Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Amazing story coming out of the US about how a single trade

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited September 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Amazing story coming out of the US about how a single trader sought to manipulate the Intrade Romney price at WH2012

The big political betting this afternoon is not EdM’s speech but a report from the US about how a single trader sought to manipulate the Romney price on Intrade in the run-up to last November’s White House election.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    good point on BBC comments

    "Re Miliband speech/ freezing energy costs. If domestic energy costs frozen then cost to industry/businesses will go up which results in increased product/service costs, bus/rail fares etc for consumers... one way or another the public will pay. "

    businesses (and especially small businesses) will end up bearing the brunt of the cost of any domestic price cap which in turn will lead to an increase in the costs of goods and services and the public will still end up paying. You dont get owt for nowt (except in Ed Milliblands fantasy land where money grows on trees)
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited September 2013
    ON TOPIC

    So that's what happened to StuartTruth. Seth O Logue will be gutted. ;^ )
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    FPT:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Question is will Cammie start to roll out the promises and pledges too?
    Populist energy price promises may or may not be believed but seemingly never ending austerity is hardly going to enthuse the voters either.

    One recalls that Cameron started this with his pledge that energy companies would be forced to put everyone on the cheapest tariff.

    Good point and possibly a harbinger of things to come at the tory conference since it's inconceivable Cammie won't be trying to dream up some populist policies of his own.

    The energy price pledge is going to be all about trust so we'll find out relatively soonish whether it might turn from a promise to an aspiration if it doesn't stand up to scrutiny or little Ed isn't completely committed to it.


    The opprobrium of the right wing papers is pretty much a given but if little Ed's own voters don't really believe him on this then he'd be in deep, deep trouble. We shall see.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Wondering if fuel prices will start to rise before 2015 and what the political impact of that might be.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    FPT

    @RedRag and other leftists

    I fully expected and still expect GO to produce some kind of bribe for the electorate prior to GE and was reasonably confident that it would work, given an improving economy. It might also have been half affordable.

    But EdM has, to use a phrase I detest, jumped the shark here with his energy price controls. He has, pretty much like he did with Syria, sacrificed his principals (in this case for the UK to have adequate electricity at a reasonable price) for personal political gain.

    And the danger is that people can't be bothered to work out the catastrophic consequences.

    EdM is literally playing with fire; he is despicable.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Miliband fils seems to agree, and is bold enough to try and sell Britain in 2015 the kind of politics that Neil Kinnock failed to sell in the 1980s.
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/red-ed-is-bringing-back-socialism/
    Tonally and in policy terms this was quite simply the most Left-wing speech made by a mainstream party leader in several decades. The key line didn't seem to register in the hall, but I suspect it is going to become a massive story. Those who own land and refuse to build on it, and ignore government orders, will see it stolen for housebuilding. Use it or lose it, he declared. That can only mean the government, or councils, swooping on land they want.

    It sounds like a small thing, but it is not. It is philosophically very revealing. Property rights, the idea that outside a time of war or national emergency government cannot simply appropriate what it wants from private individuals who own property or land, are essential in a truly free society. Upend that assumption and in the end the government can do what it likes. It starts with intentions that can be made to sound noble (homes for our children! think of the children!) but, to be blunt, government theft ends in tyranny.
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100237693/red-ed-is-back-with-a-land-grab/
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961
    kjohnw said:

    good point on BBC comments

    "Re Miliband speech/ freezing energy costs. If domestic energy costs frozen then cost to industry/businesses will go up which results in increased product/service costs, bus/rail fares etc for consumers... one way or another the public will pay. "

    businesses (and especially small businesses) will end up bearing the brunt of the cost of any domestic price cap which in turn will lead to an increase in the costs of goods and services and the public will still end up paying. You dont get owt for nowt (except in Ed Milliblands fantasy land where money grows on trees)

    Labour shook the money tree so vigorously that they ripped it up by the roots.

    Undeterred, they now seem determined to show how the land can be lit by fairy light....
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Jonathan said:

    Wondering if fuel prices will start to rise before 2015 and what the political impact of that might be.

    Or energy companies help coalition out before the 2015 GE ;-)

  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited September 2013
    Breaking news - tim 12 away 10,000 ;-)

    11 now ;-)
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    "The study says it’s possible this trader was simply hedging bets on Intrade to account for bets made in other exchanges such as Betfair, or thought Romney was underpriced, but the authors lean towards the explanation of manipulation.
    The “firewall” was created around 3:30 p.m. ET on Election Day and collapsed around 9 p.m. ET when polls closed."

    If you were going to try and rig the market to persuade voters that the race was closer than in reality you'd be doing it before 3.30 on election day.
    Looks more like massive hedging and there was such a big price difference for a long time related to the stupidity of US Republican Punters who can't legally use Betfair but could use Intrade that made hedging very easy.

    It was tried on the Morley and Outwood market in the last GE election here on a very small scale.
    But it was so obviously done that the person putting the tenners on used to tweet "Calvert now favourite to beat Balls" about 30 minutes later.

    There was much speculation on PB at the time that Intrade was subject to market manipulation.

    It would be interesting to dig out the threads and comments.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Wondering if fuel prices will start to rise before 2015 and what the political impact of that might be.

    Or energy companies help coalition out before the 2015 GE ;-)

    If prices rise, it will hurt the Coalition.
  • Mick_Pork said:

    FPT:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Question is will Cammie start to roll out the promises and pledges too?
    Populist energy price promises may or may not be believed but seemingly never ending austerity is hardly going to enthuse the voters either.

    One recalls that Cameron started this with his pledge that energy companies would be forced to put everyone on the cheapest tariff.
    Good point and possibly a harbinger of things to come at the tory conference since it's inconceivable Cammie won't be trying to dream up some populist policies of his own.

    The energy price pledge is going to be all about trust so we'll find out relatively soonish whether it might turn from a promise to an aspiration if it doesn't stand up to scrutiny or little Ed isn't completely committed to it.


    The opprobrium of the right wing papers is pretty much a given but if little Ed's own voters don't really believe him on this then he'd be in deep, deep trouble. We shall see.
    The other thing it reminds me of is the Fair Fuel Stabiliser that George Osborne announced.

    If it ever happens I am sure the detail will be very different to the headlines.
  • I see the Radicalised Right are already running scared re. energy prices :)
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    If someone spent $4m to create a difference between two different betting firms, does that mean he thought it would somehow make a difference to how people voted? i.e. did he think it might change the result of the election? OR was he doing it in order to make a profit by doing bets on both thingies and making a profit from the difference? i.e. was it a political spin or a gambling gamble?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,697
    edited September 2013
    Red Ed's Speech:

    1. All those rich millionaires living on acres of land who have been voting UKIP to punish the Tories had better get the hell back to the Tories before Red steals their land!!!!

    2. Price controls on energy WILL be massively (and I mean massively) popular in the opinion polls and Labour can expect a substantial bounce by the weekend opinion polls.

    Whether it's legal or not is another matter, never-mind the chaos it would cause if it was actually implemented - Actually it's almost worth seeing Labour win the election in 2015 so that they have to implement this policy and deal with the fall out, LOL!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    I think Mr Heath liked it..

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10331267/Ed-Miliband-has-shown-he-knows-nothing-about-business-or-the-economy.html

    "Price controls, planning and the centralised allocation of resources went out of favour when the Berlin Wall was torn down. Labour’s approach will win votes but rob the energy industry of any kind of certainty: why invest to reconstruct the UK’s crumbling infrastructure if you have no idea whether you will be able to make a profit?

    If prices can’t vary, the only means of allocating a scarce resource is by rationing. And once you start with electricity price controls, what next? Transport, perhaps, then rents? Labour is starting to sound more like Francois Hollande’s discredited and catastrophically unsuccessful hard-left gang, rather than the modern, progressive centre-left party for which there clearly is a large market among UK voters."
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Wondering if fuel prices will start to rise before 2015 and what the political impact of that might be.

    Or energy companies help coalition out before the 2015 GE ;-)

    If prices rise, it will hurt the Coalition.
    and do the energy companies need a labour government that will freeze the energy bills,so why put up the bills massively before the 2015 GE,that would kill the tories,why not help the tories out before the 2015 GE.

  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Price freezes should play pretty well, but I don't think Ed's avoided the problem of it all sounding a but like taking us back tot he seventies.
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176
    Wonder if "Blackout Ed" will gain some traction as a nickname?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited September 2013
    The other possibility is that the energy companies might dream up some 'price-cutting' wheeze of their own to try and forestall this.

    If that happened then you might see Cammie, Clegg and little Ed fighting to claim the credit.

    Little Ed could say his 'policy' had forced the energy companies into this and that his measures were no longer needed. While Cammie would presumably say this was all about the energy companies doing what was right under his watch to stop little Ed's 'unfair' and 'disasterous' measures. Clegg would likely say something between the two maybe and someone might even care I suppose.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    No-one can accuse Ed Miliband of just complaining about the need for Britain to do better than this. His prescription to improve it is socialism, and he wants voters to trust him to give Britain that medicine to make it better.
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/labour-conference-2013-dr-miliband-finally-trusts-his-instincts-and-prescribes-socialism-to-make-britain-better/
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176
    Also, if Miliband's big thing is freezing the cost of living for ordinary folk, and an energy price freeze for 20 months is part of that, then why not introduce a petrol price freeze in 2015?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @chrisdeerin: Milton Friedman: "We economists don't know much, but we do know how to create a shortage. If you want to create a shortage of tomatoes...

    @chrisdeerin: 'just pass a law that retailers can't sell tomatoes for more than 2 cents per pound. Instantly you'll have a tomato shortage...'

    @chrisdeerin: ...It's the same with oil or gas." ht @JeremyWarnerUK
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Wonder if "Blackout Ed" will gain some traction as a nickname?

    Isn't that one of McBride's ideas for GO ?
  • Also, if Miliband's big thing is freezing the cost of living for ordinary folk, and an energy price freeze for 20 months is part of that, then why not introduce a petrol price freeze in 2015?

    Because for some reason , carbon polluting cars are bad but carbon polluting home energy use is good innit!
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    Did Ed say anything about how labour would cut the defecit?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @tnewtondunn: Cameron/Osborne team say they are pumped up by Ed's speech + energy freeze. No11 source: "We're going to have some fun with this next week".
  • That's very interesting, Mike , and rather confirms what many of us thought at the time.

    Of course as Tim indicates below, it may not have due solely or even mainly to rigging, but rather to the differing perceptions of the likely outcome as between US and European punters. There is a definite tendency for the Europeans punters to lean Democrat, and the US towards the GOP.

    Shame Intrade has gone. It used to be a source of easy arbs, although actually getting your money out of the firm wasn't terribly easy. So maybe good riddance, after all.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited September 2013

    Mick_Pork said:

    FPT:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Question is will Cammie start to roll out the promises and pledges too?
    Populist energy price promises may or may not be believed but seemingly never ending austerity is hardly going to enthuse the voters either.

    One recalls that Cameron started this with his pledge that energy companies would be forced to put everyone on the cheapest tariff.
    Good point and possibly a harbinger of things to come at the tory conference since it's inconceivable Cammie won't be trying to dream up some populist policies of his own.

    The energy price pledge is going to be all about trust so we'll find out relatively soonish whether it might turn from a promise to an aspiration if it doesn't stand up to scrutiny or little Ed isn't completely committed to it.


    The opprobrium of the right wing papers is pretty much a given but if little Ed's own voters don't really believe him on this then he'd be in deep, deep trouble. We shall see.
    The other thing it reminds me of is the Fair Fuel Stabiliser that George Osborne announced.

    If it ever happens I am sure the detail will be very different to the headlines.
    Osborne is almost certain to reduce, or at least avoid increasing, energy taxes.

    This will not be in response to Ed Miliband's threat to revert Britain to the socialist price controls of the 1970s.

    It will be due to the link between energy/fuel prices, inflation, costs of living and interest rates. Carney will need help keeping base rates at 0.5% until 2017. The best way George can help is to relieve the upward pressure on inflation which derives from regulated and administrative prices.

    The problem however is that global energy prices are beyond the control of the UK government. No Chancellor can buck the market. It can only be tweaked. And any intervention carries strong downside risks of external shocks.

  • RedRag1RedRag1 Posts: 527
    edited September 2013

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Wondering if fuel prices will start to rise before 2015 and what the political impact of that might be.

    Or energy companies help coalition out before the 2015 GE ;-)

    If prices rise, it will hurt the Coalition.
    and do the energy companies need a labour government that will freeze the energy bills,so why put up the bills massively before the 2015 GE,that would kill the tories,why not help the tories out before the 2015 GE.


    However, if the energy companies do freeze the bills and/or puts them down and Labour get in, the consumers will have the benefit of it for 20 more months and it will be the energy companies own fault for trying to change peoples votes by artificially keeping it low. A political masterstroke......you only have to see the PB Hodges response, to see even they can see it(but would never admit it).
  • kjohnw said:

    Did Ed say anything about how labour would cut the defecit?

    No defecits in socialist paradise comrade..
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Ed could solve his looming energy crisis if he could just capture the spasms from my creepy stalker every time I post...
  • I know the likes of Tim and RedRag1 are bigging up this speech - but at the heart of it is some really dangerously short-term thinking designed to shore up Miliband's position with the left. It is not a set of policies that will improve the UK economy. It is not a set of policies that will tackle the imbalances in our society. It is a set of ideas cobbled together to try to get some cheap headlines.

    Immigration/Apprenticeships - unravelled
    Energy Price Freeze - unravelling
    HS2 - complete confusion - one SC member stressing support, others undermining it
    Planning/Land Law - dangerous idea for state-control of land use

    This isn't a platform for good government. This is a platform to see Miliband through the next few months. Nothing more, nothing less.

    There may be a poll bounce from the energy announcement - but it will be short-lived.

    His position might be secure - but the speech today makes his defeat in 2015 more likely.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453


    No defecits in socialist paradise comrade..

    All property is theft, or will be if you don't build not it...
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    tim said:

    Scott_P said:

    @chrisdeerin: Milton Friedman: "We economists don't know much, but we do know how to create a shortage. If you want to create a shortage of tomatoes...

    @chrisdeerin: 'just pass a law that retailers can't sell tomatoes for more than 2 cents per pound. Instantly you'll have a tomato shortage...'

    @chrisdeerin: ...It's the same with oil or gas." ht @JeremyWarnerUK

    Is that a reference to Cameron's "I'm going to put everyone on the lowest tariff" pledge?
    The count down begins 10 , 9 ;-)
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    kjohnw said:

    Did Ed say anything about how labour would cut the defecit?

    not sure Labour have much interest in that.

    spend baby spend.
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Wondering if fuel prices will start to rise before 2015 and what the political impact of that might be.

    Or energy companies help coalition out before the 2015 GE ;-)

    If prices rise, it will hurt the Coalition.
    and do the energy companies need a labour government that will freeze the energy bills,so why put up the bills massively before the 2015 GE,that would kill the tories,why not help the tories out before the 2015 GE.

    Highly likely, but the only thing they could do if Labour do get into power is cost cutting. Likely scenarios

    (1) Fire some staff
    (2) Provide power at base prices, and when they can afford to do it. So if we have a cold winter, and world prices rise, just don't supply any energy, as they'll be losing money on it.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    RedRag1 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Wondering if fuel prices will start to rise before 2015 and what the political impact of that might be.

    Or energy companies help coalition out before the 2015 GE ;-)

    If prices rise, it will hurt the Coalition.
    and do the energy companies need a labour government that will freeze the energy bills,so why put up the bills massively before the 2015 GE,that would kill the tories,why not help the tories out before the 2015 GE.


    However, if the energy companies do freeze the bills and/or puts them down and Labour get in, the consumers will have the benefit of it for 20 more months and it will be the energy companies own fault for trying to change peoples votes by artificially keeping it low. A political masterstroke......you only have to see the PB Hodges response, to see even they can see it(but would never admit it).
    If it is a masterstroke why does Ed not extend it to petrol, turnips and i-phones ?

    Price freezes all round.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    tim said:


    It was tried on the Morley and Outwood market in the last GE election here on a very small scale.

    And Chris Huhne in the Lib Dem leadership race.
  • The cost of living is a big issue. Miliblob is right that energy costs are too high. So the real question is 'why are energy costs too high and what can we do about it'?

    The price consumers pay is the cost of supply / purchase plus the energy companies own costs plus a profit margin. Plus a bunch of green subsidy crap.

    The underlying wholesale cost of gas is outside the government's control over anything other than very long timescales and is a function of supply chains and international competition. (Note that Miliblob himself as energy sec did precisely 3 parts of F all to develop the energy infrastructure of this country and bravely dithered during his entire time on seat). The cost structure of the energy companies is outside the government's control and anyway they try to minimise this to maximise profits.

    So the only two areas Ed could play in are around whether or not the energy suppliers are making superprofits and the green boondoggle. If there are superprofits / cartels / price gouging then he can make specific proposals to increase competition and enforce pricing transparency. Or Balls could impose / impute tax on these. Either way he is effectively saying 'I'm going to take money from the shareholders and the treasury and give it to the customers'. The customers will be happy. The treasury won't like the loss of tax - and I doubt Labour have really costed this! I'm less sympathetic to the shareholders if they are scamming - but please everyone do recognise that energy is a capital intensive business, and if you kill the NPV of projects by taxing them away then nobody will invest and blackouts follow.

    So...the right answer for energy, as with much else in our economy, is more red in tooth and claw competitive capitalism - supported by absolute transparency and good (rather than more) regualtion. And a willingness to invest and make investment profitable in energy infrastructure (shale anyone?). Labour's track record here is so lamentable as to be laughable.
  • Some further thoughts:

    1) Labour have given up on explaining what hard choices they might make. The public will conclude that they won't make any. This can only be bad news for Labour. Ed Miliband and Ed Balls had to say much more yesterday and today about what they would do to keep spending under control. Their failure to do so is simply lamentable.

    2) Turnout at the next general election will almost certainly be up. Both Labour and the Conservatives can look forward to a higher combined share of the vote, as we are heading for a polarised election.

    3) Ed Miliband better have a whole programme of speeches laid out for the autumn. Big shifts like this need constant reinforcement if he is not to be defined by his enemies' caricatures. To date, this has been one of his biggest areas of failure. In the past, he has shown the ability to learn. From his viewpoint, it is imperative that he has learned here.
  • Scott_P said:

    Miliband fils seems to agree, and is bold enough to try and sell Britain in 2015 the kind of politics that Neil Kinnock failed to sell in the 1980s.
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/red-ed-is-bringing-back-socialism/
    Tonally and in policy terms this was quite simply the most Left-wing speech made by a mainstream party leader in several decades. The key line didn't seem to register in the hall, but I suspect it is going to become a massive story. Those who own land and refuse to build on it, and ignore government orders, will see it stolen for housebuilding. Use it or lose it, he declared. That can only mean the government, or councils, swooping on land they want.

    It sounds like a small thing, but it is not. It is philosophically very revealing. Property rights, the idea that outside a time of war or national emergency government cannot simply appropriate what it wants from private individuals who own property or land, are essential in a truly free society. Upend that assumption and in the end the government can do what it likes. It starts with intentions that can be made to sound noble (homes for our children! think of the children!) but, to be blunt, government theft ends in tyranny.
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100237693/red-ed-is-back-with-a-land-grab/

    Labour has a long history of association with corrupt property developers. Under a Miliband government honest folk would have their property seized by regime functionaries and sold on at rock bottom prices to party favourites.

  • JamesMJamesM Posts: 221
    My perspective on Miliband's speech for it is worth, and in Tim's language I am another 'pb tory'.

    In summary I think it will have done well to cement support from tribal labour voters, the left of the Lib Dems who have peeled away from the coalition junior partners and others who are sympathetic to this specific traditional left wing policy agenda. In that sense it is job done, as this is the coalition of voters that if they turn out on General Election day can help Labour immensely. On the flip side however, as others have implied, it opens the door to the Conservatives considerably as they have a clearly left wing agenda here to tackle, which could facilitate a squeeze on UKIP. Are UKIP waverers really going to risk Miliband and his price controls in the ballot box?

    In term of delivery I thought it was decent. It had a weak start but got stronger. For me there were too many jokes and it seemed a little forced at times. In large part I think this can be down to the standing, no notes delivery format. Cameron has a lot to answer for here, I don't get this approach, much preferring the podium and teleprompters. I feel they allow for a more coherent message to emerge and to enhance the flow, timing and thus power of delivery.

    Content wise it will get some decent headlines and gives Labour some good sells on the doorstep - energy price freeze, more houses, no bedroom tax, minimum wage rise. Yes many of the policies are populist, but that is politics. To criticise a politician for this, is to misunderstand politics itself. The intricacies and flaws of the policies will need to be mercilessly repeated by the government to counter the snappy headline potential Labour have here.

    Indeed overall I think Miliband does understand some of the concerns we have as a country well, particularly over standard of living. His problem, and it is rather a major one, is that his response is to look backwards to policies that were not altogether successful when previously tried and to place the state even more firm and centre in the population's lives. Collectively this is an approach I think would be negative for the country.

    The Conservatives however need a standard of living response, they need to keep plugging away at the 'return to socialism' message, but they should also prepare themselves for many of these policy suggestions to be, in the short term at least, popular with the voters in the polls.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Angela Knight coming up in a few minutes on Sky News.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,265
    On topic - I'm all in favour of people making bets for irrational reasons - all the better for the rest of us.

    Back on the speech - response generally good outside the Tory laager, and even within parts of it - Hodges and his Murdochian friend were fairly positive. It's worth noting that the tradeoff for the energy companies is that they get a carbon commitment through to 2030 which they don't currently have, so stomping off in a fury is fairly unlikely. The suggestion that a 20-month price freeze will cause blackouts is hysteria, and politically carries the dangerous subtext that actually energy price rises are a jolly good thing.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Er, the green belt, planning controls and road building are examples of state control of land use.

    I know the likes of Tim and RedRag1 are bigging up this speech - but at the heart of it is some really dangerously short-term thinking designed to shore up Miliband's position with the left. It is not a set of policies that will improve the UK economy. It is not a set of policies that will tackle the imbalances in our society. It is a set of ideas cobbled together to try to get some cheap headlines.

    Immigration/Apprenticeships - unravelled
    Energy Price Freeze - unravelling
    HS2 - complete confusion - one SC member stressing support, others undermining it
    Planning/Land Law - dangerous idea for state-control of land use

    This isn't a platform for good government. This is a platform to see Miliband through the next few months. Nothing more, nothing less.

    There may be a poll bounce from the energy announcement - but it will be short-lived.

    His position might be secure - but the speech today makes his defeat in 2015 more likely.

  • Tim in the nervous nine thousand nine hundred and nineties. Will it be a Toby Young sneer , a housing stat, a dig at how bad PB tories are at betting or a glorious hit over mid on with the publication of Tim - The manifesto for Britain
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    AveryLP said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    FPT:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Question is will Cammie start to roll out the promises and pledges too?
    Populist energy price promises may or may not be believed but seemingly never ending austerity is hardly going to enthuse the voters either.

    One recalls that Cameron started this with his pledge that energy companies would be forced to put everyone on the cheapest tariff.
    Good point and possibly a harbinger of things to come at the tory conference since it's inconceivable Cammie won't be trying to dream up some populist policies of his own.

    The energy price pledge is going to be all about trust so we'll find out relatively soonish whether it might turn from a promise to an aspiration if it doesn't stand up to scrutiny or little Ed isn't completely committed to it.


    The opprobrium of the right wing papers is pretty much a given but if little Ed's own voters don't really believe him on this then he'd be in deep, deep trouble. We shall see.
    The other thing it reminds me of is the Fair Fuel Stabiliser that George Osborne announced.

    If it ever happens I am sure the detail will be very different to the headlines.
    No Chancellor can buck the market.

    Did a very wise and competent lady not once say something very like that?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    If George Osborne can cap Rail fares, Ed Milliband can cap domestic fuel prices.

  • Er, the green belt, planning controls and road building are examples of state control of land use.

    These are not close to taking away land from owners who choose not to build on it at a time that suits the agenda of someone in Whitehall.

    It will end up with vast numbers of court cases with the Government being defeated time after time.

    It is a bad idea
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    O/T just had an email saying school is shut next week as the teacher are on strike.

    Are they lazy or just want to watch Cameron's speech ?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited September 2013
    RedRag1 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Wondering if fuel prices will start to rise before 2015 and what the political impact of that might be.

    Or energy companies help coalition out before the 2015 GE ;-)

    If prices rise, it will hurt the Coalition.
    and do the energy companies need a labour government that will freeze the energy bills,so why put up the bills massively before the 2015 GE,that would kill the tories,why not help the tories out before the 2015 GE.


    However, if the energy companies do freeze the bills and/or puts them down and Labour get in, the consumers will have the benefit of it for 20 more months and it will be the energy companies own fault for trying to change peoples votes by artificially keeping it low. A political masterstroke......you only have to see the PB Hodges response, to see even they can see it(but would never admit it).

    If they're going to respond proactively then the energy companies will likely respond with a plan of their own for 2015 and after and they will do so very publicly to try and stop little Ed's own plan. It could involve their own 'cost cutting' measures and while they would be loathe to implement a full freeze they employ more than enough people to come up with some other offer that would likely muddy the waters.

    They are hardly going to just meekly accept this after all so little Ed better be 100% committed to this and he'll have to persuade everyone else that he is too.
  • JamesM said:

    ...

    The Conservatives however need a standard of living response, they need to keep plugging away at the 'return to socialism' message, but they should also prepare themselves for many of these policy suggestions to be, in the short term at least, popular with the voters in the polls.

    The response is that it's the same old Labour: spend, borrow and crash - an unaffordable programme full of black holes. "We're fixing Britain; don't let Labour ruin it again".
  • JamesMJamesM Posts: 221
    @Tim - there is a difference between supporting price controls and supporting a more diverse energy sector in terms of suppliers. As I say Miliband has diagnosed a problem well here, but the solution is poor.

    Flint on the Daily Politics was all over the place in her answers. Her response to concerns about preemptive or post freeze price rises was that they would set up a new regulator to deal with that. There were few details though. So we know there will be a price freeze with its potentially negative consequences, but to balance it up we just get a committee telling these same companies to keep investing in infrastructure.

    But you must distinguish between problem and solution, as must the Conservative party in their reply.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    James Chapman (Mail) ‏@jameschappers 1m

    Ed Davey: 'When they tried to fix prices in California it resulted in an electricity crisis and widespread blackouts'
  • TGOHF said:

    James Chapman (Mail) ‏@jameschappers 1m

    Ed Davey: 'When they tried to fix prices in California it resulted in an electricity crisis and widespread blackouts'

    We will be hearing a lot more about stories like this.

    A price freeze is superficially attractive and an easy sell. However it just won't work.

    Labour isn't working - again

  • The response to that is same old Tories making the same old responses

    JamesM said:

    ...

    The Conservatives however need a standard of living response, they need to keep plugging away at the 'return to socialism' message, but they should also prepare themselves for many of these policy suggestions to be, in the short term at least, popular with the voters in the polls.

    The response is that it's the same old Labour: spend, borrow and crash - an unaffordable programme full of black holes. "We're fixing Britain; don't let Labour ruin it again".
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    The response to that is same old Tories making the same old responses

    JamesM said:

    ...

    The Conservatives however need a standard of living response, they need to keep plugging away at the 'return to socialism' message, but they should also prepare themselves for many of these policy suggestions to be, in the short term at least, popular with the voters in the polls.

    The response is that it's the same old Labour: spend, borrow and crash - an unaffordable programme full of black holes. "We're fixing Britain; don't let Labour ruin it again".
    And Ed Davey - the LD.
  • The response to that is same old Tories making the same old responses

    If Labour didn't keep making the same old mistakes, the same old responses wouldn't have quite so much traction.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Er, the green belt, planning controls and road building are examples of state control of land use.

    I know the likes of Tim and RedRag1 are bigging up this speech - but at the heart of it is some really dangerously short-term thinking designed to shore up Miliband's position with the left. It is not a set of policies that will improve the UK economy. It is not a set of policies that will tackle the imbalances in our society. It is a set of ideas cobbled together to try to get some cheap headlines.

    Immigration/Apprenticeships - unravelled
    Energy Price Freeze - unravelling
    HS2 - complete confusion - one SC member stressing support, others undermining it
    Planning/Land Law - dangerous idea for state-control of land use

    This isn't a platform for good government. This is a platform to see Miliband through the next few months. Nothing more, nothing less.

    There may be a poll bounce from the energy announcement - but it will be short-lived.

    His position might be secure - but the speech today makes his defeat in 2015 more likely.

    Obviously the swivel-eyed loons are going to be foaming at the mouth from now on, but little Ed still needs to get himself or his team across the news studios to better explain what precisely he means or the right wing papers will do it for him from now until 2015.

    Time for some in the shadow cabinet to get off their arse and sell this.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Eddie Izzard says he will run for London Mayor ... in 2020!

    He doesnt think Labour will win in 2016 or he knows someone who only wants the job for one term?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,697
    edited September 2013
    I've noticed milk and bread getting expensive recently - Can Ed set the price on that please.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323

    The response to that is same old Tories making the same old responses

    JamesM said:

    ...

    The Conservatives however need a standard of living response, they need to keep plugging away at the 'return to socialism' message, but they should also prepare themselves for many of these policy suggestions to be, in the short term at least, popular with the voters in the polls.

    The response is that it's the same old Labour: spend, borrow and crash - an unaffordable programme full of black holes. "We're fixing Britain; don't let Labour ruin it again".
    Labour aren't diverse in their attack lines either. It's par for the course.
  • antifrank said:

    2) Turnout at the next general election will almost certainly be up. Both Labour and the Conservatives can look forward to a higher combined share of the vote, as we are heading for a polarised election.

    Some people said the same before the last election, and it did not come to pass. As tim has argued, sometimes polarising the politics can help smaller parties who are more credible on those particular policies.

    The detail on the latest YouGov on UKIP voters views on which party would be best on immigration, etc, is interesting on this sort of thing.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    JamesM said:

    ...

    The Conservatives however need a standard of living response, they need to keep plugging away at the 'return to socialism' message, but they should also prepare themselves for many of these policy suggestions to be, in the short term at least, popular with the voters in the polls.

    The response is that it's the same old Labour: spend, borrow and crash - an unaffordable programme full of black holes. "We're fixing Britain; don't let Labour ruin it again".
    As school children in Hexham could have told us, the election will be all about the "cost of living". EdM has made a stab at it with price controls and it will touch a nerve because everyone's energy bills have been going up for ages and it frightens a lot of people.

    But he loses in credibility. And hence the "same old Labour" meme that the Cons will level at him.

    As @JamesM has pointed out above and it's a point with which I agree, EdM is also playing shameless politics with the wellbeing of the UK and this might be too nuanced to be noticed generally.

    But if nothing else, it usefully draws the line between left and right; no more Blairite, centre-left blather. The Labour Party is now a party of the Left, perhaps far left, and it remains to be seen whether this is something the Great British Public embrace or reject.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    I must say that while I like the idea of frozen energy prices, and I think a focus on the cost of living is a good move, one area I think Ed M definitely went wrong was the whole speaking in front of a backdrop of people thing. No matter how great a speech, a lot of those people are going to get bored and distracted at some point, and look it during a crucial soundbite.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    GIN1138 said:

    I've noticed milk and bread getting expensive recently - Can Ed set the price on that please.


    Not pasties then? Because we have a master of pasty knowledge in Cammie.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Great headlines for ed and labour at the mail.

    Labour to freeze energy bills for TWO years: Ed Miliband unveils bold pledge to voters as he vows to break up power of the Big Six

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2430497/Labour-conference-2013-Ed-Miliband-speech-claims-Britain-better.html#comments

    but a warning to labour,this from a poster who knows what happens on energy freezes.


    Mike, Cartagena Spain, Spain, moments ago

    The government here in Spain tried freezing energy costs the supplier took them to court and won now we have a surcharge on each bill to repay the cost of the back dated increase


  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Don't Kenyan ministers realise that claiming the siege is over when it isn't means people won't believe what they say in future?
  • JamesMJamesM Posts: 221
    @David_Herdson - fair enough, but it needs more policy concrete itself. If it is price freeze versus don't trust Labour we will have to hope the rest of the voters see past the superficial charm of a price freeze.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    tim said:

    Floater said:

    kjohnw said:

    Did Ed say anything about how labour would cut the defecit?

    not sure Labour have much interest in that.

    spend baby spend.

    Osborne is spending more than Labour did, never forget that.
    (once you've understood it in the first place of course, big proviso)
    Spin baby spin.


    Truth is Labour will spend more than the tories, you know it and we all know it.

    Worse than that, Labour have such a crap record of getting value for money. It seems they think spending is the only important thing.

    Still, I understand an arch Blairite like yourself will be feeling the pain from the ever more leftward lurch of your party so I shouldn't be surprised you are a bit more touchy than usual.

    Truly Kinnock is getting his party back, I am sure you are very proud.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    antifrank said:

    2) Turnout at the next general election will almost certainly be up. Both Labour and the Conservatives can look forward to a higher combined share of the vote, as we are heading for a polarised election.

    Some people said the same before the last election, and it did not come to pass. As tim has argued, sometimes polarising the politics can help smaller parties who are more credible on those particular policies.

    The detail on the latest YouGov on UKIP voters views on which party would be best on immigration, etc, is interesting on this sort of thing.
    I agree turnout will probably be up, but I think the combined share for the main parties will either stay the same or go down.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @oflynnexpress: Betting market liked Mili speech, Ladbrokes have cut Lab price on being biggest party after next election to 4/9.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Grandiose said:

    The response to that is same old Tories making the same old responses

    JamesM said:

    ...

    The Conservatives however need a standard of living response, they need to keep plugging away at the 'return to socialism' message, but they should also prepare themselves for many of these policy suggestions to be, in the short term at least, popular with the voters in the polls.

    The response is that it's the same old Labour: spend, borrow and crash - an unaffordable programme full of black holes. "We're fixing Britain; don't let Labour ruin it again".
    Labour aren't diverse in their attack lines either. It's par for the course.
    The depressing thing is that since there are many smart people at high levels in political parties, the thought occurs that they would not keep trotting out the sameold attack lines if they did not work.

  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited September 2013
    Good lord, people really are taking this price freeze idea seriously. If winning elections is as simple as 'I'll pass a law to reduce prices/increase wages/build houses', then I really do despair.

    Remember, you have about a year before the markets start getting worried about the 2015 political risk. No great hurry, but a gradual rebalancing away from dependency on the UK economy would be prudent IMO for anyone with a money-purchase pension scheme or a stocks-and-shares ISA. And of course cut exposure to gilts
  • Miliband's land theft proposal is like something out of Robert Mugabwe's playbook..

    As the law currently stands, anyone can put in a planning proposal on any land; i.e. someone who doesn't like you can put in for a scheme to build houses in your garden: if you don't then build it the Goverment or Local Authority can take your house off you, if Miliband gets his way. They then ship it on to whoever they like - 'war veterans' / labour party flunkies, perhaps.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Mick_Pork said:

    GIN1138 said:

    I've noticed milk and bread getting expensive recently - Can Ed set the price on that please.


    Not pasties then? Because we have a master of pasty knowledge in Cammie.
    Cameron should promise to regulate the price of beer. Be at 60% in the polls in no time, especially if he reduced the drinking age in line with Ed's promise on voting age.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited September 2013

    The suggestion that a 20-month price freeze will cause blackouts is hysteria, and politically carries the dangerous subtext that actually energy price rises are a jolly good thing.

    Fossil fuel energy price rises are inevitable in a world where China is rapidly becoming wealthier and competing for primary resources. There are only two ways out of this. Either you increase supply - the shale gas answer - or you reduce demand (for fossil fuels) - through efficiency and alternative technologies for producing energy (such as wind/tidal turbines, etc).

    The only way to cap prices is by subsidising them from general taxation - so someone still has to pay the high price somehow. You can't do it by Act of Parliament and expect private companies with a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to lose money on every unit of gas/electricity that they sell.

    I suspect that Miliband knows this, and that in the detail will be a wodge of cash finding its way from the government to the utility companies, by as convoluted a route as possible. Blairites and Brownites alike never had any problem with bunging vast quantities of money to private companies to back up their soundbites. After all, that was the essence behind PFI.
  • So EdM's bid ideas are:

    1) To reduce Brown's house building target from 240,000 to 200,000
    2) To hasten power cuts by freezing Roman Abramovich's fuel bills
    3) To shut British factories by increasing their fuel bills

    And is he still plannng on giving Roman Abramovich his child benefit back?
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    It does look like Miliband is going to take the Tories to the cleaners.Tories better get prepared with a more substantial leader for 2020
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited September 2013
    SMukesh said:

    It does look like Miliband is going to take the Tories the Uk economy to the cleaners gutter.Tories better get prepared with a more substantial leader for to clean up the sh1t storm in 202017

    Fixed that for you.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    @Deafbloke

    Welcome back - want to talk through why the SNP and others didnt play ball over the electoral boundaries?
  • Deafbloke said:

    Miliband's land theft proposal is like something out of Robert Mugabwe's playbook..

    As the law currently stands, anyone can put in a planning proposal on any land; i.e. someone who doesn't like you can put in for a scheme to build houses in your garden: if you don't then build it the Goverment or Local Authority can take your house off you, if Miliband gets his way. They then ship it on to whoever they like - 'war veterans' / labour party flunkies, perhaps.

    Is it the case that anybody can put in planning? If so, that means the plan might have some rather critical flaws in both directions. Companies could put in planning for land they don't own, then at the end of the term grab it. If a clause is put in place whereby it's only if you put in planning for your own land, expect little companies with grand ideas and strangely large budgets to spring up.

    This may effect some people I know considerably, so it'll be interesting to see what the detail is.

    Another thought: is it just final consent, or outline, that will be affected?
  • SMukesh said:

    It does look like Miliband is going to take the Tories to the cleaners.Tories better get prepared with a more substantial leader for 2020

    That sort of self-delusion puts you in the George Galloway class of political thinking...

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "BBC under pressure to change guidelines preventing use of the word "terrorist"

    The BBC is under mounting pressure to change guidelines which prevent newsreaders using the word “terrorist”."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/kenya/10330872/BBC-under-pressure-to-change-guidelines-preventing-use-of-the-word-terrorist.html
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Good to see Greece grasping the bull by the horns 5 years too late.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/09/13/oukoe-uk-greece-computers-idUKBRE98C0LD20130913

    Civil servants who work with computers have to give up the 6 days extra holiday they got for doing so. No, really.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Good lord, people really are taking this price freeze idea seriously. If winning elections is as simple as 'I'll pass a law to reduce prices/increase wages/build houses', then I really do despair.

    Do you indeed. Is it "near perfect" despair by any chance?
    Millions to see energy bills fall after David Cameron promises tariff reform

    Millions of households will see a fall in their gas and electricity bills after David Cameron said he will force energy companies to give every customer the cheapest possible deal.


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-bills/9616124/Millions-to-see-energy-bills-fall-after-David-Cameron-promises-tariff-reform.html
    Damn you Tiny Blair Cameron, you communist Scragillian pinko!

    LOL

  • Remember, you have about a year before the markets start getting worried about the 2015 political risk. No great hurry, but a gradual rebalancing away from dependency on the UK economy would be prudent IMO for anyone with a money-purchase pension scheme or a stocks-and-shares ISA.

    For a while I've been telling my parents to sell their ISA utility shares and diversify overseas.

    Their response was "but utility shares are safe and always produce a good income", hopefully they'll start listening to me now.


  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    The one the PB Kinnocks have been waiting for. Dan Hodges says the speech is bad news for Ed...

    @DPJHodges: Just who does Ed Miliband think he is? > Telegraph > http://t.co/5e1NDOlaSq
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    So EdM's bid ideas are:

    1) To reduce Brown's house building target from 240,000 to 200,000
    2) To hasten power cuts by freezing Roman Abramovich's fuel bills
    3) To shut British factories by increasing their fuel bills

    And is he still plannng on giving Roman Abramovich his child benefit back?

    Richard,after ed's new policies today,can the con's get your vote in 2015 ;-)
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited September 2013
    tim said:

    Floater said:

    kjohnw said:

    Did Ed say anything about how labour would cut the defecit?

    not sure Labour have much interest in that.

    spend baby spend.

    Osborne is spending more than Labour did, never forget that.
    (once you've understood it in the first place of course, big proviso)
    Incorrect, tim. Osborne is spending less than Brown in current money. See this chart. Familiar?
    Public Sector Aggregates: Total Managed Expenditure             
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Year Nominal Change | Real Change | GDP Ratio Change
    £ bn % | £ bn % | % %
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling

    2005-06 526.4 ˄ 6.26% | 624.7 ˄ 4.34% | 40.6 ˄ 0.74%
    2006-07 553.0 ˄ 5.05% | 638.1 ˄ 2.15% | 40.4 ˅ (0.49%)
    2007-08 586.6 ˄ 6.08% | 660.2 ˄ 3.46% | 40.5 ˄ 0.25%
    2008-09 634.3 ˄ 8.13% | 694.4 ˄ 5.18% | 44.0 ˄ 8.64%
    2009-10 672.5 ˄ 6.02% | 716.4 ˄ 3.17% | 47.0 ˄ 6.82%
    | |
    2005-10 ˄ 27.75% | ˄ 14.68% | ˄ 15.76%
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    George Osborne

    2010-11 693.9 ˄ 3.18% | 720.5 ˄ 0.57% | 46.2 ˅ (1.70%)
    2011-12 694.6 ˄ 0.10% | 705.1 ˅ (2.14%) | 45.0 ˅ (2.60%)
    2012-13 675.3 ˅ (2.78%) | 675.3 ˅ (4.23%) | 43.1 ˅ (4.22%)
    2013-14 720.0 ˄ 6.62% | 703.9 ˄ 4.24% | 45.1 ˄ 4.64%
    2014-15 730.4 ˄ 1.44% | 700.7 ˅ (0.45%) | 44.1 ˅ (2.22%)

    2010-15 ˄ 5.26% | ˅ (2.75%) | ˅ (4.55%)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
  • 3) To shut British factories by increasing their fuel bills

    The detail I have seen on this policy is that it will apply to business fuel bills too.
  • So EdM's bid ideas are:

    1) To reduce Brown's house building target from 240,000 to 200,000
    2) To hasten power cuts by freezing Roman Abramovich's fuel bills
    3) To shut British factories by increasing their fuel bills

    And is he still plannng on giving Roman Abramovich his child benefit back?

    Richard,after ed's new policies today,can the con's get your vote in 2015 ;-)
    If I lived in Howden or Clacton or Aldrige or one or two other places in 2015 I would probably vote Conservative.

    As I'm unlikely to be then the answer is almost certainly no.
  • You'll find that the real meat of the "use it or lose it" proposal to bring long term derelict land back into use will lie in a new power to allow local authorities to tax the landowner who chooses to do nothing in those circumstances. In response, landowners will either decide to proceed with development or avoid further continuing taxes by selling the land at a loss to someone else willing to develop it. The practice of derelict sites changing hands time and time again between speculators, whilst nothing happens, will cease. Powers to exercise compulsory purchase won't really be needed because it won't get as far as that - the need to avoid the new taxes will do the job.

    And that's very welcome news for those of us living in neighbourhoods which for years have been blighted by such derelict sites. And of course it will stimulate the housing market at a net benefit to the taxpayer by stimulating the supply of land, compared with Osborne's policy of stoking up a housing demand bubble at taxpayers expense.

    It is a very good idea.

    Er, the green belt, planning controls and road building are examples of state control of land use.

    These are not close to taking away land from owners who choose not to build on it at a time that suits the agenda of someone in Whitehall.

    It will end up with vast numbers of court cases with the Government being defeated time after time.

    It is a bad idea
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @KJOHNW

    'Did Ed say anything about how labour would cut the defecit?'

    No,Just about Utopia from May 2015 & nobody has a clue how that's funded either.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Simon Jenkins finally loses the plot by partially blaming the design of shopping centres for creating the conditions for terrorist attacks:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/23/kenya-mall-attacks-david-cameron

    "The modern urban obsession with celebrity buildings and high-profile events offers too many publicity-rich targets. A World Trade Centre, a Mumbai hotel, a Boston marathon, a Nairobi shopping mall are all enticing to extremists. Defending them is near impossible. Better at least not to create them. A shopping mall not only wipes out shopping streets, it makes a perfect terrorist fortress, near impossible to assault."
  • TOPPING said:

    JamesM said:

    ...

    The Conservatives however need a standard of living response, they need to keep plugging away at the 'return to socialism' message, but they should also prepare themselves for many of these policy suggestions to be, in the short term at least, popular with the voters in the polls.

    The response is that it's the same old Labour: spend, borrow and crash - an unaffordable programme full of black holes. "We're fixing Britain; don't let Labour ruin it again".
    But if nothing else, it usefully draws the line between left and right; no more Blairite, centre-left blather. The Labour Party is now a party of the Left, perhaps far left, and it remains to be seen whether this is something the Great British Public embrace or reject.
    That certainly was my reading of Ed’s speech today - Peter Mandelson once christened him ‘Red’ Miliband – and today I think Ed with his lurch to the left has gone some way to proving him correct’
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited September 2013
    Scott_P said:

    The one the PB Kinnocks have been waiting for. Dan Hodges says the speech is bad news for Ed...

    @DPJHodges: Just who does Ed Miliband think he is? > Telegraph > http://t.co/5e1NDOlaSq

    Dan Hodges speaks for one nation:

    If this had been Ed Miliband’s first speech as leader, it would have been a triumph. But it was his fourth. The next time he walks offstage at a Labour party conference he will have to do so not as the man who feels the nation’s pain but as a prime minister in waiting.

    For all his empathy, sincerity and passion he didn’t look like one today. And it’s increasingly hard to see how he will look like one in 12 months' time.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    AndyJS said:

    Simon Jenkins finally loses the plot by partially blaming the design of shopping centres for creating the conditions for terrorist attacks:

    Simon Jenkins lost the plot many years ago - he blamed football hooliganism on the size of football goals back in 2000.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    tim said:

    Floater said:

    tim said:

    Floater said:

    kjohnw said:

    Did Ed say anything about how labour would cut the defecit?

    not sure Labour have much interest in that.

    spend baby spend.

    Osborne is spending more than Labour did, never forget that.
    (once you've understood it in the first place of course, big proviso)
    Spin baby spin.


    Truth is Labour will spend more than the tories, you know it and we all know it.

    Worse than that, Labour have such a crap record of getting value for money. It seems they think spending is the only important thing.

    Still, I understand an arch Blairite like yourself will be feeling the pain from the ever more leftward lurch of your party so I shouldn't be surprised you are a bit more touchy than usual.

    Truly Kinnock is getting his party back, I am sure you are very proud.
    Until you've understood why Tory govts always spend more on benefits you won't understand any of this
    Ooh, I think I know this!!!!

    Its because unemployment rises during a Labour government right?

    Now, do you understand why Labour always trash the economy?

    If you do, be sure to tell the Ed's coz they haven't a Scooby.

    Notice you tried to reframe the debate rather than argue the points made.

    Keep spinning baby, beats real life right? (9,990 posts and counting)
This discussion has been closed.