Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So that was the Falkirk effect that was

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited July 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So that was the Falkirk effect that was

Today’s YouGov is now out and completes the polling picture for the weekend. The shares were CON 30, LAB 41, LD 10, UKIP 13. Labour’s 41% is the highest for eight weeks.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    edited July 2013
    First!

    Hmmm, out of four polls we get a thread leader using the one with Labour the highest of the four, LibDems highest and UKIP lowest.

    [checks the calibration on my pocket coincidenceometer]
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    Charles said:

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Still a bit early to draw any firm conclusions based on the polling, but the problem with Cameron's approach - which should have been obvious at the time if they'd thought it through properly - was that it gave Ed Miliband an opening to do a public union-slapping, which he'd have wanted to do some time in the next nine months in any case.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited July 2013
    "Latest YouGov/The Sunday Times results 14th July - Con 30%, Lab 41%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%; APP -38"

    It looks like the Tory attack on the unions backfired badly as predicted by yours truly.

    Considering how out of touch Cameron is in social areas such as attitudes to trade unionism it's surprising he should choose as his adviser an Australian who doesn't even live here and whose ideas and crude right-wingery seem firmly set in another country if not another century

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Charles,

    Don't underestimate the rally the troops effect. It really is important for all parties to get their membership and activists fired up and the trade union question is one which will appeal.

    Next week the parliamentary recess starts and politics will go on the back-burner until conference season.



    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876

    Charles,

    Don't underestimate the rally the troops effect. It really is important for all parties to get their membership and activists fired up and the trade union question is one which will appeal.

    Next week the parliamentary recess starts and politics will go on the back-burner until conference season.





    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Rallying the troops is vital and the Crosby strategy is clearly to focus the Tory message on a few key messages that all Tory MPs can unite around. What it also does, though, is remind LD and Labour inclined voters why they dislike the Tories so much.

    It looks like the Tory strategy for 2015 will be to peg to the right in the hope that enough current UKIPers can be frightened into "returning home". It's probably the best chance the Tories have of winning most seats, but it is very high risk: it will mean fighting on UKIP territory and it will encourage Labour tactical votes for the LDs in areas where they have the best chance of beating the Tories (except in Scotland, where the SNP will probably benefit most).

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles,

    Don't underestimate the rally the troops effect. It really is important for all parties to get their membership and activists fired up and the trade union question is one which will appeal.

    Next week the parliamentary recess starts and politics will go on the back-burner until conference season.





    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    I'm not - my point was that Falkirk may have unwound in the polls but it has lasting value.

    Equally, as EiT said, it has created an opportunity for EdM. But I suspect that EdM won't actually do anything with it - it'll drift over summer and lose momentum
  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596
    SeanT said:

    The outlying pollster here is clearly Yougov.

    not clear at all. we only know after the fact which "Johnny Ball's think of a number/add on the number you first thought of/multiply by shy tory factor + pi/divide by the logarithm of the weight of david miliband" is the correct factor to transform measured opinion into electoral outcome. If something momentous really has happened wrt UKIP then we just don't know who has the best guess
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136

    It looks like the Tory strategy for 2015 will be to peg to the right in the hope that enough current UKIPers can be frightened into "returning home". It's probably the best chance the Tories have of winning most seats, but it is very high risk: it will mean fighting on UKIP territory and it will encourage Labour tactical votes for the LDs in areas where they have the best chance of beating the Tories (except in Scotland, where the SNP will probably benefit most).

    Not only that, it's a defensive strategy that optimizes reducing losses at the expense of reaching out in the hope of winning a majority. I can see why the Tory back-benchers would want to do this, but it's not obvious what's in it for David Cameron, especially after taking a position on the EU that will make it hard for the LibDems to keep him in office.
  • FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    This obsesion with individual polls is very worrying: It reflects upon the heart of the senior-editor and not the employment of his head. We see it all too often; the obsession with short-term dollar-sterling exchange-rates; what the latest GDP revision illustrates about the general lack of economics understanding; what Ian Bell's last x innings can tell us about the current test-match: Folks, give-it-a-rest.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    @SO

    "Rallying the troops is vital and the Crosby strategy is clearly to focus the Tory message on a few key messages that all Tory MPs can unite around"

    Even by the rather arcane values that we attach to the Tories using an entire PMQ's to bash the unions in this day and age was bizarre in the extreme not to mention passe
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876

    It looks like the Tory strategy for 2015 will be to peg to the right in the hope that enough current UKIPers can be frightened into "returning home". It's probably the best chance the Tories have of winning most seats, but it is very high risk: it will mean fighting on UKIP territory and it will encourage Labour tactical votes for the LDs in areas where they have the best chance of beating the Tories (except in Scotland, where the SNP will probably benefit most).

    Not only that, it's a defensive strategy that optimizes reducing losses at the expense of reaching out in the hope of winning a majority. I can see why the Tory back-benchers would want to do this, but it's not obvious what's in it for David Cameron, especially after taking a position on the EU that will make it hard for the LibDems to keep him in office.

    It is certainly a defensive strategy.

    On Crosby, it's worth noting that he has enjoyed his best successes in Australia and London, where there are forms of preferential voting where voters get a second choice. FPTP is very, very different, of course. In 2015 it's UKIP or the Tories, not both. It could have been otherwise, but the Toriesw campaigned against AV. The police commissioner ballots may indicate what could have happened if there had been a vote to change.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    Roger said:

    @SO

    "Rallying the troops is vital and the Crosby strategy is clearly to focus the Tory message on a few key messages that all Tory MPs can unite around"

    Even by the rather arcane values that we attach to the Tories using an entire PMQ's to bash the unions in this day and age was bizarre in the extreme not to mention passe

    Absolutely. The Tories loved the fact that Cameron was doing it. Non-Tories who noticed would have noted he preferred to bash the unions than talk about the crisis in primary school places and the growing use of food banks.

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    I think we'll have to wait quite some time further to see how the Falkirk "non event" plays out. The story has spread like an infection and Ed's medicine has yet to show any signs of cure.

    As for the poll glut these second tier polls create more heat than light and it's important that PBers keep their eye on the gold standard ICM's of the next several months, yet to report recently, and of course the fortnightly publication, exclusive to PB, of the platinum standard ARSE due out tomorrow.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    No one gives a toss about responding to opinion polls with weather like this. Its just as likely that the sample is skewed as anything else. Sensible people are either watching or listening (better) to the cricket (watching the highlights later) and enjoying the best weather for eons.

  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    - "They’d also had the EU referendum bill in the Commons."

    For all you massively disappointed Tories out there, Mike has given you a nice, big clue in that sentence. I confidently predict that you will, collectively, be too daft to take the hint. I really do feel sorry for the few bright ones out there.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited July 2013
    If Labour"s average lead is still +8 we should expect another couple of 11s to balance out the run of 5/6s......lets watch this space, shall we?

    The regular YouGov internals also make grim reading for the coalition, with approval (net) (-7), Cameron (-6) Clegg (-2), working well together (-6) all down. People have also become markedly more negative (-10) about their financial situation in the last week - did I miss an economic crisis - or might this be a panel effect?

    Mixed news for Ed, with his net "weak leader of the Labour Party" still a dreadful +34 (-3), and a jump in "too close to the Unions" to 37 (+8) - in the space of a week. That said, there is strong ( net, +52) support for his "opt in" move, and while opinion splits evenly on the impact it will have on Union influence within Labour (reduce 35, no diff 33, don't know 33), there is support (44) for him attempting to reduce Labours links with the Unions. While this move makes 21% think more positively about Ed, to 41% it makes no difference as they had a negative view anyway.

    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/zinooici1f/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-120713.pdf
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557

    No one gives a toss about responding to opinion polls with weather like this. Its just as likely that the sample is skewed as anything else. Sensible people are either watching or listening (better) to the cricket (watching the highlights later) and enjoying the best weather for eons.

    Funny how nobody ever says things like that when they are doing well in the polls.

    But please, by all means, ignore them if you like.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    - "They’d also had the EU referendum bill in the Commons."

    For all you massively disappointed Tories out there, Mike has given you a nice, big clue in that sentence. I confidently predict that you will, collectively, be too daft to take the hint. I really do feel sorry for the few bright ones out there.

    Imagine how Coalitionistas feel about the constant dribblings of SNP chaffs and not a stalk of EU subsidised wheat between you.

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    O/T The Times,Telegraph and The Mail are describing a perfect killing machine The NHS,
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557

    Charles said:

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Still a bit early to draw any firm conclusions based on the polling, but the problem with Cameron's approach - which should have been obvious at the time if they'd thought it through properly - was that it gave Ed Miliband an opening to do a public union-slapping, which he'd have wanted to do some time in the next nine months in any case.
    You used the phrase "if they'd thought it through properly" in the context of the Conservative & Unionist Party. Do you see the problem there?

    For all their delightful characteristics, great strategic thinking is not one of their prime ones.

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    With news that J K Rowling has written a critically acclaimed crime novel under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith it does rather beg the question who the bloody hell is "SeanT" ??

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23304181
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tim said:

    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Where does that theory come from and what is the evidence for it?
    Mike has certainly talked about being wary of bank holiday polls in the past - I guess because people are away. Given we are now into the school holidays I was wondering whether there was a similar effect
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Interesting YouGov supplementaries on MPs second jobs, with net +41 opposition, though a lower, net +31 support for a ban.

    On the royal baby, the overwhelming majority (82) have no preference between a boy and a girl, with only UKIP voting boy (11:6) and the highest (10) opposition to the end of primogeniture....

    James (19) and George (13) top the boys names, while Victoria (12) and Diana (11) top the girls.

    Either our panel were being ironic in voting Oliver the third most popular boy's name, the country has become covertly republican....or teaching of history ain't what it used to be....
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    SeanT said:

    The continued UKIP surge is intriguing. I expected them to have fallen back by now. It is possible that Farage is benefiting from rightwing talking points (Drummer Rigby, Falkirk, NHS failures) that previously would have advantaged the Tories. If so, Cameron has a big problem: if he successfully attacks Labour and the left, UKIP get a boost.

    I wonder if there's a generational problem, where Crosby but maybe also their other strategists are having a hard time adjusting to multi-party politics. In the two-party world it used to be OK to get people riled up about a problem without having much of a solution to it, as long as the voters trusted the other side even less. Once there's proper competition the strategy becomes ridiculous, as if Burger King were trying to compete with MacDonalds by running ads saying hamburgers turn you into a disgusting fat lard-arse, and you should buy a Whopper because it has 5% less fat than a Big Mac.

    Maybe they should fire their experienced old politics hands and replace them with people with regular advertising experience, who are used to competing against multiple brands in a competitive marketplace.
  • david_kendrick1david_kendrick1 Posts: 325
    edited July 2013
    UKIP is still pretty disorganised, and is still very much shoe-string operation. But it is getting much better.

    All PPC's now have to be tested by the party director Lisa Duffy, and her team of 3 or 4 specialist assistants. Emails of all vacancies to be a PPC anywhere in the country are sent to all approved candidates in good time to attend the relevant hustings. Her aim is to have approved PPCs in place for 75% of the constituencies by this Christmas, 18 months before the GE.

    That this will improve the quality all candidates matters less than the fact that this sort of improvement in in our organisation will attract one or two significant donors. And if any are prepared to put in time as well as money, UKIP will look very different in 2015.

    Can Crosby's dog-whistles really mask Cameron's completely implausible approach to the EU?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    Charles said:

    tim said:

    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Where does that theory come from and what is the evidence for it?
    Mike has certainly talked about being wary of bank holiday polls in the past - I guess because people are away. Given we are now into the school holidays I was wondering whether there was a similar effect

    State schools in England are not on holiday for another week. Maybe a mass exodus of parents who educate their children privately has had an effect.

  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    JackW said:

    - "They’d also had the EU referendum bill in the Commons."

    For all you massively disappointed Tories out there, Mike has given you a nice, big clue in that sentence. I confidently predict that you will, collectively, be too daft to take the hint. I really do feel sorry for the few bright ones out there.

    Imagine how Coalitionistas feel about the constant dribblings of SNP chaffs and not a stalk of EU subsidised wheat between you.
    You could legitimately throw many insults at me Jack, but accusing me of lacking grey matter is one that is unlikely to stick. The same applies to other SNP posters on this blog.

    You know this fine well, so please try a better line of attack.

    By the way, I do not recognise this term "Coalitionistas". I see plenty of Tories about, and occasionally spy a vagrant lesser-spotted Lib Dem, but flocks of "Coalitionistas" seem to be pretty much non existent.

    Compare and contrast with the successful centre-right coalition government in Sweden. But the key difference there is that the 4 coalition partners calmly formed their alliance long before polling day, not in panic afterwards.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136

    Charles said:

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Still a bit early to draw any firm conclusions based on the polling, but the problem with Cameron's approach - which should have been obvious at the time if they'd thought it through properly - was that it gave Ed Miliband an opening to do a public union-slapping, which he'd have wanted to do some time in the next nine months in any case.
    You used the phrase "if they'd thought it through properly" in the context of the Conservative & Unionist Party. Do you see the problem there?

    For all their delightful characteristics, great strategic thinking is not one of their prime ones.

    I don't think there's an ongoing partisan angle to strategy. Good strategists come and go. It's not obvious that Thatcher and her team were being consistently out-thought, and Major and Chris Patten seemed to do pretty well against Kinnock.

    Like I say I think it's more of a generational thing. Sometimes a set of assumptions gets deeply embedded in an organization, and when the world changes around them it can be surprisingly hard to shift.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Golly YouGov are bouncy today. It was 5 and 6pts three days ago.

    Let's see where the trend takes Labour - its 8ish now and that's what I'm paying attention to.

    Is there any news about the hot water MP or has he smothered it with an injunction?!
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    Interestig that it is the Times, the Telegraph and the Mail covering this NHS story. Looks like they have had a steer. Can't think from where. It may be best to wait for the entire report, rather than to rely on cherry-picked highlights run by newspapers that have a certain agenda.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    @Carlotta

    "Interesting YouGov supplementaries on MPs second jobs, with net +41 opposition, though a lower, net +31 support for a ban."

    A big opportunity for Ed. If the public begrudge their MP's £77,000 a year second jobs is likely to really get them going.

    Who'd have thought Ed could become the great reformer?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Excuses, more excuses and pathetic rxcuses !
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    test
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good morning, everyone.

    I must say that I'm very surprised that the Con figure is quite so low, and so consistently low as well.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    The outlying pollster here is clearly Yougov. Judging by their rivals, YouGov are conspicuously underestimating UKIP, and therefore over-estimating the other three parties, especially Labour. This accords with YouGov's poor performance prior to by-elex where UKIP prosper.

    YouGov can therefore be ignored.

    The continued UKIP surge is intriguing. I expected them to have fallen back by now. It is possible that Farage is benefiting from rightwing talking points (Drummer Rigby, Falkirk, NHS failures) that previously would have advantaged the Tories. If so, Cameron has a big problem: if he successfully attacks Labour and the left, UKIP get a boost.



    Sean, you rightwingers never understood this simple maxim. Whenever those three letters are discussed, N H S, it affects the Tories. I suppose like, defence. always helps them.

    Regardless of the stories, particularly about future cuts, the public will believe that Labour will carry out less painfully. They know Labour might have to do it for budgetary reasons. They also know Tories would love to do it anyway for ideological reasons.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Charles said:

    Charles,

    Don't underestimate the rally the troops effect. It really is important for all parties to get their membership and activists fired up and the trade union question is one which will appeal.

    Next week the parliamentary recess starts and politics will go on the back-burner until conference season.





    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    I'm not - my point was that Falkirk may have unwound in the polls but it has lasting value.

    Equally, as EiT said, it has created an opportunity for EdM. But I suspect that EdM won't actually do anything with it - it'll drift over summer and lose momentum
    Just wait for the Conference speech !
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    - "They’d also had the EU referendum bill in the Commons."

    For all you massively disappointed Tories out there, Mike has given you a nice, big clue in that sentence. I confidently predict that you will, collectively, be too daft to take the hint. I really do feel sorry for the few bright ones out there.

    Imagine how Coalitionistas feel about the constant dribblings of SNP chaffs and not a stalk of EU subsidised wheat between you.
    You could legitimately throw many insults at me Jack, but accusing me of lacking grey matter is one that is unlikely to stick. The same applies to other SNP posters on this blog.

    You know this fine well, so please try a better line of attack.

    By the way, I do not recognise this term "Coalitionistas". I see plenty of Tories about, and occasionally spy a vagrant lesser-spotted Lib Dem, but flocks of "Coalitionistas" seem to be pretty much non existent.

    Compare and contrast with the successful centre-right coalition government in Sweden. But the key difference there is that the 4 coalition partners calmly formed their alliance long before polling day, not in panic afterwards.

    Oh I see SNP bods chucking insults is fine and dandy and pretty regular but the hint of a return into the nationalist court on account of lack of intellectual rigour is out of bounds. Tough.

    Further I don't care whether you "recognise" the term Coalitionista or not. You may be campaigning for a sovereign state but you're not one yourself !!

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited July 2013
    No idea how 13,000 needless deaths become "Cherry picking"..
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557

    Charles said:

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Still a bit early to draw any firm conclusions based on the polling, but the problem with Cameron's approach - which should have been obvious at the time if they'd thought it through properly - was that it gave Ed Miliband an opening to do a public union-slapping, which he'd have wanted to do some time in the next nine months in any case.
    You used the phrase "if they'd thought it through properly" in the context of the Conservative & Unionist Party. Do you see the problem there?

    For all their delightful characteristics, great strategic thinking is not one of their prime ones.

    I don't think there's an ongoing partisan angle to strategy. Good strategists come and go. It's not obvious that Thatcher and her team were being consistently out-thought, and Major and Chris Patten seemed to do pretty well against Kinnock.

    Like I say I think it's more of a generational thing. Sometimes a set of assumptions gets deeply embedded in an organization, and when the world changes around them it can be surprisingly hard to shift.
    Fair enough. But right now we are assessing the current generation of politicians, and David Cameron and his team have been in place long enough to begin to draw some conclusions. And one of those conclusions is that they are complete duds when it comes to strategic thinking.

  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    Averages from these polls

    Con 28.25 (+1.00)
    Lab 37.75 (+1.00)
    LD 8.25 (-1.25)
    Ukip 17.5 (-0.50)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Roger said:

    @Carlotta
    Who'd have thought Ed could become the great reformer?

    Let's "watch this space" shall we?

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    Just catching up with the 13000 NHS story - the term 'excess deaths' reminds me rather a lot of 'collateral damage' ...

    I'm not surprised Sir Bruce has come to this figure - I've been following his statements quite closely and he's not been happy for a long while. Ditto Sir Brian Jarman who is very critical http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/heal-our-hospitals/10178296/13000-died-needlessly-at-14-worst-NHS-trusts.html

    " The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

    Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off..."

    Separate research showed that the hospitals were paying out large amounts in compensation for failures and errors. The negligence bills were three times those of the average NHS trust.

    Between them, the 14 hospitals have paid £234 million in negligence settlements in the past three years. Many of the cases will date back far longer, as the legal battles often take several years. Tameside and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust have paid out £30 million each to victims of poor care since 2009.

    United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust paid out £28 million and Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals £19 million.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    The outlying pollster here is clearly Yougov. Judging by their rivals, YouGov are conspicuously underestimating UKIP, and therefore over-estimating the other three parties, especially Labour. This accords with YouGov's poor performance prior to by-elex where UKIP prosper.

    YouGov can therefore be ignored.

    The continued UKIP surge is intriguing. I expected them to have fallen back by now. It is possible that Farage is benefiting from rightwing talking points (Drummer Rigby, Falkirk, NHS failures) that previously would have advantaged the Tories. If so, Cameron has a big problem: if he successfully attacks Labour and the left, UKIP get a boost.



    Sean, you rightwingers never understood this simple maxim. Whenever those three letters are discussed, N H S, it affects the Tories. I suppose like, defence. always helps them.

    Regardless of the stories, particularly about future cuts, the public will believe that Labour will carry out less painfully. They know Labour might have to do it for budgetary reasons. They also know Tories would love to do it anyway for ideological reasons.
    That last paragraph is nonsense, Surbiton. The Tories haven't got an idealogical bone left in it's body.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    - "They’d also had the EU referendum bill in the Commons."

    For all you massively disappointed Tories out there, Mike has given you a nice, big clue in that sentence. I confidently predict that you will, collectively, be too daft to take the hint. I really do feel sorry for the few bright ones out there.

    Imagine how Coalitionistas feel about the constant dribblings of SNP chaffs and not a stalk of EU subsidised wheat between you.
    You could legitimately throw many insults at me Jack, but accusing me of lacking grey matter is one that is unlikely to stick. The same applies to other SNP posters on this blog.

    You know this fine well, so please try a better line of attack.

    By the way, I do not recognise this term "Coalitionistas". I see plenty of Tories about, and occasionally spy a vagrant lesser-spotted Lib Dem, but flocks of "Coalitionistas" seem to be pretty much non existent.

    Compare and contrast with the successful centre-right coalition government in Sweden. But the key difference there is that the 4 coalition partners calmly formed their alliance long before polling day, not in panic afterwards.

    Oh I see SNP bods chucking insults is fine and dandy and pretty regular but the hint of a return into the nationalist court on account of lack of intellectual rigour is out of bounds. Tough.

    Further I don't care whether you "recognise" the term Coalitionista or not. You may be campaigning for a sovereign state but you're not one yourself !!
    Pointing out that the Tory ranks lack intellectual rigour is a statement of the obvious. We just do not see similar masses of dafties in the other parties, SLAB excepted. I note for example that one tim outwits about twenty dafties on here, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year.

    And I am sure that I am not unusual in not recognising the term "Coalitionistas". It is a clear example of wishful thinking that just does not exist in the real world. But feel free to carry on deluding yourself, for you are deluding nobody else.

  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    SouthamObserver

    "Rallying the troops is vital and the Crosby strategy is clearly to focus the Tory message on a few key messages that all Tory MPs can unite around. What it also does, though, is remind LD and Labour inclined voters why they dislike the Tories so much. "

    True .

    Attacking the Unions does not resonate like and it did, you would have to be about 50, to remember when they had any real power to change events.
    Crosby is talking to those who should be natural conservative voters of that older age group, and will most likely return at a GE.

    He is certainly not talking to the people who have had no wage increase for many a year and no prospect of one.These are not the squeezed middle but the pissed of workers and people looking for work, from all walks of life, who feel no one speaks for them.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour
    bit.ly/18VsOQx YouGov poll (page 5) voters by 62 % to 10 % support Miliband union reforms, but no change to his personal ratings
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    UKIP is still pretty disorganised, and is still very much shoe-string operation. But it is getting much better.

    All PPC's now have to be tested by the party director Lisa Duffy, and her team of 3 or 4 specialist assistants. Emails of all vacancies to be a PPC anywhere in the country are sent to all approved candidates in good time to attend the relevant hustings. Her aim is to have approved PPCs in place for 75% of the constituencies by this Christmas, 18 months before the GE.

    That this will improve the quality all candidates matters less than the fact that this sort of improvement in in our organisation will attract one or two significant donors. And if any are prepared to put in time as well as money, UKIP will look very different in 2015.

    Can Crosby's dog-whistles really mask Cameron's completely implausible approach to the EU?

    I can concure in this. I myself am going to a hustings for MEPs in London in two weeks time. No, I'm not standing. ;)
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    tim said:

    Interestig that it is the Times, the Telegraph and the Mail covering this NHS story. Looks like they have had a steer. Can't think from where. It may be best to wait for the entire report, rather than to rely on cherry-picked highlights run by newspapers that have a certain agenda.

    Yes, looks like Jeremy Chum has been selectively briefing certain papers.
    And the Tories will whine when Bercow bollocks him.


    ComRes found Hunt the only politician to be worse than Gove in last nights poll.

    It's that bloody hair cut ! He is only there becuase he is another chum.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    edited July 2013

    Charles said:

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Still a bit early to draw any firm conclusions based on the polling, but the problem with Cameron's approach - which should have been obvious at the time if they'd thought it through properly - was that it gave Ed Miliband an opening to do a public union-slapping, which he'd have wanted to do some time in the next nine months in any case.
    You used the phrase "if they'd thought it through properly" in the context of the Conservative & Unionist Party. Do you see the problem there?

    For all their delightful characteristics, great strategic thinking is not one of their prime ones.

    I don't think there's an ongoing partisan angle to strategy. Good strategists come and go. It's not obvious that Thatcher and her team were being consistently out-thought, and Major and Chris Patten seemed to do pretty well against Kinnock.

    Like I say I think it's more of a generational thing. Sometimes a set of assumptions gets deeply embedded in an organization, and when the world changes around them it can be surprisingly hard to shift.
    Fair enough. But right now we are assessing the current generation of politicians, and David Cameron and his team have been in place long enough to begin to draw some conclusions. And one of those conclusions is that they are complete duds when it comes to strategic thinking.

    I think that's part of the problem - Cameron may or may not be up to speed with the modern world, but his team certainly isn't.

    I think his other problem is that his party aren't giving him a lot of room to maneuver.

    The better UKIP do in the polls, the more restless his backbenchers get.
    The more restless his backbenchers get, the more right-wing red meat he has to throw out to calm them down.
    The more right-wing red meat he has to throw out to calm them down, the more salient UKIP's issues become to the voters.
    And the more salient UKIP's issues become to the voters, the better UKIP do in the polls...
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tim said:



    Charles said:

    tim said:

    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Where does that theory come from and what is the evidence for it?
    Mike has certainly talked about being wary of bank holiday polls in the past - I guess because people are away. Given we are now into the school holidays I was wondering whether there was a similar effect

    "Given we are now into the school holidays I was wondering whether there was a similar effect"

    That just tells us how removed you are from the real world seeing it through the prism of the 6-7% you think makes up the country.

    It is neither correct nor does it answer the question I asked about why polling during the holidays should be worse for the Tories.
    It's interesting that your first response is to be insulting. At no point did I say I think the country comprises the 7% or so who educated their kids privately.

    However if - and it is supposition - a proportion of the private educated kids have gone on holiday with their parents it may impact the polling results. I would assume that this group would disproportionately support the Tories
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Plato said:

    Just catching up with the 13000 NHS story - the term 'excess deaths' reminds me rather a lot of 'collateral damage' ...

    I'm not surprised Sir Bruce has come to this figure - I've been following his statements quite closely and he's not been happy for a long while. Ditto Sir Brian Jarman who is very critical http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/heal-our-hospitals/10178296/13000-died-needlessly-at-14-worst-NHS-trusts.html

    " The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

    Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off..."

    Separate research showed that the hospitals were paying out large amounts in compensation for failures and errors. The negligence bills were three times those of the average NHS trust.

    Between them, the 14 hospitals have paid £234 million in negligence settlements in the past three years. Many of the cases will date back far longer, as the legal battles often take several years. Tameside and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust have paid out £30 million each to victims of poor care since 2009.

    United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust paid out £28 million and Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals £19 million.

    Plato, did these awful lack of attention and care suddenly stop in May 2010 ?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    @Charles - IIRC the holiday season/Tory vote drop off has been noted on PB many times over the years - its especially true over BHol weekends/Easter break.

    That may or not be a factor now - but its a widely accepted one here.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    surbiton said:

    Plato said:

    Just catching up with the 13000 NHS story - the term 'excess deaths' reminds me rather a lot of 'collateral damage' ...

    I'm not surprised Sir Bruce has come to this figure - I've been following his statements quite closely and he's not been happy for a long while. Ditto Sir Brian Jarman who is very critical http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/heal-our-hospitals/10178296/13000-died-needlessly-at-14-worst-NHS-trusts.html

    " The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

    Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off..."

    Separate research showed that the hospitals were paying out large amounts in compensation for failures and errors. The negligence bills were three times those of the average NHS trust.

    Between them, the 14 hospitals have paid £234 million in negligence settlements in the past three years. Many of the cases will date back far longer, as the legal battles often take several years. Tameside and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust have paid out £30 million each to victims of poor care since 2009.

    United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust paid out £28 million and Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals £19 million.

    Plato, did these awful lack of attention and care suddenly stop in May 2010 ?

    The Conservative attack will be stepped up on Tuesday but Labour said last night that it stood by its record.

    A spokesman said: “The claim that Labour ignored problems at these hospitals is disgraceful and not supported by a shred of evidence. In fact, the truth is the precise opposite.”

    He said Mr Burnham had ordered his own review of five of the hospitals covered by Sir Bruce’s report — Basildon and Thurrock, Medway, Northern Lincolnshire and Goole, Sherwood Forest and Tameside – and claimed its warnings had been “clearly ignored” by the current government “as evidence shows all five hospitals have deteriorated sharply on the Coalition’s watch”.


  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    - "They’d also had the EU referendum bill in the Commons."

    For all you massively disappointed Tories out there, Mike has given you a nice, big clue in that sentence. I confidently predict that you will, collectively, be too daft to take the hint. I really do feel sorry for the few bright ones out there.

    Imagine how Coalitionistas feel about the constant dribblings of SNP chaffs and not a stalk of EU subsidised wheat between you.
    You could legitimately throw many insults at me Jack, but accusing me of lacking grey matter is one that is unlikely to stick. The same applies to other SNP posters on this blog.

    You know this fine well, so please try a better line of attack.

    By the way, I do not recognise this term "Coalitionistas". I see plenty of Tories about, and occasionally spy a vagrant lesser-spotted Lib Dem, but flocks of "Coalitionistas" seem to be pretty much non existent.

    Compare and contrast with the successful centre-right coalition government in Sweden. But the key difference there is that the 4 coalition partners calmly formed their alliance long before polling day, not in panic afterwards.

    Oh I see SNP bods chucking insults is fine and dandy and pretty regular but the hint of a return into the nationalist court on account of lack of intellectual rigour is out of bounds. Tough.

    Further I don't care whether you "recognise" the term Coalitionista or not. You may be campaigning for a sovereign state but you're not one yourself !!
    Pointing out that the Tory ranks lack intellectual rigour is a statement of the obvious. We just do not see similar masses of dafties in the other parties, SLAB excepted. I note for example that one tim outwits about twenty dafties on here, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year.

    And I am sure that I am not unusual in not recognising the term "Coalitionistas". It is a clear example of wishful thinking that just does not exist in the real world. But feel free to carry on deluding yourself, for you are deluding nobody else.

    To be fair, the term "coalitionista" did exist until the HoL reform bill was scuppered by those intelligent Tories. The boundary review went with it. The rest is history !
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tim said:

    Charles said:

    tim said:



    Charles said:

    tim said:

    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Where does that theory come from and what is the evidence for it?
    Mike has certainly talked about being wary of bank holiday polls in the past - I guess because people are away. Given we are now into the school holidays I was wondering whether there was a similar effect

    "Given we are now into the school holidays I was wondering whether there was a similar effect"

    That just tells us how removed you are from the real world seeing it through the prism of the 6-7% you think makes up the country.

    It is neither correct nor does it answer the question I asked about why polling during the holidays should be worse for the Tories.
    It's interesting that your first response is to be insulting. At no point did I say I think the country comprises the 7% or so who educated their kids privately.

    However if - and it is supposition - a proportion of the private educated kids have gone on holiday with their parents it may impact the polling results. I would assume that this group would disproportionately support the Tories
    "Given we are now into the school holidays " tells us all "we" need to know.

    As for the rest of your post,that just tells me that you don't know how polling works,alongside thinking Slough schools close at the same time as Eton.


    I doubt that the pollsters would weight for educational choices by parents.
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805

    Charles said:

    tim said:

    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Where does that theory come from and what is the evidence for it?
    Mike has certainly talked about being wary of bank holiday polls in the past - I guess because people are away. Given we are now into the school holidays I was wondering whether there was a similar effect

    State schools in England are not on holiday for another week. Maybe a mass exodus of parents who educate their children privately has had an effect.

    Week and a half.

    On the NHS - I was out with some of my usually righter-winger friends the other day, and the NHS 'scandal' came up as a topic (not from me). The consensus seemed to be that many of the NHS's problems are associated with Blairite/New Labour policies like targets, unwieldy/bloated management and 'uncompetitive' privatisation. All of which they think the Tories will do and worse. So I'd go for a cross party approach on this or stfu.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott
    Former health sec Andy Burnham will be on #Murnaghan later talking about secret govt files showing he overruled officials on Mid Staffs
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Plato said:

    @Charles - IIRC the holiday season/Tory vote drop off has been noted on PB many times over the years - its especially true over BHol weekends/Easter break.

    That may or not be a factor now - but its a widely accepted one here.

    Most pollsters weigh the raw poll with GE 2010 vote pattern or Party ID. So, it doesn't matter.
    "Widely acceped" by PBTories !
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Are you fretting Surby? I would be if I were Andy Burnham and Labour - it was on their watch. There will always be problems in the NHS like there are in the Home Office, but its the scale of the Eff Up and the real harm its done that's the issue.

    THIRTEEN THOUSAND DEATHS - and its the NHS Med Dir saying it, not some CCHQ press officer.
    surbiton said:

    Plato said:

    Just catching up with the 13000 NHS story - the term 'excess deaths' reminds me rather a lot of 'collateral damage' ...

    I'm not surprised Sir Bruce has come to this figure - I've been following his statements quite closely and he's not been happy for a long while. Ditto Sir Brian Jarman who is very critical http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/heal-our-hospitals/10178296/13000-died-needlessly-at-14-worst-NHS-trusts.html

    " The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

    Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off..."

    Separate research showed that the hospitals were paying out large amounts in compensation for failures and errors. The negligence bills were three times those of the average NHS trust.

    Between them, the 14 hospitals have paid £234 million in negligence settlements in the past three years. Many of the cases will date back far longer, as the legal battles often take several years. Tameside and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust have paid out £30 million each to victims of poor care since 2009.

    United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust paid out £28 million and Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals £19 million.

    Plato, did these awful lack of attention and care suddenly stop in May 2010 ?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    I see Labour complacency is back on the menu for Sunday brunch -excellent.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    ""Inevitably, the document will be long, informative and redolent of civil service expertise and attention to detail."

    That'll be a first!

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/13/alex-salmond-white-paper-william-mcilvanney
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Plato said:

    Are you fretting Surby? I would be if I were Andy Burnham and Labour - it was on their watch. There will always be problems in the NHS like there are in the Home Office, but its the scale of the Eff Up and the real harm its done that's the issue.

    THIRTEEN THOUSAND DEATHS - and its the NHS Med Dir saying it, not some CCHQ press officer.

    surbiton said:

    Plato said:

    Just catching up with the 13000 NHS story - the term 'excess deaths' reminds me rather a lot of 'collateral damage' ...

    I'm not surprised Sir Bruce has come to this figure - I've been following his statements quite closely and he's not been happy for a long while. Ditto Sir Brian Jarman who is very critical http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/heal-our-hospitals/10178296/13000-died-needlessly-at-14-worst-NHS-trusts.html

    " The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

    Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off..."

    Separate research showed that the hospitals were paying out large amounts in compensation for failures and errors. The negligence bills were three times those of the average NHS trust.

    Between them, the 14 hospitals have paid £234 million in negligence settlements in the past three years. Many of the cases will date back far longer, as the legal battles often take several years. Tameside and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust have paid out £30 million each to victims of poor care since 2009.

    United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust paid out £28 million and Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals £19 million.

    Plato, did these awful lack of attention and care suddenly stop in May 2010 ?
    Plato, any NHS discussion ultimately will help Labour. Because, the public in their hearts believe the Tories don't like the NHS> That is why Cameron has to use his personal experiences to reassure.

    Simple question: how many Tory MP's have private health cover ?
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Surbiton .. With these NHS figures we should all have private health cover
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    TGOHF said:

    I see Labour complacency is back on the menu for Sunday brunch -excellent.

    Sometimes I wonder at the yaa-booery of politics, if Sir Bruce said it was 130k *excess deaths* some on PB would reflexively post something about Thatcher, and then pile on with a load of 'but whataboutery' as if that makes the monster go away.

    It's appalling what happened - and is hopefully no longer lurking in the shadows. MidStaffs wasn't a one off, its very clear. At any one time some rogue unit will be screwing up - that's life but the scale of this and the culture it stemmed from are criminal.

    I sincerely hope the culprits are prosecuted where laws have been broken, and sacked where found to be negligent.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    tim said:

    surbiton said:

    Plato said:

    Just catching up with the 13000 NHS story - the term 'excess deaths' reminds me rather a lot of 'collateral damage' ...

    I'm not surprised Sir Bruce has come to this figure - I've been following his statements quite closely and he's not been happy for a long while. Ditto Sir Brian Jarman who is very critical http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/heal-our-hospitals/10178296/13000-died-needlessly-at-14-worst-NHS-trusts.html

    " The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

    Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off..."

    Separate research showed that the hospitals were paying out large amounts in compensation for failures and errors. The negligence bills were three times those of the average NHS trust.

    Between them, the 14 hospitals have paid £234 million in negligence settlements in the past three years. Many of the cases will date back far longer, as the legal battles often take several years. Tameside and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust have paid out £30 million each to victims of poor care since 2009.

    United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust paid out £28 million and Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals £19 million.

    Plato, did these awful lack of attention and care suddenly stop in May 2010 ?
    The leaked part of the report seems to claim an acceleration last year to 3,500 deaths.
    Best wait until we see the whole thing, we need to know what statistical modelling they are using

    But it won't stop the PB Tories claiming 2012 was on Labours watch.

    Unfortunately, for them, the Health Secretary was not Cable in May 2012. Lansley was busy going through the unnecessary Top-Down restructuring spending billions. Since then, the awful Hair Cut is in charge !
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    tim said:

    surbiton said:

    Plato said:

    @Charles - IIRC the holiday season/Tory vote drop off has been noted on PB many times over the years - its especially true over BHol weekends/Easter break.

    That may or not be a factor now - but its a widely accepted one here.

    Most pollsters weigh the raw poll with GE 2010 vote pattern or Party ID. So, it doesn't matter.
    "Widely acceped" by PBTories !
    fitalass used to claim that weekend polling put the Tories at a disadvantage, not realising that ICM always poll over the weekend for the Guardian series.

    Only on PB.

    terminological inexactitude tim. I seem to recall people saying that YOU GOV polling changed at the weekend not ALL polling.




  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    SO, Get real, the Labour Party are hardly going to say "Mea Culpa".
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    "Tory MP John Hayes was fired as Energy Minister for secretly plotting to persuade an electricity boss to challenge Government policy.
    Climate change sceptic Mr Hayes had asked the head of power giants E.on to warn of blackouts unless the Coalition watered down its green crusade and made a U-turn on the closure of coal-fired generators."

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2362772/Climate-change-sceptic-energy-minister-fired-security-asking-energy-companies-warn-blackouts-unless-coalition-watered-green-crusade.html#ixzz2Z0MRzt6B

    David Milband on Marr - with Marr
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    Oh and I see The STimes has some appalling stats for weekend admissions. Why its ever been custom and practice for office hours to be done in the NHS is beyond me.

    "THOUSANDS of patients are dying unnecessarily because of the failure of Britain’s hospitals to provide safe out-of-hours care. Death rates are rising by up to 27% at the weekend in some hospitals. The figures show that 129 of the 146 trusts had higher death rates at weekends in 2011-12, the latest year for which there is available data for every trust. Twelve of the trusts had unexpectedly high weekend death rates, according to Dr Foster Intelligence, the company that analysed the data.

    These included Hillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, which showed a 27% leap in death rates at the weekend compared with weekdays; the Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, which had a 25% jump; Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust, which recorded a 16% rise; and Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust which showed an increase of 11%...

    In an interview with The Sunday Times, Sir Bruce Keogh, medical director of the NHS, said the health service “lacks compassion towards patients” by shutting down over the weekend. He believed a seven- day NHS was a “necessity”. Keogh said routine treatment should be available at the weekend. He also believes that if consultants were on the wards seven days a week, savings would be made because they could take decisions about the correct treatment for patients and discharge those who were ready to leave. http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Health/article1287668.ece
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Surbiton .. With these NHS figures we should all have private health cover

    But but but but Danny Boyle !!!!!
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876

    SO, Get real, the Labour Party are hardly going to say "Mea Culpa".

    No, of course they are not. If Burnham ordered enquiries and the Tories ignored the findings, why on earth should Labour take responsibility?

    Obviously, you are not going to understand that the report has not actually been published and that parts of it have been leaked to newspapers which are Tory-friendly and long-standing critics of the NHS, but what we may find when the report does come out is that it is a little more nuanced than the Mail, the Times and the Telegraph are reporting.


  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,670
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    - "They’d also had the EU referendum bill in the Commons."

    For all you massively disappointed Tories out there, Mike has given you a nice, big clue in that sentence. I confidently predict that you will, collectively, be too daft to take the hint. I really do feel sorry for the few bright ones out there.

    Imagine how Coalitionistas feel about the constant dribblings of SNP chaffs and not a stalk of EU subsidised wheat between you.
    You could legitimately throw many insults at me Jack, but accusing me of lacking grey matter is one that is unlikely to stick. The same applies to other SNP posters on this blog.

    You know this fine well, so please try a better line of attack.

    By the way, I do not recognise this term "Coalitionistas". I see plenty of Tories about, and occasionally spy a vagrant lesser-spotted Lib Dem, but flocks of "Coalitionistas" seem to be pretty much non existent.

    Compare and contrast with the successful centre-right coalition government in Sweden. But the key difference there is that the 4 coalition partners calmly formed their alliance long before polling day, not in panic afterwards.

    Oh I see SNP bods chucking insults is fine and dandy and pretty regular but the hint of a return into the nationalist court on account of lack of intellectual rigour is out of bounds. Tough.

    Further I don't care whether you "recognise" the term Coalitionista or not. You may be campaigning for a sovereign state but you're not one yourself !!

    Sounding a bit rattled there Jack, did Stuart hit a sore spot
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    School places crisis sorted:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/14/primary-school-admissions-code-change-confusion?CMP=twt_gu

    On that note off to prep to go play a 'Kubb' tournament (with picnic and Pimms, obv).

    If you've never seen/played it highly recommended for friend and family sunshine fun.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3ELBTr8jI8
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    @SO

    Interesting you should hint that newspapers are biased when it suits you but you ignore it when it supports your case.. tsk..
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    Plato said:

    TGOHF said:

    I see Labour complacency is back on the menu for Sunday brunch -excellent.

    Sometimes I wonder at the yaa-booery of politics, if Sir Bruce said it was 130k *excess deaths* some on PB would reflexively post something about Thatcher, and then pile on with a load of 'but whataboutery' as if that makes the monster go away.

    It's appalling what happened - and is hopefully no longer lurking in the shadows. MidStaffs wasn't a one off, its very clear. At any one time some rogue unit will be screwing up - that's life but the scale of this and the culture it stemmed from are criminal.

    I sincerely hope the culprits are prosecuted where laws have been broken, and sacked where found to be negligent.

    By "ya-booery" do you mean this kind of thing:

    Are you fretting Surby? I would be if I were Andy Burnham and Labour - it was on their watch.



  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    How to bend your 'excess death' figures - STimes

    "Experts will study Keogh’s report closely for any evidence that hospitals tried to massage their mortality figures by reclassifying patients as undergoing “palliative care” rather than being treated for a specific illness.

    The statistics would then record that the patient was considered certain to die and simply being made comfortable. As a result, the death would not affect the hospital’s mortality figures for standard medical procedures.

    One critic said that some hospitals on occasions appeared “to turn into hospices overnight” as patients were put into the palliative category."
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876

    @SO

    Interesting you should hint that newspapers are biased when it suits you but you ignore it when it supports your case.. tsk..

    And your evidence for that claim is ...

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @StuartDickson wrote :

    "Pointing out that the Tory ranks lack intellectual rigour is a statement of the obvious. We just do not see similar masses of dafties in the other parties, SLAB excepted. I note for example that one tim outwits about twenty dafties on here, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year."

    ....................................................

    Using "tim" as your yardstick for intellectual rigour is one of the funniest posts any SNPer has ever composed on PB and boy there have been some side splitting candidates.

    I consider you have made my case comprehensively and I'll rest there m'lud.

    Chortles with abandon !!

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited July 2013

    If Labour"s average lead is still +8 we should expect another couple of 11s to balance out the run of 5/6s......lets watch this space, shall we?
    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/zinooici1f/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-120713.pdf

    I have checked out the unweighted polling numbers. I can reassure Plato and Charles that all Tories have not decamped to the beaches !

    But I did notice that something has changed markedly. 9/10 of 2010 Labour voters now say that they will vote Labour whereas for the Tories the figure is 7/10. Exactly the opposite prior to Budget 2012 ! 30% of 2010 LD voters will now vote Labour against 37% staying with the Liberals. 20% of 2010 Tories are now kippers. If I took the PBTory sub-sample that figure is probably an underestimate !

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    @SO

    Your moral high-chair is a lofty place. I'm looking forward to you moaning again about going off-topic if a few of us discuss the occasional film or tv show. You never talk about cricket of course ;^ )
  • FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    edited July 2013
    Off-topic:

    And this is a question for [the likes of] Professor Nabavi [sp?], JJ (or, ideally, Mrs JJ), EiT or Dr Plank:

    On another web-site I am having great fun reading the battles between Red Trousers and the-late-and-lamented HurstLlama (once of this parish). Being an informed software-engineer/analyst the following comment by RT got me thinking....
    ....whatever the state of the art is. In discussion with one of our network solutions architects yesterday, he informed me that processors are now getting to the point of non-improvability in electronic terms: they can cycle so quickly that the real bottleneck is now waiting for electrons to jump the gap. Only optical connections can do better.
    So - and to keep it simple - are photons faster than electrons? If so, how (and why) does e=mc^2 hold...?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited July 2013
    @surbiton wrote :

    "To be fair, the term "coalitionista" did exist until the HoL reform bill was scuppered by those intelligent Tories. The boundary review went with it. The rest is history ! "

    .................................................

    To be accurate I've been using the term "Coalitionista" since for the formation of the government in 2010.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    This is almost too Yes, Minister for words. Paywall

    Not in the best interests of the patients?

    " SECRET government files have revealed how senior civil servants tried to cover up the Mid Staffordshire hospital scandal. Documents stored in the Department of Health show officials sought to discourage ministers from launching a public inquiry into appalling standards at the NHS trust, which resulted in the unnecessary deaths of almost 1,200 patients.

    “We do not feel a full public inquiry would be in the interests of patients and the public,” one document said. A senior government lawyer went on to warn that even a limited inquiry would carry “significant risks”, adding that the government had no legal obligation to take further action.

    “The benefits of embarking on any kind of formal inquiry (public or private) are outweighed by the potential consequences,” officials said..."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-5zEb1oS9A
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    Plato said:

    @SO

    Your moral high-chair is a lofty place. I'm looking forward to you moaning again about going off-topic if a few of us discuss the occasional film or tv show. You never talk about cricket of course ;^ )

    I just found it amusing that someone could write a post about Labour fretting because it all happened on their watch and then literally five minutes later write another post about the dreadfulness of political yah-booery over the NHS.

    As I have said previously, I no problem in people discussing films, TV programmes, cricket or anything else on here. Whole threads being taken over by long posts and links, though, do get a little boring. But each to his/her own.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    It depends where you live. State schools in Leicester shire broke up last friday.

    Nonetheless we are into summer polling and most of the country is interested in other things like BBQ's and catching rays rather than political infighting.

    Charles said:

    tim said:

    Charles said:

    IIRC, there tends to be a holiday effect that dosen't help the Tories - when does that start usually (or is it only bank holidays?). Certainly my impression is that summer has come early.

    Not great polls anyway - although IMHO, process issues/attacks on union leader influence is more of a "rally the troops" topic than something that gets much wider traction

    Where does that theory come from and what is the evidence for it?
    Mike has certainly talked about being wary of bank holiday polls in the past - I guess because people are away. Given we are now into the school holidays I was wondering whether there was a similar effect

    State schools in England are not on holiday for another week. Maybe a mass exodus of parents who educate their children privately has had an effect.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Needs sorting:

    "More British soldiers and veterans took their own lives in 2012 than died fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan over the same period.

    The British government, unlike its American counterpart, does not record the suicide rate among ex-soldiers.

    But Panorama has independently established that at least 29 veterans took their own lives in 2012."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23259865?ocid=socialflow_facebook_bbcnews
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    @SO

    Interesting you should hint that newspapers are biased when it suits you but you ignore it when it supports your case.. tsk..

    And your evidence for that claim is ...


    Well, If you can point me to comments you have made (where you have added a link) that adds a rider that although the link supports your case, of course it might be biased in favour of what you are commenting about, I will apologise profusely.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited July 2013
    I think I might have been privy to a brief sighting of Jack's ARSE. It looks like there's been a leak!

    The big news is that ED WILL NEVER BE PRIME MINISTER!

    (Or I'm I mistaking it with last months poll?)

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    surbiton said:

    Plato said:

    @Charles - IIRC the holiday season/Tory vote drop off has been noted on PB many times over the years - its especially true over BHol weekends/Easter break.

    That may or not be a factor now - but its a widely accepted one here.

    Most pollsters weigh the raw poll with GE 2010 vote pattern or Party ID. So, it doesn't matter.
    "Widely acceped" by PBTories !
    Then why the caution expressed over BH polls?

    I would assume if you are having to be more aggressive on the re-weighting there will be a greater margin of error?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    surbiton said:

    Plato said:

    Are you fretting Surby? I would be if I were Andy Burnham and Labour - it was on their watch. There will always be problems in the NHS like there are in the Home Office, but its the scale of the Eff Up and the real harm its done that's the issue.

    THIRTEEN THOUSAND DEATHS - and its the NHS Med Dir saying it, not some CCHQ press officer.

    surbiton said:

    Plato said:

    Just catching up with the 13000 NHS story - the term 'excess deaths' reminds me rather a lot of 'collateral damage' ...

    I'm not surprised Sir Bruce has come to this figure - I've been following his statements quite closely and he's not been happy for a long while. Ditto Sir Brian Jarman who is very critical http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/heal-our-hospitals/10178296/13000-died-needlessly-at-14-worst-NHS-trusts.html

    " The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

    Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off..."

    Separate research showed that the hospitals were paying out large amounts in compensation for failures and errors. The negligence bills were three times those of the average NHS trust.

    Between them, the 14 hospitals have paid £234 million in negligence settlements in the past three years. Many of the cases will date back far longer, as the legal battles often take several years. Tameside and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust have paid out £30 million each to victims of poor care since 2009.

    United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust paid out £28 million and Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals £19 million.

    Plato, did these awful lack of attention and care suddenly stop in May 2010 ?
    Plato, any NHS discussion ultimately will help Labour. Because, the public in their hearts believe the Tories don't like the NHS> That is why Cameron has to use his personal experiences to reassure.

    Simple question: how many Tory MP's have private health cover ?
    Why is that relevant? Many people use both the NHS and private care as appropriate.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941


    So - and to keep it simple - are photons faster than electrons? If so, how (and why) does e=mc^2 hold...?

    Electrons themselves move relatively slowly, several tens of meters per second, but the signal propagated by them is transmitted a lot quicker. Think of it like a tube of ball bearings, you push one end at a relatively slow velocity, however the 'signal' is very rapidly transmitted to the other end, which is evident by the ball bearings at the other end of the tube moving almost simultaneously.

    So a signal transmitted by electrons (for want of a better phrase which eludes me), is on the order of the speed of light ~50-90% (I'm guessing it is not 100% due to imperfections in the conductor you are using, or some other fancy physics). So by moving to photons, you only gain by a factor of two -- hardly groundbreaking.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    Perhaps Labour posters would like to address the NHS stories rather than attempt to divert from them.

    The monster won't go away because you don't look at it.

    RT @PeterWatt123: The left is going to have to find a much better response to the series of NHS scandals than 'I love the NHS'
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited July 2013
    Carola said:

    School places crisis sorted:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/14/primary-school-admissions-code-change-confusion?CMP=twt_gu

    On that note off to prep to go play a 'Kubb' tournament (with picnic and Pimms, obv).

    If you've never seen/played it highly recommended for friend and family sunshine fun.


    From your link:

    St Mark's told Jarman it offers only part-time provision for children in Eibhlís's position in their first term: three hours a day in the morning or afternoon, switching halfway through the term.

    When Jarman said this was an impossible arrangement, given her work commitments, she was advised to look for another school.


    Now, I am sure there is more to the story than is reported, but it appears that she wanted special treatment. When this was refused she intends to sue. A sense of entitlement?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    surbiton said:

    If Labour"s average lead is still +8 we should expect another couple of 11s to balance out the run of 5/6s......lets watch this space, shall we?
    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/zinooici1f/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-120713.pdf

    I have checked out the unweighted polling numbers. I can reassure Plato and Charles that all Tories have not decamped to the beaches !

    But I did notice that something has changed markedly. 9/10 of 2010 Labour voters now say that they will vote Labour whereas for the Tories the figure is 7/10. Exactly the opposite prior to Budget 2012 ! 30% of 2010 LD voters will now vote Labour against 37% staying with the Liberals. 20% of 2010 Tories are now kippers. If I took the PBTory sub-sample that figure is probably an underestimate !

    Fair enough. I take it that's a Labour increase rather than a Tory decline in CtV? The union story? Can't think of anything else major?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876

    @SO

    Interesting you should hint that newspapers are biased when it suits you but you ignore it when it supports your case.. tsk..

    And your evidence for that claim is ...


    Well, If you can point me to comments you have made (where you have added a link) that adds a rider that although the link supports your case, of course it might be biased in favour of what you are commenting about, I will apologise profusely.

    I fear you may be confusing me with people who link to lots of stories on PB. it is not something that I do very much.

  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Navel-gazing is a slow-burn issue. Same for the Tories' disunity over Europe.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited July 2013
    Will we reach a tipping point at which the NHS becomes the NDS* in the eyes of the majority of voters?

    *National Death Service.

    I do however wish that the NHS was renamed the English HS and the Scottish HS and the Welsh HS etc. That is the reality.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited July 2013

    @SO

    Interesting you should hint that newspapers are biased when it suits you but you ignore it when it supports your case.. tsk..

    And your evidence for that claim is ...


    Well, If you can point me to comments you have made (where you have added a link) that adds a rider that although the link supports your case, of course it might be biased in favour of what you are commenting about, I will apologise profusely.

    I fear you may be confusing me with people who link to lots of stories on PB. it is not something that I do very much.

    Yes I know that but when you have done so, I doubt very much you have ever added a rider warning that the link in support of what you have written might be biased in favour of your point.

    I therefore rest my case m'lud
    Time to get sorted before the cricket..
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    'Salmond v Darling: who's leftiest of all?'
    ... the hard fact is that the SNP today are more Labour than Labour ever were. The Scottish National Party are unilateralist and reject Trident, are opposed to market reforms in the NHS and reject the bedroom tax, UK welfare reforms and austerity budgets. They support free higher education, the European Union, the Social Chapter, social housing, green energy, open immigration, a living wage, public spending, comprehensive education and many other left-wing policies.

    Yet metropolitan journalists and Unionists continue to claim that Labour in Scotland are fighting the good fight for social justice against a populist Nationalism that wants to put identity above class, and turn politics into a culture clash.

    There was a striking illustration of this last week in two major speeches on independence: the first in Glasgow by the chairman of the Unionist Better Together campaign, Alistair Darling, and the next day, by Alex Salmond in Nigg on the Cromarty Firth. Curiously, it was Darling who concentrated on questions of identity, while Salmond based his pitch almost entirely on social justice.
    http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/salmond-v-darling-whos-leftiest-of-all.21592091

This discussion has been closed.