reaches 5/6 on, surely?
URW - on top form: post 16 is a must-read.
Need some sleep, so g’nite all!
The key player in this, as always, is Harriet Harman. If she insists on the precedence of deputy leader, as is her prerogative, the plotters have to ask themselves do they want Gordon Brown or Harriet Harman? Not an easy choice.
Any new leader has to explain what he or she will do differently. Just before a general election, that will lack credibility. Who is going to rewrite a manifesto?
Unless (as Edmund in Tokyo suggests) Gordon Brown himself chooses to step down from a position of relative strength, it’s just too late. The best chance was August 2008. The next best chance was this June. Labour is likely to rue those missed chances for many years.
27 Agreed, antifrank, so just what exactly do you suppose is going on between Straw (nice hat btw in the MoS picture)and the others. It all seems far too late as you suggest. Were the alleged five members to increase in number to say 10, i.e. almost half the Cabinet, would the forces ranged against Brown then become irresistable?
I haven’t seen any denials of this story from the would-be gang of five as yet. Presumably Marr is off-air over Christmas - pity, just when he might have proved entertaining.
A jolly good Christmas present, Mike. How did they know you were interested in politics ?
As I have pointed out previously, while the figures for Brown are bad, they are not quite as bad as they look.
Lebo & Norpoth have shown that PM approval must be reweighted by the two-party vote.
So a PM approval of 40% in the days when Lab/Con got 90% of all votes is comparable to 28% now when Lab/Con get only ~65% of all votes.
Throw in the unprecedented electoral bias to Labour, and the game is still not quite up for Brown…
280 - I like Yellow Submarine’s hypothesis on the last thread that it’s really an attack on Ed Balls.
No plot can successfully break cover. What reason would plotters give for acting now? “We’re going to lose otherwise” would be honest but would require a) a new message to sell and b) an obvious political titan to save them waiting in the wings. Do tell me if you have seen the glimmer of either.
The story seems to have been planted on Jack Straw’s behalf. Of the five ministers named, he actually ranks lowest in precedence. Interesting, that.
It’s the economic situation.
Darling said in the PBR, the 2009 borrowing requirement was 12.5% of GDP.
The Economist hikes that to 14.5% in the Christmas Edition.
My check of The Treasury’s figures makes it 17% of GDP.
Tax Revenues are tumbling month on month. The UK’s borrowing requirement for 2010 is heading for over 20%.
Everyone is saying Greece is bust with a mere 13% of GDP. Gordon’s biggest lie to date, the finances, will explode in his face very shortly. That’s why they want to act now. His approval rating will halve again once the truth gets out.
The blogosphere is enjoying listening to Gordon Is A Moron resurrected from the punk era.
I sense it is all too late to rescue the situation, economically and politically. New Labour are spent!
16 - good post.
“It remains my view that the 15.0-16.0 (LTP 15.0) for a LAB MAJ is the worst bet on the boards.Everyone who is anyone is probably maxed out Laying this, so it is difficult to see a more realistic price emerging this side of an announcement….and even then, reality may not bite.”
I think reality WILL bite, eventually. It has to, as the market grows more efficient and draws more interest nearer the time. I completely agree that for now that it’s unlikely to change, as you need deep pockets to lay at 15 when you won’t get paid for x months. I’d rather keep my money for trading on the football and cricket.
However, as the period of time between staking and settling narrows, so the price will drift as people clamour to get on.
31 - Quick comment before bed: Jack Straw actualy leads the Order of Precedence, even ahead of Gordon Brown.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_precedence_in_England_and_Wales
As Lord High Chancellor, he is the highest commoner after the Archibishop of Canterbury
yes peter - look on intrade — on the front page! I also opened a thread on it a few weeks ago on the intrade forum — section *politics* under the moniker ‘Katechon’
32 Which again brings us back to the over-bearing need for Labour to avoid at all costs what would otherwise inevitably be a disastrous Budget Statement in March. How does Brown achieve this? There’s only one way folks!
34 - thank you! It’s always good to have gaps in my knowledge filled in.
thanks Edmund — Rasmussen is polling virtually daily; there can’t be 2 Ras’s polls in the RCP count. The actual ‘44′ is Obama’s lowest evah (he reached it twice methinks). i have to hit the road on my mopped; will catch up wt the thread later!
From previous thread.
(Mike) ‘Thanks MORUS for pointing that out. The final five represent a pretty good spread politically. As you say “2 Tories, 1 irked Labour-leaner, a LD, and an independent/other””
Who is the indepenent/other?
And if there are only 2 Tories which of Easterross Nabavi and Herdson are non Tories?
Without wishing to spoil the Christmas bonhomie if the Beatles had penned ‘Blue Submarine’ only PtP would have spiked a full house
btw — URW, it’s good to see u’re still posting regurlarly here!
A rather damning letter from some notable economists in today’s Sunday Times, begins as follows…
“AS economists with experience in financial markets, economic modelling, policy advice and academic research, we are concerned about the integrity of fiscal and monetary policy in the UK. The absence of even the rudiments of a convincing plan to reduce Britain’s structural budget deficit in the December pre-budget report was highly irresponsible and risks damaging the economy. It showed alarming complacency in the face of the fiscal challenges facing the UK.”
41 A good basis for Dave’s Q1 at the next PMQs perhaps (whenever that might be and always subject to Brown actually deciding to show up)?
42. A good answer though would be a different view from a different set of economists.
Quoting opinions from economists is a game for any number of players.
39 - Richard Nabavi is an Independent/Other I believe.
Sleeping now…
I look forward to seeing how the ‘killer’ numbers look in March 2010 when the UK economy is going great guns again.
Many Cabinet Ministers just went through a bruising PBR, with their budgets constrained or cut, including Ministry of Justice, Home Office, Foreign Office, but saw the Balls-Cooper Praetorian Guards get more cash at their expense but nothing to reduce the deficit.
Their civil servants will be producing papers about what needs to be cut, they are aware that the PBR was not well received by the markets that matter and while Brown & Balls seem to think it is a matter of free choice when UK starts to reduce deficit and cut expenditure most of the Cabinet are aware it will be decided for them unless moves are made soon.
Those that believe something can be salvaged, that the message shouldn’t be investment v cuts but Smart Labour restraint versus harsh Tory slashing, the strategy outlined by Mandelson, must be aghast at the reborn Brown, happy at last to be able to run his Toff bashing, Tory butcher campaign, urged along by Ed Balls.
Tessa Jowell’s intervention today is interesting, another attack on Brown from the Labour women, and could be part of another try to unseat Brown but I think is more about trying to restrain him, to get back to the promise he made in June that he would act more collegiately.
The downsides of a coup remain IMHO more dangerous than the relief of getting the man Parris describes in his Times column yesterday as “a talentless bully”. Labour is a disunited Party and there is no obvious leader of talent to bring the disparate parts back together, certainly it isn’t Straw.
Who still votes Labour?
1. The payroll vote (assiduously expanded by Broon) - public employees and benefits junkies.
2. Guardianistas, Church of England clergy, champagne socialists and deluded bleeding hearts of various stripes.
3. The old core-vote tribal numpties (”we always vote Labour, Labour are for the working man” - generally recognisable by an IQ at the level of a comfortable Fahrenheit room temperature and no knowledge at all about politics or current events, other than who is winning talent shows and who’s who in soap operas).
4. Trade union and party power seekers.
5. One-issue fanatics, who reckon Labour is their only chance, e.g animal rights nutters (well, that £1 million donation did the job with the anti-hunting ban, shame it doesn’t work).
6. The greatly-expanded immigrant vote (especially those from cultures where paterfamilias kindly takes care of the chore of voting, see next item).
7. The mysterious phantoms of postal voting and disappearing registers.
8. True believers in the great socialist dawn (there must be one or two of these left, even after the demise of the Socialist Sunday Schools)
You get the idea
19. I doubt there will be a significant bounce for Obama. The Republican’s will never rally behind a Democrat president in times of crisis.
PfP @42, that depends whether Dave intends to rise to this challenge:
“In the absence of a clear and credible plan from the government, we believe the Conservative party should set out its intentions well before the general election. This would give voters and markets a clear choice between a governing party prepared to indulge in risky procrastination about the scale of Britain’s fiscal problems and an opposition prepared to take the necessary action.”
47. Also:
9. Those who believe in the minimum wage.
10. Those who want to keep VAT below 20%.
11. Those who don’t want huge tax cuts for the richest few percent of society, while the rest of the country has to suffer tax rises to pay off the national debt.
12. Those who want to keep the NHS.
13. Those who remember what a Conservative government was really like in the 80s and 90s.
14. Those who do not want to return to the days of double digit interest rates.
Hell hath no fury like a lady scorned….
This “fearless 5″ Looks more like briefing from Mandy to retaliate for Balls regaining influence over Brown.
Yet again the Brown out story appears, but this time its during a slow news period and the question has to be asked how much of is down to that.
I have no doubt there are people wanting to oust the man but it never seems to gather enough steam. Will the closeness of a defeat focus minds and will new years result in MPs having a bunch of resolutions, one of them being to dump the leader?
I was fairly sure there were powerful moves to kick him out at least twice. They came to nothing. I have no idea this time.
Nice list Fergus! It could be summed-up with the word ‘deluded’.
Socialism sounds so good on paper. To vote against it, is to vote against motherhood and apple pie.
It’s such a pity that it doesn’t work.
@rr — we only a *bounce* of 0.5% for the bet to be a winner…
51 “15-Those who believe homosexuals should have sex with schoolchildren”
Have I missed this one?
56 I think he’s referring to the equalisation of the age of consent, first introduced into Parliament by that red blooded socialist virago Edwina Curry in 1994.
Hasn’t legislation for years allowed old men to have sex with schoolgirls?
Paedophilia legalisation is a platform of EU policy. Kate McCann has written that she cannot understand how a supposedly civilised society permits paedophile exploitation to operate openly across the EU.
LINK.
I see I have been “moderated” for suggesting that Labour made laws so 16-18 year olds could have gаy sex.
Is it unture?
Thanks to Labour 16-18 year olds are mostly schoolchildren.
Anything I said factually untrue? Or just uncomfortable for the thought police?
57 Peter2, knock it off. The age of consent was balanced up across differing sexualities. It has not proven to be any sort of issue - or we would have had the Daily Rant full of “Evil middle-aged poof made my 17 year old son gay” stories. No doubt they’ve been looking.
This issue has no place on Labour’s List of Shame, which is already long and, er, shameful…
58-and we know what sеxuality is over represented in that section of society.
btw PfP — I agree it *souds crazy* — I opened the said thread on Intrade’s Forum (no link; i’m on a mobile) when the contract was trading @ 4-1!!! Crazy but true!
Peter2 and Tapestry. When Mike has a fruitcake of the year award you can be sure of my joint nomination
59 - 16-18 year olds were already having gay sex. By legalising it, the chances of boys that age being exploited by older men rather than finding someone their own age has probably substantially diminished.
Good Morning Fowl Sandwich Voters For Nick Palmer Worldwide
Meanwhile …. I note Peter2 has probably found a new use for his oversized turkey baster and is posting accordingly !!
63 Roger. A fruitcake and “joint” nomination ?!?!
Some have had a large slice already.
63. And that’s before you’ve read the evidence, Roger. Think how much more certain you’ll be afterwards. Deniers of paedophile legalisation and tolerance by governments, are a bunch of cowards in my opinion.
Dumping Brown is a no-brainer. Would his cabinet colleagues really allow Gordon anywhere near a live TV debate?
last price traded: 30 — which is 7-3, so better than 2-1… I’m actually holding 777 contracts @ an average of 27.5 — which is 7.25-2.75…
57. Thats just your dream Roger, just your dream…
The MORI table up above only matters politically if it is in contrast to a similar table for Labour’’s popularity. Is Gordon really dragging Labour down? Not much, in my view.
What would a defenestration of Gordon require? Effectively, an apology by Labour that their strategy of spend-spend-spend has been flawed - and will be changed. Walking away from the “Tory cuts v Labour invesments” line. Addressing the deficit. That can’t be done with Brown around. (And not even standing as a candidate for Labour either.)
But can it be done with Darling still in charge too? A man who has stood by Brown and given us a PBR that refuses to acknowledge our problems? No. So you are looking at a clear-out at the top, with those remaining saying “er, sorry for being crap for so long…”. Isn’t that best done AFTER the election?
Hello, Phillipe and thanks to Morus upthread. Am slightly behind the curve in this Test Match having Layed S.Africa at 4.0, Baked England at 6.0 and Backed the Draw at 1.77.
On topic: Think The Mail on Sunday is having a spot of fun.
I’ve just read your link Tapestry. Forget the joint nomination. You’ve left Peter2 for dead.
Meanwhile II …. Duncan Hamilton in ‘Scotland on Sunday’ looks at Tory prospects in the election and how PM Cammo might deal with a near Conservative free Scotland :
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/comment/Duncan-Hamilton-Who39ll-speak-for.5939766.jp?
50. There, there, Richie Rich. Be a good boy now, and go lie your way into starting a war.
Jowell’s “end the class war, Gordon” piece is getting aired on Sky…
re 30 “Lebo & Norpoth have shown that PM approval must be reweighted by the two-party vote.”
That’s you at your most irritating Rod. Source please - a link.
Agreed that that a large 3rd party presence must be taken into consideration but your re-weighting is quackery. You really ouught to apply it to the historical numbers rather than current ratings and if you do that, I suggest, it still makes the main point valid.
Plus of course you don’t recognise that for the last 35 years there has been a significant third party vote. In Feb 1974 the Liberals got 19.7% of the of the UK total.
70. ‘Addams Family Values’!
67-I read somewhere (wiki? - not sure true of course), that 75% of victims are girls , so that leaves 25% as boys. Since women are exceedingly rarely perpetrators (why the Plymouth case was so surprising) that leaves c25% victims of gаy predators. Even Peter Tatchell claims only 10% of us are gаy, so 10% of people (I reckon less) cause 25% of victims. “Do the math”.
btw-How many of the 75% girl vicitms are Romeo & Juliet cases? Only increases the % of victims of the 10%.
btw2-before I get banned by the thought police I am not claiming all gays are pаеdos. Not all Muslims are suicide bombers either, they just seem to be over-represented in that population segment.
73. And Kate McCann?
Any comment on Rallins and Thrasher’s “heading for a hung Parliament according to local by-elections”?
Meanwhile III …. Andrew Rawnsley in the ‘Observer’ looks at the prospects for 2010. Good article :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/dec/27/general-election-2010
Kate McCann in her own words on the toleration of paedophilia inside the EU, as Roger refuses to read them.
Child sexual exploitation and child pornography in particular, is sadly and shockingly extensive worldwide. It is a multi-billion dollar industry aided by the use of the Internet with the ‘thirst’ for younger victims growing. Once again, my ‘bubble’ of a life burst as I began to discover the facts relating to this now global crisis.
As we travelled through Europe in an attempt to raise awareness of Madeleine’s abduction and appeal for help, we were repeatedly made aware of the unbelievable existence of such a horrifying activity and its vastness in our so called civilised and ‘child-loving’ society.
How can such ‘businesses’ be condoned or tolerated by us all? What are the benefits for our children of being in a European Union where several member countries offer child pornography as a LEGAL past time?
Lack of sex offender registers, lack of reliable tracking systems for known offenders and no CRB check requirements , not even for those working with children are other major areas of concern within many parts of Europe.
Just a reminder that there’s a new sexy post on pb2 about the drivers contending for the title in F1 in 2010.
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.com/2009/12/return-of-king-ii-return-harder.html
re 81. Rallings and Thrasher local by election projection was spot on in 1997 - but a total disaster in 2001 when I believed it and made bets according to their projections.
Just going back to the previous thread a moment, and Richard Nabavi and Yellow Submarine are leading as I said they would.
On Brown business? I find it keeps getting more boring. The more Labour leaders talk the less they do.
I heard a comment the other day about the father that was vomit inducing but probably true.
Nice to see Gerry though trying to cover his own credibility. Protecting his profile is what he’s all about, at least he’s consistent.
83-Weren’t Belgian Socialists (what a surprise, lefties!!) implicated in some sort of ring in the late 1980s?
27. “If she insists on the precedence of deputy leader, as is her prerogative, the plotters have to ask themselves do they want Gordon Brown or Harriet Harman? Not an easy choice”
The choice would be between:
a) Brown as is, with the cabinet, PLP and party roughtly as is, and
b) Harman as leader and PM, with a brooding, sulking and perhaps revengeful Brown on the backbenches, with allies in the cabinet and PLP, with the cabinet probably divided on the succession but in the main living with it, having gone through a possibly bloody dethronement and messy coronation.
Is anyone else having problems accessing Electoral Calculus today? I’ve tried various browsers and the raw ip address, but am getting an odd error message. Has Martin Baxter forgotten to pay a bill or something?
Don’t think anyone’s posted a link for the article alex mentioned @81 (maybe there was one on the last thread?)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6968442.ece
The Sunday Times by-election model, constructed by Professor Colin Rallings and Professor Michael Thrasher of Plymouth University, is based on actual votes cast in the dozens of by-elections that take place for council seats each month.
…
“The Tories would have won over 60 more seats than Labour, with Labour losing more than 100 constituencies — nearly one in three of its current complement of MPs.
“Cameron, however, with just 311 seats, would be 15 short of the 326 needed for an overall parliamentary majority.”
David Cameron will shrug off claims he has lost direction with a ‘Tory relaunch’ in the New Year designed to lead to a landslide Election victory.
He will unveil new policies on health, welfare and law and order. The move, due for the first week of January, comes after the surprise recall of Mr Cameron’s former political director, George Bridges.
He quit two years ago after a bitter feud with Tory tycoon Lord Ashcroft and former leader William Hague.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1238624/Cameron-New-Year-relaunch-Tory-guru-recalled.html#ixzz0ascVf3iV
I have frequently suggested Straw would be the substitute for a defenestrated Brown.
But the current plotting is more to do with the fight for position after the election than it is about getting rid of Brown.
And, as someone else suggested, the one to hammer in this respect is Balls as most of the cabinet think that is what he speaks and that is the sort of cocck up he would make of the party if he were pulling the levers.
Brown is not under threat before the election but God help him afterwards.
3.’Tessa Jowell is the one who could have the biggest impact’
Mike S, is she not the MP with the unusual marital/living arrangements, who had no idea that the mortgage had been paid off? Her credibility is shot to pieces.
‘Salmond offers deal to ditch threat to TV debates’
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6968437.ece
If the focus of the debates is really about who becomes prime minister after the election, then why is Nick Clegg invited?
Neither McCann is in a position to lecture anyone on child safety and protection, are they? Cutting through all the well funded PR they did leave their children alone in a strange flat while they went to a bar.
When the POTY was first announced the other day, I suggested the following odds:
Yellow Submarine 4/6
Richard Nabavi 2/1
Nick Palmer 3/1
David Herdson 4/1
5/1 bar.
Not far off, as it turns out. Now it looks like a two horse race. Could David Herdson, Easterross or PtP rally to the cause of one of the two front runners and become the kingmaker?
83. That’s a long way from suggesting that the German government encouage fathers to sexually molest their 3 year olds as your ACTUAL link suggests.
Anyway enough or I’ll end up as crazy as you two!
95 If the SNP could command 20% of the vote, then they’d be invited too.
95. Stuart Dickson: If the focus of the debates is really about who becomes prime minister after the election, then why is Nick Clegg invited?
He leads a party that has a large number of seats in Parliament (more than certain other parties will even be contesting), and therefore could well have a big say in who becomes Prime Minister.
97 stjohn. Shouldn’t that be ‘Peter the Punter’ 5/1 at the bar ??
91. EiT.
The by-election model, which has been reworked to take account of different patterns of competition between the parties, has the Tories on 38%, with both Labour and the Liberal Democrats on 28%.
File this one under “yeah, right” - not least because it gives the Others just 6%!
“I have frequently suggested Straw would be the substitute for a defenestrated Brown”
Straw has as less chance as my deceased Grandmother.
98. I don’t suggest anything, Roger.
I merely reproduce word for word the German government document that instructs fathers how to molest their daughters. It is hard to take it in, I agree, coming from Britain where paedophilia is not highly regarded. But don’t misunderstand that in other European countries it is regarded as not only normal but as a good thing to do. Hence the attempts being made to legalise it, which will affect life in British society.
As Kate McCann says, is this the world we want to create?
99. John Lilburne
The SNP attracted 29.1% of the vote at the June Euros, and 32.9% of the vote at the last Scottish general election.
The Ladbrokes 7/1 on Gordon not leading the PLP into the election has tightened to 5/1. I wonder if it was my investment this morning that caused it……..
82. Jack W. That is a good article by Rawnsley.
If he is correct that Labour supporters will sit on their hands at the GE then this should lead to two betting opportunities.
A low total Labour % vote and a lower than expected overall GE turnout %.
I think he is right about the Labour vote being low. I’m guessing about 26 %. On the overall GE % vote, in a “change election” year, I’m not so sure.
95- Because Nick Clegg has a theoretical chance of becoming PM..
105 - You know full well and good he was referring to UK-wide elections.
105. Stuart Dickson: The SNP attracted 29.1% of the vote at the June Euros
Easy to check.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/elections/euro/09/html/ukregion_999999.stm
The SNP received 2.1% of the votes cast.
@104:
Which are these European countries in which Child Pornography is an encouraged legal pastime?
And at the last Scottish general election, assuming you’re not abusing the term “general election”, the SNP received 1.5% of the votes cast.
@110/112:
He’s talking about his wee pretendy country again.
The killer figures are mainly contained here:
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/Budget2007/pn-complete.pdf
and include this passage:
“The Government’s long term economic goal is to maintain macroeconomic stability, ensuring the fiscal rules are met at all times [debt to GDP ratio remains under 40%; no borrowing for current spending over the economic cycle] and that inflation remains low.
…
the current budget shows an average surplus as a percentage of GDP over the current economic cycle, even using cautious assumptions, ensuring the Government is meeting the golden rule. Beyond the end of the current cycle, the current budget moves clearly into surplus
including, by the end of the projection period, the cyclically-adjusted current budget in the cautious case”.
Expectation-management is an important aspect of politics.
95: Stuart to me it seems there is two criteria to the debate inclusion.
1) The theoretical ability of the party to form the next UK governement.
2) The cutoff for probable representation in terms of seats or voting share.
Now, SNP fail certainly the first test. They are only contesting scottish seats, which number about 60ish. Whereas the theoretical cut off is 326 or so which only the UK wide partys can do. This can certainly be said with a matter of certainity as the conested seat numbers for each party is exact.
The second one is a matter of judgement. On certain level, the Lib Dems fail the test, as it is highly unlikely that they will form the next election. However they do represent the views of approx 20% of the electorate, which is definitely a signifigent minority.
113. Martin Coxall.
If he is, and if he’s being serious, he’s an idiot.
95 Stuart, it’s not about who becomes PM but the three parties which would be most likely to form a Government of the United Kingdom. The outcomes are either a Conservative majority, Labour majority or possible a coalition of one of those and the Lib Dems. So its only those three parties that matter in a UK election.
While you can construct a model in which neither Labour plus LDs or Conservatives plus LDs have a majority it is a very unlikely outcome.
On an entirely OT note, got myself a delightful Amazon Kindle from Sinta Klaus, so thanks to all those PBCers who offered up words of wisdom on the subject of eBook readers.
@116:
He’s showing the cultural and political myopia of a nationalist.
Stuart Dickson in being parochial shocker.
Bloody weird thread.
EdP on Politics and Kate McCann on childcare.
It is, and always has been in Labours interests for Brown to stand down in the New Year voluntarily, preferably on New Years Day so I win tipster of the Milleneum.
Will it happen? I did think it was a 40-45% chance, now only 20% sadly.
But I don’t think there would be much of a downside for Labour, their expected seats numbers would rise by 50 overnight.
74. Jack W
Thanks for pointing out that article Jack.
Anyone interested in the continuance (or demise) of the Union ought to read it carefully, as it is an early exposition of the post-GE constitutional crisis which awaits.
An extract:
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/comment/Duncan-Hamilton-Who39ll-speak-for.5939766.jp?
I’ve said it before, and I will be saying it again, THIS summer article (completely ignored on PB at the time; note: I was on holiday at the time anf taking a break) was the death-knell of Scottish Tory hopes at UK GE 2010:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6689936.ece
77. I must have posted the link 10 times over the past three years…
http://ms.cc.sunysb.edu/~mlebo/Lebo%20and%20Norpoth%20BJPS.pdf
Re the leadership
Replacing Brown now is high risk.
A new leader might get a bounce, but…
Brown’s USP is that his opponents (Cameron & Clegg) are lightweights who are very similar to one another but different to Brown.
A Miliband as leader would remove that distinction, and reduce the election simply to the choice of a different lightweight, which would probably help Cameron.
Johnson remains Labour’s best choice for a replacement.
The BBC seem to have dragged a leftie union teacher straight out of the 1970s to talk about this alleged bomber.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1189466/One-12-child-rapists-let-community-punishments-ministers-pressure-judges.html
Many child rapists in Britain do not get custodial sentence. It’s coming to Britain.
95 - Salmond is not a candidate in the election.
He is irrelevant.
If he wants an Alan Hansen pundit role then let him sit on a sofa and do it, but there’s no point pretending he has a role in the electoral process.
This surprising flurry of Labour leadership speculation can be interpreted in several ways:
1) A genuine move to oust Brown; this can’t be discounted, but it is very much too late for that. It certainly won’t improve Labour’s fortunes at this stage, because it would both be a sign of panic and disunity, and a full admission that their economic policy has been totally misguided. It would also bring into sharp focus the split at the top of Labour as to strategy (see 3 below).
2) Jockeying for position post-GE.
3) An attempt to gain control of the manifesto and prevent it being a Brown/Balls suicide pact based on total fantasy. However, it seems a bit late for that; the PBR (which, after all, was delivered by Darling, allegedly one of Straw’s plotters) set the course firmly in that direction, and it is hard to see how they can credibly now reverse that course.
I tend to the view that (3) is the most likely explanation. One way of playing this is to Sell on SPIN’s Brown and Out market, which would be profitable if Brown is ousted, or if there is a March or early April election.
122 “I must have posted the link 10 times over the past three years…”
Which, let’s face it, is chicken-feed compared to the number of times this link has been posted:
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/conference/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
@121:
I’m somewhat confused, Stuart. How precisely did you expect Dave to act on Calman before he becomes Prime Minister?
I remember you implying some years ago that Dave and Eck and Annie had already stitched up some kind of devo-max deal in the eventuality of a Tory victory.
What happened to that? Alex and Annabel had a lovers’ tiff?
112. LS
“General Election” is the term used throughout the Scotland Act (an act of the UK Parliament). So, if “General Election” is good enough for the legislation creating the Scottish Parliament then it ought to be good enough for most hinged folk.
126 Richard, I’d vote for 1) - that final dawning of the Brown epiphany - and resultant blind panic.
“My God - what have we done???”
@127:
Mike should create a bot whose job it is to post that link once every hundred posts or so.
114 I don’t think that the average man in the street realises just how far we’ve strayed from those 2007 projections. It’s not helped by some elements of the press repeatedly referring to plans to halve the debt when they mean deficit.
131 - What, and cut down on the frequency while raising the insight?
@129:
Don’t be dense, Stuart. We’re talking about the entire country, not that icy peninsula on the top where nobody lives.
120: Politics is rarely governed by pure logic in itself though. The numbers may mean and say one thing.
However the saying ‘Many a slip twixt cup and lip’ applies. ‘They’ may be in position A and want to get to postion B which is certinly more favourable, but there is many things in which something can happen (Harman and Balls being the ones to worry about I know that Harman is one of the ‘five’ named, but I wouldn’t trust her).
I’m still of the position that Brown will only go unless he wants to go. He can still point at the polls can say ‘we’re only 10points behind’, a swing of 5% and we’re all equal. If he was 15-20 behind, I would think there would be more imputus, but he’s still got freind there, and still got a lot of cards to play.
Morning all and catching up on this and the last thread.
Thankyou for all those kind remarks yesterday and even more so the votes I have received thus far.
I expect either YS or Richard Nabavi to win but frankly couldn’t put a tissue paper between them in terms of who I would vote for.
I also see URW as a strong contender for Tipster of the Year though Tim could be a (very) dark horse.
I don’t know what to make of the “Famous Five” article this morning. Are we sure it hasn’t come out of the bunker to help Brown flush out the potential conspirators?
Mandelson’s silence speaks volumes. There is a suggestion that if he thinks Labour is doomed he will not want to be anywhere near the UK when the election takes place so a job at the World Bank or something similar perhaps? Has he forgiven Brown for pushing Baroness Ashton forward instead of himself?
Thanks for the Scotland on Sunday link. Duncan Hamilton was the pretty boy of the SNP who couldn’t hack the Scottish Parliament after one term. His abilities are not matched by his own opinion of them.
The key to the Scottish result will lie with the 500,000 people who voted LibDem in 2005. As I have said many times if the Tory vote rises from the 15.6% of 2005 to around 20-22% which almost all the polls over the last 12 months have been suggesting then the Scottish Tories are going to gain around 130,000 votes and these will be concentrated in 20 constituencies not spread evenly over 59.
Scotland on Sunday has already identified 11 of those 20 constituencies as key Tory targets and I know the seats the Tories are working hard, indeed harder than I can remember in 30 years of party membership. If you folks correctly identify the ones where the breakthough will happen in 2010 then you should make some money.
Richard Navabi @126)
4) Journalists making stuff up on a slow news day
126: Or, maybe more likely, 4) bored jorno’s having to write something at a very quiet time of the year.
re 122. Rod - are you still sticking with your 35% Tory share projection?
It strikes me that if the Tories are as low as this then Labour must be at 35% or thereabouts - which means a Labour majority.
Is that what you are suggesting?
121. (Cameron said) “The Cameronians must march swiftly and march light””
What is this Tory thing of referring to themselves in the third person?
This is up there with “We are a Grandmother”
83 Tapestry the biggest problem about the McCann case is that frankly we do not know whether Maddie was taken away but assuming she was, it is far from certain it was by a sex offender. It could equally have been done by someone trafficing children to desperate childless couples.
74. Jack, thanks for that, I had missed it, not very prominent on the paper’s site. Very good article and clearly states what is coming, once the Westminster sideshow is over we can look forward to the main show in 2011, by then Dave will have upset most of the Scottish population.
95, that’s big of Salmond to demand a lot of airtime to criticise his opponents who have no right of immediate reply.
140 - Perhaps its a Columbian marching powder reference.
117. That result happened in Feb 1974 but that was when the Liberals returned far fewer MPs. For there to be such a result, the majority of Others over Lib Dems has to exceed the majority of Lab over Con (or vice versa). In 1974, the gap between Lab and Con was just four, to 14 Liberals and 23 others.
As long as the Lib Dems poll more than SNP+PC+Inds+NI - extremely likely while the Lib Dems return in excess of 35 MPs, which itself is highly likely if Con and Lab are roughly equal - then either Con+LD or Lab+LD must be able to command a majority.
I always think it is amusing when Jack Straw is suggested as Brown’s replacement. If there was an award for most skeleton’s in cupboard, I think Jack would be the man.
He is associated with dodgy dealings regarding Iraq, he is associated with sleazy dealings e.g Cantaxx Ventures , he was a staunch defender of Blair during cash for peerages, his own dodgy expenses weren’t great(and Labour then made him anti-sleaze supremo), there was alleged Postal voting fraud in his own constituency in 2005 and finally his alleged connection with the Jeremy Thorpe trial.
Straw reeks and the papers will have a field day.
@141:
Look, we *all* know what happened to Maddie. Everybody pretends not to, simply because Kate and Gerry have shown themselves to be rather trigger-happy with the lawyers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5jtmkXXv58
126 Richard, agree that it is most probably 3 but it does occur to me to wonder where the story has come from - its been planted with several commentators/reporters.
First we had “Mandelson is sulking” stories, now Tessa Jowell directly attacks a Gordon Brown tactic and reports of the five plotters (Labour does love the number 5, Gordon’s five tests etc). In James Forsyth’s column on internal divisions and dissatisfaction over the Brown Balls approach he ends:
“In June, Lord Mandelson saved the Prime Minister. In the New Year, he will have to decide how to save New Labour.”
141. I am not stating anything about the McCann case itself, although I do believe that a paedophile abduction is more likely than an attempted adoption. I am quoting Kate McCann who wrote the words I gave you.
The authorities in Portugal have previously accused parents whose children have disappeared as a way to make the cases go away. But that is not the point I’m making. It is that there are attempts being made to decriminalise paedophile acts, and that in many other European countries paedophile abduction goes unpunished. It is a big business.
146: There are other rumours surrounding Jack Straw as well…
143. Presumably Salmond could say the same of his opponents. It’s not a bad compromise position and would make a lot of sense. Salmond always seemed less gung-ho in opposing the debates without SNP inclusion than some of his supporters, no doubt because he has the political acumen to know how badly it would have played out for the SNP - either they’re negative and ineffective (if they lost the case), or prevent Scotland seeing one of the biggest political events for ages (unless you’ve got cable).
150 - Unless he eats babies, I doubt anyone will care!
Brown rules out March election
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/12/27/gordon-brown-rules-out-march-general-election-115875-21924576/
105. Stuart, you have set the Tory donkies braying this morning, obviously upset them by pointing out a few truths. Wonderful to see.
151, he could, although they’re unlikely to attack him, I’d've thought. He’s also the leader of a minor British party with literally no chance of becoming Prime Minister.
I also agree with those who say Clegg should not be present (I’d have him in 2/3 of the debates) but the media would cry and kick up a stink.
@150:
There’s enough of a statute of limitations on Rinkagate I doubt anyone will care.
154 - What, the wonderful truth that the SNP scored 2.1% in the June Euros?
148 Ted, Labour unity building nicely going into the election campaign.
152 But that would make him a Tory
153, I wouldn’t take that as certain, despite the Mirror living in Brown’s bottom.
For a start, he knows he cocked up in 2007 hugely by letting the media narrative run too far and his ultimate decision made him look like the frit mountain of cowardy custard he is. Secondly, it could be a not-so-cunning plan to try and wrongfoot the Tories. And last but not least, he u-turns all the damned time. Even if he means it he might change his mind if the polls shift.
159 - That is why I said ‘unless’
159, maybe he eats babies, but with inappropriate cutlery?
95 The SNP gets between 1-2% in national (ie UK-wide) elections. In contrast the LibDems get 20%+ and around two thirds the vote of the second placed party. In addition they contest seats across the whole UK. So they are players on the national scene in a way that the SNP aren’t.
Feel free to construct a localist/nationalist alliance across the UK and put up a unified ticket. Oh no you can’t.
The argument that there is something wrong about Scotland being governed by the Tories if there are no (or few) Tory seats in Scotland is risible. It’s as stupid as saying that Republican states of the US are entitled not to be governed by the Federal government when there is a Democrat in the White House. For UK-wide issues there is no devolution of powers to Scotland, and it is in no different position to large parts of England which will have no Tory representation after the next Election. Or those of us in the South East.
I live in Hampshire, we have spent the last 12 years being run by a government we don’t want. But we are in a worse position than you, because our local issues are run by the national UK government. But hopefully, one day Hampshire will be a federal unit in a devolved English government.
160 I’d believe the Sunday Sport’s political coverage [is it still Lembit BTW?] than the Mirror.
139. I’ve never predicted the Tories would obtain only 35% at the election, although it’s quite likely a poll will give them that score between now and the election.
I have said many times that I expect the Tories to finish around 37%, Labour around 32% and the LDs 20%.
162 And calls a napkin a serviette? That’d be suitably 70s
Richard - Please correct Morus at 44 for describing you as an “Independent/Other” as regards the composition of the POTY finalists. Were that the case, one must also presumably discount a high proportion of previously assumed Tory supporters on PB and I for one will be rushing off to put a few pints on a NOM GE outcome.
#136 Easterross
“Duncan Hamilton was the pretty boy of the SNP who couldn’t hack the Scottish Parliament after one term. His abilities are not matched by his own opinion of them.”
Duncan Hamilton decided (having been elected as the youngest MSP at the time) that he wished to pursue for a time a career outside parliament (he is a lawyer,)and not to be a life long politician with no experience of the real world. A good decision, I feel.
Many have suggested that if someday (many, many years from now, I hope) Salmond no longer leads the SNP that they would then be much weakened. I believe someone like Duncan Hamilton will disprove this theory.
Duncan Hamilton is now an adviser to Salmond, and I view him as a future SNP leader. I think the very fact that Easterross bothers to make this dismissive comment is indicative of a certain concern about the man’s talent rather than the supposed lack of it-incidentally, I have voted for you, Easterross, in the current voting as I am always interested, and even sometimes enlightened, by your comments
UPDATE: There’s a good article by Dr Roger Mortimore, head of political research at Ipsos-MORI, on this broad point putting the focus on leader approval ratings from the last time that the Tories won back power in 1979. The firm has also published online for the first time polling data from the 1976 - 79 period.
Breaking on the BBC website:
IRAN CLASHES:
Opposition reports from Tehran say three protesters have been shot dead
Somewhat surprised that’s still rumbling on.
One of the key sentances in the Mail article is
“But Mr Brown would have little choice but to resign if several Ministers threatened to quit the Cabinet unless he did so.”
Only if he believes them. It’s a big game of political chicken. Would they really quit the cabinet en mass a few weeks before the start of the election campaign? The article suggests Mandelson wouldn’t; I’d be pretty confident the rest wouldn’t either.
If Darling was going to go, he should have done it over the PBR. People understand and to an extent respect a policy-related resignation. They don’t like resignations as part of a game or for party advantage.
Powell and Macleod (?) refusing to serve under Douglas-Home still get blamed by some for costing the Tories the 1964 election - and not without reason. Though there were obviously other reasons too, it weakened the team the Tories were able to field on the front bench and made them look divided. Any cabinet minister resigning now would have that effect several times over - and would reap much of the blame were Labour to go down. I tend to agree with those who say it’s about post-election manoeuvring.
Can anyone recall which poster was trading heavily on In-Trade about the Iranian elections several months ago?
Some info on how their bets turned out given the nonsense of the outcome would be interesting.
One problem with Jack Straw. He supports hunting, if my memory serves me correctly.
Peter2 Tapestry Coxall Easterross and voreas.
Five conspiracy theory fruitcakes on the same thread. I suppose one finalist of POTY is just about representative.
144 tim, as pb.com’s pharmacological tsar surely you’d know?
163. John, you must be pretty thick trying to compare Hampshire County Council to Scotland. I have seen some illiterate rubbish spouted on here regarding Scotland and the politics surrounding it but that takes the biscuit. Only conclusion I can take from it is that you are thick or under 10 years old. Get a grip.
169 - The key point is what would happen to the polls if Brown stood down and was replaced by Johnson.
My guess would be 36-34 ish
172 - It was Phillippe Magnan and I followed him in, making a lot of money (and feeling vaguley uncomfortable about it) on the Ahmedinejad “win”.
129. Stuart Dickson.
If you’re going to cite the Scotland Act, then presumably you will never refer to the “Scottish Government”.
176. Hampshire is much bigger than many units that manage to carry out federal government quite adequately across the globe. Its population is, I think, about 1.5million, a good deal larger than several US states and at least one German land.
That said, Yorkshire would be a more appropriate English county to compare Scotland to.
179 - They’d have to call in the Feds every time it snowed.
168. Tom, hear hear , I too voted for Easterross as I rate him the best poster on the site, however he was a bit petty at 136 which is no doubt down to the fact that he knows how true the story is and the significance it may have going forward , ie 2011. It has the potential to cause a similar affect to the Tories in Holyrood.
176/179 A little game on just this topic
“Can you name the country closest in population the each US state?”
http://www.sporcle.com/games/stoch/stacoun
167. Perhaps for obvious reasons he’d prefer the polls to close first?
Re 81/85, surely it’s dangerous to extrapolate from local election results as recent poor Tory performances can nearly always be attributed to a local factor eg councillor not turning up but claiming expenses.
Jack Straw was Gordon’s proposer in the Labour Leadership non election iirc. His credibility as an anti Gordon candidate is nil.
Balls and Cooper are hardly going to let Straw or Harman or anyone else depose GB as that kills off Balls’ chances as Leader.
SO depose Gordon = Labour civil war. A proper one.. No behind the hands briefing rubbish but full on attacks.
Worth 5% points lead to the Conservatives in my view…
168 Tom,
Thanks for yuor support. I didnt buy the Duncan Hamilton excuse at the time. There are far more able young Nationalists than him.
167. PfP.
Intention to vote Conservative at the next general election is not sufficient to make one a Tory.
179, David , I thought you were a sensible poster, trying to make out a minor region of England is in any way comparable to Scotland is crass , stupid and only a Tory would come up with it. You indicate exactly why Scotland has no time for the Tories.
185 Surely Alan Johnson would sweep in and save the day? I do worry about his florid complexion though; it suggests he’s not at the peak of health.
188. I was merely pointing out that Hampshire has a population larger than about a dozen US states (thanks, Plato, for the link). If they’re able to carry out the functions of a federal government, why can’t Hampshire, never mind Yorkshire.
In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Hampshire’s bigger than *any* of the Swiss cantons, which have some of the most extensive powers in any federal system worldwide.
176 Oh f*** off. Of course I know there’s a difference, although as David Herdson points out, Hampshire is a suitable size to be a federal unit of England, there are at least a dozen US states with smaller populations.
My point is that for undevolved national UK issues there is surely no difference between the position Scotland will be in under a Tory government, and the difference we are in under a Labour government. The fact that certain local issues are devolved to Scotland is irrelevant in my view, as they will not be controlled by the UK government.
Btw, Mike, to avoid another fiasco like this year’s awards, might I suggest placing this rating tool permanently on the sidebar, or even as a small link next to each post?
http://vote.superduperapps.com/polls/vote/7wsN1JDCu2KzKvIq
People could vote continuously throughout the year and in response to actual posts, rather than give their Xmas-befuddled impression of posters’ strengths…
137/138 Edmund/Slackbladder - That was my initial thought yesterday, but the coincidence of similar stories appearing in several newspapers suggests there is something going on.
167 PfP - Yes, since I’m a Conservative Party member (although not a very long-standing one), Morus wasn’t right on that.
Btw, Mike, to avoid another fiasco like this year’s awards, might I suggest placing this rating tool permanently on the sidebar, or even as a small link next to each post?
http://tinyurl.com/y8u9zmz
People could vote continuously throughout the year and in response to actual posts, rather than give their Xmas-befuddled impression of posters’ strengths…
193 In what way is it a “fiasco”? No swingback to the Crosby faction? That the shortlisted candidates don’t share your political views? It’s just a bit of Christmas fun, surely.
191. JOhn, usual Tory tactics, when shown to be wrong use personal insults, get a new dummy teat.
189 - Are we ruling out people who go red in the face.
Alex Ferguson and David Cameron stand down now.
176 Actually I’m slightly perturbed at being called “John” (better than Jimmy I suppose). You do realise that John Lilburne isn’t my real name? I suppose it is quite possible you have such a poor understanding of English political history.
174 I can’t believe Roger Joke poster of the year 5 years running is mocking me, oh the shame!!
I hope you all had a good Xmas, but if you spent all of your time on this site, you obviously didn’t: only kidding.
Worth a look!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6968442.ece
194. “That the shortlisted candidates don’t share your political views?”
No, several nominated candidates were not in fact shortlisted, as the thread designed for the purpose said they would be…
190. Hampshire’s population is a shade higher than that of Northern Ireland, which has a devolved administration.
196 tim, the difference is that Johnson and Ferguson are both permanently red in the face. It must be all those early morning starts in cold weather.
200. RodCrosby: several nominated candidates were not in fact shortlisted
As was noted, there were about as many nominated candidates who weren’t longlisted as those who were.
Five candidates were shortlisted, compared with the four that we were told would be, thanks to a tie at the longlist stage.
177 Would it last though, or would Johnson just be Labour’s Kim Campbell?
Someone asked upthread about PM’s ratings in the run up to 1983, 1987, and 1992.
In December 1982, Thatcher’s rating was +2%, and in December 1986, -16%. In December 1991, Major was on +12%. Foot’s rating in December 1982 was -38% (when you consider that, Labour did quite well to win 28% in 1983); Kinnock’s was -14% in December 1986, -22% in December 1991.
Thatcher’s ratings were hardly ever great, but they were only briefly as bad as Brown’s, for a few months in 1981, 1986, and 1990. Remarkably, Foot’s ratings were actually rather worse than Thatcher’s in 1981.
re 165. I’ve tried searching and have not been able to find you making a post with that prediction before. Maybe you can point to when you wrote it?
To search comments use Wibbler’s excellent guide -
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/wibbler-on-searching-pb-comments/
isnt this going to be the killer blow for labour in the new year? Surely yet enough police investigation and the fact the mps are all LABOUR is going to be toxic for brown. Once again, even the two tory peers being investigated gives cameron the opportunity to wrestle lords reform from labour and announce/promise radical reforms.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6968514.ece
195 What insult? Telling someone to eff off might be churlish and impolite, but it’s hardly a personal insult. I didn’t refer to the chip, for example.
How about answering the point? Second para in 191, the one with the bit in bold. No, thought not.
The truth is, if the UK had a federal government with lots of different units, then lots of them would have local governments opposed to the national one, and some of them would have very few MPs from the governing party. It would be normal. The fact that the UK has only two federal units, with the bulk of the country run by the national government as a federal territory, makes it look odd. (Yes I know I left out NI but I’m not sure if it counts as a federal unit or a territory at the moment).
Peter2, be careful, there is no freedom of speach. The lefties will have you banned.
I will not get involved in this discussion. However, for the record, it makes me feel very uneasy. There is something fundamentally wrong with 30/40/50 yr old men legally performing A.nl S.eks on 16 yr olds.
Why is it different? Male and female are specifically designed. The R.ctum is not designed for s.ks, is easily damaged and we must protect our children.
There are many middle aged men singing the virtues of a low homosexual Age of Consent (AoC). There are not many mothers or fathers wishing it for their 16 yr old sons.
Labour and middle aged homosexuals will tell us that the AoC also permits the same acts on girls. Perhaps but misleading, I suspect it is very rarely enacted.
That aside, Labour lefties and middle aged homosexuals never tried to get the heterosexual A.o.C raised - they only wanted to lower the homosexual A.o.C.
Or to put it another way - Labour never tried to protect 16yr old girls form A.nl s.ks, they only facilitated A.nl s.ks on 16yr old boys.
Perhaps after the next election and Political Correctness has been made illegal, we can have proper open discussions.
I can’t see what Scotland would have to complain of, if the Conservatives were to win an overall majority at Westminster with only a handful of Scottish seats.
Most matters that directly affect Scots have now been devolved. Those matters that affect the UK as a whole, such as defence and foreign affairs, will rightly be the responsibility of Westminster.
do these figures not correspond (roughly) with the usual opinion polls as regards the parties?
Conservatives and Lib/Dems + a few others v. Labour?
I can’t believe some posters are getting hmphy about a bit of Christmas polling fun
Have another mince pie
208 In some respects, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 made the law more stringent. For example, it is now an offence to have sex with a prostitute (of either sex) below the age of 18, and it’s an offence for a person in a position in authority to have sex with anyone aged under 18.
In actual terms, it may well be the case that there are more older men and women now being prosecuted for having sex with under 18 year olds than was the case prior to the law being changed.
208 Actually hetero a.nl s.ks used to be illegal until relatively recently. I believe it was effectively legalised by making “consent” a defence - in one of the acts that lowered the age of homosexual consent to either 18 or 16. So they have actually been making it easier for middle aged men to b.gger your 16 year old daughter.
Thought I’d drop that in just to wind up the conspiracy theorists. Now to get it through the spam trap!
205. There’s one here @367
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2009/12/14/welcome-to-tory-squeaky-bum-time/
I’ve said it before, several times…
re 200. Rod - you obviously missed my apology for the exclusion from the ballot form of two names - yours and Edmund from Tokyo who were on the list.
We have considered in the past an ongoing system for people to vote on posters and for them to be given a rating which would then be displayed. When I suggested this there was uproar and we dropped it.
Given the demands on the server I’m very reluctant to add a new feature this side of the general election. What is paramount is keeping the site running at times of exceptional demand.
208. I find the variable age of consent to be a bigger crime. A whole new host of crimes have been added to the statute books which are putting people behind bars for actions which in the worse cases should be little more then professional misconduct.
212. And its a disgrace.
217 Why?
I think that a teacher or care home worker ought to know better than to have sex with one of the children who’s in their charge.
216 I agree - if the participants are over 16, it’s prof misconduct in my book. Stupid, yes - criminal, no.
so what about predicting Obama’s approval rating on RCP, hey?
There’s been a spate of prosecutions arising from teacher-pupil relationships recently, including a female teacher at a posh school in Crosby…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/6590834/Teacher-denies-sexual-contact-with-pupil.html
It’s a bit sad, and a bit unfair on the girl too, I think. Boys will be boys…
221 It’s an interesting fact that public sympathy (or disgust) for the teacher has a lot to do with the sex of the participants.
There was one case recently which involved a stunningly attractive 26 year old female music teacher having sex with a 15 year old girl. She attracted a great deal of (mostly male) sympathy. Yet, had it been a 26 year old man having sex with a 15 year old boy, the general attitude would have been “string the brute up.”
74
‘Meanwhile II …. Duncan Hamilton in ‘Scotland on Sunday’ looks at Tory prospects in the election and how PM Cammo might deal with a near Conservative free Scotland :’
Set it adrift or junk it?
221. Each case is different, but a 17 year old lad in the sixth form?
Bad for discipline, yes, breach of contract, yes, but a crime?
@219:
Quite. It should be gross misconduct, but it’s not a matter for the law.
224. Did they smoke afterwards? That would surely be a crime.
I do hope the full minutes of this particular meeting will be published in full.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/david-cameron/6890179/David-Cameron-meets-NHS-privatisation-campaigners.html
Some how I don’t think so.
@227:
Helen Evans sounds like she might be unfamiliar with a few of the more basic syllogistic fallacies.
225 I’m not even sure about that. When I was a sixth former, there was one of the teachers who usually had one of the sixth form girls on the go. Did it do any harm? Sex is after all fun, and I’d guess he was better at it than most of us spotty 16-18 year olds.
I suppose the question is whether the teacher can give the person an unfair advantage/disadvantage. Back then there was little or no locally marked coursework so the answer was no. And you could always give one of your colleagues the job of marking your girlfriend’s work.
224 When I was growing up, I’m sure the attitude on the part of the police would have been “he should be so lucky!”.
Even if it were not a crime, I think that at the very least, a teacher in that position should be barred from teaching generally - so I do see it as more than just a case of breach of contract.
David Cameron talks to people he disagrees with (presumably without throwing a Nokia at them) … the swine!
@229:
If you, as a teacher would be prepared to indulge in this way, it calls into question your professional ethics, and I can’t see how any headmaster should be reasonably be expected to tolerate such behaviour.
If anyone here wants to understand all aspects of the McCann visit the following site. Its about the only site the McCann lawyers haven’t closed down yet and has English translations of the official Police files (not good reading for the McCanns)
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/
227 I think it’s very sensible for him to meet with people of different views. He might not support them on most of their points, but the idea that healthcare could be provided by independent hospitals, surgeries or other providers is hardly a threat to the NHS - just as Gove’s Swedish independent schools model is not a threat to free-at-point-of-use education. And most countries in Europe have a healthcare model involving state insurance with provision by a range of municipal, charitable and private institutions.
229 Any age of consent is bound to be somewhat arbitrary, but it exists to protect the vulnerable and the immature (the principle is the same as not permitting under 18s to enter into binding contracts to buy land). And the scope for a teacher to put pressure on one of his pupils to have sex with him/her is enormous.
What does interest me is why a woman teacher (particularly one who is attractive) will invariably attract far greater public sympathy than a male teacher.
@233:
What became of the Portugese police finding samples of Maddie’s hair and blood in Kate and Gerry’s hire car boot?
@235:
Age of consent laws are stupid. What matters is whether or not somebody is capable of making informed consent. That’s not a power you mysteriously wake up with on your sixteenth birthday.
@235:
In answer to your second question, I think it boils down to the fact that most men still believe that, deep down, women don’t really want to have sex and have to be tricked into it by some silver-tongued male cunning.
237 In theory.
In practice, trying to determine on a case by case basis whether a teenager can give informed consent (whether to sex, house purchases, consumer credit agreements etc.) would prove almost impossible, and the law enforcement agencies wouldn’t even attempt to do so.
235 Probably because as blokes we remember that when we were 16 we would shag anything that was up for it, and would have gained quite a lot of kudos if we’d done a [young, attractive] teacher.
Surely the “enter into binding contracts” bit is not about immaturity, it is the age of majority. You can’t enter into a binding contract for anything other than “necessities” under the age of 18, as I remember. In any case, there are plenty of ways that under 18 year olds can be pressurised into sex, I’d guess that the teacher/student relationship is one of the least worrying - it is after all quite public in a school. Whereas it’s not illegal to pressurise an under-18 year old into sex if you are anyone else.
@239:
Which is why I think the law should stay well clear, except where it’s fairly clear cut that somebody in a vulnerable position has been taken advantage of. The law needs to allow certain amount of flexibility, especially when dealing with teenagers.
234
Assuming that he does actually disagree with them. It isn’t unknown for a politician to say something in public, whilst saying the opposite in private: Cameron won’t be any different.
Just for fun of course.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2393?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PollingReport+%28UK+Polling+Report%29
240 There would be other situations. For example, a worker in a care home would be in a good position to put pressure on a teenager to have sex with them.
241 I see the argument. I just think that it would result in considerably more harm being done than the present law.
#154, malcolmG December 27th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Malcolm, by mentioning Tory donkies you just show that you are a Scottish a$$. I blame the wrong breeding…!
On PotY:
I’ve always assumed Richard Nabavi was a Tory. Still think YS deserves the title more….
On Topic:
I am inclined to support voreas’s opinion of Jack Straw. The most unbecoming choice for PM; let’s keep Rusty McBrown!
Labour MP Ken Purchase says that 12 years of Labour has left no legacy.
i disagree. Labour’s legacy is enormous.
- We are poorer.
- Poorer Education.
- More immigrants.
- Dismantling of British Industry.
- Lisbon without a Referendum.
- Elevation of muslim sensitivities.
- Supression of Christians.
- Elevation of homosexual sensitivities.
- Lower homosexual age of consent.
- Lower Average Wages.
- Less affordable Houses.
- Less affordable University education
- Dismantling of Defence
- 2 unresourced Wars
- Cash for Coronets
- Sale of political posts
(etc)
Well this has been a fun thread to read through. Paedos, bumming, libel, Scot-Nats on form and Jack Straw. And no-one has even hinted at the most scurrilous Straw rumours.
All we need now is that Galt fella to pop up and talk about lizard people and we’ll have a full house.
245 Why do the Scottish Nationalists care about the UK election. They have their own parliament. It barely affects them.
+++ Betting Post +++
Within the last hour England have gone in from 6-1 to 4-1 in the Second Test. South Africa have moved from less-than 2-1 to 4-1.
It’s early days, so I have placed a marker on the draw…!
236
Gerry McCann on a Portugese TV interview that the interviewer should ask the dogs why they sniffed where they did.
If you are interested, these are the questions put to Kate McCann in her police interview (none answered)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm
#250 [Applies to Willaim Hills}
243 I would regard that as far worse than a teacher. In a care home a care worker is far more in loco parentis. The Teacher/student law apples to any teacher/student relationship at the same school or college whether the teacher has professional contact with the student or not.
And in the case of the care home, I would still leave it to employment law (gross misconduct) rather than the criminal law.
251 Most of those questions are not answerable.
Many seem to be load questions based on assumptions.
251. It was the best tactic for the Portuguese Police to discredit the McCanns. There was a desperate need for the powers that be to make this case disappear, rather then have the extent of paedophile abduction revealed, and the extent of child abuse.
If they are alleging that the McCanns murdered their own daughter why didn’t they arrest them and charge them accordingly? That would seem quite an oversight.
253. Flower.
This’ll be fun!
253 Those are fake schemes that fail in reality.
Certainly the destruction of Britain is not balanced by Free Dental care for Pensioners - especially when Pensioners cant find an NHS dentist.
Lefties say, “Yes Labour has destroyed Britain but look at all the Free things we give to immigrants!”
Any way, dont tell me. I already know. Tell Labour MP Ken Purchase.
I think I’ve spotted Mandelson’s game.
He’s talking up Balls’ influence and talking down his own. He is making sure that Balls, not Mandelson, gets the blame for the impending election defeat.
It’s a good idea, and supports the view that Mandelson is still in Labour politics for the long term.
Afternoon All,
There was a terrific interview ( I don’t know where we would get a link from ? ) with Kim Campbell, the former Canadian PM, on the WatO the Sunday before Labour conference last September. Full of the kind of fiesty wisdom you sadly only get from retired politicans. She aruged very clearly that last minute changes at the top help no one and that Gordon should be allowed to take the fall in the best interests of the Labour party long term and its reconstruction. Of course she speaks from experience having led the canadian Conservatives to 2 seats in her election despite an initial positive flurry after her succession.
Which takes us to the largely unasked question about this latest Brown out article. What would be the point ?
Where is the hard evidence that labour would do better at this point?
1. There is hardly any time left to relaunch with only the budget left as a big set piece?
2. we still have no evidence of an alternative policy agenda only arguments about presentation.
3. the debate on the successor seems entirely about a lowest common denominator choice that everyone elese can agree on rather than a tried and tested new attractive product.
4. The thank god he has gone boost in this senario is countered by the chaos and anarchy of the removal and he really doesn’t want to budge.
As a political betting site its unsurprising we focus on what could and might happen. However on this case its worth asking if it should?
To paraphrase a comment I’ve made before Britain is an old country with a residual sense of historic exceptionalism. I think a number of people will object to the premiership being treated like the renewal of the Dr Who franchise.
Gross overpayment for what few school and hospital buildings have been built, leading to lack of money for maintenance of existing premises. Soldiers families, in contrast, being housed in appalling conditions.
A £5 per week increase in the state pension, paid as an annual lump sum because we all know that pensioners are too senile to budget properly. Alternatively, a non-means tested benefit that most of my over-60 friends and family spend on booze and other treats for Christmas.
Free Bus Passes for all (non means tested), abstracting money from where it could be better spent and largely benefiting the younger, fitter and better-off pensioner (those who can afford and are mobile enough to go out and about on day trips).
Free Dental Check ups for Pensioners, again non means tested, why should I have to pay when better off people don’t?
Free Prescriptions For Pensioners - why not get rid of free prescriptions, charge everybody £1, and fire the civil servants who administer it?
Sure Start - ineffective and very, very expensive
Child Care tax Allowance - I support this, but the government could make it easier to operate by not requiring employers to do a salary sacrifice.
Free Entry To Museums - lots of people who don’t want to go to museums have to pay for the largely middle class people who do.
Increased Support For Art and Culture why? The country is skint. Art and culture should be paid for by the people who consume it, or by rich patrons.
261 Oops, should have said that’s a response to Flower at 253
8 “Apart from ruining the economy, bringing us into wars on a pack of lies, destroying our civil liberties, selling us out to the EU, vandalising the constitution, wasting hundreds of billions on inefficient public services, etc., etc., what else do they have to do to lose the remaining quarter of the electorate?”
ruining the economy: reported on the BBC but blamed on US banks
bringing us into wars on a pack of lies: reported
destroying our civil liberties: not reported on the BBC
selling us out to the EU: not reported that way on the BBC
vandalising the constitution: not reported on the BBC
wasting hundreds of billions on inefficient public services: not reported on the BBC
So with the exception of the decision to invade Iraq (but not the execution of the wars or the chasm between the task given and the resources allocated) there’s been 12 years of zero scrutiny of this government by the dominant media organization that people are brought up to believe is honest and impartial.
Without the BBC they’d be on about 19% ish.
256 I would guess that many more children are killed by their parents than are abducted by paedophiles. So it would seem a reasonable line of enquiry - although I would probably argue that in the absence of evidence either way they should have followed both lines of enquiry. As it happens, they appear not to have found enough evidence to charge the McCanns, and they must therefore be regarded as presumed innocent.
264. Over 100,000 children go missing in Europe every year.
The Portuguese Police did nothing for six months before making the parents into suspects, by which time the case was receiving worldwide publicity.
They were desperate to fend off accusations of incompetence, and deliberately holding back evidence to protect the perpetrators.
The timeline tells the story.
MP for NW Leics died yesterday
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news/MP-David-Taylor-dies/article-1649454-detail/article.html
Very sad, a political opponent but worked very hard for the area and will be sadly missed.
256 JL.I didn’t want to get drawn in. Upthread, Martin Coxall suggests that “every case is different” and of course he is correct.
I would go further and suggest that some cases aren’t ‘cases’ but rather a manifestation of Witch-burning.
By far the greatest damage inflicted upon young children takes place within the home. Phil Larkin commented on this.
All the media focus is on events that occur outside the home.
You can’t sell a newspaper with the headline “Dad shags daughter” but “Female teacher shags fifteen year old pupil” is really sexy.
266. Very sad.
Has a March election just moved a step closer?
I’d say Labour’s biggest achievements have been in the area of gay rights - civil partnerships and equalizing the age of consent. Beneficient changes that will last and which the Tories, I think, would not have brought forward.
Their constitutional reforms have been a mixed bag, but the directly elected mayors are a step in the right direction.
Also, I have been told - don’t know if it’s true - that Labour have enacted legislation restricting the circumstances in which dogs’ tails can be docked.
268. Certainly Labour will not want a byelection in that constituency - they could conceivably drop to third behind the Tories and the BNP.
Tapestry et al
Read the police files, then decide whether the PJ messed up the case.
Gay rights, elected mayors and dogs’ tails — Five More Years!
271. I think you should be very careful commenting on this subject, for the sake of the site.
I should know better….
After missing England at 6-1, I decide to jump-in at 3-1 at TEA. Lo’-and-behold: RAIN.
My covering DRAW-bets are not going to cover my stakes. And - to add injury - England have drifted to 7-2!
I should never gamble on sports….
268 - possibly not as there was a five month delay in holding the Glasgow North East by-election.
Leicestershire NW 2009 locals results (from vote 2007)
Con 12874 41.0%
Lab 6438 20.5%
BNP 5807 18.5%
LD 5549 17.7%
Ind 695 2.2%
Labour could even drop to fourth….
I noticed in the Sunday Times today that Jack Straw is making noises about reforming the libel laws.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6968551.ece
Brave man.
261 John Lilburne did you see what the Leftie did?
Instead of focusing on the Destruction that Labour have wreaked, you waste time arguing with a leftie of achievements they didnt do.
The Leftie successfuly lured you off into a battle field of its choosing.
275. Not even four months, and most of that was the recess…
Labour are on a sticky-wicket here. If they don’t move the writ almost immediately, load up on a March election.
273. The Timeline is not controversial. It is fact. I think I’ve made my point. People should not easily believe the Portuguese Police. The abduction was May. They first made the parents into suspects in September, and then they quickly changed their minds. As propaganda against the parents, and as a method of deflating the surge of interest in the world’s media, it was a successful strategy.
253 Labour Legacy:
Minimum wage
Good School Buildings
Good Hospital Buildings
Winter Fuel Allowance
Free Bus Passes
Free Dental Check ups for Pensioners
Free Prescriptions For Pensioners
Sure Start
Child Care tax Allowance
Free Entry To Museums
Increased Support For Art and Culture
Etc etc etc
Cost - £1 trillion.
Value for money? Let the voters decide….
275. But that was because Martin resigned and you can’t move a writ for a by-election caused by a resignation during a recess. Unless the writ had been moved at the very end of the 2008-9 session, the by-election couldn’t be moved until parliament returned in October.
A March GE has moved a touch closer but not much. This is the sort of by-election Labour really wouldn’t want to hold in the run up to a General Election, though in the big scheme of things, it’ll be of little lasting effect.
280 As I understood it at the time, the status of being a “suspect” is a formal judicial status in Portugal. It is true that the police didn’t make them into official suspects until then, but it doesn’t mean they were potentially suspected of the crime from day 1.
Without wishing to talk elections while someone is still warm, it’s worth noting the late MP was not contending the upcoming General Election, his replacement had been selected.
279 if they held it before the General Election, a rather risky gamble. Do they want to spend £100,000 of precious cash prior to the election? I think it will remain vacant until the next election which I still think will be in May.
281. It’s almost never worth quoting numbers that big to the electorate. There’s no practical difference between £10bn and £100bn: you get the response “ooh - that’s a lot” in each case. Much better to divide by 60m to get a per person amount, or by 15m to get a ‘family of four’ figure.
To say the government will borrow £180bn this year and next is quite an abstract concept; it hits home much more to say that the average family of four will owe £24,000 to the international money markets by April 2011 that they didn’t in April 2009.
282 - David, Michael Marin resigned on the 21 June, Westminster did not go into recess until 22 July so there was ample time to move the writ.
North West Leicester 2005 result
Labour Co-op David Taylor 21,449 45.5 −6.6
Conservative Nicola Le Page 16,972 36.0 +2.1
Liberal Rod Keys 5,682 12.1 +1.8
UKIP John Blunt 1,563 3.3 +1.0
BNP Clive Potter 1,474 3.1 N/A
Should be a Tory win in theory. Labour will want to avoid a By-election at all costs.
Kneel before Balls!
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5665961/balls-pitches-for-the-leadership.thtml
new thread
287. OK, they had four weeks in which to move it, which I grant you is enough time if they’d wanted to. However, as they didn’t, that’s why it then took five months.
The citizenry of this country will enter 2010 as at the entrance to a dark tunnel.
On January 1st Vat goes up to 17.5%.
During the first two weeks of Jan., the last three monthly bills start to come in.
Fares are going up all over.
The GE campaign will start in earnest.
Also this forecast: winter will be worse this year than last.
So much for global warming
289 - Balls would be a disaster as leader and guarantee Cameron a landslide re-election. The only Labour leaders I see posing a threat to Cameron are Johnson and Burnham, both of whom are moderate enough to appeal to floaters without being too Blairite and alienating traditional Labour voters while also having far more appealing personalities than the likes of Balls!
285. Brown or whoever is leading Labour will be faced by taunts of “chicken” if it’s not held within a reasonable time.
The nearest example I can think of was Meriden.
The Tory MP died on 13th Jan 1997 and the writ had not been moved by the date of the Major’s request for a dissolution on 17th March 1997.
They can move the writ for the by-election, but it could be overtaken by the dissolution. This has occurred several times, most recently IIRC at Gravesend in 1955…
Hey,
Just to let you know the Trading Spreads spread betting forum will be launching in February, you can register your interest on the website now.
Sean