Will 12% from Populus put the pressure on Ming?
October 9th, 2007
Are the Lib Dems the big losers from the conference season?
The regular monthly Populus poll for the Times is out this morning and the shares are, compared with the last survey from the firm last week CON 38%(+2): LAB 40%(+1): LD12%(-3).
It is important to note that the fieldwork took place over three days, from Friday to Sunday, and all but 200 of the interviews had been carried out before news of Brown’s election retreat became known.
The big story is that, like the YouGov poll on Sunday, the Lib Dems are in sharp decline. This is the smallest share by the telephone pollster since well before the general election and is only one point above the YouGov figure.
Populus carries out its surveys by telephone and applies both past vote and “certainty to vote” weightings. Its past vote methodology is marginally more favourable to Labour than ICM and its “spiral of silence adjustment” - a complex means of making an allowance for the don’t knows and won’t says - is less favourable to the Lib Dems.
Generally speaking the pollster with the most favourable methodology to Ming’s party is ICM and a poor showing from that firm could start to cause problems for the leadership.
Labour strategists will be delighted that it is the Lib Dem party that appears to be taking the hit for the Tory resurgence and not them. Given that the firm had Labour with a 10% margin just a week and a half ago the Tories will be reassured that they continue to progress and will be hoping for even better figures when the first full post-Saturday survey comes out.
As I have been saying for months, though, we really need to wait until November at the earliest before we can confidently start to measure the impact of Labour’s change-over.
In my betting I have now closed my £100 a seat Labour sell spread betting position. I had “sold at 332 seats, 320 seats and 312 seats. The close-down prices were 304 and 306 - so a very nice trading profit which, unlike other forms of betting, I can pocket immediately.
I think that Labour might now drift up a touch. Also I’m off to the US on business on Thursday where there are legal barriers on betting and I did not want to have open positions when it was going to be difficult to trade. Combined with my spread betting on the general election date my overall profit in the past two and half weeks amounts to just on £5,000 - all tax free.
If only we could have this level of polling turbulence all the time!
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Labour to increase its polling a tad? Labour will be next to suffer the effects of having chosen the wrong leader. Where the Lib Dems have led, Labour will now follow. If a Party has a poor leader, there is nothing that can be done to resurrect its position until that leader goes. Brown is damaged goods, a ditherer out of his depth becoming increasingly unpopular both within and without his party. There is little sign that Labour have anyone able to launch a bid for the leadership against Brown, so the ship will quietly list, as it is badly holed below the water line. The sycophancy of the media ensures that Brown will be very hard to shift, but the longer he stays, the more assured is Labour’s decline and fall.
I seem to recall commentators at the time describing the 2007 local election results as particularly bad for the Lib-Dems as they lost councillors where they needed them for general election contests, and gained councillors in areas where they had no hope of winning a Westminster MP election.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk_politics/2007/election_2007/default.stm
Is the redoubtable Mr Maggs going to mind the shop in your absence, Mike?
The other half of Ming’s double whammy is that, since Gordon has ruled out an early election, there is now ample time for Ming to be replaced.
2. This actually isn’t true, the opposite is. With the exception of Torbay, the Lib Dems did well in the areas of seats they hold but poorly in most of their targets.
@2 Tom
I found a brief analysis from the Telegraph:
“Despite a few high-profile successes - snatching control of Hull in Labour’s backyard and taking Eastbourne in the Tories’ traditional southern heartland - the party lost more than 200 councillors.
It was the largest single loss of councillors the party has suffered.”
6. (above)
My mistake. That should have been attributed as a reply to comment #5 from Tom. Sorry.
Seems that Ming’s days are numbered and the betting will focus on his successor.
I will take the birthday wishes of pbc.com to David Cameron with whom I fully intend to get pi**ed tonight.
I feel Mr Darling’s speech will ruin D.C.’s birthday celebrations.
Be lucky all
6 Factually incorrect , LibDems had a greater loss of councillors in 1997 . As Tom says in areas with LibDem MP’s the party generally did well .
How soon until the headline, “Can Ming survive speculation on pb.com about his leadership?”
Happy birthday to David Cameron, Britain’s next PM.
I suspect that with his announcements today on Non-Doms, Stamp Duty and Inheritance Tax, Alastair Darling will finally confirm that the Labour Party has given up all pretence and become Tory-Lite. However, this will prove futile as the population is developing a taste for Conservative-Max…..
2: I was going to post a rebuttal but others have got in there before me. However the only party who have really done well out of conference season are the Tories; Labour seem to have taken some big backwards steps, largely of their own doing, and the Lib Dems don’t seem to have picked up any momentum. Given that Ming spent his big speech, which deservedly went down well in the hall, talking about how he wouldn’t be shouted down on the issues he cared about, he seems to have been very quiet on most of them since! But as I’ve posted many many times before, while Ming has the confidence of his MPs there will be no coup, and the rumours of plotting just aren’t there at all. Even Simon Hughes was 100% suportive on Andrew Marr on Sunday. So it’ll take more than poor polls to put Ming in trouble.
12 - Labour have a massive issue with this, if they do something about it. Then the Conservatives can make the case that what is the point of Labour all the good ideas come from our side etc. If they do nothing about it then the Conservatives will merely say that Labour are failing to respond to the needs of large sections of the electorate.
Be interesting what happens when Labour finally bite the bullet and make tax cuts funded by growth in the economy.
Off topic, but when is the new policy on school leaving age coming into effect?
Cobblers. No-one is making any excuses for Labour’s weekend debacle but it’s already clear from a quick scan of the blatts that the story hasn’t got “legs” and will soon be forgotten.
For example, both the Sun and Mail ask readers to “judge” the decision in their on-line polls, (alongside questions such as, “X Factor or Strictly Come Dancing: Which do you prefer?”) which implies that they don’t have a particular editorial line either way. The press aren’t “sycophantic” but they don’t want to bore their readers, and the timing of elections is only a matter which obsesses a small core of political activists, pb.com people etc.
Brown’s “masochism” strategy of taking criticism on the chin yesterday clearly worked.
And sorry to disappoint you Tapestry but no, there won’t be leadership challenge.
17. Whoops, my post referred to previous post 1.
The weakness of Brown’s position will next become apparent (if not before) when he tries to ram the EU Constitution through Parliament. If he loses that vote, then he might well face a challenge.
tapestry @ 19 re EU — was Brown’s handing a scoop to Andrew Marr really as ham-fisted as it seemed or a shot across Murdoch’s bows: make trouble for us and we’ll shut out your news teams. Or both?
16 - I don’t know but I can imagine truancy rates will rocket.
19. But if he wins a parliamentary challenge, he will be stronger. And the EU treaty is a risky area for the Tories because it’s a political trainspotter’s issue, not a real-people issue. When I canvassed last weekend the people I spoke to (roughly 50/50 lab/tories) talked about crime, the NHS, transport, housing and immigration. Europe? nope, not a single mention.
22 Captain Spaulding. “When I canvassed last weekend the people I spoke to (roughly 50/50 lab/tories)…”
Wot! No LibDems? Where is this earthly paradise of which you speak?
23. OK, maybe there were one or two LibDems amongst them!
I somehow doubt that the Lib Dem figures would be any better, if some other Lib Dem MP would be the leader. It’s more like a Tory thing to ditch the leader each time the polling figures will drop.
Good morning people.
Nice poll to settle the troops (not that they matter much now).
Many of the Lib Dems problems in the polls stem from facts outside their control - Iraq dropping off as an issue, both main parties having leaderships which are acceptable to larger parts of the electorate than in 2005, less media coverage as often happens mid-term - and so on. But part of it is not. Ming simply hasn’t been getting the coverage that Kennedy or Ashdown used to (though he did quite well after Brown’s election-dithering act). With no popular USP, a leadership in hiding and no ‘gift’ votes due to unpopularity with either of the other two parties, there was always going to be a substantial squeeze.
The question is: would anyone else do better? In fact, not just better, but enough better to overcome what would be the additional mess of changing leader twice in two years. I’m not convinced. Huhne is talked about as a possible - presumably on the grounds that he did quite well last time. But how much of that was him and how much was it that he (a) avoided the kind of stories that pushed Oaten out of the race and damaged Hughes, (b) was a good bit younger than Ming and (c) looked moderately competent? In other words, to what extent were his putative leadership skills tested?
Clegg is the other name often mentioned. But shadowing the Home Office should be a gift to any opposition MP - it certainly has been for David Davis, who has already faced four home secretaries across the dispatch box and will no doubt be looking to make it five before too long. In that time, how many blows has Clegg landed on the various ministers? Not many.
Ming’s problem seems to be that he seems too wedded to an older style of politics and is missing out on the coverage that he could get elsewhere. Obviously a replacement could put that right, but so could Ming. Either way, without a particularly unpopular Labour or Tory party, it will be some time before any Lib Dem leader takes their party back to 20%. And in any case, as no doubt the previous string analysed (haven’t read it), they can afford to drop votes where they’re not in contention.
Dan seems to be very quiet this week! Only last week he was posting the following:
“The Lib Dems will win nearly all of their held seats and make compensating gains for the handful of seats they lose (like 2005).
These polling results are bad for the Tories and mean a general election on 1 November.
To be as far behind as they were in 2005 given a week of supine press coverage means that in reality they are significantly behind - 35% is the maximum they can hope to poll in a general election - no where near enough to be even the largest party.
The Cameron is likely to gain 25-35 seats on these sorts of figures - the chances are fewer than Howard. Can he really stay as leader if that’s the outcome?
by Dan October 4th, 2007 at 10:53 pm”
For the past 20 years the main strategy of the Liberals/Lib Dems has been to attack the Conservatives.
For the past 10 years the Conservatives were not in Government but the Lib Dems carried on as if they were with more attacks on them than Labour.
The Lib Dems are focused on the wrong party to attack and have even tried to be more left than Labour.
It is a strategy that is failing as exemplified by their net loss of MPs in GE2005 vs the Conservatives and the waste of resources in their decapitation strategy against shadow cab ministers. What real opposition party focuses on shadow ministers rather than the Govt Ministers? That strategy was the one that an ally of Govt follows. The soft votes were with Labour not the Conservatives.
Ming failed to grasp that and is institutionally more favourable to wards Labour than the Conservatives as he revealed in that infamous speech. The Lib Dems have the Wrong Leader and the Wrong Strategy. It will only end in tears.
17- Captain Spaulding - did you actually read The Sun?
In fact their editorial is titled “You don’t fool anyone, Gord”
This editorial is very critical of Brown’s behaviour regarding elections and Iraq.
The last paragraph states that the only way out of his troubles for Brown is to block the EU treaty or allow a referendum…
Sounds like an ultimatum from The Sun…
I think the Captain has got it right. I said that this Brown episode would be forgotten in a month. Infact I think it’ll be forgotten in a week. After all the media smoke what is the charge that has stuck? That he’s ‘Bottler Brown’. In other words he’s cautious. Hasn’t he spent ten years being ‘prudent’? A ‘Dour Scot’ someone who wouldn’t take chances?
Compare with Cameron’s biggest discomfort over the last few months. Calling his party ‘Cameron’s Conservatives’ and appointing Tony Lit a Labour donor DJ with no previous connection to the Party as PPC in Southall. What were the public to read into that? It must be something because it cost his Party several points in the polls.
Both to an extent show a lack of judgement but the stereotype of the ‘Cautious Scot’ is never likely to be as damaging as the ‘Flash Harry’
Hardly an “infamous speech”, HF (29). Ming’s speech was rousing, consistent with the Lib Dem principles, highly critical of Labour and scornful of the Tories. A hundred times beter than Cameron’s.
The fact that it was given totally pathetic coverage by our totally pathetic press (whose representatives start, continue and finish with their own agenda regardless of what actually happens) is another matter, of course.
I would suggest you have another look at it.
31 Roger. “Hasn’t he spent ten years being ‘prudent’?”
Er…no…actually.
He’s spent ten years being profligate with the nation’s resources, whilst chanting the mantra that he is being ‘prudent’.
Obviously, Brown belongs to the school of thought that if you tell a lie often enough, then people will believe it.
Surely you don’t believe it, Roger? You are much too worldly wise for that.
“Combined with my spread betting on the general election date my overall profit in the past two and half weeks amounts to just on £5,000 - all tax free.”
Don’t rub it in!!
It was a competent speech by Ming. Brogan said so and I respect his judgement.
However, the poll numbers tell their own tale. He’s got to go.
29 - It’s very difficult *not* to be more left than labour.
In fact, I think this is the only logical lib dem position now as there’s very little ground between labour and the tories on the centre right. Positioned slightly to the left of centre with the added bonus of liberal ideas and you contrast both the true rightism of the tories, the false rightism of labour, the authoritarianism of labour and the pale liberalism of the tories.
On the poll, all this tells me is that the Conservatives have narrowed the gap (again) and that it will be a straight two-party fight at the next election. Prob v. close. Bit of trench warfare and all that..
As I predicted last week (and they are SO predicatable) Labour will try to steal IHT proposals today in the pre-budget report.
You can set your clock by them.
Just goes to prove how intellectually bankrupt, visionless and rudderless this government is. Something tells me that, this time, people will pick up on the fact Labour is just stealing its opponents policies to cling on to power. It will be seen through the prism of cynicism and spin - and I expect that will be the media narrative too.
Be interesting to see how the polls react.
No, Test (35). The poll numbers are simply a reflection of the Tory/Labour Brown/Cameron polarisation that we have been seeing in the media in recent weeks.
As soon as a general election starts, with campaigning in individual seats, the polarisation AT THAT LEVEL, will be completely different - as we saw at the local elections earlier this year - which were of course the Lib Dems’ second best results ever, in terms of seats won.
It seems to me that the Tories would be better off getting themselves some solid policies. They won’t ever need to implement them in government, but at least they might be a bit more convincing.
Reading today’s papers it is clear that the news fully reflects my spin line for today, which is that the humiliation of my leader will soon be forgotten and double-digit poll leads will quickly return - leading to a 1997-style landslide next time.
“As I have been saying for months, though, we really need to wait until November at the earliest before we can confidently start to measure the impact of Labour’s change-over”
Mike the problem is however can the Lib dems afford to wait until November?
Granted some of the very poor poll ratings relate to the last frenzied two weeks when it has appeared a two horse race and the Lib Dems have disapeared from view.Some of the problem is the result of a different strategic environment-the Tory’s moving to the centre with a likeable leader,and Labour still in the centre with a less tarnished leader than Blair.But some of the poor ratings must be pinned on the door of the leader-a leader who is not particularly liked by the electors,is deemed to be be ineffective and most tellingly the opposition parties would like to stay in pace.
The polls may recover a bit for the Lib Dems but all the above factors will stay in place.The polls are likely to increasingly suggest hung parliament territory.And this is the rub- to take adavatage of this requires Lib derms to hold most their seats.
In this scenario a couple of extra points from a better leader can be the difference in holding the balance of power or not.
Therfore the big decision should be to change leader.Ming can say now that the next election is likely to be 2009/10 it seems appropriate to hand over to one of his bright young team.The best timing is now - so the contest can take place in the Autumn and be over by Christmas,keeping the Lib dems in the public eye and allowing them to showcase their excellent tax cut proposals and other policies.
Of couse there is a risk-but the biggest risk is surely do nothing!Its now or Never!
Rogerh
If Labour taxes the non-doms for another purpose (say put the money raised towards the reduction of child poverty, or to increase pensions etc) then the tories’ guns are effectively spiked.
These non-doms cannot be taxed again If the tories proposed moving this money raised from little kiddies and your nan to help some very well off people (mainly in the south), it will not look good at all.
Although, who knows what he will do.
Meanwhile the infighting starts within Labour, with talk of a new leadership contest….
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;jsessionid=A5LDTDLPAFJRVQFIQMGCFFOAVCBQUIV0?xml=/opinion/2007/10/09/do0901.xml
The Libdems are in desperate need of revitalisation, only a new leader can do that, they really need a Paddy Ashdown MK2.
42 - Leadership contest? Per-lease! OK, Gordon may have made a mess of the past week, but he is still number 1 in my book!
COMPETITION:
How will Alasdair Darling try and nick the Conservative Inheritance Tax proposals today?
Prize: You’ll look really clever.
My prediction: He’ll announce a 2-stage step rise in IHT tax thresholds to £500K, through budget 2008 and budget 2009 and crow about how “affordable” it is compared to his opponents.
So predicatable
40. One additional comment.
Gordon has been acccuse dof poll dithering.The lib Dems will doing the same if they wait for November polls before grasping the Ming nettle.
Roherh
27 David. Have to disagree there David. Iraq remains a strong issue for the Lib Dems although its potency to damage the government has diminished.
IMO the reason why the Lib Dems have polled so badly since the end of their conference is that they have been utterly squeezed out of the massive media narrative of an impending election and the huge specualtion that has driven both Labour and the Conservative into the first stages of their general election battle plans.
The question remains whether it’s possible for Ming to stabilize the ship and head back to calmer waters. Politics is a harsh trade and despite many qualites I believe that the punters have decided that Ming’s age is a insurmountable problem and the media keep nagging away at it and that further reinforces the difficulty. It wasn’t a problem for Michael Howard but somehow that appeared not to matter.
Now the prospect of an election has receded for another 18 months I think it’s in the best interests of the LibDems for Ming to step down sooner rather than latter, and no latter than the Spring and thus give his successor a fair wind to the next election.
Clearly the oustanding candidate to succeed is Our Viscount, but sadly he’s decided to spend more time with his moustache in the country.
So it’s the member for Yeovil for me …. sings … Jack W speaks and the Laws won.
30. OK it’s easy to miss stuff if you read the on-line editions, but now you draw my attention to it, I reckon that the Sun’s leader is not unsympathetic to Brown. Their key quote is his statement that “I take full responsibility. I will not blame it on anyone else”, i.e. they have picked up on the contrite tone.
Yes, they comment on the EU leaders’ meeting in Lisbon next week but as they must know, this will give Brown a great opportunity to bang on about his red lines again, sound patriotic, maybe even have a row or two with other EU leaders - without actually conceding a referendum.
Peter Riddell’s, piece accompanying the Populus poll, is a pretty fair assessment of the present situation.
http://tinyurl.com/33xs6p
I’m sure the, ‘usual suspects’ won’t agree.
Tressage - is that meant to be a joke? You lost 250 seats.
48. After all that has happened over the last few weeks, Labour spinners appear to have learned nothing - they apparently still think the public can be treated like idiots and manoeuvred into position with a few bits of ‘clever’ media management.
Their arrogant belief in their own ability in this area also remains undiminished. Amazing.
45. Wouldn’t an obvious change be to introduce tax bands. That would be different to the Tory proposal (so reduces charge of copying), means that it does disproportiately bvenefit the very rich (a flaw of the Tory proposal) and largely relieve the tax on those so called people in Middle England.
40 Balls. They will have a tough time in the Locals next May, and if they are going to replace Ming they a) Don’t want to link it to this conference season b)would be advised to let Ming tak any hit next May and c)Once they’ve given him every chance withno 2008 Election the later it is the fresher their new Leader is
Ming’s was easily the best speech of the three. It even contained the best joke, the line about Gordon trying to be Maggie but not Tony and Dave trying to be Tony but not Maggie and Ming trying not to be like any of them.
The problem is got overshadowed by all the election speculation and the prospect of a presidential contest between Brown and Cameron. I suspect this would still have been the case had Nick Clegg or Chris Huhne been leader.
32 Tressage the “infamous speech” I was referring to is the earlier conference speech where Ming set out his tests for co-operation with Gordon but implied he could not co-operate with David.
Ming could not have been any clearer about which party he preferred.
So if a Lib Dem vote really was the same as one for Labour then why the surprise when voters decided to align directly with Labour rather than through an intermediary.
52 Silly me ‘doesn’t’ not ‘does’
roger: “In other words he’s cautious. Hasn’t he spent ten years being ‘prudent’?”
Prudent? Are you mad? He’s spent 10 years grabbing unprecedented amounts of our money and flushing it away. Latest is his “Lack of British jobs for for British trained doctors fiasco”.
48 is not unsympathetic to Brown
Corporal Spaulding - you should try and avoid John Majoresque language, the feartie’s leadership already has shades of Major without you adding to it.
44. Do you have a calendar of him, with pictures and poses or something?
January - Earnest Gordon
February - Dour Gordon
March - Gloomy Gordon
April - Serious Gordon
May - Sullen Gordon
June - Solemn Gordon
July - Short-tempered Gordon
August - Neurotic Gordon
September - Sinister Gordon
October - No election (thanks very much) Gordon
November - Sulky Gordon
December - Bah.. Humbug! Gordon
51
You’d have to be an idiot, not to see that the last week had not been incredibly damaging for Brown and exceptionally rewarding for Cameron. Cameron has now removed any threat to his leadership, until the next GE.
But what is amazing, is that the media, especially the Tory press, has not been as vitriolic as I think they could have been.
The Daily Mail, editorials, (while critical) have not been as scathing as I expected.
Ouch, that has got to hurt Ming a bit.
Ah well, Lib dems in meltdown shocker
45. He will cut the rate to 20 % up to 1 million and fiddle with the thresholds by 100k or so..
47 JackW regains form at last - I knew you could do it Jack.
49 Agree GOM - Riddell’s piece gets it right.
48. Captain Spaulding. I wonder if Brown’s contrition strategy will come back and bite him. “I take full responsibility. I will not blame it on anyone else.”
Next time the government makes a major strategic error hasn’t Brown put himself more clearly in the firing line?
I think “The buck” moved a bit closer to Number 10 yesterday.
60
This is the editorial that amazed me, those who remember the old Daily Mail, couldn’t imagine that a ‘Labour Disaster’ would be followed up by such measured comment in the, ‘Mail!’
http://tinyurl.com/2k7vne
interesting piece on the Brown posse in the Tele
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/10/09/do0901.xml
There is a growing feeling around Mr Brown’s top table that the Prime Minister has leant too heavily on “young turks” who have more enthusiasm than wisdom. “There’s a lack of experience in his immediate team, they’re bright people but they haven’t been in the trenches like some of us,” is how one Cabinet member put it to me.
A junior minister was franker still: “I’m in despair about the cack-handedness of these arrogant little sods,” he said. “These people don’t understand politics, they speak at think-tank seminars, not public meetings.”
59 -
Yes, the sexiest man in politics! Why go for a little boy like Cammy when you can have a *real man* like Gordon?
60 - do you think that Dacre and co will risk their pending knighthoods by slaughtering Brown?
I’d like to see the real circulation figures of the Telegraph and the Mail in its current editorial direction
54: Yes but with the others the dip wouldn’t have been as bad. People see Ming as a caretaker leader.
I was thinking of offering Mike an article on this, but will settle for a slightly longer post (sighs of relief all round).
What I think this poll reflects is, as Tressage says at 38, the two-party polarisation triggered by an apparently impending election. But I think Tressage is mistaken to think that will disappear in individual seats if an election happens. The electorate is reasonably sophisticated about tactical voting so sitting LD MPs will clearly be able to ride the waves to some extent, but if the media are dominated by a close Lab-Con contest, then a lot of people who might have lent them tactical support are goinng to want to ‘take part’ in the national contest by expressing a Lab/Con preference instead. So sitting LD MPs on medium-to-low majorities are in real danger.
The optimal LD position is a not-very-close GE where the other parties are strongly disliked by many voters anyway. Because the Iraq factor is fading (witness the small turnout at yesterday’s Stop the War event) and DC has partly detoxified the Tories, potentially none of those factors will be present.
The Labour scores in the 38-42 range that we’ve seen recently reflect the return of the Lib-Lab floating vote. Locally I reckon I got only a third of it in 2005 and 2/3 in 2001; it’s now back at 2/3. The Tories’ generally centrist stance (let’s leave aside whether it’s genuine) is enabling them to pick up much of the ‘fed up with Labour’ vote that might have gone LD. That leaves the core LD vote, and there isn’t a lot of it.
I’m not hostile to the LDs, despite what you might think - if Labour didn’t exist I’d certainly join them rather than, say, the Tories or Respect, so the advice I’d offer is intended to be friendly. Don’t waste time trying to change the leader - he isn’t the main problem. Instead:
(1) Build up the core vote by pushing a distinctive positive approach. The ‘freedom party’ line is probably the most promosing - there are people in both major parties who are socially liberal but keen on libertarianism and free markets. Don’t burn your tactical vote bridges by being too savage about either major party.
(2) Push all your resources into the seats that you hold, working hard on the tactical vote. I know that LD DNA is to attack, attack, attack. Sometimes you need to defend, and in my judgment the next election will be one of them.
It seems ridiculous to me to suggest that Campbell has come out of the conference season the worst of the 3 leaders whatever recent polls might suggest.
Anyone with half a brain can see that it’s been a disaster for Brown not only in the short term but also in the long term as any credibility he may have still had, with some people, for honesty and straight dealing has now been shot to pieces and this will stick round his neck like an albatross.
Campbell has performed reasonably well in the media over the last few days so this may be reflected in coming polls but the fact is, he was never any more than a stop gap leader before one of the younger brigade took over.
But let’s not get distracted by the minor, and over-hyped, side show. It’s “Bottler” Brown who’s been holed below the waterline and he will continue to sink right up until he is soundly beaten at the next election, whenever it may be.
68 - anonymous and dangerous “do you think that Dacre and co will risk their pending knighthoods by slaughtering Brown?”
Sad but true.
70 - I think this is an excellent analysis.
70. Best for Labour would be Clegg in charge of the Lib Dems. Best for the Cons is status quo - or even better Huhne
68
Somebody posted on here last week that the Mail’s sales have gone down 60,000 a day over recent months (ie since Dacre’s lover affair with Brown started)
In the same period sales of the Express (a bit of a joke paper but virulently anti-Brown) have incresed by 30,000.
It seems that support for Brown can be hazardous to your circulation for traditional Conservative supporting papers.
Telegraph editor please take note!
71. Agree.
I think Campbell has come out with some timely comments recently about Iraq stunt, the election that wasn’t, and various other things. Of course I’m happy because it has often re-inforced Tory positions, but nonetheless he has been in the press, and quoted. He is in a hopeless position during conference season, particularly when the Lib Dem one is the first. When the polls settle next month they should rise again to the high teens at least.
Not really, HF (55). Ming’s speech at the Spring Conference laid down five tests for Brown, which Brown - obviously - would not be able to meet (unless he changed his position totally). A parody of Brown’s five conditions for not joining the Euro….
As for Cameron, it is very hard for anybody - even Ming - to get to grips with anything as vapid as the Tory Party’s current policy proposals. Now that some have finally emerged, half of them are the traditional Tory headbanging stuff: and the other half are pale and partial imitations of Lib Dem policies.
So Cameron & Co were dismissed without a second thought - not worth bothering about really.
So that was a good speech of Ming’s too.
75 - yes, that doesn’t surprise me. I think the Sun lost a load of readers when it supported Blair as well, though could be wrong on that score.
70, a very good post from Mr Palmer. The point Nick makes about focusing more on a core message was supported in an article by Simon Titley in a recent Liberator.
http://www.liberator.org.uk/article.asp?id=121804034
“Because the party believes that it can ‘win everywhere’, it subordinates policy to short-term tactical expediency, and fails to target and cement the loyalty of a core vote. Hence support is so shallow that the party must campaign for most of its votes afresh at each election.”
That is like a consumer good which continually relies on “BOGOF” offers with massive marketing (campaigning) effort just to stand still.
Eventually the product will have so diluted its core values that it will just be seen as something to buy when the voter is prompted by the advertising. Possibly where the Lib Dems already are?
60
Of course Mrs T, was rather fond of rewarding, editors who, ‘pleased her’
The reason is much more interesting. As the pool of newspaper readers declines, under the impact of 24 hour news, the internet etc. newspapers can’t afford to, ‘offend’ potential readers by overtly supporting a particular party.
Newspapers can still support a political point of view’ right left or centre, but can’t afford to be too tribal.
In my own case, I’ve taken a daily newspaper for forty years, costing me at present, £30.0 per month, my broadband connection cost me £22.0 per month. Six months ago, I cancelled my paper, now I can read them all on line, and save £8.0 per month.
I know not everyone could do that, commuters etc, but its a straw in the wind.
See Clegg was ultra loyal on Newsnight yesterday evening, “Ming is leading us up to through and beyond the next election”.
Clearly this is nonsense, he will by 69 in 2010.
One presumes Ming will do the decent thing, suspect many Liberal Democrats hope it is done quickly.
Commonsense says that with every passing month the pressure will increase.
77
Whether it’s “traditional Tory headbanging stuff” or not, the voting public seem to like it and we’re likely to see Darling attempt to purloin some of it later today
77 Tressage, to me the point about the speech is that he revealed the true core of what he believed about preferring Labour to the Conservatives. That is what you believe as well.
So why not join Labour rather than be a Labour-lite party?
70. Yes. The LD MPs generally tend to be effective at Constituency level and once they take seats they can build strong positions which hold out against national trends (Bermondsey, North Norfolk). They are not in danger of losing seats like this. They are also working very hard in seats they consider targets. I live in one of them and we get a monthly 4-page tabloid paper which is professionally produced and delivered and they are also doing a lot of direct mail - again using paid-for delivery, not just activists. Because they only fight seriously in about 100 constituencies they do not need to worry overmuch about their national vote share.
82 - The editorials would probably just go with a line of ‘Darling thieves Tory policy’
80 - “Of course Mrs T, was rather fond of rewarding, editors who, ‘pleased her’ “. What a gruesome image that has just been planted in my head.
Even though papers (in their traditional form) are on the decline, there’s still a lot of brand loyalty about. And obviously brand dis-loyalty. If you’re a dyed-in-the-blue-wall Tory, you wouldn’t buy the Mirror. Likewise if you want to reclaim the Labour party you wouldn’t have the Daily Mail on your lap.
If anything, papers are going to need to stick to what their readership expects more and more now just to keep alive.
83. Lots of Lib Dem members would join Labour if they lived in an area where Labour had any chance of winning. Some of the people you meet in local Lib Dem parties in the rural SW for example are so left wing they are verging on Dave Spart-style caricatures.
What was it that Brown threw at Blair? “I’ll never a believe a word you say, ever again.”
Could be that all Darling’s efforts to take back the initiative over IHT and the super-rich will be damaged by the media’s new attitude and overshadowed by previews of Wednesday’s PMQs.
That was the message of yesterday’s press conference. Brown speaks of vision, the media see through him.
I find it interesting that Brown’s ‘clearing the decks for an election’ tactic - bringing forward the health review, the PBR and the CSR - may ultimately mean that none of them receives any positive coverage at all. Anyone feel the health review had much impact?
I think one of the attractions of ‘The snap election that wasn’t’ was that a quick campaign squeezes out the LD’s.
From talking to people involved in the Sedgefield byelection its clear that they thought this a factor in what they considered a prime LD target.
71 I think your wrong Nick. All your recommendations hinge on whether the Lib Dems can attract the oxygen of publicity. With Ming, however great a person he is, the only story going is that he is a bit grey and too old for the job.
If I were the LibDems I would vote for a woman leader. Instantly the media would be bound to give them coverage. They would be interesting. They would have a unique voice and if they pick the right woman could seriously damage Cameron’s soft focus strategy. It would be wonderful to see it.
To answer James point on the last thread. Politics is a 50:50 a mix between policy and personality. And rightly so. You wouldn’t for example accept a child welfare policy from Gary Glitter to take an extreme case.
nickc, yes most of the Lib Dem MPs do dig themselves in but eventually they can be defeated once the other parties get themselves organised. Look at Newbury, a well entrenched MP was finally replaced by a Conservative against the national swing.
To maintain themselves LD MPs also have to focus on more local activity than Westminster activity. 10+ years of that type of work can take its toll. We see in Cornwall that 2 of the Lib Dem MPs are standing down at the next GE.
It also needs a strong base of activists and deliverers and I know that in my area the LD deliverers are thinning out due to age and their enthusiasm waning. It is reaching a tipping point where they will soon be unable to regularly deliver.
In 2004 the Lib Dems were boasting about becoming the main opposition party. That goal has now gone for maybe a generation.
27 - actually CK and Paddy didn’t have more coverage at the same point (except of course what CK had had in the chat shows).
OT- Now the election is off, when is the Croydon Central by-election?
81 and others , Ming will step down early next year Jan or Feb . There is nothing to be gained by doing it earlier with Xmas already on the horizon .
At what level of support in the polls should the LDs be relegated to the status of a fringe party like the Greens or UKIP ? 8%?
I’m convinced that Ming will not step down and will not be challenged anytime soon for the simple reason that nobody ambitious is going to be in a hurry to be in charge before the next election.
The Lib Dems poll problems will not be solved by a new leader. They are the only main party left that has not had a root-and-branch review of exactly what they want to stand for in the 21st century.
A patchwork of cobbled together ‘niche’ policies in most cases left over from the days when Mrs Thatcher was in No 10 is simply not enough to protect their support in a closely fought general election, they need a unique selling point which at the moment they haven’t got.
Simply banging on about breaking the two party ‘consensus’ which is about it from them at the moment really isn’t inspiring anyone - partly because the idea of the two main parties having a consensus about anything at the moment is risible.
27/47 - Laws is still an incredible 66/1 with William Hill.
The 7/4 Clegg and 4/1 Huhne are more than fair too.
“I needed money cos I … had none;
I backed Dave Laws, and Dave Laws won;
Came in big - sixty-six to one;
I backed Dave Laws, and Dave Laws won”
We can but dream
Apart from Darling’s efforts to “theive” Tory policies this afternoon he is also expected to downgrade projected growth figures.
We became used to Chancellor Brown trumpeting umpteen quarters of growth, growth that was largely based on the easy availability of cheap credit. Now that the loose money has dried up and Britons, and the Government, are left with record debt, it wil be interesting to see how the fall-guy Darling tries to spin it.
94 - As long as he doesnt go on top of Christmas becaues headlines like ‘Lib Dems sacrifice their election turkey’ would beckon.
70. “if Labour didn’t exist I’d certainly join them rather than, say, the Tories” - How can you SAY such a thing!
A point no-one seems to have picked up on yet, is that many LibDems are very wealthy (and smug) people. Think Bristol, Bath, Cheltenham, Richmond, Winchester, North London etc.. They vote LibDem for a sense of moral superiority; something which they don’t hesitate to rub-in at dinner parties, or to canvassers, or their work colleagues.. you name it. I’ve heard it.
However, because the IHT cut is so blatantly in their own self-interest, they are switching to the Conservatives in their thousands.
*This* is where most of the extra Tory support is coming from.
88 - I think thats probably the case, the health review and crossrail were both swamped .
I hope darling plays the CSR boringly safe, I think Doing anything major to IHT will be a mistake, better to take the hit and move on.
As Casino royale suggests 2008 would be better timing.
The other possibility is that Darling will use the CSR to attack the Tory proposals - if Lab are confident they have enough to demolish them then it would make sense to start the ball rolling.
97. Perhaps the bookies know something the wider public is unaware of.
98 - I know and he can’t try the Brown trick of blaming his predecessor.
96 Marcus Your comments in the last 3 paragraphs are valid and are the reason why your first paragraph will be proved wrong early next year .
Vox pop. It seems to be forgotten that the Conservatives went from pushing 40% to barely 30% in the short space of two months. What’s more their leader’s personal ratings fared even worse. Now it’s possible to blame all that on the ‘Brown Bounce’ and think it’s been wiped away by a successful conference but that would be simplistic.
Whatever the factors that made voters go off the Tories in such a big way are still out there. They made some crass decisions and if it wasn’t for Brown’s own goal It’s likely they’d now be looking for a new leader. If you think Cameron can avoid showing his inexperience and hide his unattractive hubris for two whole years then I think you’re dreaming.
63 Kingbongo praises Jack W shock !!!
I’ll need to take to my bed after reading your post. Either your on mind bending drugs or I’ve dropped a boo boo ???
101. But can you imagine Polly Toynbee’s reaction if Labour were to cave in on IHT? That alone would be worth waiting for!
I’m amazed the report of the European Scrutiny Committee hasn’t provoked a vigorous debate yet. Sean t are you asleep?
Btw surely the value bet at the moment is the date of Gordon Brown’s departure as labour leader q2 2009 : 6s or q2 2010 10s
107 She’d probably have to hold her nose with both hands
93 simon9999 “Now the election is off, when is the Croydon Central by-election?”
An interesting question as that will be a very tough one for the Conservatives to keep and relatively easy for Labour to win. An impossible one for Lib Dems to win.
100 Most Lib Dems I know - and I was on the the Council with quite a lot of them - are well-meaning, often not very worldly community activists who are very good at campaigning against things but less good at being in favour of anything. The vast majority seemed to me to be much closer to Labour than the Tories in their political outlook (inasmuch as LDs have a political outlook, which is not much - that is why they are LDs!).
111 - assuming a by-election is in the offing.
102 - without wishing to sound arrogant, I seriously doubt it. Last time Ladbrokes had this market up, they had Laws around 12/1.
Moreover William Hill have consistently been the most generous (bad prices) and stubborn (holding those prices, and laying decent amounts) bookmaker when it comes to politics - witness the Sarkozy 10/11 which lasted for days as everyone on here cleaned up.
97. Bravo Aaron!
Quick couple of thoughts on the poll- it’s now quite clear that after tory conference Labour held a small but consistent lead, and that Brown was likely told he’d win an election but with a reduced majority. No idea where we are now, but i’d imagine a small tory lead..
The other question i’m interested is which LDs are going tory. is it LDs in LD/tory seats or in lab/tory seats or both? in terms of the electoral impact it makes a huge difference…
109 - or his departure as PM - 2009 @ 7/2 and especially 2010 @ 10/1, both Hills
86
Don’t agree! as tribal politics and the party political system that underpins it, is in decline, the tribal/political newspaper will mirror that decline.
Re the papers, I think it is now indubitable that ALL of them have become more hostile to Brown than they were just a week ago.
The Guardian and the Indy have, if anything, been more critical than the Mail. Which just goes to show how quickly and unexpectedly things are shifting. Some of the language in the Guardian - “opportunist” - was nakedly anti-Brown.
Talking of news (ta-da!) surely the big news of the day is the report on the European Constitution by the Commons Committee. This is incredibly negative about the Treaty, especially when you consider it was largely written by Labour MPs.
Mark Mardell does a good summation in his blog:
http://tinyurl.com/3xdt23
For those that can’t be bothered to link, he starts his essay with this comment:
“Heaven knows what the whips are coming to. In my days in Westminster there would have been trips to St Lucia here, a murmured word about a knighthood there, and perhaps the odd broken arm. At any rate, it’s rare for a Labour-dominated committee (nine out of 16 members) to produce a report quite so unhelpful to the government.”
Then he goes on to list the points made by the committee:
The new Constitution is virtually identical to the old one, whatever the government says
Only about 2% of the clauses have been changed
Britain does have a special situation with her opt-outs and red-lines but these might not be worth anything
It says the government’s approach to the Constitution could be “misleading”
It stresses concern over the ratchet clause which allows the EU to take more power without any more Treaties
It is concerned about European courts overruling British courts, despite our red lines etc
They are angry about the way the Constitution was rushed through
They demand that Brown changes the Treaty to prevent further erosion of transparency and accountability
They finally are very concerned that the Treaty, as a whole, infringes the sovereign rights of the British parliament
Nice.
I know you guys are bored by Europe. But please, listen up. This is Labour MPs who have concluded this. Not Bill Cash and Rupert Murdoch over a pizza.
This Constitution is a serious threat to the way we conduct our affairs as a democracy. Brown wants to ram it through parliament without even granting the referendum he solemnly promised in a manifesto on which he was elected.
This isn’t just bad politics. It is simply wrong. Enough.
Give us the vote we were promised. Let the people decide.
Roger, you start off well, then fall into the same trap as those you criticise.
Yes, the Tory/Cameron polling figures fell during the Brown Bounce but they recovered all that ground during the Cameron Comeback. This was all totally predictable. I know it was totally predictable because it was regularly predicted on this site.
What wasn’t predicted was the scale of the Bounce/Comeback and the polling weakness of the LibDems.
We all agreed that it was only in November that we would be able to judge Brown’s position. I would say the chaos of the past few weeks means we will now have to wait until February before we are back to ’stable’ polling.
With the greatest of respect, using such unstable polls to criticise Cameron and exonerate Brown is, frankly, what I’d expect from an advertising hack.
[NB. 'With the greatest of respect' is used in the same context as Gordon Brown uses 'to be honest'.]
97. Thanks for the spot. i can’t believe 66-1. Couldn’t resist the price. He should be 8-1 -12-1.
Lost amongst the avalanche of tosh and wild conspiracy theories that have consumed the site for the past few days a few relevant points seem to have been overlooked.
Despite the scorn with which the point about labour winning an election in November was received in certain quarters today’s populus poll reinforces the point, academic though it is , that labour would have almost certainly won any election held in November. Even polls showing labour behind the tories still point to at the very least labour being the largest party if not a majority. My view is that labour probably would not have managed to equal the current majority but would have won.
Gordon Brown is in the process of withdrawing from Tony Blair’s Iraq adventure. The force will be down to 2500 in May 2008 and potentially down to 0 by the end of the year. This is bad news for Ming Campbell, his USP is that he is against the Iraq entanglement if that is going he has a real problem beyond the plummeting poll ratings.
The real issue for Gordon Brown and labour party is that the original strategy was never for an election in November but on the 1st May 2008. Unfortunately the party machine and some of the younger members of the cabinet got carried away by some favourable polls, the rather odd atmosphere of a party conference and the prospect of keeping the cost of the campaign to a minimum ( thus removing a potential tory advantage ) and made rather a bad tactical error, which Gordon Brown did not spot and did not shut down the froth and speculation soon enough. This unfortunately has meant having to drop the original plan of a spring 2008 election, which would have allowed sufficient time for various policies to be implemented most noticeably the Iraq withdrawal noted above.
So yes the past few days have not been brilliant for the labour party and with no one to blame but itself has had to drop its favoured electoral plans, however it is still ahead in the opinion polls and must remain favorite ( a point with which the betting markets concur ) to win in 2009.
100/112. What a load of patronising twaddle.
120 With the greatest respect , it is equally wrong to use unstable polls to claim that the Cameron polling figures have recovered to pre Brown bounce levels .
122. However you completely overlook campaigning, new policies and strategy. The reason the polls switched BACK to the Cons in the lead was their tax policy - they now have 2 years to fluff up some other rabbits to pull out of the hat on tax and other issues. If they go down as well as the minor IHT announcement then the Con lead will stretch again.
119 Those who bang on endlessly about Europe being a defining issue, the EU is destroying the Britain we know & love etc etc etc should perhaps reflect on the fact that every general election since 1974 has been won by the party which presented itself as closer to Europe than its main opponent.
126 Not true. 1992 Labour were more Euro friendly than the Tories. In the early 1990s the Eu was very popular on the left.
125 - Indeed, and Cameron’s strategy could be the mirror of Blair’s. Blair took the Conservatives policies and pretended to adopt the popular ones and disowned the unpopular. He then presented the electorate with a choice. Have the moribund and flavourless genuine article, or a knocked off version that at least tastes ok. Cameron could force Brown to adopt popular policies where he can and disown them where he must and then present the electorate with the choice of an insipid fake or an inspirational genuine article.
124. No, Mark, the polls DO show Cameron recovering the ground. What I am saying is that they are unreliable and shouldn’t be used to project into the future. Cameron may have overcome his character issues, Brown may do so, but these polls don’t give us any reliable data.
127 I would accept that in 1992 there was very little to choose between the parties on Europe. But I am right about 1979, 1983, 1987, 1997, 2001 and 2005.
If Ming goes, the absolute worst thing the LDs could do would be to appoint a young leader on the left of the party who gained his/her seat from the Tories in the nineties/noughties.
With the political landscape shifting, their best chance of shoring things up is to ‘fight from the right’ for the first time in 20 years.
When the momentum is with the Tories, they would do best to write off some of their home counties and suburban seats (where Labour are nowhere to be seen, even in landslide years) and ludicrous ‘decapitation’ strategies, and focus on hitting Labour instead with moderate candidates in areas where it’s a Lab-LD fight.
They’ve made a reasonable start over the last few years, in Brent and Birmingham and Liverpool etc. Now they need to make this their focus. If so, I believe the LDs won’t be in any danger of losing seats to Labour (as the Baxter swing suggests) and will have a chance of winning a few, to make up for the southern seats they lose back to us.
I can see a head count of around 45-55 LDs in the next parliament, but with plenty of big names from the 97 and 01 intake absent.
126. So Europe is popular then?
In which case, give us a referendum.
What’s the problem?
Can I just nominate Captain Spaulding’s comment upthread, which says today’s Sun editorial is “not unhelpful to Gordon Brown”, as the most ludicrous comment of the morning.
The editorial is actually entitled, YOU DON’T FOOL ANYONE, GORD
And it then goes on to say our dithering PM is a twit of the first water, who must give us a referendum. Here it is in full:
http://tinyurl.com/32mhab
“not unhelpful to Gordon Brown”.
lol
106 Jack - think of me as a critical friend !! I want you to win next year’s poster of the year so be prepared for ‘tough love’
The last time I did mind bending drugs was a Night Nurse overdose in 1987, admit I might never have fully recovered.
97/121 Aaron/cheltboy. Indeed. 66/1 is massive …. but don’t tell everyone.
It’ll not last for too long. IMO around 8/1 would be about right.
As a possible indicator of enthusiasm for the future.
The list of retiring MPs on Anthony Wells site has
26 Labour, 8 Conservative, 4 LD (5* including Colin Breed).
This translates as a % of all their MPs,
7.3% Labour, 4% Conservative and 7.9% LD (5*).
Voting with their feet?
130. I repeat. You claim the EU is so wildly popular with the people it has always ushered the most pro-European party into power.
It’s certainly a point of view.
But if Europe is so popular, why can’t we have a referendum?
You would surely win in a massive Soviet style landslide, as the people hoist Jose Barrosso on their shoulders, and take him to live in a palace made entirely of silver, paid for by grateful widows? No?
131 In your vision that maybe on the low point for them. If they are gaining seats from Labour but not shipping any back, then the Tories would have to be making strong gains against them. I can think only Ten to be really at risk. After that we get to people like Bob Russell who will be really hard to get out regardless of the Tory swing
119 seanT. are you not worried by Hague’s offer of referendum on all future treaties that transfer power? we all know the reform treaty makes explicit provision for transfers of powers WITHOUT the the need for a treaty in the future. without a specific pledge to repeal the current treaty (which i havent heard) his comments are worthless.
135. Why the * against Colin Breed?
133 kingbongo.
… I’ve no chance in the PB contest. Too many party blocks to contend with and the Highlands don’t have too many internet cafes to rush around and rig the vote !!
Was the PB poll a rotten borough contest ?? … did Sean Fear visit all the internet voters in Dunny in the Wolds ?? … I’m crest fallen I didn’t think of that wheeze first.
I’m working on the bar charts though !!
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article316818.ece
Seant it is a fact that his mate Gordon Pascoe-Brown continues to portray him in a reasonable light as bravely taking the blame and rarely mentions the referendum.
“Last night Mr Brown was loudly applauded by his MPs at a party meeting in the Commons.”
If the Sun was really after Brown it would not print stuff like that.
Yesterday Pascoe-Brown called Brown a “goliath”.
139 jj, I put the * to show I had amended the ukpolling report LD fig from 4 to 5 as they were a few days behind the announcement.
124.Mark, I agree that the polls are extremely volatile at the moment. But equally we must not assume that they are going to just settle down with normal service being resumed in a month or two.
We know that the polls can be unstable at conference time because the different parties usually get a week of concentrated coverage which drowns out the others, it happens every year. But one of the leading polling experts (Kellner I think) admitted that he had never seen that large a swing in the figures in such a short time.
I think that the events of the last few weeks have shown that when it comes to a GE in the next couple of years, we are probable going to see the biggest shift in the HoC since 97′. I don’t predict who will be winners or losers, but no one should be complacent about the outcome for any of the parties. I don’t think the polls will settle down any time soon, and I expect the Libdems to continue to be squeezed as a result.
The other factor about the LDs having the highest % of MPs standing down is that it throws aay a lot of their personal vote so those seats are easier to acquire.
Interesting that the same principle applies to Labour and it is the Tories that have the smallest % standing down.
David Niven used to say about Humphrey Bogart - “You could always rely on Bogey - He will always let you down.”
That just about sums up how I feel about the Labour Party. Many of the principles of the Party I would happily support but the party has let down its supporters since the days of Harold Wilson.
Now there they were with the chance to really kick the Conservatives where it hurts and they have failed again. We do need some new approach from them now - “I am managing the economy better than you would” or “We’ll cut this tax more than you” can’t be the way forward, can it?
Gordon has time now, damn him, to propose fixed terms, PR and revive local democracy. What is the point of Citizens Juries, whatever they are when we have thousands of elected councillors to represent us? I am afraid though that he will be a lame duck becoming more bedraggled the stronger the Tories get and the nearer the last date for an election comes.
Glad I have been able to contribute to Mikes winnings - pain helped by a £5 multiple on England and France winning - actually did a treble with Tigers to beat Gloucester but Betfair didn’t allow the Tigers part (they lost!) and I had a nice surprise at 30-1
132 No, just that it’s not a big concern to most people - it’s just one of those annoying things like the inland revenue or the local council - if you ask people if they want a referendum to abolish them they would say yes, but they would also know that this was never likely to happen in reality. The last polling evidence I saw said Europe was named as a major issue by 3% of respondents - most of whom seem to be on this site.
138. Yes I am slightly worried by this. I would have preferred more watertight language from Hague.
However the commitment is so red-blooded and so definitive I don’t think any future Conservative government would be able to sneak past ANY major transfers of power without complete rebellion from the rightwing media, and, more importantly, their own voters and MPs.
So in effect it is a deadlock on significant future power-transfers, even if the language is woolly, in light of the constitution ratchet clause (Crikey, I never thought I’d one day be typing sentences like that - without being paid!)
Anyway, for eurosceptics, which means all people of good intent, the Hague pledge is the best thing we have heard for decades.
Finally, Cameron has hinted that he might try and repeal the Constitution when he gets into power if it is passed before then (increasingly less likely IMHO). I’m not sure how he would do this - probably he would wait for the next major negotiation on the budget and start causing a fuss.
But I am sure the next Tory government will see a major readjustment in Britain’s relationship with the EU. It’s inevitable. The rest of the EU want full-on Federalism. We don’t. You can’t fudge this forever, much as British governments have tried. We need a somewhat more detached position. We are already sort-of doing it with our euro opt-outs and Schengen opt-outs etc etc.
Are Citizen’s Juries Gordon’s version of the Cones Hotline?
141. Er, Goliath in the Bible is a monstrous evil giant who gets killed by the hero David.
Apologies for this long and rambling post, but in character I always try and say what I believe (often with a healthy dose of humour)- and usually that angers the Tories here. I guess this post won’t, so Labourites look away now.
Politics is more about sentiment, feeling, confidence and reassurrance than policy- always has been always will be.
Brown looked to be a genuine heavyweight, the real deal. His handling of the summer crisis showed that Brown was a substantial politician- the contrast with Cameron was startling. And people trusted him- with Northern Rock, and he would have carried his stance of the Euro referendum, and whatever else was coming.
But Brown has obliterated that image in a week- an unmitigated disaster. Arrogant, opportunistic, untrustworthy, scheming, appalling judgement, weak, pathetic and desperate, and worse still he has the look and feel of a loser.
Yesterday’s press conference was the culmination, the icing on the cake. He could have said then- yeh it was the polls, we flushed some policies from Tories, and heh we are going to steal them, so what we still have 2 years to run. People may then have believed him over the Iraq stunt (what was going through his head?). He was too arrogant to admit to it. Idiot, idiot.
And now the proposals on IHT instead of looking like a masterclass in political strategy which they could have been look like the act of a desperate man, dead man walking, trying to salvage his fatally damaged reputation.
And you know what- he deserves his fate, every little bit of it. The fact is that Brown is not a political heavyweight, he is a calculating weasal, an opportunistic arrogant lightweight. Every act of his being is calculated- writing a book on “Courage”- just so he can project in people’s minds an image for himself. So pathetic because the man is pretty pathetic.
Brown has got himself into this mess because he is a poor excuse for a political leader.
I am terribly annoyed, and moreover just let down by Brown. He will never regain an advantage over Cameron- why? Because Cameron as much as it grieves me to say simply has more integrity, character and trust than Brown, which, by the way isn’t saying very much.
I am now having to plan for leaving the country in 2.5 years because I really cannot bear to be around in the UK when the Tories come back in. Italia here I come.
147. SeanT
The next Tory government - hopefully in 18 months - will probably be a minority administration, save some major movement in our favour!
Softly, softly catchy monkey. It’d be very difficult for Hague to make any major moves on quashing past treaties and altering our constitution unless he is secure in parliament. I expect an absolute majority of 30 would be necessary for real reform to allow for rebellions by the usual pro-EU Tory dinosaurs.
Otherwise, we have to deftly deal with the Lib Dems!
149 - He was a philistine.
150. Your best post ever. Bravo.
No Sean, Goliath was a champion of the Philistines - a cultered lot descended from the Greeks, faced with a load of former Egyptian slaves.
Of course the victors write the history books!
I am sure both sides were good chaps really!
147. thanks, i hope you are correct.
149 seant yes goliath was eventually slain but the impression left by Pascoe Brown in his article was more of Brown as a giant vs Cameron as a pygmy.
Pascoe Brown still sees Brown as strong, whilst many in the media see him as an indecisive dithering bottler.
150. couldnt agree more
119. - Report on the European Constitution by the Commons Committee
“This is Labour MPs who have concluded this. Not Bill Cash”. Bill Cash is a member of the committee in question, you twit. I think some of the other conservatives on the committee are eurosceptics too. Labour’s Kelvin Hopkins MP certainly is - he regards the EU as a nasty capitalist plot and he is so far to the loony left of Labour that he has never accepted the abolition of clause 4.
That is not to say that the committee may not have done a good forensic job on the treaty, which will help Brown.
To quote Mark Mardell’s conclusions
“…Gordon Brown’s top civil servant dealing with the EU.…has ordered diplomats and lawyers to tighten up what he apparently regarded as a rather sloppy document.
If Mr Brown wants to make a fuss at the summit in a couple of weeks’ time this will strengthen his hand.”
i.e. he will seek to clarify and strengthen Britain’s position at Lisbon, by negotiation.
But we know that negotiation isn’t what you want, you miserable xenophobe – a referendum, for UKIP, is of course a device to pull us out of Europe altogether. But you’re not honest enough to admit it.
28 - I’m still here Rik!
I think there is no doubt that Brown would have won a November election - the Tories knew it - which was why they were so desperate to put him off.
As I said on other threads a snap election benefits incumbents and stops opposition parties with money throwing a stash of cash at seats.
Whether the circumstances will be as good for Brown again - who knows? What I do know however is that the Lib Dems will not collapse and any thoughts of such is purely wishful thinking on behalf of some over excited Tories.
So who are the Reading defectors?
Absolutely, Tyson. Think I’ll try Australia!
150. Tyson.
“I am now having to plan for leaving the country in 2.5 years because I really cannot bear to be around in the UK when the Tories come back in. Italia here I come. ”
*Sigh* EVERYONE says this!! So did we before 1997, we’re all still here
The next Tory government is going to be nothing like as radically polarising, combative and obstinate as the Thatcher governments of the 1980s. Those days are over.
Besides, if we do win, it’ll be a minority administration and your beloved Labour party will still matter. It’s healthy to lose now and again.
So, relax!
Not good for Ming, but it’s a tough job he’s got. I think lefties have been tempted by the Lib Dems at the last 2 elections as a kind of Blair protest. Now the Tories seem like a real threat again, they’re going back to Labour. I think has steadily improved in the job after what was not the greatest of starts - he had a corking Question Time last week! - but when you don’t have a leader who can command the public attention well, the Liberals suffer. I would still expect them to go up a few points in an election campaign because of the extra coverage. Still Ming has the advantage of there not being an obvoius alternative for the leadership. Kennedy and Hughes are damaged goods, Huhne and Clegg unproven. I don’t think this is a bad time to buy Ming, once the price settles.
As for Brown, he’s paying the price for his own poor leadership. He surrounded himself with inexperienced acolytes instead of potential rivals (how Reid, Blunkett and Blair must be laughing!) and his own insecurity was woefully exposed at conference when all Cabinet Ministers were given just 7 minutes to speak! As i said before he’s like the ugly bride who insists all her Bridesmaids look plain, so as not to be upstaged.
Given none of the younger generation have covered themselves in glory during the wobble, is it time to buy Jack Straw as the next Labour Leader? It’s not as daft as it sounds!
One area where the Lib Dems are in better shape than Labour is with the choice of alternative Leaders.
They may only have 63 MPs Vs Labour’s 356 but they have at least 5 candidates who are markedly better than Labour’s choices.
The thing we should all worry about is that Labour’s are all in the cabinet running the country!
One former PM said (I think) about Churchill that “nothing grows under a heavy roller” and Labour have had two heavy rollers.
156 - It’s probably all part of Murdoch’s hedging strategy.
Goliath - hit by a small pebble and stopped in his tracks
Gordon - hit by a small tax cut and stopped in his tracks
94 Sean If Ming is going to step down in Jan/Feb that would mean a leadership campaign in the run up to the locals.Why wait?
A journalists view on Ming- Andrew Rawnsley 16th September.
“ala sfor Sir Menzies he is also much less charismatic than either of his predecessors………he couldn’t spin his way out of a plastics bag.He can’t deliver a sound bite to save his life…….
the Torie make no secret of their desire for Sir Menzies to carry on as Lib Dem leader.David Cameron says to friends “Ming is always in my prayers”
Rogerh
160. Icarus.
Australian views on immigration make the Monday Club look like a group of campaigners from Student Action for Refugees.
It never fails to surprise me how many people view Australia as the land of milk & honey, yet are back in the UK 5 years later. In addition to the media reports, I can think of 2 couples I know personally off the top of my head who’ve been through this.
It ain’t all it’s cracked up to be.
Tyson. Bravo! I laughed out loud and I agreed totally with your last paragraph.
Here’s a joke someone just sent me to cheer you up;
A magician worked on a cruise ship. The audience was different each week, so the magician allowed himself to do the same tricks over and over again.
There was only one problem: the captain’s parrot saw the shows each week and began to understand how the magician did every trick. So……..
“Look, it’s not the same hat!”
“Look, he’s hiding the flowers under the table.”
“Hey, why are all the cards the ace of spades?”
The magician couldn’t do anything. It was the captain’s parrot……
One day the ship sank. The magician found himself on a piece of wood with the parrot. They stared at each other with hatred but didn’t say a word. This went on for a day and then another. On the third day, the parrot couldn’t hold back any longer:
“OK, I give up.” said the parrot. “Where’s the f*cking ship?
119. Capitain Spaulding. You say: “”This is Labour MPs who have concluded this. Not Bill Cash”. Bill Cash is a member of the committee in question, you twit.”
Actually, no, it’s you that’s got a reading age of 12. But then, why am I surprised, you thought the Sun leader which was actually headlined:
You Don’t Fool Anyone Gordon
Was “not unhelpful to Gordon”
lol.
Anyway, to the point: Bill Cash actually wrote his own conclusions, which were rejected by the committee. It actually says that in Mardell’s report.
My friend works with adult learners. I can give you his number.
160- Icarus- at least there will be a Lab govt there
161- Casino- it is in our plans to move to Italy anyway- the Tory govt thing just sounded a bit more dramatic.
166- Dont be stupid, every other country in the world is better than the UK. Thats what the media tell us so it must be true…
167- roger, thanks- that joke is very funny- had me laughing out loud
165 True , A leadership election in the run up to next May’s locals would keep the LibDems in the news throughout that period . It is another positive reason for waiting till the new year .
161: “*Sigh* EVERYONE says this!! So did we before 1997, were all still here
”
Speak for yourself.
(Personally I vowed to leave Britain in 1997 if Blair, Major or Ashdown got in…)
52 - The obvious thing to do to IHT is simply to make the main residence of the deceased exmept, in the same way that it is exempt from capital gains tax.
This would, at a stroke, deal with all of the hardship issues surrounding very close friends who live together, and similar, where the house has to be sold to pay the tax. It would also remove the link with house prices which is doing so much to put the fear into “Middle England”.
It’s imperative that action is taken to clsoe the loopholes that the rich use to pass on other wealth untaxed, at the same time, to deal with the unfairness whereby it is only a tax paid by those who choose to pay, or who aren’t rich enough ofr it to be worthwhile to establish trusts, etc.
162. Frank Booth. Agreed I think Jack Straw is tremendous value at 50/1. I put this up a few days ago and had a score on. I’ve just gone in again.
I was a big fan of David Miliband in the run up to the Blair succession as regular readers will know. I am still a fan but don’t now seem him as leadership material for some time to come. He is intelligent and sincere but needs a lot more experience.
Miliband is Even money with William Hill. Jack Straw is 50/1! Go figure.
Just checked the price on William Hill. Straw is 50/1 to be next leader. Only 16/1 with Ladbrokes, however!
174. Why shouldn’t wealth be passed on untaxed ? Why is a member of a family dying a valid reason to take money for the state ? This is money that has already been taxed once when it was earned and twice when any income from it was taxed. It is the most unfair tax of them all. If you want to have a yearly luxury tax that is one way of achieving leftie redistribution but why randomly tax people just when they die ??
174 No this would encourage elderly people to remain in big houses that they couldn’t manage. Many would be put off seeking proper care. This is NOT the way to mitigate IHT.
174 - Unfair in practice, more so than a threshold rise. Could you imagine the screams when some mega rich person inherits and the 30 million pound gaffe they live in is exempted and due to some clever dodge there entire remaining estate is valued at just shy of the threshold?
174 - Timothy, how do you know the value of a house? Would the survivng relatives need to pay for a valuation?
I’m intrigued by the certainlty expressed by some LDs that Campbell will step down.
Why should he do that? Genuine question, I can see why other LD MPs might want to get rid of him, but they can’t have another coup, so the only reason I can see that there can be a change is if he chooses to step down.
This is a genunine enquiry- why would he want to do such a thing?
Tyson 150
Excellent post, I applaud your honesty.
However, don’t be in such a hurry to leave the country when the Tories regain power. Remember: after we’ve rid ourselves of the repulsive Brown, THINGS CAN ONLY GET BETTER!
168. I actually said “not unsympathetic”, so I suppose I could make silly jibes about your reading ability, too.
The point that I’m making, that you fail to grasp, is that
a) yes, Labour had a bad setback over the weekend
b) naturally, this has attracted much adverse comment in the media, but
c) this morning’s papers were, on the whole, not too bad and the story will be forgotten quite soon by most people (except obsessives like you)
geddit now?
No I didn’t pick up the fact that Bill Cash wrote a set of recommendations that were rejected by his colleagues. Poor nutter, he obviously hasn’t changed.
If Brown had gone for a November election, I believe the real contest between Tory and Labour would have wiped out the LDs - especially with a leader as weak as Campbell.
The LDs must see this as a narrow escape. I would be amazed if Campbell survived until the next election.
I think if Nick Clegg took over, many of the LDs who have switched to Tory would switch back again.
From Mike’s article. Well done Mike with your recent spread betting success. I’ve managed to buy well recently but haven’t yet traded out. If I was going abroad I would probably do so.
But I still foresee further downward movement in the spread for Labour once we get some polls that fully take into account the debacle of the election that dared not speak it’s name and Brown’s subsequent dissembling.
173. Didn’t leave yourself much room for maneovere did you!!
186 - Well at least he delivered going by his name!
150: good honest gutsy post, respect.
But I don’t agree the Northern Rock thing was good for Brown, quite the opposite! It was panicky and they seemed all at sea. Labour nationalised the banking system in effect, which is courageous to sya the least given the fact that the economy is largely built on a quicksand of personal debt.
The election whenever it comes will be decided by the economy, and it does’t look pretty for Prudence.
183.
“geddit?”
“obsessives like you”
“you twit”
“miserable xenophobe”
Captain Spaulding, you do seem a little bit irritable today. You have my sympathies, it can’t be much fun having to come on here and try and spin some tedious bunch of crap, to try and get Gordo out of the hole he so recently excavated. In fact your life must be quite dismal, if you feel a need to post this drivel.
So take a holiday. Really. Gordon is an idiot. He’s not worth it.
Move on.
Tyson/Rodger/Icarus.
Above all party politics, I am a patriot. The thing I am loyal to first and foremost is my country. Politics is secondary. I would never leave. It upsets me to hear that you want to leave to
There is no country in the world that rivals our green and pleasant land, rustic pubs, quaint pastimes and sense of humour. I am fully prepared to accept the democratic electoral mandate of a party I completely oppose, if elected by my fellow countrymen, but I am willing to stay and fight to see my own party elected, no matter how long it takes.
Sorry, but this whole “I haven’t won, so I’m not PLAYING anymore!” smacks me as rather childish and immature. Maybe selfish even?
Leaving is surrendering. Not only does your party lose your vote, it also probably loses one its most committed activists.
Be men - stay and fight for the Britain you want!
“Combined with my spread betting on the general election date my overall profit in the past two and half weeks amounts to just on £5,000 - all tax free”
So shall I ask them to make you a reservation for dinner at La Mere Germaine?.
Tyson at 150. I sympathise with your frustration, but try if you can to imagine what it’s been like to have been a Tory for the last fifteen years or so.
Just checked on Hills…have I missed the 66/1 on Laws?
192. Quite. I’ve had to sit here and watch Labour try and sell my country down the river in Europe. That hasn’t been easy. If they continue to do it I too might feel obliged to bog off somewhere sunny.
Hey! Let’s hire a pb.com bus so we can all emigrate. The Mike Smithson “Anywhere But Here” Eurosceptic Charabanc. Tyson can drive.
Tyson You may have decided to emigrate but that need not change your decision to continue posting here.
181. I agree with you Brit spin.
Also why do people assume that a new leader will automatically provide some magical boost. I thought we had comprehensively dis-proved that particular theory with Haugue/IDS/Howard.
Lets be honest do we think that the Lib-Dems real problem is that Ming is a bit ancient and struggles with sound bites?
No.
Their problem is that they are were formed in the late 1980’s (and lets not pretend the Lib-Dems have any meaningful connection to the old Liberal party) as a soft left Trojan horse to take Tory seats in the Southern shires, at which I acknowledge they were very successful. Their life span was extended beyond 1997 by the electorate’s lingering repugnance of the Tories and, laterly, by taking anti-war votes from Labour. Both these factors are now rapidly receeding into history.
A new Lib-Dem leader will, on its own, change none of this. The whole party needs to reposition itself. I would argue that there are greater opportunities on the left (there is a reasonable case for redistributing wealth, even if I personally disagree with it). If someone had the courage to make it they would find they had a considerable constituency.
“Leaving is surrendering. Not only does your party lose your vote, it also probably loses one its most committed activists.
Be men - stay and fight for the Britain you want!”
Sorry Casino but I’ve had 18 years of that Britain……. ‘Wait for me to get my hat Tyson……’
192, 194: On a bit of a tangent, I’m sure we could do better than a system where a party representing just over half of the electorate takes all the decisions for years and locks out the others, then the whole thing switches over and the other half get locked out.
Time we got rid of the whole parliament business and let people vote on the issues (all of them, not just the occasional referendum cooked up with a specific objective in mind) themselves - or if they don’t want to worry about all the nitty-gritty, delegate their vote to somebody else for as short or as long a time as they want.
If I may raise a question which is off-topic but really intrigues me!
Does anybody have any explanation as to why Tony Blair had an audience with the Queen the day after the 2001 and 2005 Elections? There is no constitutional requirement for a re-elected PM to go to the Palace - and I am not aware of an earlier precedent! It may hane been a typical Blair publicity stunt - but why would Buckingham Palace go along with it?
Fred Thompson’s debate debut in Michigan tonight.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/08/a-crucial-debut/
197.
Roger, I thought you were already resident in Villefranche-sur-Mer, and merely had millionaire non-domicile status in England. Hence your support for Labour, no?
I would never leave, (bet that cheers everyone up) it doesn’t matter whose in government, you accept the verdict of the voters, even if it isn’t the party of your choice. While leaving yourself free to carp and criticise.
However if someone were to offer me, (free) a nice villa over looking Lake Garda, I’d be f***ing tempted: any offers?
196. Undoubtedly correct, up to a point. But the Lib Dems simply couldn’t pull off such a transformation - they have a ringing wet middle class leadership and most of their voters are of the same ilk, especially in the seats they actually hold.
They couldn’t credibly pose as a ’socialist alternative’, nor could they take their middle class support with them if they did. Labour’s bedrock leftwing vote wouldn’t come over in the numbers required - the electoral geography is against them here. Swapping Cheltenham, Harrogate and Richmond for Doncaster, West Ham and Bootle just ins’t going to happen.
198. Edmund.
Labour find it too hard to give the British people even ONE referendum. Yet alone a regular vote on all the issues!
The Swiss have a pretty funky system. Bit boring though.
198 - It would turn Britain into a Big Brother society in the Endemol rather than Orwell sense.
202. I can offer you a free flat in Brixton, overlooking Lake Ganja?
The Monarch is always around after an election in case there is a change of Government. The newly elected PM will visit the Head of State outline proposals for the State Opening and discuss the new Cabinet.
John Major and Margaret Thatcher did exactly that.
190- Casino- good post- Britain really is a great country- the people, Radio 4, the climate, the countryside, the cities, the coast. Politicians will come and go- the fabric of this country will not change.
192- Marcus- what is totally annoying about the Brown situation is poor leadership. The Tories had to contend with events (ERM), and a genuine and divisive split in the party. These in many respects were unavoidable, even for many years hence.
Brown had a united party, a good reputation, a Tory party still malcontented with life, and pretty much a benign set of events- and has blown this completely. And- if you look beyond Brown who else is there on the Labour front bench. Only Jack Straw and a bunch of kids!
This is not just some mistake- this episode has clearly shown that Brown is not upto being PM. I do not trust him now. At least Blair was charming, skilful, and light footed- Brown just seems lumbering, weak and calculating.
I mean not mentioning the Tories once in his conference speech- who does he think he is? You can only rise above politcis once you retire. In his delusion he was trying to project himself as something else.
Everything Brown now does will be coloured by this set of events. He has lost his credibility, integrity, feeling of competence, and trust. And the worst part- he deserves it.
It’s not taken long for the dust to settle. Labour ahead in the polls again and the Tories tax plans ripe for picking.
What does it say about the state of our politics that so many committed activists would joke about leaving the country? Because clearly it *is* tempting. Dare I suggest a period of ruminative malaise, reflecting that of the electorate, might be settling here after the last two weeks exertions?
207 -Major, Thatcher, wilson and Macmillan did not go to the Palace the day after their re election.Audiences relating to the State Opening of Parliament and the Queen’s Speech took place a week or more later!
208 - I think that Brown is one of the few people ot become PM who doesn’t have a hinterland. Most PM’s you can guess what they might get up to after Downing Street. Blair was always going to be a roving celebrity ambassador, Major always gonna watch cricket etc. What does Brown do having been scheming a political career since he was in short troosers? I think people realise now that he is an uber-politician, with nothing else in his life at all. He is a politics geek with none of the quirky charm.
212. What about ‘Miranda’ Blair?
181 - he isn’t going to stand down. Campbell will be Leader at the next election in 2009/10.
My better half watched Clegg being interviewed this morning and was most complimentary. She is a socially minded conservative, but said no problems voting for him, he is articulate, good things to say, clear, young and definately not pompous. If that is a general view then both Labour and the Conservatives may have to think deeply about what they want and where they will be in 12 months time.
How would he go down in Scotland?
Personally I differ slightly and would like to see them select a suitable woman candidate, if there is one, which would accentuate the differences between the parties.
Think Ming should step down by the Christmas recess, then the contest could be organised for mid January and end during February.
One thought will his wife let him?
Blair was an extremely courteous man. It’s no surprise that the Queen would want to congratulate him on his return- especially as he saved her bacon in ‘97.
212 - What hinterland did Thatcher have?
209 - A poll they were never behind in, and which was 4/5’s complete before Brown red the runes and ran away shedding his credibility along the route. And you think the way to win a battle of ideas is to prove that the only party that has any is the Conservatives.
212 Another politician without a hinterland was St Margaret, and it didn’t seem to do her any electoral harm.
214 We will have to agree to disagree on this , Dan .
217. Thatcher had a surprising hinterland as a drinker and Soho-ite.
Seriously. I went to the epically bohemian drinking club the Colony Rooms in Soho, a few years back - and they’ve got a signed picture of her on the wall (or they did have).
I was most surprised by this so I asked the famously crabby barman what that was all about - and he said she used to pop in from time to time and sink a few whiskies.
No kidding.
I don’t understand all the sudden Labour wavering “oh God let’s move abroad” crowd. I would *never* leave this country. You go if you want to. Your “support” was obviously paper thin. I mean, if you could vote Labour after Iraq and then want to emigrate just cos Gordon made a bit of a horlicks about an election date, well old fruit, it says more about you than anything else.
218 - The Labour vote has gone up in this poll!
As for the ‘battle of ideas’ - it’s a very good ‘idea’ to flush out the Tory foxes and shoot them.
174 Problem with just making the main residence free of IHT is that you can just go out and buy a house up to the value you need to avoid IHT in later years, say it is your main residence (as per Ed Balls) and it’s all sorted.
212- James- what a sad little figure he (Brown) projects at the minute.
I am so angry you know because I had such high hopes for him- I quite liked the odd stunt like trawling out Thatcher. There is a rough and tumble to politics that is amusing. I was rather hoping he was going to spoil the Tory party conference too- maybe a defection. But the Iraq visit was just so badly done- and that was just the start. So depressing because we are stuck with him now as leader of the Labour party.
Tyson at 150 “I am now having to plan for leaving the country in 2.5 years because I really cannot bear to be around in the UK when the Tories come back in. Italia here I come.”
Even if Berlusconi makes a comeback by then?
224. Yes - that sort of behaviour is what is behind the recent boom in agricultural land prices.
193.
“have I missed the 66/1 on Laws? ”
You would be wiser, at those odds, to bet on Kermit the Frog.
223 - You flushed out one idea from the Conservatives for a profligate use of political capital. What a bargain!
re 199 I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with Blair publicity stunt. No need whatsoever.
Tyson, stop blubbing!
It’s a relief that Gordon has made these mistakes so early on in his premiership.
We’ve all just witnessed how long a week in politics can be. There are at least another 75 weeks to go before the next election.
There’s no real appetite for the Tories. Not even their best showing in the last week would give them a majority.
Labour can learn some valuable lessons at their leisure and come back stonger than ever.
220 - indeed - we’ll know in a few months whether you’re right…
93. No Comment!
225 - And the next generation have blotted their copybook because they were so naively eager and are responsible for this unholy mess. It’s a shame because I genuinely want a contest, too many one-sided elections in the last 30 year!
229 …and a lead in the polls.
22 redflump- it is not the election date, it is the character of the man that this whole episode has uncovered.
Gordon IMO opinion over the next 2/3 years will squeeze public services to deliver tax cuts, he will pander ever more to the authoritarian press of the Mail and the Sun, he will pursue the populism of ID cards- he will be doing this to win an election.
Brown will probably sanction a referendum on the Euro treaty, a vote he will undoubtedly lose as anti Labour sentiment spills over. He will lead to Boris winning London for the same reason. In the next 2.5 years he will lead the Labour party into a state of division, demoralisation and loss of identity for the sake of saving his political reputation.
The Tory years have started now in all but name- Labour’s ERM moment, but Brown will lurch full stream to the right on taxation, europe, immigration, crime to try to regain popularity. At least the Tories had some years of a Tory govt after the ERM. Brown is too calculating to stick to his principles.
gabble 231 “Labour can learn some valuable lessons at their leisure and come back stonger than ever.”
Brown will learn no “lessons”, he doesn’t have the capability, he is an empty vessel who operates by bullying, scheming, lying and manipulation. He won’t change his spots because he is incapable of doing so.
He will continue in the same dismal vein as before but, sadly for him, most of us have now seen that the emperor has no clothes.
235 - one poll. We are not going to see the damage until polls done after Saturday are in the public domain.
Tyson I must admit that I would be pretty damn cheesed off if Cameron started re-nationalising things and returning power to trade unions; so I can see why Brown ticks you off so much.
In fact I can remember being incandescent when a Tory government - having worked so hard to deregulate and disassemble numerous state monopolies then came up with a single lottery franchise, granted to a monopoly provider with the proceeds going to a single state-run body.
WHAT WERE WE DOING!
It still makes me angry now!
I quite like the new Tyson. Wasn’t that averse to the old one, but the new one is rather bracing.
218. James, do you really want me to list all the policies that Labour has introduced since 1997 which the current conservative party has adopted as their own? Please, spare me having to do that.
This talk of “stealing” ideas is silly. Voters don’t care where an idea comes from. in fact they quite like it if a government is willing to listen to ideas from beyond its own patch.
Look, if IHT is really unpopular and Labour are going to reform it, people will be pleased. End of.
It’s as if Labour posters in 1990 were crowing “ah you’ve stolen our ideas on getting rid of the poll tax” or if Callaghan had had the guts to introduce a Council house ownership scheme in the late seventies then Tories would have cried “see, shot yourself in the foot there- that was our idea”
Of course, none of this is to deny that the Tories will have got credit for making a proposal first- though mostly they’re gettingthe credit for making it look painless, which won’t last.
Personally I think we’d be better to push IHT up the scale, but not as far as the Tories, and if there’s money left over from taxing the private euity boys, use it for the NHS and Schools, with a hint that if the economy grows above forecast we might be able to but the basic rate.
236 - Why don’t we just all go out and hang ourseleves - prospects for us are just so *bleak*.
For pity’s sake, pull yourself together. Boris will not win the mayoralty of London as he is a buffon - entertaining, but still a clown.
The economy *may* be headed into troubled waters, but you get two economists that agree on anything!
Brown may have forever blotted his copy book with you, but he is a man of immense calibre and stature and dispite all the sh*te that I and others have rained down on him he is still the man for the job. I predicted Labour will win a fourth term with a 40+ majority and I stick to that.
Why don’t you just take a chill pill and have a nice cuppa tea. Gordon will win through for us.
‘Brown is too calculating to stick to his principles’
‘he is an empty vessel who operates by bullying, scheming, lying and manipulation’
It seems we have a great deal of consensus across the political divide in PB.com concerning the deeply unattractive figure who is currently prime minister.
242 - “Gordon will win through for us.” That encapsulates why he will fail.
Aye, Gordon is indeed a moron. The weird thing is that we were all so taken in my him just a week ago. You could have said of Gordo, a few days back, what Shakespeare said of Ceasar:
“Why man, he doth bestride the narrow world: Like a Colossus, and we petty men: Walk under his huge legs and peep about.”
But now we’ve walked between his huge legs, and we’ve had a peep about, and we’ve even looked up his kilt. And we’re still sniggering.
240- with that compliment seanT- I will sign off for a bit- until the next exciting phase of politics hits us, and I cannot quite see myself building a whole heap of enthusiasm for the Oz election.
By the way as this is a betting site would like to say with all my laying, and betting on the election date I made a grand profit of 87p. Could have been a lot worse- but I dithered as much as our Great Leader on this one. Still, glad that I am not PM mind.
192 Marcus Wood “Tyson at 150. I sympathise with your frustration, but try if you can to imagine what it’s been like to have been a Tory for the last fifteen years or so.”
What about the unfortunate people who have been socialist for the past 28 years?
236 I hope you’re right, but I have my doubts.
I hope the next few weeks brings some sanity to politics in general and this board in particular.
The last week or so has been a personal disaster for Brown, but he isn’t “holed beneath the Water line” as some have suggested. The acute memory of this - the memory of a shambolic man humiliated and caught in a lie - will fade pretty quickly, though it will leave a legacy including a reluctance on the part of the press to take what Brown says on face value and a reputation as a ditherer, a bottler and a political gameplayer which will be readily brought to the fore on future occasions when he looks set to dither, bottle or play games. Expect opponants to (rightly) take the line “this is just like the time when…”
The Tories on the board have been a little over-exuberant. Given the current volatility in the polls a small lead here or there carries little meaning - I wouldn’t trust a man who switches his vote with political weather to turn out to vote for my party at an election. That said, the long-term prospects for the Tories are looking very good. Plenty of us noted that Brown was best served by going early, but were betting long in view of Brown’s known caution (and other factors including boundary changes, the Cameron effect etc). Now we know (or at least think we know) there will be no election for the next 18 months or more, and we know Cameron and his team are able to produce policies
OK Tyson. Time to get real. Brown was too clumsy to execute a publicity stunt with the aplomb Maggie used to every time she was photographed driving a Chiefton Tank or when she ran a ‘Falklands Factor’ campaign…….
….But neither has he pilloried gays been the only leader in the Western world to support apartheid South Africa or befriended the mass murderer General Pinochet. Nor been the friend of every fascist South American regime Reagan could find to arm.
Neither for that matter did he spend the last four years with his head stuffed up Bush’s backside or declare the Israeli bombing of Lebanon “justified” and appoint the dreadful Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary.
What he did was try to imitate some of Blair’s less charming stunts and fail because it’s not his thing. In two months he’ll get into his stride and we’ll talk again……
…which resonate with voters, the contest is very open.
The big beneficiaries of Cameron and Osbornes policies will be people like this I guees.
And screw whether the figures stack up to pay for it
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=462313&in_page_id=1879
Man of the people, and wife to benefit by £560,000.
What he did was try to imitate some of Blair’s less charming stunts and fail because it’s not his thing
..plus engaging in a bizarre attempt to pose as your hero Maggie Thatcher in drag, with a party conference speech more suited to Nuremburg than Bournemouth.
“But neither has he pilloried gays been the only leader in the Western world to support apartheid South Africa or befriended the mass murderer General Pinochet. Nor been the friend of every fascist South American regime Reagan could find to arm.”
You must be so, so sad, that the Cold War ended the way it did.
250. No Brown just PAID for the Iraq War, and the bombs that helped to kill 700,000 people, while Blair went out and sold it.
BTW I like this Reuters news about the LABOUR head of the European Constitution Committee:
This morning the Commons committee’s chairman, Michael Connarty, from the governing Labour Party, warned that [Gordon Brown's] Constitution safeguards would not be water-tight. “We believe that the red lines will not be sustainable,” he told BBC radio.
“Looking at the legalities and use of the European Court of Justice, we believe these will be challenged bit by bit and eventually the UK will be in a position where all of the treaty will eventually apply to the UK.”
That’s Gordon’s man, speaking about the Constitution. The LABOUR chairman of the Commons committee who have been studying the entire text.
C’mon Gordon. Let’s be having this referendum. You know you’ve got to in the end. Stop prolonging the pain.
250, Roger, I think you are overlooking the fact that at the time the photoshoot with Maggie was deemed a success for Team Brown - it was interpreted as a nod of approval from (still) our most popular prime minister and something of a snub to Cameron. It is only in hindsight, after Brown showed himself to be a gamesman in re the election fiasco, that people began to re-interpret this and other events and see them in a new, more cynical, light.
252 tim
Get with it. IHT is a tax on the unprepared. The rich don’t pay it unless they are lazy.
Tyson stick around, it will not only be the Oz election coming up.
One caveat though, the shop steward is getting worried for us Tories as you are so effective this week, so lay off Brown for a bit otherwise we will be out of a job.
Paddy Ashdown’s former press secretary likens Ming to Skeletor (those of you with children will know apparently) in today’s Indy.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3041079.ece
Compeltely off-topic but I notice from the Menezes trial that getting back on a bus is a capital offence these days. The farce that no-one is going be held culpable for his death is the only thing that has left me more angry than Iraq in recent years.
252 Good to see our future PM can afford pay for his own holidays.
Just come across this interesting analysis from Forecast UK
http://www.forecastuk.org.uk/
Suggests GB had a lucky escape.
Gordon said he had a vision - the voters saw through it.
257.
Thats the dream headline isn’t it.
Cameron and Osborne families avoid all IHT.
Chris A other dodgy logic from the other Blair: terrorism is increasing so we need to increase detention without trial.
Frank field refreshingly honest on world at one. “we should be honest about lifting the tory IHT idea. be honest where it came from, there is nothing wrong with lifting good ideas from the conservatives”.
259. Well we couldn’t have ‘Sir’ Ian the government’s pet copper losing his job now, could we?
Poor old Woger, a few years ago he could have used all that wealth tavelled to Moscow with Labour Party activists and decided that this was the future.
The millions that died in the the Gulags and Mao’s Great March Forward were just little people werent they? They probably didnt have second and third honmes in the South of France and a nice Millfield education paid for by daddy. They would just starve whilst Woger studies the desert menu in his favourite restaurant, or get run over by a tank whilst he reads the overseas edition of the Guardian.
Sad the world got it wrong in 1989.
262. The pitiful recent standard of astroturfing by this poster shows no sign of improvement.
262 how nice it would be if we ere like the States and politician’s tax records were in the public domain. Then we could see which taxes they impose on the rest of us the politicians pay themselves. Mr and Mrs Balls, Gordon, the Milliband family Trust Company etc.
It would be very revealing to see which socialists bequeath their entire estate to charity or the Treasury. I think we know the answer.
I note Rik W’s 2 defections in Reading from the LibDems are a former Town Councillor and someone who stood as a candidate in 2004 , not quite earth shattering but I suppose in his own mind it may make up for the mythical 3 LibDem MP’s who he forecast were going to defect .
268 kingbongo. I’m not too sure that policy will be in the next Conservative party manifesto either !!
232 Dan. You can’t be serious, a man of 68 or 69, No, No No, and I am in my sixties as well.
It would be electoral suicide for the Liberal Democrats, and they would deserve what they get.
269.Mark, don’t you ever get bored of this kind of tit for tat posting? Its boring and childish, and next week you will be crowing about some non entity we have never heard of defecting from the Tory party to the Libdems, and so it goes on!
The only time I find this kind party switching/twitching interesting, is when it effects the control of a council.
272 You mean like the 2 Conservative councillors in Barrow who defected to the LibDems last week and cost the Conservatives control of the council ?
On the issue of any Lib Dem MPs defecting, their window for doing this has shrunk because most now have their main challengers selected. The last of the top Tory targets should be selected within a few months. So jump now or it becomes more difficult.
That said the fact that many LD MPs have a large personal vote can make it easier for them to defect than a Quentin Davies type of defector.
269 - With poll ratings as dire as they are at the moment. Career minded Lib Dem birds might be well advised to come roost in the Tory tree! I don’t think it will happen but ya never know.
272 ChrisD. No no … it’s one of the joys of PB that Rik amd Mark trade defections like cold war spies on a bridge in Berlin.
We’re all Smiley’s people now !! :-)…… Aarrgggh
246. Got you beat!
I made 46p - if I hadn’t bottled it (haha) and traded like a deranged Nick Leeson, that would have been 46 squids, rather than pennies
273.Yes.
276.Jack, I keep waiting to see to if either one of them will come up with a knock out defection like an MP.
270 for some reason I suspect it won’t garner much cross-party support!
277. I made £118. Should have been a lot more but i missed laying 1.34 by a millisecond. Never mind, will pay for all my petrol running round organising our local campiagn for the autumn election.
Is Captain Darling likely to make this a long speech today. Can’t find any spreads.
“Watchdog attacks “harsh” tax credit system”
http://news.scotsman.com/latest_uk.cfm?id=1613762007
281 - It won’t matter how long it is it will still send everyone to sleep!
283. True, he is a tedious speaker. Could be worse. Imagine if it was Piers Fletcher-Dervish sorry Ed Balls doing it.
The candour some Labour supporters have shown on this thread concerning these difficult times is admirable, so I will resist any temptation to laugh or sneer. However, the root of the problem is that Brown allowed himself to get carried away with the nonsense some of the acolytes of his inner-circle and sycophants in the media were telling him about himself - namely that he is a political tactician of such dizzying abilities that a few of his stunts would be sufficient to obliterate the Tory party and keep Labour in power for ever. Sorry Gord old chap but you’re not that good. I think it all started to go wrong at Brown’s conference speech - a piece of opportunistic, populist rabble rousing whose sole, cringe-worthy aim was to tickle Paul Dacre’s erogenous zones. I must confess that at the time I was terrified by what I heard. Now I just hope it was a clumsy and irresponsible attempt to mop up the votes of bigots and will quickly and quietly be abandoned. Brown has been exposed as a political mediocrity in recent days - probably even to himself. The delusions of grandeur should now have passed, and ironically that could be Labour’s best hope.
284 - What blinky? He’s already overpromoted.
281. Well done.
I’m wondering whether I should just do *exactly* what Mike Smithson always does (kinda like shadowing the Deutschmark
) in the hope of getting a result!
He rarely gets it wrong and my betting instincts seems to suck so what’s there to lose?!
All of this bouncing around in the polls reminds me very much of 1992!
145 Icarus. Didn’t David Niven say that about Errol Flynn ?
Touching to see Roger and Tyson clinging together in adversity.
Grumpy: agree with you about the newspaPERS.
re 287. Thanks for the vote of confidence. I’m going through a good run at the moment but I do get it wrong on occasions. In July I underestimated the scale of the Brown bounce and lost a bit and on Saturday I could have made more money on the “Gordon weeks” spread market if I had not been totally involved with the rugby.
I had put on offer for sale on the Spreadfair markets all my sell position at 87 weeks. I had got this at an average of about 40 weeks and when I heard the election news I rushed to close the sell bet down. Alas I was too late. The sell price is now about 107 weeks.
What time does Captain Darling start ?
285 Yes I agree. The groupies at the Party Conference obviously began to believe their own propaganda and Brown was convinced he could walk on water. A few salutary lessons have been learned - I hope.
However I am a bit concerned about all this talk of visions - does this really mean what I think it means (ie that he hasn’t got one???)
292. Yes.
178 - Yes, you are right, back to the drawing board! Although… a land value tax would help to encourage people to downsize anyway…
180 - Er, what I had proposed would obviate the need for a valuation since the main house passed down would not be taxed (but see above). As I understand it the present situation is that a house needs to be valued to establish the IHT payable on it. Capiche?
177 - It is the inheritance that is taxed, being unearned income. What Tories need to explain is why they think workers should pay higher taxes on their earned income, so that the rich can benefit through an accident of their birth.
The money raised by taxing the non-doms could be used to cut the tax on those on lower incomes, rather than increasing the nest egg the already privileged have access to.
179 - I think the main problem in your scenario is the “clever dodge” that would value the rest of the estate at just shy of “the threshold”. After removing the main house from the estate to be taxed, the threshold could be substantially reduced and the loopholes closed. It’s true that large country houses being passed down would be exempt, but then I thought they already were due to creative use of existing loopholes (the open one sunday a year thing?)
290 I was sitting in a tent at the Oktoberfest on Saturday afternoon when a text arrived confirming the election was off, not really possible to close out my position from there either!
I am the bearer of crushing news that will undoubtedly send our very own Andrea into a morbid depression from which only the repeated playing of Village People’s YMCA and a quick fix with a pink sequined boa will bring him back to his wits.
I refer, of course, to the latest finding of Mrs Dale’s Dairy poll that indicates that if David Davis pushes Cammy under the proverbial eco friendly Clapham omnibus then Hunky Dinky Dunky would score a whopping ….. next LibDem poll score ?? …. a whole one percent !!!!!!!!!
The burghers of Rutland are outraged ….. assist the recovery of the Milan one !! Vote Dunky !!
291 3.30 i think
BBC saying 14:15 for the pre-budget briefing. It’s 15:15 now… I am in the wrong time zone of something?… confused. The BBC feed is an hour behind on the clock.
294 re 177. Yes but when my dad slipped me a tenner on the way to the pub when I was a poor student I was benefitting from “unearned” income on which he had already paid tax, had he happened to die that day I would only have received £6. Why is that fair ?
Its an envy tax - but life isn’t fair - some people get an inheritance - good on them for having hard working parents.
You want an “etch-a-sketch” model where everyone is shaken clean at birth just because you dislike wealth and wealthy people.
HF Even from a purely tactical point (without considering the political / policy / ideological implications) it is clear that attacking the Tories IS the right way to go for the Lib Dems. Only by clearing them out the way was it on to get at Labour. Now that the media, the commentators, and not least the Tories themselves, are believing they have won the battle with the Lib Dems decisively (for the moment), the squeeze is on the LDs. Had the LDs had a different outcome, which was possible until the decapitation of Charlie, then the whole polling situation would now be different, and would have enabled the attack on Labour to continue as in the period 2002 - 5. As things stand, the LDs should attack both. I think Ming’s “Cosy Consensus” attack on both Tories and Labour during his Conference speech was well-judged, and has resonance with many people in the country.
The BBC keep telling its viewers not to believe everything you here from the chancellor!! how things have changed. the BBC is now looking only for the hidden tax rises and trumped up spending increases.
I’ve just had a comment on ConHome censored for being “childish”
Freedom of speech is a truly wonderful thing !!
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2007/10/peter-bone-mp-w.html?cid=85739270#comments
300. This is nonsense, really, isn’t it? the idea that the Lib Dems - a left wing party - could ‘replace’ the Tories - a right wing one - was absurd. It was just the overexcited response to the dismal Hague/IDS leaderships.
302: What was the content of the post?
303 - Are the LibDems now suffering the invetable consequence of fighting a war on 2 fronts?
291.
Brown: “I want to make you happy darling. I want to cover you in pepper and then sneeze all over you!”
Darling: “Really, Gordon, I must protest!!”
294 A land value tax (it use to be called the rates) is an excellent idea from an economic and social policy point of view. It would have the effect of reducing the price of property thus helping the famous “first time buyers” we all hear so much about.
The Tory proposals on IHT and Stamp Duty, on the other hand, would both reduce property taxation and therefore drive up prices. They make good politics but crap economics.
300 Tim13, the lesson from GE2005 is that the LD decapitation strategy for Tory shadow ministers achieved one scalp and consumed resources that would heave been better directed
1) winning Labour seats and
2) defending their own LD seats in fights with Conservatives.
This happened before Charlie was removed.
I also suspect (not verified), that since the Conservatives have been growing their base of councillor seats in every year since 1996, that in the Lib Dem Vs Conservative battles that the LDs have been losing councillor seats to the Conservatives.
If that is the case then what we have is a long term trend of losing battles to Conservatives. It follows that the Lib Dems have been gaining councillors, in nett terms, in their battles with Labour.
300 It was fanciful then, and it’s even more fanciful, now.
Darlings going a little bald from the back
Brown looks knackered
305 James, yes a war on two fronts is not a good idea. Something that the Conservatives have had to endure but which looks like reducing to 1 1/2 fronts after the next GE.
302. jsfl. I noted that it was a difficult comparison to say that the economies of Norway, Switzerland and Iceland were like the UK, but that if we did withdraw from the EU we might take a leaf out of their book and become a chocolate making fishing nation with a handy line in cuckoo clocks and geysers.
It seems such comments are now inappropriate in the new puritan model of moderated ConHome.
Which Economic cycle is he talking about. Goalposts have been moved so often, I’ve lost track.
313. You are so immature Jack
313. I appreciate the humour in your comment obviously Conhome didn’t!
299 - I’ve just read Kurt Vonnegut’s “The Sirens of Titan” in which, at one point, people are inspred to handicap themselves for accidents of birth which they see as giving themselves an “unfair advantage” in life. An interesting way of thinking about things.
I wouldn’t take things as far as that, but I do think that unfettered inheritance allows the unjust accumulation of wealth which distorts our society. So I have philosophical objections which spring from my egalitarian tendencies.
However, there is also a more immediate pragmatic political problem. Given a spare few billion pounds, why cut IHT for estates above £300k instead of reducing tax on the low paid?
Take a family with six grandchildren: £300k gives £50k each, entirely untaxed! Why should the tax on this be reduced even further at the relative expense of the working poor?
Full time on the minimum wage and it would take about 5 years to earn £50k… but that would be gross, before tax. Put simply, cutting IHT is about redistributing money from the poor to the rich. Naturally a leftist would oppose it, just as I will wail and gnash my teeth when Labour ape the Tories and do it anyway.
299. Do you remember that thing the leader of the Conservative party talked about the other week.. social.. social.. no not ism… err. Oh yes. Social Mobility. that’s the thing.
What’s happened over the last two decades, under Thatcher, major and Blair, is that we’ve reduced taxes on high incomes. That’s reduced this social mobility, because if you’re wealthy you’ve been able to keep and pass on more of your wealth. What’s more, because the economy’s been roaring along for the last decade, the value of assets has risen, so the asset rich are feeling very good about life.
Now, the asset poor (people like me ol’ mum and dad) aren’t worse off, far from it. Jobs have been plentiful, the rising tide has been lifting their boats too, no question. But there’s a problem see. take George and David. Both of them have been to university, got decent jobs and are working hard. George’s parents are going to pass on a million quid when they kick the bucket. Fair enough. David will get 10p, a bag of crisps and a consolong handshake from the vicar. Again, fair enough.
Now, give George an extra 250k to play with an he and his ilk will quite reasonably inflate the price of various assets beyond the reach of David.
Now if you want to promote social mobility, as your leader says he does, you could take that 250k and use it to cut taxes at the low income end, subisidise house building, improve a broader range of schools, pay for more university places or whatever.
All of that will be good for Dave and his kids. YOu can even do it in very thatcherite ways by using it to provide massive tax breaks for small businesses, small scale share ownership and so on.
Now, I very much fear that due to the nature of politics and the number of people in the SE who look at their newly impressive asset (house) and think I want to keep that in the family, Labour will have to do something on IHT, but no-one should pretend that doing so is anything other than a big handout to the haves, to the social disadvantage of the have-nots.
Put simply, cutting IHT is about redistributing money from the poor to the rich
I think ’simplistically’ is the word you were looking for.
“savings” made by departments by 2010 GBP30bn………….errr so thats budget cut of 30bn then?
315/316. I had another comment censored !!
I’ve got Tim Montgomerie on the run now !!
Nick Robinson is an arse isn’t he “As chancellor, total obscurity is not an option for Alistair Darling” - Well it worked for his predecessor!
No surpise from Osborne at that one.
He made up his figures anyway.
317 Yes you are right - inherited wealth creates a lazy rentier class who have no need to use their skills and talents for work and so these skills and talents are often wasted and society is the poorer. It’s hard to think of a thriving society whose success is based on inherited wealth - most of the last century’s most successful societies have been those which worked and invested hardest (and I mean postwar West Germany, Japan, South East Asia, Australia etc - not much inherited wealth there).
Oh ho ho. What a surprise. Labour are nicking policies again.
He’s nicked all of our ideas.
darling is just reading out osbornes tax proposals what a tw@t. txes on flights not passengers……..the fightback has begun….. how pathetic
325. How have they done it?
(the hairs on my wooden leg tell me the “story” from this may well be “Labour steals Tory policy”; “intellectually bankrupt”, “spin” etc. etc.)
I don’t think Labour realise how much they have mightly p1ssed off the press corp and how they’ll be much more willing to give the Tory counterattack a look-in now.
327. It just goes to show how spineless NuLab are. They have no conviction. They are a party desperate to cling onto power and that’s it.
Whose the nodding dog behind Darling. No not Harman - the other one?
This non-dom thing is going to decent into Labour saying the Tory figures are wrong and vice-versa, with no one knowing who is right.
Osborne won’t be claiming more could have been raised from the non doms will he?
He’s not going to be that stupid.
The flights thing was a good policy.
Right to nick it.
317 “accidents of birth”
Our parents are our parents. I fail to see what is “accidental” about it.
299, “Its an envy tax - but life isn’t fair - some people get an inheritance - good on them for having hard working parents.
You want an “etch-a-sketch” model where everyone is shaken clean at birth just because you dislike wealth and wealthy people.”
Fine, if your that’s your view, you’re entitled to it. Just don’t come bleating about meritocracy and working hard for your money whenever that sounds more politically expedient. Just come clean and admit that you’re in favour of inherited wealth, privilege and status.
Who replies Osborne or Dave?
332 isnt your boss doing well?
334. I agree. Politics of envy. I’m never going to benefit from any greta inheritence but I don’t feel the need to go round spouting it’s not fair.
Look at Brown’s smug face.
334. The socialist envy merchants are out in force this afternoon it seems. Isn’t it sad they don’t have a party to vote for anymore?
Wheres he getting the money from?
Does the government have a credit card?
325/326/327 - it amazes me how people STILL can view Labour as having “vision” for the country, when all they do is throw a few buzzwords around at glitzy presentations, words like; “new”, “change”, “forward”, “progress” whilst coming up with zero new ideas of their own and blatantly nicking those of the opposition.
If Darling is doing it *SO* blatantly, so soon after the Tory conference, then all it will do is add to the narrative that Labour are rudderless, spin-obsessed and have absolutely no ambition but to cling to power.
Of course, you can argue they have been doing this successfully for years, but Browns team are about as subtle as a nuclear airstrike and theres a real danger he shoots himself in the foot (again)
it sounds like a pre-election PBR……..shame there wont be an election…..desperate stuff really.
339 American Express … That’ll do nicely.
339 - Yes it is used to be called the Public sector borrowing requirement, it was then renamed the Public sector net cash requirement. Don’t know what they call it now.
294: weasel words. It is a tax on income which has already been taxed at least once. Imagine i had a million quid, and I left it under my mattress for 5 years. It would not be taxed in any of those years. If I died, at present, my heirs would be forced to give £280K to Gord.
Why??? It is simply unfair, it is my money, earned after tax. It should be mine to do what I want with, as it was for the previous 5 years, including via my wishes in my will. Me being dead shouldn;t change anything. You may not agree but the polls last week would suggest you are in a minority.
It is a most unpleasant feature of Britain today that simply being rich is enough for some people to judge, without having met you, that you are unpleasant and/or undeserving. And in any case, having a £300K estate is not rich these days since that includes housing.
You know, I’m willing to believe the Tories who say osbourne’s a genius, but god he looks awful on TV.
343. The ‘We dont mention it Requirement’.
342. I get the impression they got more than one….taking every deal that dropped through the Number 11 doorstep…
Irwin Stelzer said on Sky about an hour before this budget that all the ideas were at the Tory Conference and not at Labour’s. He is very close to Murdoch.
Well Brown/Darling agree and they have stolen them all. I cannot recall any Govt stealing so many of the oppositions policies.
It is so brazen and illustrates that this Govt is utterly devoid of ideas. But will they pull it off and fool all of the people?
Does Osborne shave yet?
346 - Can guarantee that the Bank of the British Public won’t get a minimum monthly payment or 29.5% APR!
The backdating and including widows and widowers in the IHT change is excellent news. It was grossly pernicious that a couple effectively had two nil rate bands to utilise in passing on assets, while a widow(er) only had one. I think the Chancellor has just solved a family headache I have been wrestling with for 13 years…
I love you, Darling!
345. He’s no genius and in public political terms is not great though I don’t know if he’s a genius behind the scenes.
The problem is, particularly in Health, is that the government can announce the money all they want but if people see their local hospital closing or laying off workers thats all they will see.
I thought Labour were the anti-hunting party? They’ve spent all afternoon shooting foxes…..
348. All youve got then Tim…shockin…
344: In case there’s any doubt, I don’t have a million quid, nor am I in any sense rich! Whichever of my parents dies first will leave half a house to me and my sister, so we won’t be affected by IHT in any case as far as I know (barring post mortem under-mattress shocks!)
But it’s still wrong!
Tsk too many exclamation marks I am turning into Rik W!!!!!!
350. What are the changes?
IHT - widow’s £600k allowance:
Will this still apply if the husband has previously left money to children?
ie A couple can now leave £1.2m?
I suggest everyone waits for the details on this - could well be not as it seems.
the key issue is that following on from browns stunt tax cut earlier in the year the labour party are now following a tax cutting agenda….. they are cutting spending growth rates to reduce some headline taxes. that only play into the hands of the tories. a backfoot PBR if ever there was one
If that’s his pre election budget, what’s he going to have for 2009??
358. New government credit cards?
Just want to be nice about the Conservatives for a moment. That Pacman game they did last week is a lot of fun, Very nicely done and I spent an enjoyable time playing it while listening to the PBR..
Though I note that no matter what you do the Gordon’s always get back to Number Ten…
358. Access to everybody’s bank accounts by the sound of it….
sky reporting that the IHT tax changes “support married couples” sound familiar??
Brown’s wooing Dacre again!
The most idiotic thing Darling has done is the change to taper relief which will push up tax for Private Equity and move all the activity from London to elsewhere in the world. This will probably mean that even his revised growth figures are meaningless.
IHT is another bit of spin that will unravel I expect, like the 2p tax cut that never was.
Presumably the only way you get £600,000 tax free is for both your parents to expire at the same time?
LOL! Darling doing a nice job on osborne
apparently the “independent” expert who had costed the tory non-doms policy and was being quoted in all news studios by the bullingdon boys was “accountancy age”, so when checking accountancy age, it was an article in the magazine quoting a sunday newspaper article, and when you check the sunday newspaper article it quotes an “anonymous” financial expert…
back of fag packet budget planning from the tories, not fit to run a serious economy.
HF 308 I always viewed that the Tories “de facto” (in the eyes of the people) went into opposition in 1996, and their recovery at local govt level started from then. It only needed the final nail on May 1st 97 to finally put them “de jure” in opposition! I think you will find that there have been swings one way and the other in Tory v Lib Dem battles since. LDs did particularly badly in 1999 (when the Euros were coming up in June) and (obviously) 2007. Notall that well in 2005 but better in 2001 (although for some reason the Tories achieved a “foot and mouth bounce” in affected areas), and especially 2003 (the IDS factor?) I happen to think that they have fallen a long way against the Tories, and assuming a reasonable level of activism can be found, and a credible message, I see the next movement against the Tories as up. I am not sure which way movement will next be against Labour.
363.IHT channges also benefit people in civil partnerships.
Thats not Dacre friendly
Any couple with assets currently over the 300K limit should have set up a Nil Band Discretionary Trust in their wills. As far as I can see these will be unaffected. Does this not then mean that in effect 900K is available at today’s rates prior to IHT. Eg £300K if one spouse dies now put into trust and £600K when the other spouse dies. And of course once the combined limit is raised to £700K the amount will be £1,050K
OK being serious now.
Watching Osbourne I couldn’t work out whether he wanted NHS and Education spending to go up or taxes to go down. He went from criticising the increase in taxes to criticising the rate of increase in NHS spending in one paragraph. I found this baffling.
On the wider political debate, I think “affordable tax cuts with increases in NHS and Schools spending” vs “straight tax cuts on IHT” is a good battle to fight for Labour. It does, narrow the difference between the two parties, as others will say, but the very narrowing brings it into sharp relief.
Finally, Vince Cable is always good on these occassions. Hard not to respect him.
Give over! Like other taxes, it has been catching more people over recent years. Brown’s income tax policy has been the most sleekit of his stealth taxes though, Brown has been catching more and more people by not adjusting the basic rates in years.
When he finally did something, it was to remove the lowest rate for the poorest earners.
356.”I suggest everyone waits for the details on this - could well be not as it seems.” Good advice.
Marcus
I’m not sure about that. It soounds like he’s giving each partner the right to leave £300,000 rising to £350,000 ie £700,000 ultimately. In the US at the moment they can leave $2 million each.
At one point I thought that the spin and stealing of policies was just used in the run up to an election. Now I am not convinced that Brown and his team actually have any policies or vision for the country. Either they don’t or they will be conducting a 18 month pre-election campaign.
I know Blair used to take some policies, but I never remember it being as brazen and as obvious as this - the Conservatives are setting the agenda and the government are just following - that seems like a government that is out of energy 18 months before a probably next election.
Labour supporters must be concerned.
365. No it is transferable anytime. In fact he said he was backdating it for all widows/widowers still alive. So they get it (well their children do) when they die.
IHT looks very very messy.
What if people remarry?
Husband 1 dies 10 years ago - leaves something to widow’s kids tax free.
Husband 2 dies 5 years ago - leaves something to his own kids tax free.
Now widow dies. What can see leave tax free? £600k?
OR will they go back and look at what the 2 husbands left tax free?
A real mess.
373. I doubt it. Labour could start stealing policy ideas from Mein Kampf and their cheerleaders on here wouldn’t bat an eyelid…oh they already did that…
On IHT what Labour have done is remove the need for a Nil rate band will for married/civil partners.
Essentially the recipients of the married/civils estate without the need for a trust etc. We will have to see if the words restrict the advantage to a total of £600k or £1.2m.
The unmarried couples and singles stick at the £300k level. Which is £700k lower than the Conservatives level and £200k below the Lib Dems figure.
For widows/widowers this benefit also applies.
So unmarried couples and singles are being discriminated against.
370. Has spending in the NHS and Education been increased in real terms with this PBR, or is it all smoke and mirrors with a nasty sting in the tail?
375 Mike L yes very messy for remarriages etc.
374. OK , can you go back to Husband number 1?
I have to declare a personal interest. My Mum has been widowed twice. Her second husband left everything to his own children. Can she now claim the £300k re her first husband?
Just as an aside- I hadn’t realised that the Police had forwarded a file to the CPS on Tory “cash for honours”. There’ll be no charge, but I’d not realised a case had even been considered- thought the police were just doing a trawl. Does anyone know the details?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7035759.stm
HF What he has done is backdate which is more generous than the Tory proposal for widows and widowers. I think he also said that civil partnerships would get the benefit although I stand to be corrected.
The Copycat Chancellor with cheap knock-offs of the real thing.
382- Yes he said civil partnerships would qualify.
Government by focus group - Cameron should keep all further bright ideas under his cap - he’s got a great excuse for doing so now..
377. No I don’t think it does away with the Nil Rate Band in a trust (see my post in 369). These will still work thus adding another £300K to the limit.
If of course he outlaws them then the net effect of the budget change is completely zero and pointless.
375
In the short time this was put together I doubt that was considered 
Actually on reflection I presume the Tory propoal didn’t need backdating because it didn’t involve transferable allowances. My mistake
386. But it’s classic Brown. Incredibly complicated. Looks like you will have to refer back to the IHT computations of previous husbands.
This IHT proposal sounds like another Tax Credits Fiasco in the making: far too complicated and consequently liable to cause more pain than necessary because the bureaucracy cannot manage it.
388. Reminiscent of his ’solution’ to the fuel protests as well.
318. Ha, BritSpin, you are comic.
I love the way your definition of “social mobility” is based on the idea that the the top end of achievement is inherently negative for the rest, as if life is some sort of zero-sum game. Furthermore you retreat into the positively neanderthal marxism of basing the so-called “cure” to social immobility, on restrictions to those who are successful rather than doing what I believe the Conservative governments of the last 25 years have fundamentally been all about (and, I think, Blair also).
Social mobility is promoted not by limiting those at the top, but rather by HELPING THOSE AT THE BOTTOM BE MORE FREE. The old left has never understood this and never will. For your electoral future you had better hope that Brown, Balls and the rest understand this in the same way that Blair and Thatcher did, because people on the streets know this in their very marrow. We on the right don’t have your incredibly pessimistic attitude towards human behaviour - if given freedom to earn and achieve, the vast majority of people WILL be able to do so and society advances. Directing them on their way from Whitehall will never be the answer.
From Iain Dale - lol !
Responding to Alan Milburn’s recommendation to cut inheritance tax radically:
‘I don’t think this proposal really has much support across the political spectrum.’
Alistair Darling, The Times, 21 August 2006
‘It may make for a headline, but I don’t think it makes for a prudent and sensible tax and spend policy.’
Alistair Darling, The Times, 21 August 2006
‘Inheritance tax brings in about £ 3 billion a year. If you get rid of it, it follows that some other tax has to go up or you have to cut some public spending, on health and education and so on.’
Alistair Darling, The Times, 21 August 2006
The one thing we were all completely certain about in Blackpool was that Labour would promptly steal the policy ideas.
I cannot help but feel that Osbourne has led them into some kind of trap. I honestly don’t know why I think this, but the fact that we were so sure about the likelihood of Labour stealing the policy and the fact that GO is a very shrewd political strategist suggest to me he has anticipated this move.
I’m afraid this really is the first very visible signs of a big problem.
I posed a question about what the government would do to meet tigher conditions would they:
a) Borrow
b) Cut spending
c) Up taxes
2 out of 3 eh….Darling is on a hiding to nothing over the next 2 years at least.
377. The advantage is £900K not £1.2M with the trust. One spouse dies and you put in trust the Nil Band Limit which is £300K. Anything extra would attract IHT so is pointless. Second spouse dies and has 2xNil Band Limit now = £600K. Total = £900K.
The BBC’s John Pienaar, who often seems sympathetic to New Labour IMO, has just stated that that was the “most platantly political pre budget statement he has ever heard”. He described some of Darling’s (ie Brown’s) proposals as a “smash and grab raid” on Tory policies. Radio 5 generally have been extremely hostile to the Government in their coverage of this farcical performance from Darling, Brown’s puppet.
Not content with playing fast and loose over so-called troop withdrawals the Government are now shamefully playing fast and loose with the economy in a desperate attempt to outflank the Tories.
Brown, even more repulsive than usual, looked like the fat cat that got the cream at times but Osborne’s powerful riposte wiped the nauseating smirk off his increasingly gruesome face.
In fact, the whole of the Labour front bench resembled a collection of gargoyles from the wall of some mediaeval cathedral. What a grim bunch of freaks they are
Reading the BBC comments, I sense another 2007 budget fiasco coming on - people seem to have cottoned on fairly quickly to the sleight of hand on IHT which changes almost nothing, as I understand it (or they understand it - I haven’t looked yet).
Chris D He is talking real terms increases in health and education. You always get arguments about what is the rate of inflation for health and education, of course. I don’t think a 4% real increase will provide much for improvements in service unless, finally, we start to see some decent productivity increases in the NHS.
393 - Is it not simply that the ideas were cr*p in the first place and now Labour are saddled with them (implemented badly and seemingly more confusingly more to the point). Ergo - Labour end up with bad (albeit temporarily popular) policies without getting the credit for them either. Job done I would think
396.
:) 
The key question is this.
Can a widow leave £600k tax free if her late husband has previously left anything tax free?
Wording from document;
“5.76 The inheritance tax (IHT) spouse relief rules mean that there is no IHT paid on assets passing between married couples or civil partners. Many people therefore leave all their assets to their spouse or civil partner, and do not make use of their individual tax-free allowance of £300,000. The Government will therefore make the IHT system fairer by ensuring that if a person’s tax-free allowance is not used on their death, it can be transferred to their surviving spouse or civil partner, enabling every married couple or civil partnership to benefit from double the tax-free allowance – £600,000 this year – in addition to spouse relief.”
A fairly modest concession. Of course, it’s of no benefit if you’re single. They reckon it’ll cost circa £1 billion per year, so the cut is less than 30% of the Conservative one and much harder to understand.
“Make it up, as you go go”
389 Witan, yes it looks a mess but not on the scale of the tax credits because the number of people involved is smaller.
It is however indicative of this Govt “on a whim” approach to running the country. They make an announcement and then work out the details. It is just bad government and creates problems far into the future. As Mike L says “classic Brown”.
This certainly will open up more loop holes that will keep the accountants employed, requiring more Govt tax staff and will end up losing the country even more tax revenue.
UK PLC suffers.
397. Haven’t been listening to the news. Why does it not change anything?. As far as I can see it wouldn’t change anything if Nil Band Discretionary Trusts were outlawed, which would seem unlikely. Is that the case?. If so it would mean the budget annoucement would have precisely no effect whatsoever.
Mike L I understand your personal interest. However, this is hardly the key question arising out of today’s announcements!
woeful…burnham squirming like a rascal when are the straight question by Boulton; Are taxes going up in the next 3 years? it took him three goes of swerving before boulton ended with “:so thats a yes then”.
Don’t quite know what to say about this. Alistair and Gordon have just saved me about £50,000, if the worst should happen…
Must be galling for the Tories to have their neatest policies swiped. On the other hand they have the compliment of knowing that their policies are now running the country - not anything devised by Labour.
So in effect we have Tory government by proxy. Next time Cammo and Osborne should just fax their manifesto to Number 10, so it can be be implemented.
Bizarre!
Blue Moon The real problem is the underlying philosophy, if I can grace it with that word, which assumes, deep down, that more money equates to better service.
That will never change with a Labour government. Its in the genes.
393.Marcus, I sensed that all the way through his speech.
Some interesting comments on ConHom regarding this IHT for couples.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2007/10/not-just-a-scar.html#comments
398. We all know that greater productivity is acheieved by more money….
To sum up Darling’s (Brown’s) pre-budget statement statement:
Taxes up…….spending down
All the rest is just lies, spin, and pie in the sky.
Have I got this wrong? Is there no extra relief from death duties if it is handed on to kids? I am confused. Does it only apply to partners?
If so that’s daft. But I am a dimwit on issues like this.
As all bequests to spouses are exempt until their death how will this increase in the IHT threshold work? More smoke and mirrors I fear…..
339. Yokel “Wheres he getting the money from?”
He’s changing the rules on private equity. The taper rules that allow them to be taxed at just 10% are going, and instead there will be a flat tax of 18%. This will be popular with Labour people (and not so onerous on private equity people that they want to leave).
Witan I was simply answering Chris D’s specific question. Of course, the quality of outputs are what matter, not inputs.
397.Thanks, that is the understanding of some commenting on the ConHom thread a posted a link too.
Sun Trevor Kavanagh “Followed Tory tax plans, a huge compliment to them.” “Just as the economy is going into a down turn they are having to tax more and borrow more.” “What are the stealth taxes?”
Asked what about Council Tax?
Andy Burnham “I believe a good settlement for local Govt”.
He does not state what it is.
Asked is 18% CGT a flat rate? Burnham says yes.
I posted 404 before reading 402. So if you set up a Nil Band Discretionary Trust you lose the transfer.
So there is no benefit whatsoever. All my previous posts were b*llocks.
An absolutely pointless change.
412. Sounds like it.. As I said sounds like smoke and mirrors….
I maybe wrong but I can’t remember Darling actually stating what the net effect of the IHT changes to the tax take. Did anyone else?
Conhome poster has identified 4 new stealth taxes …. so far…
414. is he borrowing more?
Snowflake Surely in the real world he is paying for this from borrowing as that is already exceeding the target and all the rest is prestidigitation.
398, is that the measure of productivity in the NHS that counts having one nurse to look after 20 patients as being twice as productive as having on nurse to 10 patients? Should we ask a patient which one they prefer?
Conventional measures of productivity do not apply very well to public services.
Snowflake. Help us out. This is important to me.
My dad’s estate is worth… say… £800,000. There are three kids and a third wife.
It would be divided equally on my father’s demise, which I trust will never happen.
But if it did happen, would this Darling change exempt us from all death duties up to £600,000 - or not? Very confusing.
The Tory proposals at least had the merit of simplicity. Everything up to a million exempt. Bingo.
417. Council tax, as always, will be the one to watch.
418. kjh that is my understanding of it. I stand to be corrected but it looks as though there is actually no change at all on IHT.
Will any of the Labour ‘analysts’ on here please clarify if they can?!?!
358. “Government by focus group”
I can understand Tories being ticked off - but voters love it. They signal what they want, and get it right now, without having to wait yonks for an eleciton, and without having to stomach other policies from other parties that they don’t want.
Big thanks to Tories for flagging that IHT was an issue with voters. Keep up the good work and all that.
412: it’s like this: at present you can leave stuff to your spouse up to £300K, but as the house is IHT-free between spouses it doesn’t get used much. Darling is making it a transferable top-up, so the surviving spouse (or civil partner) can leave up to £600K. The figure rises to £350K the following year.
By the way, I’m doing an hour on
http://www.18doughtystreet.com/
at 10pm tonight. Usual bloggers’ panel thing.
420 - must be true then
Dave H Yes, I agree, each service needs different ways of measuring it, but there is no doubt that the services can get better and more efficient.
If I recall, Wanless Of Northern Rock, as Brown’s own NHS management guru, admitted that 48 billion spent in the last ten years was not used efficiently and the improvements it brought were less than could have been expected.
I paraphrase but in the press the word wasted was used I think.
427. So Gordo’s only link to the real world is through George O ?
One look at his advisors - Balls and Alexander tells me you are probably right !
429. It is actually.
428. But what if my dad - say - wants to leave the house directly to his kids, and not bequeath it via his wife?
Then we still get taxed, right?
If so, it’s stupid. Better than nothing, but stupidly complicated, and a recipe for family rancour.
419 - the loss of thx re IHT changes are tabled to be about £1bn in 2008/9, £1.2bn the year after, £1.4bn the year after that, so reasonably substantial.
Incidentally, they seem to have adopted virtually the Conservative’s plans re non-doms:
“• firstly, from April 2008 resident non-domiciles who have been in the UK for
longer than seven out of the past ten years will only be able to access the
remittance basis of taxation on payment of an annual charge of £30,000,
unless their unremitted foreign income or gains are less than £1,000;
• secondly, people who use the remittance basis of taxation will, from April
2008, no longer be entitled to income tax personal allowances. Again, people
with small amounts of foreign income will be exempt;”
424. If your father dies you could marry your mother - then you’d be exempt under Capt Darling.
396. Then John Pienaar was not listening to the speech. A big emphasis on overseas aid - the right thing to do but hardly a short-term vote winner (what is the conservative’s policy?). Big emphasis on increasing housing supply/stabilising mortgages (what is the conservative’s policy, apart from stopping all house-building?)
As in Labour’s previous 10 years, a significant proportion of the increase in health and education spending will benefit the very poorest, who have a low propensity to vote, rather than the easily-bribeable middle classes in the marginals.
On a rather trivial note I noticed that Gordon seemed to be enjoying himself tremendously while Harriet looked utterly bored. Memo to Harriet - do try harder at looking interested - all you need to do is smile when others do, and from time to time nod vigorously.
Nick I don’t understand that. Surely you can leave all your assets to your spouse without IHT, not just £300,000. I assume at the moment if both partners make sure they set up a trust for dependents of £300,000 they get relief of £600,000 in total. This therefore benefits those who don’t bother to do this because they don’t get their act together. There are probably quite a few of them.
391. Anatole, how lovely. All you need to do is set the low end free?
Look, if you want to reduce taxation rate for people at the low end, or reduce taxation to those stating small businesses, or fund a super vc fund for entrepeneurs and I’d listen to the argument, all of that makes sense to me.
But arguing that shoving a large wodge at the asset rich will of itself improve the social mobility of the asset poor is both ludicrous and nonsensical. At the very least it will push up prices of property that both are competing for.
Now, since we live in a world where asset prices have increased and the numbers holding those assets have broadened, massively improving the finances of those that hold them compared to everyone else, there’s a legitimate argument about what level of taxation on assets is appropriate. If 60% of people hold assets, then you can argue you should only redistribute at the top end of that 60%, not the middle.
But to put it in thatcherite terms, if a government was truly committed to soical mobility through tax cuts, surely IHT is the last place they’d cut taxes? I can think of a whole bunch of areas I’d rather cut taxes than IHT for the top 2% or so.
Stealing the Conservatives’ Blackpool conference ideas makes me wonder what was the purpose of Labour’s Bournemouth conference. I’ve come up with two things:
1) Booze-up 2) finalising activity timetable for November 2007 election.
Presumably, time allocated between 1) and 2) varied according to whether you were Neil Kinnock, Douglas Alexander, Ed Balls, Gordon Brown or Dianne Abbott.
Still no answer, is the Chancellor borrowing more?
433. Your dad and his wife have a combined allowance. I think she can transfer her allowance to him (will check and get back to you).
New thread - Is copying the Tories smart politics?
the most uniform reaction to this PBR seems to be “wait until we know what it actually means rather than what he said” ie its all in the detail, you dont know what it means yet. therein is labours problem post browns bottling….nobody believes a word they say.
Ok, wait….capital gains..according to the BBC Economics blokey has now become a single 18% level no matter how long you’ve held the asset.
Which means those who want to invest for the long term have no incentive to do so.
440. Yes, I think so.
Didn’t anyone think Darling did rather well? I did. Even Osborne wasn’t bad when you could forget his voice. A pity all those odd looking Tory’s tried to get in on his shot. Good for democracy I thought. A vigorous debate with competing points of view. If there was a loser it was Darling’s deputy who didn’t quite understand his bosses budget.
426 Anatole: The wording in 402 (Casino Royale) seems very clear but I really can’t believe this is true surely. It will mean the announcement has no effect whatsoever for practically everyone who has a will.
It will of course have the effect of wasting the time and money of all those people who set up Nil Band Discretionary Trusts in their wills so they could in effect transfer the allowance and probably waste their time and money again as they undo them.
Can anyone confirm? Iif this is the case it is the biggest con I’ve seen in a budget statement as anyone writing a will that has assets over £300K should be including this automatically.
447. Surely just the biggest con since the last budget?!
I don’t disagree about priorities - but you were earlier stating a *principle* which attacked those who were actually getting ahead in life. Individuals becoming rich or super-rich are very unlikely to have a negative impact on their fellow men. Indeed I’m sure the research will show that on the whole, both in setting an example to aspire to and in their almost invariable (in the West anyway) philanthropy, they are a net good. You were sailing into the politics of envy in implying a parasiticism which simply isn’t born out. There are plenty more things that can be done to liberate the poor without placing limits on the rich.
Coming [cue sob story] from a first generation immigrant Chinese family, I have experienced first hand what people can and should do with their lives when they have aspiration. Your politics, on the basis of what you wrote, does nothing to advance this, but instead chooses to substitute it with cheap anti-elitist rhetoric which ultimately stifles people rather than helps them. That is bad all-round in the long run.
428. From what I understood from Darling’s statement the new IHT tax rules are effective from today and widows and widowers will receive £300000 allowances from their deceased spouses. Does this mean that if say only £250000 was bequeathed to sons and daughters when the first parent died around 6 or 7 years ago then the remaining parents IHT allowance has been increased by £50000 to £350000?
2. “I seem to recall commentators at the time describing the 2007 local election results as particularly bad for the Lib-Dems as they lost councillors where they needed them for general election contests, and gained councillors in areas where they had no hope of winning a Westminster MP election.”
Such commentators would have had too much of their beer! Even at the Tories height in popularity nationally in 2007, in the North West region the Lib Dems continued to make gains at the expense of both Tories and Labour in all their held seats - and are moving into a good position to take Warrington South and possibly the new Liverpool Wavertree.