Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Harry Hayfield’s PB local elections special
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Harry Hayfield’s PB local elections special
North East Lincolnshire was one of the unitary authorities established following the abolition of the generally not liked Humberside County Council (which still lends it’s name to the electoral region for the European Elections) and over the years has reflected the national political mood quite nicely.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
@MShapland: Elections not won and lost in the few weeks of an election but two or three years before - if you're not credible on THE issue, go home now
In 1997 Labour didn't play their hand until 4 months before the election. Labour should do the same again.
The solid budget, the slow recovery, the shock on welfare and the political cowardice of Labour in refusing to address the issues, it may not be over yet.
When UKIP continue to grow in support will you realise how stupid a strategy for the Tories this is. You end up stoking the UKIP dragon. You go further to the right to win those votes but it just gets bigger.
You go even further. Lose the center ground. Lose the election. Just like the Republicans and the Tea party.
The Tories are idiots.
Stupid Tories. Just making UKIP seem like they have a point. So more people on the right support UKIP.
I agree too. The later Labour leave it the better for everyone.
Depends if the Tories keep drifting to the right at the pace they are. All they do is make the UKIP vote stronger. Just how the Republicans stoked the Tea Party until it destroyed them.
Just like the Republicans lost the center by trying to please the tea party.
I agree with you that the Conservatives are idiots to spend any time on the EU - all it does is help UKIP. It's probably too late for them on immigration too as well. But welfare is a subject where they retain some credibility with old right voters.
The Conservatives have had a good week, thanks largely to a whole series of self-inflicted mistakes by Labour. Labour cannot afford to have a position on welfare that consists of them wringing their hands. They look like space aliens on the subject.
You may well be right antifrank.
It was just that the sh1t storm after the budget last year was so absurd and so much of an over-reaction that it reminded me very much of the period from 1994 to 1997 when whatever the government did it was wrong and they could not get a hearing. As it happened Ken Clarke and even Norman Lamont were doing good things but no one wanted to know anymore. The zeitgeist was with new labour and it was irresistable.
That has been the picture for most of the last 12 months. Every little detail twisted to be a "gaff" and just plain lies (such as Mitchell) when that couldn't be done. Somehow, and I can't help feeling it is Labour's fault for leaving the field so empty, the tories are getting back into the game. Behind undoubtedly, but back.
I have never seen a space alien look anything like as useless as Labour this week on welfare.
Denigrating the good name of space aliens this way is racist claptrap.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/clips/p006vm6j/the_league_of_gentlemen_a_local_shop_for_local_people/
' The later Labour leave it the better for everyone.'
To be fair they need time to come up with an explanation of how will they fund the reversal of every cut that has been made and re-instate benefits to millions of voters,quite a challenge.
This Labour MP seems to be Pamela Nash of Airdrie and Shotts.
What else can I tell you about her?
Before becoming an MP she was the parliamentary officer for the Young Fabians, an intern for John Reid and then John Reid's parliamentary assistant. In 2010, after being chosen from an AWS, she succeeded John Reid as Airdrie MP at the ripe old age of 25.
In Westminster her notable triumphs, as reported by wiki, include:
' Nash was criticised in local media at the beginning of November 2010 for “failing to represent her constituents after a study showed her to be one of the worst performing parliamentarians at Westminster." '
and
' Nash failed to turn up for a debate she was to lead in Parliament at 2.30 pm on Tuesday, 6th November 2012. This was to have been on Scotland's membership of the European Union after Independence. The sitting was suspended for 90 minutes and the debate was lost. '
Given her age and the safeness of her constituency it seems that unless Scotland achieves independence this political titan will be at Westminster for the next forty years.
Prescot West could be an oppurtunity for LibDems. In May 2012 LibDems didn't recover in that ward compared to 2011 (which is probably the low point for LD) but the total absence of an opposition within Knowsley council should give them a campaign theme to run with (please, elect me so I can keep an eye on Labour without threatening their majority).
Nottingham Wollaton East has Labour in third place in 2003 and 2007. If 2011 was the low point for LibDems, they can try and recover from that and there is a big Tory vote to squeeze.
Wigan, the other Nottingham ward and the other 2 Knowsley wards don't seem to offer particular interesting themes to reflect on.
I wonder where Barking, Newham and Knowsley rank on those desirable place to live surveys?
Lets see where the polls are in a few weeks.
Here's what happens though. The Tories start all this bluster. Parts of the public think "ah ha, I knew benefits were bad." Then the Mail keeps running its stories. The same people think the Tories can't deal with it.
They then give up on the Tories and vote UKIP.
Outside London the living wage is currently £7.45 an hour and the minimum wage is £6.19. If you really think that this is the answer to a £200bn a year benefit bill then you are more delusional than I gave you credit for.
And Osborne may be giving guarantees of up to £130bn for housing but that is nothing like the same as actually spending it. It is only a contingent liability. Do you really think that Labour will go into the next election with a commitment to spend another £130bn of borrowed money on top of what will be a large deficit?
My optimism increases by the hour.
Do you know if the LibDems have said anything on welfare in the last day or two?
Could this be a catalyst case to get a public discussion about the insanity of concurrent sentences?
Tough, this opposition lark.
If Labour did that together with a commitment to cut earnings for those on double average earnings in the public sector (plus BBC plus nationalised banks) and introduce a national maximum wage of ten times living wage for all those in the public sector (plus BBC plus nationalised banks) it could make a real breakthrough on the 'fairness' front.
He could link this with the special rate of income tax - 50% tax for private sector earnings over ten times living wage couldn't be complained about if the public sector top earners were effectively paying 100% tax at that rate.
As only Nixon could go to China perhaps only EdM can make the guardianistas howl?
Labour promising to hit fatcats across the public sector would put Cameron in a real mess - support it and he would look weak (and lose some affluent votes himself), oppose it and he would look like a 'protector' of the rich (and lose votes to UKIP).
The Tories aren't going to do anything. They haven't so far.
Vote UKIP.
After a long running feud between national party and constituency party about the AWS, the NEC imposed it and the Airdire & Shotts CLP had to take it. The election was approaching and the NEC was in charge of the shortlist. They agreed not to stop the CLP's favoured candidate. CLP favoured candidate seemed to mean the favoured candidate by CLP officers.
So they shortlisted Joanne Milligan (former chair of Scottish Labour Students; now she lives in Croydon. She was the central party choice), Cathy Dick (a former local councillor and the favoured candidate by CLP officers) and Pamela Nash.
Nash surprised all of them emerging as winner after second preferences from Milligan were redistributed.
A CLP member immediately briefed the Scottish papers saying her performance at the hustings was poor (Dick was described as passionate and Milligan as professional). The CLP Chair resigned.
It seemed that Nash got lots of postal votes from armchair members. Apparently she was the only one working them during the selection campaign. The CLP officers apparently relied on the usual activists who were vacal and turned up to meetings and basically forgetting about everybody else. They did seem to have forgotten also about second preferences as it was 59 to 57 after the first round and it became 73 to 57 in the final count.
Around 50 members turned up at the hustings while the total votes cast were at least 130.
http://www.theage.com.au/business/australians-whingers-and-worriers-20130404-2h8gg.html
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2013/04/racist-english-defence-league-announce-support-for-ukip/
No one expects them to have a fully-detailed plan more than two years ahead of the expected date for the election.
All we want to have an answer to is the simplest of all possible questions: "You say Osborne has got it all wrong. Would you spend more, or less than he proposes?"
That's all. Shouldn't be beyond the wit of a bevy of Oxford PPE graduates to answer, should it?
There are oodles of plot twists and some superb actors involved - off the top of my head = the meanie in Breaking Bad, Robert Carlyle doing every role you can imagine from cheeky chappy in Full Monty to sadist, coward and master manipulator, and loads of others who pop up in a long list of other series from True Blood onwards.
Well worth your time if you like this sort of plotting.
http://www.croydonguardian.co.uk/news/10333327.Monster_Raving_Loony_becomes_a_Conservative/
http://www.libdemvoice.org/secret-lib-demukip-pact-revealed-33916.html
http://carons-musings.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/sarah-teather-blasts-osbornes.html
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2011/05/the-time-spent-in-prison-by-people-sentenced-to-a-life-term-has-increased-over-the-last-30-years.html
Presently mandatory lifers serve an average of 14 years and for other lifers the average has been in decline and now stands at nine years. (Data from 2006...)
Tim believes that it will simultaneously make the working poor better off and cut the welfare bill.
That can only happen if there is a different form of financial transfer to the working poor through wages instead of via government welfare.
Which means the goods and services which the working poor produce will have to be still purchased by everyone else but at a higher price.
Which means that everyone else will be slightly worse off.
And provided that people are willing to pay more for British produced goods and services than can be supplied by foreign competition.
If they're not then it means more of the working poor end up unemployed.
Now there are some individuals such as myself who do try to buy British produced goods and services and can afford to do so even if they cost more.
But judging by the trade deficit I think I'm in a minority.
It won't be as easy for Ed Miliband as it was for Tony Blair. Back then the Labour party was totally united and wanted power, plus the Tories were ragged and war-weary and resigned to opposition.
But nobody should underestimate how prepared Blair and his team were for office. In the two year run-up to the 1997 election Blair barely put a foot wrong. He is a first class politician and had cute answers to all the issues. He nullified the (growing and improving) economy as an issue by pledging to match Tory spending plans and then developed well-thought-out responses on crime, education and all the other big topics. It was built on concise soundbites, but underneath that Blair cleverly convinced the public that he had the answers.
Clever opposition responses are, of course, different to well-thought-out policies. And even Blair himself regrets that Labour didn't achieve more during their first term. But in terms of media-handling, rebuttal, quick and disciplined on-message responses, Blair's top team were kings of the game.
Contrast that with how Ed Miliband and his team have handled the current welfare issue (admittedly a difficult issue for them) and you can begin to see how the pre 2015 election campaigning is going to be a very tough time for Team Miliband. Miliband will need concise answers, good rebuttal, well-thought-through arguments. He'll need to convince the public.
Blair was luckier in that the 1997 Tories were effectively a busted flush. But this Tory team won't be. Far from it; they'll be free from the 'shackles' of the coalition and will be refreshed (as will the Lib Dems). They'll have a message to the public. It won't be a particularly positive or mosaic one, but it will be 'stick with us, and we'll get through this' rally cry. They'll also be inured to the flak by then, whilst Miliband and his team will be new to it, whilst being forensically questioned on how they plan to create a brighter future (which won't be easy at all).
All the while, as Miliband and his team are contemplating how best to formulate policy on tricky issues like cuts, immigration and welfare, they have the likes of Owen Jones representing the arguments of the left. For Miliband, this will only make matters worse, for he knows that the Jones school of argument, however populist and comfy it may sound to the left, is economically impossible.
Under Blair the likes of Owen Jones would've been captured, hooded and stored in a dark place along with the likes of Ken Livingstone. Alistair Campbell would've made sure of that. Nothing would've got in the way of the disciplined message.
As the election nears Miliband will need convincing answers to a lot of tricky questions. To my mind the Tories have had a very poor eighteen months during an extremely (possibly unprecendently) difficult time. But their one hope will be the unveiling of Miliband's masterplan for the nation, and of how it gets torn to shreds by the rabid hound of media spotlight.
Remember 'good and bad businesses' anyone?
One solution to the wages problem you identify is to provide government help to meeting private sector wages (perhaps for small and medium size businesses) towards the living wage.
Take away that forced transfer and bring in a living wage and you end the compulsion on the middle classes.
They can't avoid paying taxes but they can avoid buying the goods and services produced by the working poor.
They can't chose to pay third world tax rates instead of UK tax rates but they can chose to buy third world produced goods and services instead of UK produced goods and services.
As for the Philpott sentences, as a) I am not a lawyer b) I have not read the sentencing guidelines for manslaughter c) I have not been through all the evidence in the case, I am quite happy to leave it up to the judge to decide what's appropriate.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/parents-murder-monster-son-jailed-for-life-69648
Why don't we just stop taxing businesses at something like 30% to 50% of their rent bill in business rates, and 14% of most of their wage bill in National Insurance, and taxing their employees a further 12% National Insurance over £149 a week, so we can give some of the money back to low-paid employees we've just taxed (and to Mick Philpott)?
Just a thought.
•Hillary Clinton (D) 46% {46%} [44%]
•Chris Christie (R) 42% {41%} [42%]
•Hillary Clinton (D) 49%
•Rand Paul (R) 43%
•Hillary Clinton (D) 50% {50%} [53%]
•Paul Ryan (R) 43% {44%} [39%]
•Hillary Clinton (D) 49% {49%} [51%]
•Marco Rubio (R) 42% {41%} [37%]
•Chris Christie (R) 49% {44%}
•Joe Biden (D) 40% {44%}
•Joe Biden (D) 47%
•Rand Paul (R) 43%
•Joe Biden (D) 48% {49%}
•Paul Ryan (R) 45% {45%}
•Joe Biden (D) 46% {48%}
•Marco Rubio (R) 44% {43%}
Given the choices of Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Andrew Cuomo, Kirsten Gillibrand, Martin O’Malley, Deval Patrick, Brian Schweitzer, Mark Warner, and Elizabeth Warren, who would you most like to see as the Democratic candidate for President in 2016?
•Hillary Clinton 64% (58%) {57%} [61%] (57%)
•Joe Biden 18% (19%) {16%} [12%] (14%)
•Elizabeth Warren 5% (8%) {4%} [4%] (6%)
•Andrew Cuomo 3% (3%) {4%} [5%] (5%)
•Mark Warner 2% (1%) {2%} [1%] (2%)
•Kirsten Gillibrand 1% (1%) {1%}
•Martin O’Malley 1% (1%) {3%} [2%] (1%)
•Deval Patrick 1% (0%) {2%} [1%]
•Brian Schweitzer 1% (0%) {1%} [1%] (1%)
•Someone else/Undecided 6% (9%) {10%} [12%] (12%)
Given the choices of Joe Biden, Andrew Cuomo, Kirsten Gillibrand, Martin O’Malley, Deval Patrick, Brian Schweitzer, Mark Warner, and Elizabeth Warren, who would you most like to see as the Democratic candidate for President in 2016?
•Joe Biden 49% (57%) (32%)
•Elizabeth Warren 11% (13%) (8%)
•Andrew Cuomo 10% (5%) (18% )
•Kirsten Gillibrand 7% (4%)
•Mark Warner 3% (3%) (2%)
•Deval Patrick 2% (2%)
•Brian Schweitzer 2% (0%) (1%)
•Martin O’Malley 1% (1%) (2%)
•Someone else/Undecided 15% (14%) (32%)
If neither Hillary Clinton nor Joe Biden ran for President in 2016, who would you most like to see as the Democratic nominee?
•Andrew Cuomo 22% (25%) {19%} [21%] (27%)
•Elizabeth Warren 18% (21%) {16%} [16%] (9%)
•Martin O’Malley 8% (5%) {7%} [5%] (4%)
•Kirsten Gillibrand 5% (3%) {5%}
•Mark Warner 5% (4%) {4%} [3%] (4%)
•Deval Patrick 4% (3%) {6%} [8%]
•Brian Schweitzer 1% (2%) {2%} [2%] (2%)
•Someone else/Undecided 36% (36%) {40%} [45%] (46%)
If the Tories overplay their hand on welfare, they reinforce the nasty party image. Increasing brand toxicity will more than wipe out any advantage they gain.
I would say the Tories have way overplayed their hand. Osborne wading into the sewer today just the latest.
Remember, the Tories need to win over Gordon Brown supporters or left leaning ex Lib Dems to prevent a Labour majority. The more they appeal to Mail reading PBTories, the further their electoral prospects recede.
You shouldn't and for that matter I don't.
But I don't mind spending a little more * for British made of an equal quality or when a purchase is purely discretionary its origin often tips the balance in my decision on whether to buy it or not **.
* The extra I would pay for British made could be termed as being for the psychic satisfaction that gives me.
** "Do I need it? No. Do I want it? Maybe. Where's it from? China - put it back, Britain - go on then I'll have it"
It wasn't inflammatory like the Mail. It was just good, old fashioned commonsense.
And Teather is busting for a transfer to Labour anyway.
The increase in Osborne's appearances is interesting.
Almost as if its a 'double or quits' atempt to improve his image and restore his political credibility.
Personally I'd say quits.
Patrick McLoughlin might have been a better choice for the Conservatives on this issue - working class background and a Derbyshire MP.
David Miliband has barely left country before Eds M&B put another nail in Blairite coffin. They remain addicted to unreformed welfare spend
Prison inmates are to be deprived of legal aid to fund complaints against the penal system, the Government has announced.
The Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling, said that he was “appalled” at the amount of public money was being used for “unnecessary legal cases” that could be resolved through internal channels.
The proposals, which were announced late last night, would save £4 million by reducing the number of cases brought by prisoners, he said.
http://www.lccsa.org.uk/news.asp?ItemID=47839
All it does it legitmise the potential UKIP voters view of the world. When nothing changes the potential UKIP voter thinks the Tories cannot sort it out so they might as well vote UKIP.
In the mean time the Tories have drifted so far right chasing the same voter the sent that way that they cannot win the center ground.
I always thought Sarah Teather would be the next leader of the Lib Dems until she soiled herself by being a cheer leader for Gove. With that powerful denunciation of Osborne she has gone some way to rehabilitating herself. Only a Lib Dem could say what she's just said and have had that sort of impact. Being female makes it even more powerful.
Every single one of them will agree with Osborne that the welfare system needs reform. They know, or at least strongly suspect, that Labour are not on their side. The challenge is to convince them that the Tories are.
Labour have made that challenge a tad easier today,
I agree he didn't mean to kill his own children, and he is probably utterly devastated at what he has done.
But the question still remains: should hard-working Britons see their taxes paid to a man who has (what was it, 17?) kids by a couple of women, then have the welfare paid to him and controlled by him, whilst he gets to sh*g another woman, in his kids' house, who isn't the kids' mother, and then, when he's feeling especially horny, get his friend round his kids' house as well, to help him sh*g his wife?
That's the basic question, and the one Osborne was alluding too.
Personally, I'm all up for the guy doing loads of shag*ing and threesomes and having loads of kids and having two women on the go at once and never doing a days work, but please try to do it off your own back, not off the backs of hard working others.
See, lefties like Owen Jones get all antsy, saying things like 'why should we deny the kids the welfare money?' (we shouldn't) but won't address the fact that the kids don't get the money, the controlling Phillpotts's of this world do instead.
Meanwqhile, Japan climbs the magic money tree:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/04/japan-quantitative-easing-70bn
The Conservatives and the LibDems went into a coalition government on a fixed term of 5 years passed into law at Westminster with a 60 odd percentage vote to dissolve.
Previously, an opposition had to be prepared to become the government at any time and have a rolling manifesto ready in case a General Election was called.
By having a fixed term, it has allowed the HM Opposition to do it's job and hold the HM Government of the Conservative / LibDem Coalition government to account - which due to the seemingly incompetent Coalition leadership it is able to put the ball into a series of open goals.
Nowadays it's therefore only worth while printing a manifesto if the government of the day is coming to the end of it's fixed term or if the government is probably going to collapse under the weight of it's incompetence.
Ok, I can now see that the Labour Party must now print it's manifesto quite quickly.
PS: Who came up with the Fixed Term anyhow?
I have strong personal interest. My severely disabled elder brother is a Tatton resident and the problems off transportation are massive. To have Osbo doing this is despicable and if you think it is acceptable then you are despicable too
That photo doesn't show Osborne parking in a disabled bay. It shows someone getting into a car in a disabled bay (it doesn't particularly look like Osborne, but maybe it is). There's a driver sitting at the wheel - you can see the collar, albeit not much else.