Analysing the election's debate 'Clegg effect'
The Labour tactic is now to turn this into a two-against-one election: the party is cosying up to the Lib Dems with the aim of ganging up against the Tories. You could see that in Gordon Brown's several "I agree with Nick" statements in Thursday night's debate; the refusal of Mr Brown's other brain, Ed Balls, to utter a word of criticism of the Lib Dems on Friday's Newsnight while emphasising where they both disagreed with the Tories; and Alan Johnson's friendly musings about the virtues of a hung Parliament in Saturday's Times.
The Lib Dems in general and Nick Clegg in particular are wary of this Brown Bearhug and Mr Clegg even went out of his way to rebuff it on Thursday night: he wants to be seen as pristine and "uncontaminated" by the other two (the Lib Dems are benefiting from the anti-politics mood provoked by the expenses scandals and want to keep their distance this side of May 6th). But it hasn't stopped the Labour wooing.
Here's why. Though they won't say so out loud, or even in private, Labour election strategists have pretty much given up any hope of winning an overall majority: the campaign is just not moving in that direction. But they haven't given up hope of being the largest party and reckon that's mostly likely to happen if the Lib Dems do well -- so talk them up as you talk down the Tories and start being friendly to them because you'll have to deal with them after the election to stay in power. That, for what it's worth, is the private logic currently in Labour HQ
Several polls in tomorrow's Sunday papers show why this new, post-debate Labour tactic has a chance of success. They show the Tories still ahead, but not by much, with the Lib Dems either second or a strong third. Such are the vagaries of our first-past-the-post system when the vote is split three ways fairly evenly that such an outcome -- even with Labour coming third in the popular vote -- could mean Labour still being the largest party, with a boosted Lib Dem representation holding the balance of power. No wonder Labour is cosying up to the Lib Dems -- it could come third and still stay in power!
I doubt our voting system would survive such an outcome: the Lib Dems would be furious that, despite getting almost as many votes as the other two parties they still got a lot fewer seats. They would demand something much more proportional than the AV system Labour is offering. Labour would probably give them what ever PR system they wanted if it meant it could stay in power (at least for a while). Even the Tories might start to look more kindly on PR: after all, in the scenario painted by tomorrow's polls, they would have more votes than any other party by a fair margin yet still be denied power.
I suspect PR would be inevitable in these circumstances and 2010 would turn out to be a truly watershed election, perhaps even leading to a realignment in British politics and a radically new party system for the 21st century.
Exciting stuff. But two caveats before we get carried away with all this. First, the "Clegg effect" might not be lasting; things could change in the subsequent debates and the current Clegg bounce could be an aberration.
Second, the transfer of vote shares into seats in the Commons is done on the basis of a uniform national swing, and such a thing may be meaningless in this most fragmented of elections.
Even so, there is a growing feeling among pollsters and pundits of all persuasions that Thursday night's debate was a game-changer. The future is still hard to divine but it is hard to avoid the sense that this is going to be a transformative election -- and that British politics will never be the same again.
The Tory high command is trying to come to terms with this since it is the Tories that have most to lose. There are recriminations about David Cameron's performance on Thursday night: some think it a mistake that he was advised to be subdued and not bite back when attacked.
A growing group of influential Tories want "Cameron to be Cameron" in the next debate. Others fear it might be too late: there is of course still all to play for but for the first time I detect senior Tories admitting in private that they might not win this election (in the sense of having an overall majority) after all.
UPDATE
With the Lib Dems now at centre stage, it is more important than ever to hold them to account (as I suggested in this blog earlier in the campaign) and I tried to do with my Straight Talk interview with Ed Davey.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~19~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Andrew
You are a little behind the times. It appears one poll tomorrow at least puts the Lib Dems in the lead.
The end of Labour?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Andrew,
what I would push the liberals on is the £10,000 without paying income tax. Now then as you so rightly pointed out how much of the anticipated billiuons would actually go the the poor. Also many people 'earn' less than £6,000 or so, they would not get any benefit whatsoever.
Also what if somebody has two jobs, £9,000 each, how would the tax due be collected. There seriously needs to be a proper system set up to ensure that people do not avoid paying their dues. I have my way of doing it, but I will make them pay for my advice.
In the meantime what has St Vince got to say about Goldman Sachs, and RBS.
Complain about this comment
Clearly the Lib Dems won't commit themselves on the most seats or most votes definition of a mandate-it's a simple enough question- because they want to keep their options open. They can then interpret the result accordingly to enable them to work with the Party that will offer them electoral reform, and we know which one that is, thereby 'hardwiring in fairness' by which they mean hardwiring in the Lib Dems.
Complain about this comment
Hi Andrew,
I think you are right there has been some calculations within Labour HQ regarding the resurgence of Lib Dems, being of a greater damage to Tory ambitions than Labour, just because of the vagaries of FPTP system.
There are a few hostages to fortune that Cleggover left open after the last debate - Brown clinically destroyed his Trident position which will be more exposed in the next debates.
The Problem Dave has is his major threat is Cleggy however if he attacks him he looks like the old vested interests clinging to power.
I am with you I think Brown could get back in with the smallest popular vote - where does that leave democracy?
Regarding Dave I think he has done his best to put lipstick on a pig, but ultimately when it comes down to it the country just don't want a right wing party who look and sound different to the rest of the country. Also it is interesting that in many ways the Lib dems are more left wing than the Labour party.
We might all be overreacting this is the first game in a 3 match series as Man Utd showed - it ain't over till its over. What Labour must be thinking now is whatever Gordon Browns talents and virtues are he is totally unelectable as a leader, but he will be- where does that leave them?
The big question is how will Labour deal with the PR issue if they are elected with the largest number of seats as the smallest major party.
Dave will review his vanity in agreeing to these debates.
Complain about this comment
The essence of the Lib Dem pitch is that they are not Labour or Conservative.
Labour would abandon any principle and embrace any principle to stay in power.
The Lib Dems would abandon any principle and embrace any principle to get a foot on the ladder of power.
Result - Vote Lib Dem, get Brown.
Complain about this comment
Yes, probably the end of FPTP. The right thing, it's eccentric and it's time to move on, but like most eccentrics it has its charm and I'll be sad to see it go. Could well mean that John Major's Tory government proves to be the last one, however, and this is something I'm not so sad about.
Complain about this comment
If the election results are in accord with the polls as of today,then yes
Andrew,you are right,British politics will never be the same again.
Con 31% = 239 seats
LDs 29% = 103 seats
Lab 27% = 279 seats
Others13% = 29 seats
This illustrates clearly just how undemocratic our electoral system is.
The only good thing would be that the electorate wouldnt tolerate Brown
being the "winner" as I am sure he would claim to be.His cosying up to
Clegg last thursday was sheer desperation tactics,did he really think that we wouldnt see it for what it was?
However there are 2 more debates to follow,and no doubt lines are being
learned,loins are being girded,and much deliberation being given as to
what colour neck ties shall be worn!
Complain about this comment
Andrew, the floating voters do seem to be agreeing with your view that the debate has ushered in a three party era. They were taken by the Clegg easy charm & body language offensive and, as importantly, by his simple denigration of all things old and other peoples (ie Con v Lab).
So, suddenly, Clegg is dominating the Change agenda and has wrong footed the Tories who didn't anticipate the tactics (just like when Labour caught out David Cameron by tricking him into a supposed U turn over the ‘no swingeing cuts’ episode on Jon Sopel's Politic's Show).
This lack of anticipation/foresight/proactivity by the Tories is extraordinary when they've had so much time to prepare for this moment.
The Tories only chance is to focus on:
1. Big Society policy as the Big change,
2. Provenance as managers of the economy over 40 years
3. Honest alternative to the dishonest incumbents
If this approach is seen as genuine rather than a series of gimmicks by politicos and they also instil sufficient doubt into the electorate's mind by questioning Clegg’s depth and unrealistic policies then they might regain the initiative. If they fail I agree that we will be heading for new political territory. This will be fun for you, Andrew, but disastrous for our economy which can not afford the luxury of a period of political obfuscation and indecision.
Complain about this comment
The interesting thing is the polls that show the independants going up, people voting for smaller parties to keep the LD's out of any position of power. The conservatives falling - what did Cam do wrong? The adjustments to the polls, esp. 100 LD seats, are somewhat questionable. 22% got them 30 seats, so I'll guess at 40 seats for LD. I'll also guess 20 of them will be new MP's (taking the 50% figure from the 100seat maths and saying they applied it to the wrong thing). Or maybe \I should apply the 50% to no. MP's and say 20 Mp's for LD? Or how about tapering as LD % increases? 35 seats. Or fewer seats for more%, as in the old days? 25 seats?
Undecided.
NB the polls THAT show etc
Complain about this comment
Can we go home now?
Complain about this comment
Too right Andrew, there must be closer scrutinty of Lib Dem policy. Currently it's far too easy for Nick Clegg simply to say 'we're different' etc, without spelling out exactly why, or exactly how they would be different, or how they would fund their ideas. Hence why he couldn't fail to win that first debate.
I'm not expecting Clegg to perform so well on foreign policy, however. How will his pro-European views sit with the Eurosceptic majority? Do we really want to do away with our currency? Are we happy to reduce our protection and status as a result of Lib Dem plans regarding Trident? What are his plans on Iraq and Afghanistan? And am I right in thinking that their manifesto rules out military action against Iran in all circumstances? If so, it seems cavalier in the extreme to make such a guarantee: none of us can predict the future. I believe foreign affairs is the weakest area of Lib Dem thinking.
I have nothing against Clegg, nor the Lib Dems per se, but I'm very worried by the prospect of two more easy debates where he can simply utter the mantra 'we're different' and ride on the crest of a media-fuelled wave of popularity. At the moment he's having his cake and eating it: maximum exposure with minimum scrutiny. You won't find a Lib Dem in the land complaining.
Complain about this comment
This isn't a Clegg effect. It's a result of DC doing badly and GB doing well. The polls are actually showing a large move in favour of GB and a large move away from DC. It's no good STeather going on about how great Clegg is, but as she's never been right on polls etc, I'll take that as proof that I am.
We've been through this all before with polls, I'm not saying anything new, and these methods have never been discredited. So why all this other rubbish?
How many times do we have to go through this? 'For the 20th time everybody, it's your final chance..'
Somebody do something about the Guinea Pig.
Complain about this comment
And DC - he wants to improve job prospects with the NI thing, and now he wants a nation of volunteers! Well that proved popular.
Flip flop flip flop, can't he make up his mind about anything? His leadership was in question so he brought out the inheritance tax change. But then oh no he can't do it.
If he had the same momentum as MHoward he would be looking at an overall majority now. And is he going back to MHowards waste cutting policy or not????
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I am not interested in the polls, which actually should be suspended during the election campaign. Others have said it is the 'I' which matters, does the politician I want to vote for represent me, or do they represent somebody else, in which case we do not actually live in a representative democracy, there is nobody who can represent me. Furthermore, no political party represents me, they can't. I may agree with one aspect of their so called manifesto, but they do not represent me. Finally, with the political system as it is, it is so not democratic, there is no such thing as democracy.
As for Brown saying that this is about protecting the recovery, this will bring in even more disillusionment, people do not understand how dire the situation is. This is about an economy which is in freefall, it is unsustainable, and this is not going to be a double dip recession, this is the end game. Afghanistan is a disaster slowly unfolding, and as Brown has said it is a problem of the whole area, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The trouble is that the polticians have said that this is no longer about Moslems, this is about people, this is about Afghan an Pakistan people.
Here is the problem, we must ask the question that if this is no longer about religion, this is about terror from a geographic area, so what about the people from those countries who now live in this country. During the world wars the people from 'our enemies' were placed in internment camps.
There is another problem which is becoming manifest. This is the flight problems. What are the British Consulate doing, is this not the situation which they are paid for. What about Cathy Ashton, who whoever it was that Brown put into a most important job in Europe. What do these people do for their money.
I raised the issue of events, it is events dear boy, well this is an international event, and we are seeing the failures. Could the volcano in Iceland which is the e evnt which Brown feared most, it shows the failing of the system, and we have to ask, what if this event happened a day or two before the election, or actually on election day.
Surely all the candidates, Brown, Cameron, and Clegg, must tell us what they would do about this unfolding disaster, we can't all afford to catch a taxi from Norway to my country. Is this the let them eat cake moment for British politics.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
sometimes I think that I am completely alone, over the war in Iraq, the occupation of Afghanistan. Then one of the Sundays goes public on the forgotten war, Afghanistan. When the political leaders come to us on Thursday with the latest debate this is what will win or lose it. Browns suggestion that this is about keeping terror off the streets of our country is just so wrong. This is about the gas pipeline which I pointed out yesterday with the Americans, or the cable between the French and British over a 'benign dictator', Quizling Karzai.
Sometimes Andrew, just as I think I am alone, then something happens which shows to me that I am not alone, that your blog is so much more influential than many people know or understand. I mean on fridays PM there was even a mention of Catch 22, you can't make it up.
As an aside my initials are TAG and whenever I used to write any code I used to put (TAG) against the line to indicate that it was mine, and now you will notice TAG everywhere, everybody TAGs...delusional moi, surely not.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
if what is being said in one of the Sundays is true then your blog must be one of the most widely read in Afghanistan:
'Sycophantic courtiers feed him (Karzai) rumour and a daily digest of the foreign press with anything negative highlighted in yellow'.
They must have been spitting blood in the zone when I aluded to the closeness of the term Karzeey to Karzai, and am always referring to him as Quizling Karzai.
The problem is that before the Americans withdraw then they want to see a total victory, they want to be victorious in military terms, they want to grind the Afghans into the dust, they will never forgive 9/11, they really do want the head of bin Laden, on a plate, served up, then they can go home, but leaving their gas pipeline safe and active. American hegemony, that's what this is about, Iran can't be far off.
Complain about this comment
16 catch22
Regarding Afghanistan and your previous posts over the last few days on Andrew's last blog, a very troubling report has been posted by the respected independent reporter/blogger Michael Yon entitled:
"The War is above General McChrystal's Head". Yon says he does not trust the General in the same way that people do not trust the New York Times, ObAma or Bush. Heavy stuff indeed.
A bit of backgound may also help. Yon was arrested when he flew back to the US recently on the spurious charge of how he earned his income. Reading between the lines his reporting is proving to be a nuisance to the US authorities, who like the MoD prefer a sanitized version of events of what is happening in Afganistan to reach us the gullible public.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/war-above-mcchrystal-s-head.htm
The article ends with: McChrystal is a great killer ... He must be watched ....
Complain about this comment
It isn't that Gordon's doing well, or he'd not be losing out to both opposition parties, it's more that Cameron's alternative change policy just looks airy fairy, high on aspiration but devoid of detail.
The country is crying out for change, but Gordon has spent us into a situation where there will be limited options and it will be forced on us by developments and it won't be nice. I suspect that the Lib Dems have touched a note of reality with their approach that both other parties could learn from.
I might find the Lib Dems palatable with some of their policies, but on Europe, AGW and immigration they are out of touch with reality. The idea of having immigrants consigned to specific parts of the country has sinister implications that haven't been thought out properly and is thoroughly unworkable. Quite how you can operate an immigration policy which depends on enforcing restrictive conditions on immigrants, in classic discriminatory form, would be worthy of the National Front. They acknowledge the problem and attempt to face it by imposing a policy that any legal challenge would find discriminatory.
Complain about this comment
#19
Down here in Exeter there was the proposal to accept some Somali refugees, under something called the Gateway Protection scheme. It would have been totally inapproraite, for various reasons. However, the local council would have received substantial sums of money for housing, but no extra for schools, translators and health. Nobody had worked out the real coasts. Now the plan was abandoned.
However, what has to be understood is that the government has already been following a policy of sending distinct groups to different parts of the country. For example, it is well known that many of the asylum seekers from the former Yugoslavia should never be put in the same place as others. there would just be a contunuation of the very problems in that former country.
So there is already a policy of keeping people apart, the liberals are being totally il-liberal in the proposals, it would be against their principles. You cannot 'force' people under liberal principles to live ina designated area, it is a crazy proposal. The next thing is that all land ladies will have to fill in a card and send it to some central controlling department, the Ministry of the Interior. How can you control work and movement, the proposal that the liberals are putting forward is so awful that I am surprised that others have not pointed out the total impossibility of this proposal being implemented. Not unless you want to live in a totalitarian state, but then it is where liberalism leads to, the ends justify the means, we are all utilitarians now, not.
Complain about this comment
19 gomerpyle
Restricting immigrants to specific parts of the country has already been tried by the MoD when Iraqi/Afghan translators attached to the British Army had to be rehoused with their families back in the UK for their own safety. In their wisdom the MoD chose Glasgow. The natives soon showed their displeasure at this turn in events.
The verbal antagonism moved swiftly to violence. The immigrants swiftly got the message, and subsequent migrants travelled up by train at tax payers expense, arrived at Glasgow Central walked 4/5 blocks north to the city bus station and within hours were travelling back south. I live in South Bucks and the local Afghan community are happily settled here - I am not sure if they live off the state as I suspect that most of them are reasonably well off anyway.
The UK media is quite happy to peddle the half truths of a poverty stricken Afghanistan. Yet property prices in Kabul can easily run into a 5/6 figure sum in Pounds Sterling. Belief and trust are becoming rare commodities indeed.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
surely what the volcano ash shows is just how subservient we are to nature. All the talk of global warming and a volcano in Iceland can cause this much damage. I can still imagine Darling on the phone now to the Icelandic finance minister, 'I told you to send cash...'
Actually surely we should have the UN involved in all this. Suspension of visas, accepting people into their country people who cannot get home. The clouds of ash know no borders, as I have said before there is no such thing as a man made border, they are imaginary. There are natural borders, mountain ranges, rivers, etc, but man made borders are ridiculous. The same as fishing, fish know no borders, they don't hide off shore just because somebody says that these are international waters, and these are not.
How long before the food begins to run out, how long before the economies in certain overseas countries are broken, no movement by air because of some volcano in Iceland effects food distribution from Kenya.
There really must be an urgent international meeting at the UN to come up with some answers. As for hotels saying that they are fully booked and that the current residents must vacate their rooms, well surely the new guests cannot get there for the same reason that the current residents can't leave. Or am I being stupid.
Complain about this comment
As an ex soldier (who spent last year serving in Afghanistan) and aslo a local Labour politician, I feel I have the knowledge to say that we should be in Afghanistan, if we were not - i am sure Pakistan would be in even more turmoil.
Michael Yon was in Sangin with the Rifles and the MOD gave him unrestricted access to UK troops.
General McCrhystall is General to be impressed by, he had the respect of all UK soldiers who met him and is the sort of military mind needed to work in such a complicated conflict that Afghanistan is
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
it is not only our country which has problems:
He told a House of Commons committee hearing that he believes every Canadian armed forces member who was involved in transferring detainees in Afghanistan knows the NDS tortures people. "All along the chain of command, they know what is going on — everybody," he asserted.
Now the Commons referred to is Canada, just as my vey close family member had an injunction on him by our MoD you really cannot keep a lid on all this. The Canadians are referring to Afghanistan, my close family member was of course in the other war zone, but there is trouble, in all the democracies of the occupying forces, over what is being done in our name.
We have so lost in Afghanistan, just as we did in Iraq, we will desert these people with our tails between our legs, leaving all our expensive equipment behind, it will be delivered too late. We might as well say that we are giving it as part of our overseas aid.
Complain about this comment
Predictably, Cameron has started denouncing the evils of a "hung" parliament and Haig has returned to the eurosceptic theme, which failed in 2001, when he was leader.
Cameron says that a strong government is needed to implement the immediate cuts in public expenditure that he believes are necessary. But many people, including the leaders of the other parties, believe that immediate cuts are not necessary and undesirable. So if the Tories do not get a working majority and the cuts are not implemented, this will be in line with the expressed will of the voters.
If on the other hand the Tories get just over 40% of the votes cast and an overall majority, and go ahead with the cuts, this will not be the will of the people.
Hung parliaments and weak governments may not suit power hungry politicians, but do mean that much more attention must be paid to the opinions of voters. Government should be for the benefit of the people not the politicians.
Many voters hate the EU, but this turned out to be a "back burner" issue in 2001 and is even more so now.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I have a problem with Brown and the comments which he made over Goldman Sachs. What people need to do is to look at the connections which Goldman Sachs have had with this government, going back to 1997, and there is one individual in particular whose connections to senior labour people needs to be looked into. And this even has connectios with the Kelly Affair, and who do I identify in particular, a certain Gavin Davies.
Now in this modern age it is easy for people to look into other sources for Mr Davies, and I would advise them so to do.
There are strong links as I say between Goldman Sachs and the government and it is interesting how morally upset Brown now seems to be with them in particular. Look into Sue Nye, the wife of Gavin Davies, who was a private secretary to Gordon Brown, and just to remind people Davies was the Chairman of the BBC at the time of the Hutton Inquiry, and resigned from the BBC on its publication.
I have previously said about lobbyists who are paid to look at all these postings, and that some people then complain about the content, and have the comments moderated, but there are problems with regard to the closeness of labour to Goldman Sachs, and the fact that Goldman Sachs have now been charged with fraud in the United States. It is alright for Brown to call now for inquiries and investigations as I called for, but he is too late, it should not be up to me to point out what is obvious, that there must be a full public inquiry into what has been going on in the banking and finacial sector.
In the meantime there seems at last to be a realisation that there is corruption in the system, just like how on earth can we in any way criticise Quizling Karzai when he can read our newspapers and see for himself what has been going on over here.
This is the route which Clegg needs to go down on, it is about politics, economics and philosophy, and we in Britain are failing the test on all three. There will be a hung parliament, a balanced parliament, or a givernment of national unity, but there will be, and Brown will have to go to the Queen saying I cannot head a majority, that is unless he wants to be another Ramsay McDonald.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I know that this about Clegg but there is interesting news coming from over the pond in respect of international finance, and what this or any government can do about it. Do you know how much Exxon paid to Uncle Sam in taxes, a big zero, yes Exxon Mobil paid absolutely nothing to Uncle Sam, their employees might have done, but the corporation itself, on its massive overseas investments apparently paid nothing. Now it is the same with the banks. If taxes were not deducted directly from pay, how much tax would the international banks make on their massive profits.
Complain about this comment
If there was PR two things woul change. First it wouldnt just be 3 parties- the Greens, UKIP and BNP would all win seats. Secondly voters would would vote differently. The assumptions that the Lib Dems would permanently be in government are wrong. Parties can come and go. Look at Ireland. PR has killed of numerous small parties (the Greens likely to be the latest after the Progressive Democrats)
Complain about this comment
# 23 I respect the insight your experience as a soldier may have given you Alasdair Ross but we never went in to Afghaistan to do anything about Pakisan. If ISAF soldiers went in to Pakistan it would only provoke greater political instability in that country and what right do we have to re-organise them politically ?
Regime change as foreign policy has been a failure, and I suspect Afghanistan was just another example, again a failure. There appears some desire to achieve a homogenous inert populace there, much as has been achieved in the UK, but we could probably learn from them as regards people having direct control and influence over their lives. It's hardly a surprise that Afghans are't over excited with having another central despot foisted on them. I think it was George Galloway who pointed out that the most settled and peaceful era was during the Soviet occupation, but for selfish Western polictical interests we couldn't accept it.
Arguments that our action is being taken in the interests of the Afghan people are hollow to say the least, and I don't recall us sending troops in to Darfur. Humanitarian wars are rare indeed, and viewed differently by either side.
Gordon was on TV this morning dithering over banks again. We don't need international regulation to control gambling, so what's the difference ? Resisting regulation is merely attracting more financial fraud to our shores and bringing our financial services into disrepute.
Taxation is not an answer. It's just the knee-jerk reaction of politicians who are too besotted with banks to have the will or wit to act. The government was quick enough to act on the danger of the synthetic drug, but making banks let go of their own financial 'high' is pathetic to watch.
Banks love developing these complex toxic securities and there needs to be a rigid line betweeb those who deal in them and those that don't. If bankers are so worthy of their high salaries then I would suggest that must be capable of recognising the difference. If not then perhaps they should be paid in accordance with their limitations, but this is all hokum. Bankers design a complex game to snare the unwary, and our system allowed them to take that principle to a nuclear extent, which is a shame on them and a shame on our politicians. It would be nice to review all the bonuses paid out to the FSA during the period they allowed this all to occur untroubled by regulation. Bonuses appear not to have benefitted the taxpayer with better service.
If bankers do not serve the public, and politicians too, then both should be replaced. I don't consider myself to be left wing, in fact I consider it natural capitalism that if workers aren't fit for purpose then they should be discarded without pity. Gordon and the FSA should be sacked for their failure, and banks separated from their speculative function. The speculation is only possible by making use of our money and savings and wouldn't be possible otherwise, and the reason for that is that it is too speculative for anyone to invest in such a venture. That says it all. I wouldn't allow a heroin addict to operate on me, and there's no reason to allow a gambler to look after my savings.
Complain about this comment
I think Clegg has the advantage in the foreign affairs debate given the LibDems stance on Iraq and Aghanistan. The EU question is already a delineated issue so the pro or anti camps are already spoken for. I hope our position in Afghanistan is put under proper scrutiny.
Brown maintains that most of the terror plots against the UK are hatched in the Afghan Pakistan border tribal corridor and that is why to make our streets safe we need to be there fighting the Taliban. Now if I wanted to organise a plot along the lines of 9/11 or 7/7, would I really need to fly to the mountains of the Afghanistan Pakistan border?
I understand the importance of a stable Pakistan but I'm not convinced the agenda of the Taliban and al-Qaeda are the same.
Any terror threats are surely far more directly linked to Pakistan than Afghanistan. There is a lot of bs around the true political motives of this campaign.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
may I point out that the commentators are making much of the grey vote, the overr 55s. Well may I point out that demographically they also constitute the largest group of the indiginous white population.
Please also note how Brown continually refers to the liberals, he did it on the Andrew Marr Show, it is a very annoying trait, and he knows how it upsets people, I mean it is just like referring to the Conservatives as Tories, or labour as Nulabour, or even worse, socialists.
Complain about this comment
25. Stanblogger
'Many voters hate the EU, but this turned out to be a "back burner" issue in 2001 and is even more so now.'
Maybe, but this time around we are having pre-election debates, one of which is to focus specifically on foreign affairs.
Nick Clegg, widely acknowledged to have won the first debate, will surely be forced to justify not only his general pro-European views but, more specifically, his belief that Britain should join the Euro. I can't see that going down well. Further, if he persists with this 'I'm different' strategy (and there's no doubt that he will), he'll have to face up to the reality that his views on Europe are more in tune with the deepy unpopular incumbent than the majority of the population. He might end up tarred by association or, perhaps, simply damned by his own 'eccentric' views.
Complain about this comment
BG,
"I think Clegg has the advantage in the foreign affairs debate given the LibDems stance on Iraq and Aghanistan."
The only one of these three parties which called it right; a big call too and they deserve some electoral gain. I also like the anti Trident stance and would hope that (a) they mean it, and (b) they don't plan some sort of expensive and messy alternative.
Complain about this comment
GP,
"I consider it natural capitalism that if workers aren't fit for purpose then they should be discarded"
Mmm. How come the bread & butter norms of the free market (supply and demand fixes wage levels, if you're bust you're bust, if you're poor at what you do then sorry but you don't prosper) are suspended when it comes to what's meant to be the very embodiment of the free market ... The City. If it weren't so not funny, it'd be funny.
Complain about this comment
gomer,
"The idea of having immigrants consigned to specific parts of the country has sinister implications that haven't been thought out properly and is thoroughly unworkable"
I don't like the sound of this either. Free movement of people around the country is not a principle we should depart from.
Complain about this comment
one lars,
You're cherry picking there, that's all the Lib Dems good stuff (along with their tax policy).
So ...
"Do we really want to do away with our currency?"
Yes.
"Are we happy to reduce our protection and status as a result of Lib Dem plans regarding Trident?"
Yes.
"What are his plans on Iraq and Afghanistan?"
Pull out, one hopes.
"And am I right in thinking that their manifesto rules out military action against Iran in all circumstances?"
Dunno, but it should.
Complain about this comment
Clegg's platform is 'change' - the Lib-Dems are different from the other main parties, he says.
But how much are they different? They broadly support Labour's actions on the economy - bailing out the banks and maintaining spending and not taking immediate action to reduce the deficit. They have a broadly similar immigration policy to Labour, except for the nonsensical regional element and the 10 year amnesty for illegal immigrants. Their education policy, as far as it's been defined, is also similar. They are pro-EU, like Labour, and like Labour they opposed a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, even though it was promised in their manifesto.
Their main differences are on defence - cancelling Trident and Eurofighter, and opposing the Iraq and Afghanistan decisions. The true financial benefits, certainly in the short term, of the cancellations are debatable. They were right on Iraq, as everyone else was fooled by Blair. Afghanistan is more questionable because it is a UN/NATO led project, involving some 40 countries (I think that's the number).
Overall, the differences claimed by Clegg may not be as great as he is implying. Naturally he would claim to be different on a few other, minor matters, but greater exposure will show whether his claims stand up to close examination.
Complain about this comment
20 Catch22
Some years ago when I worked in Brum city centre it was common to be approached by Asians proffering a peice of paper asking where please? It was always the chest clinic. One politely directed them and prayed one had contracted nothing whilst so doing.
An equally large number of peoples from the 4 corners of the earth used to proffer another pice of paper and they were all looking for The Aliens Registration Office.
So even 25 years ago we had some kind of check and control on non nationals. What happened to it ?
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
as many people might well know I am originally from Plymouth and like that recently deceased brilliant labour politician, I support Plymouth Argyle. Now then we are due to play Newcastle United, sponsored by Northern Rock, and it is a very long journey to Plymouth from Newcastle.
Now then I hope that the no fly rules are not abandoned just so that Newcastle United football team can fly to Plmouth, rather than have to catch the train, or travel by coach.
With a bit of luck they will be so tired by the journey that they are unable to perform to the required standard and that accordingly we gain the victory which might just save us from relegation. You see every cloud does have a silver lining.
Complain about this comment
Gordon confused the issue by detailing EC immigration, or perhaps he really doesn't understand himself. Emigration is irrelevant, so quoting net figures merely emphasises that he is uncomfortable with the situation. Emigrants won't release the demands on public funds that immigrants will make, so a trade off is not possible. It's Gordon playing with numbers.
The other fault with Gordon's attempt to 'net' immigration figures is that he is implying an immigration cap, which he has rejected. If they are not able to be matched as having similar impacts on public funds, and there isn't a cap, then why is he netting the figure at all ? - for cosmetic purposes. If he didn't think the figure were bad, he wouldn't be investing so much time in processing them.
Complain about this comment
Whatever happened to "showbiz for ugly people...?"
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
the problem is that Brown refers to net immigration. He is incorrect, if anything it is net migration.
Birds do not emmigrate, they migrate, people also migrate. To say that net migration is smaller is a nonsense. If 1,000,000 leave the country, but 2,000,000 come in then net migration is 1,000,000. If 1,000,000 leave, and 1,000,000 come in then net migration is zero, is that a good thing or a bad thing.
I thought that we we meant to be world leaders in training doctors, and nurses. It is actually morally wrong to draw in the trained doctors and nurses from other countries. So what has happened to all the doctors and nurses we have trained over the last twenty years, let alone since labour came into government. What has happened, well a lot seem to have given up the ghost, they hae retired, or emigrated.
But it is no good Brown trumpeting all the extra doctors and nurses, if the ones we have trained have left and the others have retired. The same with the police, define waht does Brown mean by police, does he mean some of Blunketts plods, who are not police at all, but look and dress just like the police.
As for the National Insurance rise, Brown needs to answer the point how much will it cost the NHS, and the Police, fire and ambulance services, the state employers. The problem is that Brown is the one taking the money out of the economy, not Cameron, Cameron is actually keeping the money in the economy.
As for the bankers, Brown has been too close, Goldman Sachs, and Lehman Brothers, whose London office he opened. As for the days when as Chancellor he went to the Mansion House in his lounge suit, what an insult to tradition, nowadays he kow tows to the bankers, and the money men, he is no different to a cat or dog which has been neutered.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
how interesting that now Brown and the government are announcing that they are holding a cabinet meeting over the problems with travel caused by the ash. They really must be reading your influential blog to find out what it is that they should be doing. I am surprised that Brown is not flying to Iceland to show how much he cares about us mere mortals. I mean he loves going to Afghanistan, why not Iceland, to see for himself what is being done.
Complain about this comment
Now the airlines want a bail out - why ?
I thought that we were trying to stamp out the satanic CO2, so this is a blessing. It seems that these environmentalists cant't get their story straight.
Now I hear they're taking scientific advice - we're doomed.
Complain about this comment
23: "If on the other hand the Tories get just over 40% of the votes cast and an overall majority, and go ahead with the cuts, this will not be the will of the people."
For goodness sake, get real. Even if "it will not be the will of the people" cuts are coming whichever party or combination of parties forms the next government.
This country is virtually bankrupt. One of the key reasons for that is that Brown has spent far more than he has received in taxes to the sum of almost £170bn. To finance that massive deficit we are dependent on the buyers of our gilts, or bonds, who effectively lend us money. If cuts are not made it is more than likely they will be less willing to do so or, alternatively, they will expect a high rate of return to cover their risk. Interest rates will then go up sharply.
Harsh as it may be "the will of the people" doesn't really come into it. And if you want to blame anyone for that, you should look to Brown for he is the one who has spent as though there is no tomorrow.
You should also look at today's Sunday Times [page 2 main section] where there is an article setting out some research that newspaper has undertaken. It reveals that more than 225,000 public sector jobs cuts are "quietly being forced through by councils, the NHS and police forces, despite Gordon Brown's pledge to protect frontline services". The article goes on to say that those cuts are already being implemented.
And that is nothing to do with the Conservatives. It is Brown's Labour government that is wielding the axe.
Complain about this comment
No doubt we shall be subjected to Gordon reassuring us all that he has
solved the problem of getting stranded Brits back home.The emergency meeting he has called to address this problem caused by volcanic ash,must
surely be led by his superior thinking.
For the man who singlehandedly saved the world,this must be a doddle,so we can all rest easy now,Gordon is on the case.
This may be causing untold problems for some,but its a telling moment for
mankind,showing our impotence when faced with the force of nature.
Complain about this comment
46 Sevenstargreen
Perhaps Gordon could start by telling immigration control not to be so jobsworthy in these exceptional circs.
There is a good report on the BBC England site on how badly returnees were treated and being about to mutiny the police were called and negotiated a fasttrack system .
They still missed the last trains though.
Be ashamed Portsmouth immigration control, be ashamed.
Complain about this comment
The horror of the NHS is that unless you have the wit and strength to avoid the obstacles they place in your path, the simplest way for them to implement cuts is to avoid diagnosis and treatment. I have learned by experience and my concern is those who allow themselves to be ignored and overlooked.
The latest ploy I have experienced is for them to offer a non-urgent procedure which they feel allows them to remove me from their cancer follow up list. Nice try.
The NHS cast aside the ill and dying nowadays in pursuit of statistics fashioned to suit their needs.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
do I have any trust left in my country, no. What is one of the most contentious issues which the government has difficulty with. It is the flying back to the country of the bodies of our dead soldiers. I hope that there is no conspiracy about flying the bodies back.
We already know that returning soldiers are now stuck in Cyprus because of the no fly zones. Does this mean that we can't fly in soldiers, or send out supplies to the troops. Should the war now be suspended as well as the flights.
What is also annoying me is the fact that the next series of debates is not even on terrestrial television, it is on a pay for channel. This is totally unaccpetable and one has to ask how has this come about.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
on the 4th April Rifleman Mark Turner paid the ultimate price and his body was brought home to this country on the 9th April.
On the 7th April Fusilier Jonathan Burgess also paid the ultimate price in the occupation of Afghanistan. As yet I can find no trace that his body has been brought home to his country. One has to ask exactly why not, surely not so that Brown does not have to watch his TV to see another body being brought back as a result of his war. Oh, and please do not blame the problems with the volcano in Iceland.
You bet I am angry, you bet I am cynical, and it is really strange that since the 7th April no British soldier has been killed in Afghanistan. Now when did Brown call the election, remind me.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I am more convinced than ever that what is really wanted is a change in our politics. The policies of the Lib/Dems is almost irrelevant compared with the benefits we would get from a change in our politics. I don't think people are turned off politics, they are turned off participating in politics. The two main party machines are so dominant that they stifle the country. By having a hung Parliament it is just possible that we will get some real reform, that is the real benefit of Clegg.
Every business has to evolve to survive. Look at the recent example of John Lewis or the way that cumbersome organisations like the BBC are changing, even the Scouts and Guides. But our Parliament is stuck with a model which does not meet the needs of the future of the country. A hung Parliament might just force the change and that is part of Clegg's appeal.
Britain does feel broken, but not from the incidents that fill the newspapers, but from the politicians. In the late 70's there was Maggie who was offering an alternative. In the 90's the rise of Labour was giving hope and appeared to offer a new direction to answer people's needs. The big question for now is why aren't the Tories coasting towards victory. My answer is that they do not appear to be answering people's needs. Neither do Labour, nor do the Lib/Dems. The only solution is make the politicians change the way that the country is run by confronting them with the will of the people in the form of a hung Parliament.
The Tories 'power to the locals' is a bit of a joke. First of all it was they who took away powers from local councils (even if it seemed sensible at the time). 'You have freedom of action provided we agree with it' seems no freedom at all. No one could go on about 'post code lotteries' as that is a direct consequence of local autonomy. In the case of schools and hospitals, people's interest is transient ( children in the school, family with an illness), would the people with long term interest be little better than the present management structure, or if we had elected people wouldn't opinion swing violently as a new issue came to the top of the heap? Inertia can hinder progress, but a certain amount can achieve steady progress and change.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
can I suggest that if the conservatives want to keep their number of voters up, then they have to attack the government in the foreign affairs debate on Thursday. They must not turn and in any way support the liberals over the wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan.
What they can do is the hearts and minds bit in respect of our pathetic escapades in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course they have to support the soldiers, that is a given, soldiers except in a few notable cases cannot refuse orders.
What they can do is to attack the policy which the government allowed the generals to follow. I mean just accepting that a general could dare to seek his own legal advice before accpeting orders. Beown is mired in Iraq, and Afghanistan is now his war.
Where the government is weak is the situation over Baha Mousa. The inquiry is much more informative than Chilcot. Cameron must go on enhanced interrogation techniques, and extra ordinary rendition, these are the responsibility of this government, and it was Hutton in his statement in late February last year who supplies the key to the attack which can legitimately be made on the government.
It is the suppport for Karzai which this government has failed on. It is the failure to win hearts and minds, it is Harry and 'we do bad things to bad people'. It is the Ministry of Defence overstaffed with media people which has failed the country. It is the choice which Brown made over the various defence ministers, it is the lack of supplies, the duplicity over equipment to the troops at the front, too late, the war will be over when America withdraws before the next presidential election.
The Afghans have their heroes, their flags, their drums, their history, and we have the usual lions led by donkeys, just as in all the other wars. In the meantime no deaths to report since 7th April, it is just so weird.
Complain about this comment
#51
why am I so not surprised that my posting has been refrred to the moderators. Some institutions have an amazing amount of power. Look for yourselves at the links between the finance sector and the government. It is too late for Brown to call for an inquiry, he could have done it earlier, when he actually had the power to do so.
It is amazing how some stuff gets lost, ignored, whilst peoples concentration is diverted to the problems over the Icelandic volcano. The British media has a lot to answer for.
I am looking forward to the programme on the BBC radio 4 tonight on the University which ran out of money, the tip of the iceberg if you ask me. This year my local county council is actually reducing wages under the job evaluation process forced on them by government dictat, whether I agree or disagree is not relevant, it is the process which needs highlighting, under a labour government.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
listened to the Today programme this morning about the effect of the no fly zone, they chose to go to Newcastle, brilliant, I keep telling people that this is the best, most influential blog, but nobody believes me. I wish that people would read the terms and conditions, and I paraphrase, that our comments can be used by the BBC as a source for their reports. Well I hope that Newcastle United football club are even now boarding their coach for the long journey to Plymouth. I can only hope that the nationalised Northern Rock are not picking up the tab.
Complain about this comment
Catch22, I presume your #51 refers in some way to that all American success story Goldman Sachs, whose Chairman was quoted as saying in a Sunday Times Magazine article recently that "we do God's work". Clearly the man suffers no delusions of grandeur...
An alternative news site that catalogues stories that tend not to hold GS in such adulatory fervour can be found at:
http://www.goldmansachs666.com/
Another American financial institution often found scurrying behind GS clutching at it's coat tails is JP Morgan Chase (what is the name of that non-entity of an ex PM that works there?) and accordingly has it's own website which can be accessed from the above.
The US President Barack Obama is similarly honoured.
The Securites and Exchange Commission (SEC) is an entirely independent organisaton from the US government. Coincidentally the last time the SEC investigated financial wrongdoings in a large organisation, their main office in New York was destroyed along with all the evidence pursuant to that investgation. Oh, where was the office? Building 7 in the World Trade centre, was a 50 storey building that collapsed even though no jets crashed into it in September 2001.
Complain about this comment
Why all this talk of introducing PR? We've had PR since 2005 when DC was elected Tory leader, and a fat lot of good it's done us.
Complain about this comment
#56
You may well be right, I couln't possibly say. It is bad enough that a very close family member of mine has an injunction against him over extra-ordinary rendition, and enhanced interrogation techniques, so I really don't want to suffer the same fate.
Suffice to say the BBC have a former chairman, at the time of the Hutton inquiry, who will know about the power of the government. There are people who who used to work for Goldman Sachs in the past who have either direct or indirect connections, not only to labour, but the current prime minister.
Just as there has been no satisfactory answer to the problem when people either who have suffered or are susceptable to cancer received post cards from labour about the effect of a conservative government on health care for cancer patients.
I know that at this time there are only allegations against Goldman Sachs, but the press went quiet when the contentious issue of Harry in Afghanistan was effectively censored. The worst days for the British press were during Harrys tour of duty in Afghanistan, where they kept silent, and we all saw for ourselves the problems caused by Harry and his 'we do bad things to bad people'.
I think that this government has problems with its connections to American banks, for example does nobody remember when Brown opened the London offices of Lehman Brothers, who does Blair now do consultancy work for. Look for yourselves what the American banks had been up to before the Great Crash of 1929.
Where has all the billions gone. Please don't cough and splutter when you read of the massive bonus payments being payed to Goldman Sachs staff, they deserve every penny. Trouble is there are rather a lot of pennies being paid. What can Brown actually do, send in the Royal Navy.
Complain about this comment
Probably the more appropriate question in the coming election is which bank are you intending to vote for ?
It isn't an issue of bashing bankers or anything so stupid. It's a matter of removing their fingers from the levers of power. Banks have reached a plateau of untouchability not enjoyed even by politicians, in that governments may fall but banks are preserved and financed more like religious icons. They can clearly work with governments of any hue, and it is apparent that none have the will to control their excesses and dubious activities. Having them involved in the CO2 farce is merely opening up a new world of egregious financial exploitation to their care, and with such a tarnished record behind them, it turns farce into something far more disreputable.
Gordon's 'golly wow I don't believe it' act is wearing a bit thin now, and its overuse doesn't bolster his reputation, especially now he owns up to some level of culpability, not that I'm expecting the Tories, or any of them, to resolve the fundamental problems. I had reason to investigte the New Zealand banking system and was astonished to discover how lax their regulation is in that area, but our banking system isn't defined by the laxity of others. If banks scuttle off to the area that allows them to perform the greater misdemeanours then surely that's a mark of their disreputability. Having a big 'City' is all well and good, but it's a positive handicap if it's also a dirty City. You might as well brag about having the most fraud or biggest crime gangs.
I interpret Clegg's rise in the polls as being down to people being sick of the lot of them, and commentators have pointed out that many of those voicing support for him not actually agreeing with some of his key policies.
It remains the case that neither main party is owning up to the slashing cuts they have planned, and they continue the folly of challenging each other to tell the truth, pretending that they won't be doing the same. Meanwhile the outsider who gives a glimpse of reality, may run off with the prize. A pox on all their houses.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
may I suggest that people look at the BBC News for the Brown broadcast. At approximately 3minutes and 48 seconds he starts to say 'this is the most serious financial' then remembers that this is about transport, and then says 'this is the most serious transport disruption'. He refers to HMS Ocean, and all that is going to do is to go to Spain to pick up the soldiers who have left Afghanistan. I think that knowing our brave and courageous soldiers that they will say don't take us, take the civilians, we are brave and hardy, and the people come first, we serve our country, we can wait, just put us up in a nice hotel, meet all the costs of our food and drink and we will be ok.
What on earth will be the good of sending HMS Ark Royal, and HMS Albion, what is the point, other than to justify the spending of billions on the new replacement aircraft carriers. I just can't wait for the sight of British holiday makers wading out to the waiting landing craft to bring them back home. Please note that Adonis is actually a non elected minister, and is Lord Adonis, so much for reform of the House of Lords eh Gordon.
Complain about this comment
Should Brown be chairing the COBRA meetings? Technically the government has been dissolved and he is not PM, correct? I may be wrong but I thought that the Cabinet Office took over as head of the Civil Service for the day to day governing of the country during the GE campaign.
It was also for these reasons that Brown did not attend the nuclear disarmament talks in the US as it would be a conflict of interest. If Brown is making decisions surely these actions are illegal? This is all very odd.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
We do not elect Prime Ministers in the UK.
Mr Brown was elected leader of the Labour Party - unopposed.
I thought you would have known that - perhaps you do.
Are we allowed to make allowances for ex Murdoch bag carriers?
Complain about this comment
#61
I think that you are correct. Unless we are being set up for the cancellation of the election, on grounds of...ash.
I am amazed that during this, the greatest economic crisis since the last economic crisis, that so many people can afford to take these brilliant holidays. Why is that it is the teachers who can afford to be away. Maybe we really ought to be looking at how much they are being paid. It seems that the public services have far too much money.
Complain about this comment
The interesting issue is that with Lib Dem pospects rising, it almost makes a hung Parliament inevitable. That being the case, and with so much about the inevitable slashing of public finance and services being held back until after the election, the resulting Parliament is going to be full of drama and disputes and whoever takes the reins will face a furore and responsibility for what they find they have to do.
It's doubtful that a hung Parliament will last too long, perhaps a year, so winning the current election should not be the prime aim of any party. I would have thought that Gordon being supported in power by the Lib Dems would be an ideal result for Cameron, and having the Lib Dems constantly reminding Labour what Socialism is all about would be hilarious.
Complain about this comment
Have the Lib-Dems fully spelt out their policy on a nuclear deterrent?
We know they want to cancel Trident (although the short term financial benefits seem small), and I believe their plan is to replace it with something cheaper. But has that alternative been clarified, costed, and publicised? They claim to be open with the voters, but this area seems rather vague.
Complain about this comment
Andrew
Your blog title analying the "Clegg Effect" neatly encapsualtes the Lib Dem problem in truly becomng a mainstream party. Apart from Clegg and St Vince their top hitters are thin on the ground. Both Lab and Con have concentrated their campaigns on their respective leaders. If the leaders were to step back and allow the lesser figures from their Cabinets to take the limelight, the paucity and low calibre of the Lib dems would be exposed.
The lady from the Lib Dems on today's programme was not convincing either to the viewers nor I suspect to the DP Team. I remember a few weeks ago when a question about what constituted a majority in a hung parliament scenario - most seats, or votes cast - completely flummoxed the Lib Dem spokesman, to the extent that he was completely ridiculed.
The other parties can bring out the big guns, and if the Lib dems do not want to play can always taunt Clegg as being a one trick pony type of party. Their pro Euro stance is a weakness especially with the possibility of all the PIGS economies needing a bailout - can the UK afford this even indirectly? Equally an amnesty for illegal immigrants allowing them to stay is questionable as the initial estimate is not much more than a guess. Could Clegg please tell me the winning numbers of this week's Lottery? I would be very grateful.
Complain about this comment
Hi Andrew, As you say - the LD's policies need closer scrutiny. How many people in the Shires etc.(Regions, in LD speak)would be happy with greater numbers of migrant workers moving in to change the existing cultural nature they are used to and enjoy. The cities are already unrecognisable as G.B. as we used to know it and many people 'escape' to the country for that very reason. When were the British public ever given the choice about these great changes? As I recall the mere mention of immigration only five years ago at the last Election was deemed to be rascist! We are a tolerant society and, yes, we have a lot to learn from different cultures but it seems to have been a deliberate policy of the Labour goverment to change our nation completely.....Did they expect most immigrants to be natural Labour voters I wonder and strange that they have so many MP's in city centres representing fewer constituents than do the more Conservative seats elsewhere.
We need a thorough discussion about Trident. Maybe the LD's are right...no Trident no need for us to go to war ever again! No army, big saving!
Complain about this comment
Fact remains that a vote for LD's in a marginal seat the Tories hope to win will mean a Labour government or at the very least a hung parliament. Can anyone imagine Gordon Brown working hand-in-glove with Nick Clegg - or anyone for that matter? He is not a team player in my opinion. If he has to stand down will Nick Clegg have achieved what Brown's cabinet colleagues couldn't?!
Complain about this comment
Good afternoon each & Andrew.
#66 ecb
With so much guff about I do not wish to add to it...
BUT
"If the leaders were to step back and allow the lesser figures from their Cabinets to take the limelight, the paucity and low calibre of the Lib dems would be exposed."
Exposed? As in contrast to what?
The Milli-bro set?
Sundry unelected mouthpieces?
The make-up of the respective cabinets is yet another thing the LDs have in common with the other old hands. Wind and p..
Complain about this comment
Note to moderators. My contribution @ 6 has been "referred to the moderators". Presumably no decision has been taken to withdraw as I have not received an email so informing me.So circa 42 hours after posting, not withdrawn but not there to be read. If it is eventually reinstated, which I imagine it will as I can see no basis for disallowing it,the chances of it being read are ultra thin - perhaps the intention of the referrer.
How can it take so long to make a decision, one way or the other?
Complain about this comment
So Andrew...
Doncaster council is to be undergo government intervention. All is not Rosey for one Milli-bro.
I have read of the sorry state of that council for years; tales of institutional thuggery for the most part.
Is this New or Old Labour?
Complain about this comment
I think that voters have just got fed up with the Gordon/Cameron staged fight on issues irrelevant to the reality voters are very well aware will hit home after the election.
Gordon and Cameron like to set the agenda, where it suits them. Now they have had a wake up call that a leader who appears more in tune with reality, is going to attract attention, and votes.
Though I wouldn't vote for Clegg in a million years, I do enjoy Gordon and Cameron both getting slapped down for their poor showing so far. If they continue as they have, they really could promote Clegg into the lead. Perhaps they'll find a more suitable title for Mandelson than that of strategic mastermind. Gordon's new 'smiley face' is unnerving my cat who peers out from under the sofa at his new chairman Mao facial impersonation.
The unnerving thing for Gordon is that the Lib Dems have become the new Socialists, and with the Conservatives moving slightly to the left, Labour are getting squeezed. The mastermind didn't see that coming.
At least Gordon now has a winning smile.
Complain about this comment
Just what does the Leader’s Debates achieve?
The participants can just give answers, or make statements, virtually unchallenged.
A better way of informing the interested electorate would be to have an hour long interview – as used to happen when Brian Walden fronted Weekend World, okay the questions were often longer than the answers, but it provided was a forensic analysis of each party’s manifestos.
Mr Clegg gets a boost, but he’s allowed to just throw in policies such as ditch tranche 3 of the Euro fighter – What are the consequences of this?
Ditch Trident without being grilled on the consequences.
The Liberals want to stop all new coal fired and nuclear power stations, what about some analysis of this stance? Pray for wind? What about the unit cost of the power generated, it will be high, what does this do for British industry.
The liberals would have introduced the Euro, which would have made the recession worse in the UK, but he wasn’t grilled on this.
Go back to the long forensic interviews, in my view and make the politicians talk about their policies and manifestos not talk about the other parties policies.
Now that Walden has long retired Andrew Neil would do
Complain about this comment
For all those who have complained to the BBC about bias and wondered why nothing is done about it...
From Guido Fawkes website:
http://order-order.com/2010/04/19/labour-candidate-is-bbc-bias-complaints-judge/#comments
Complain about this comment
72. GomerPyle
A bit like Jack Nicholson's in Batman.
Whatever he's on I'd like some.
Complain about this comment
I have to agee Matt that many of the Lib Dem policies are just plain daft, but surely that only highlights that the main parties aren't connecting with the electorate. Gordon's spending his way to oblivion as banks make off with the country's loot and Cameron wants to mobilise the Women's Institute into Mao's Revolutionary People's Army. In comparison Clegg doesn't look quite so bad.
We just don't have much to select from, and nowadays an outbreak of runny noses is labelled a pandemic simply because we have funded some group of scientists to look for pandemics. I bet they awarded themselves big bonuses for saving us from that one. Poster in my GP's surgery appeared to be begging people to empty their fridge, but as a cancer patient with a damaged immune system I judged I was quite safe.
Now we have an outbreak of dust imperilling the world and the economic fate of Greece must be delayed as our imperious leaders could not contemplate travel by anything less than private jet. It's hard to believe Aleaxander the Great and Napoleon left home without a jet waiting on the runway ready to transport them in splendorous luxury.
In a competition to select an idiot we are blessed with choice. The problem isn't so much their differences but their similarities and that, above all else, makes the final choice of the electorate a coin toss.
Complain about this comment
73 Matt
Although I agree in the most part with your post - please - save us from 'someone like Brian Walden!' The only person who could ask the same question in a hundred different ways!
This surge for Clegg is just "we haven't tried this one yet' mentality. There is no choice as Gomer says - it's between a toss of the coin or pin the tail on the donkey!
Complain about this comment
LIBDEMS WILLFULLY BLIND TO EU CULTURES' REALITIES- & THE HUGE INTERNATIONAL DANGERS OF AN EU SUPERSTATE!!
It's plain that one of the biggest challenges for members of the UK Libdem party is acknowledging mainland-Europe's cultural and historical realities as they are, not willfully blindly seeing mainland-Europe, and by extension- the EU- as they would like it to be....
This would require an honest acknowledgment by prospective Libdem politicians, party members and others of:
1) What 'Europe's countries' peoples' unequivocally demonstrated for 800-years worst propensities are*; and are evidenced contemporarily**
2) The fact that the 'good Europe' (EU) of today COULD CHANGE TO A BAD EUROPE OVERNIGHT;
3) The fact that the likelihood and potential of today's 'good Europe' turning into a bad Europe increases with the greater integration and amalgamation of EU member nations into each other and within a 'superstate EU';
4) The fact that if EU member nations such as the UK lose their sovereignty and become part of a superstate EU, opposing the dominant culture (or maybe 2 cultures) that eventually control the majority of EU structures, bureaucratic and political posts, etc- and hence set the superstate's 'internal and/or foreign-policies and international MILITARY OBJECTIVES will not be possible...;
5) The fact that should the EU- as a 'superstate' of 600 million people- turn bad while the UK was irretrievably bound into it- the UK, its peoples and its politicians would have no effective recourse to oppose UK military and materiel resources being, in effect, hijacked for improper purposes...;
The US/UK 'special relationship', while not perfect, is at least a relationship between two sovereign states, with each country free to make its own decisions and set its own objectives on the world stage as it sees fit...
While it is true that closely bound histories along with common mercantile, legal, trade, democratic and global political principles and philosophies have often acted to encourage constructive alignment of UK and US endeavors world-wide since the end of WW II, the UK has always had a "national choice" of whether or not to participate in US geo-political objectives...
Although criticized by many, the recent Iraq and Afghanistan operations are good examples of the 'superstate' that is the US initiating international endeavors in which the UK participated- only after freely making a democratic decision to do so...
Should the UK be subsumed into a superstate EU, no such "free choice" would be available to the UK as to whether or not to participate in a superstate EU's global 'projects', endeavors and/or military fracas's...
The UK can best be enabled to continue doing good around the world- and to further its own reasonable interests- militarily or otherwise- as an independent nation continuing to work closely with the United States, British Commonwealth countries, the U.N., and NATO...
These objectives are not conflicted by the UK as a member of a multi-speed, non-superstate EU (IE: an aligned-to-varying degrees economically, politically and in internal legal & social-policy ways group of nations)...
But removing all one's (the UK's) chips from an 'international bank' (UK sovereignty on the world stage) that has served one- the UK- well for centuries and putting these chips into a "very troubled history 'bank'" (European Continent) which has a centuries-long, uncontradicted track record of internal malfeasance and board-room bust ups- would only be recommended by the most intellectually dishonest and dangerously naive...
* Ego driven militarism; religious intolerance; persecution of minorities; never-ending wars; overseas land & property theft and subjugation of overseas peoples for the benefit of 'Europe's' country's peoples...
** Think the Balkans early 1990's- 2010
__________________
Roderick V. Louis,
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Complain about this comment
The Volcanic Event has shown the limitations of air travel and one of the main problems is the transportation of food. Surely, we need to be questioning the Politicians about their agricultural policies.
The main question is Can the UK feel its population without food imports? Can the UK protect its sea lanes to bring in food? I suspect the answer is to both these questions is no. The same with energy.
Nick Clegg was the only leader to mention the public sector pensions and suggested the need to curtail them. Neither Brown nor Cameron did. It looks as if the Labour and Tories are doomed to repeat the last election, which is probably why the public is so dispirited and looking for change. Whether it will convert into votes is another matter.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Andrew
I am puzzled. UK airspace by and large is closed as are the UK airports due to the ash cloud and the Icelandic volcano getting angry again. Yet KLM flights across the Atlantic are taking place, and their final routes on the approach to Amsterdam Schipol Airport fly over the South East of England (I have gleaned this from the KLM Flight Tracker facility on line).
This seems a bit odd, though I do not possess a technical background to explain this. Perhaps you could ask around, although a technical explanation would naturally preclude any politicians of whatever hue or persuasion.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
there is a problem. Let us say that the conservatives poll the most votes. Let us say that they get the most seats, but they don't have an overall majority.
The liberals must join a coalition with the conservatives, on the basis of any democratic vote.
So lets say that they do exactly as they did after the 1928 election, go with labour. It failed miserably. Eventually the liberals went with the conservatives, there was a government of National Unity, with a labour Prime Minister. It ain't going to happen that way again. I can see a labour liberal coalition government, but not with Brown at its head. I can see somebody like Jack Straw, an operator, a survivor, but one person who could be an alternative is Mandelson.
Complain about this comment
Labour - Brown, when 60+% don't see adding any more to the last 13 as a plus
Conservatives - Not Brown, but handing Cameron a small % of a small turnout as a 'mandate'
Lib Dems - Get Brown (unless prepared to guarantee against it soon)
NOTA looking better by the minute, except that simply feeds into one of the above anyway, or anarchy.
Ain't democracy a peach?
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
with regard to the Today programme there was a very short piece on the inquest now going on into the deaths of three British soldiers as a result of 'friendly fire' when they were accidently killed as result of an American pilot dropping a bomb on them rather than the Taliban. How many foreign soldiers have been killed by 'friendly fire' by the British military.
The Americans I'm afraid are just not very good at protecting their coalition partners, they are trigger happy.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I have called for some time for a formal inquiry into the finance sector. It is good when the major political parties follow where I lead.
In respect of the political situtation, a large number of individuals were going to go for the BNP as their alternative vote, for those who are NOTA I will vote but it is still going to be none of the above. I regard the liberals as even worse, there proposal to increase tax free pay to £10,000 will mean a reduction in the take to the treasury of over £17 billion, and less than £2 billion of that will go to the poor. You rightly pointed this out in your programme.
The trouble is what about pensioners who already do not get the current tax free allowance, they won't benefit at all. What about people who receive their state pension, who have a modest income from an occupational pension, and still need to work, taking their total income to over £15,000. Which income will be taxed at source. What about the person with two jobs each giving £9,999 how will they be taxed. Of course there should be a larger tax free allowance, but it seriously needs exploring as to how it will work.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
just listening to Alex Salmond. It is a Government of National Unity which is needed, call it a balanced parliament, a hung parliament, but really it is a government of national unity. Trust me there will be no alternative. The people are beginning to see the ediface collapse, just like the old USSR, it just dosappeared in a puff of smoke. It can happen here, they are so afraid, people are seeing it on the docks in Spain. I said yestreday about the problems of sending the ship to pick up the soldiers, so what about the civilians, of somebody in Madrid has decided, it is the let them eat cake moment.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
last October the RPI was in negative territory, my pension was not reduced, but it did not rise. Inflation as measured by the RPI has just hit 4.4%, I mean 4.4%, this where Quantitative Easing leads to, inflation. We are just so doomed.
Complain about this comment
Considering that all three main parties ride the eco-bandwagon of hate to all CO2 and that the prime CO2 driver is humanity, it is patently absurd to encourage the country to stock up on more CO2 producers.
Still, the eco-lobby have never allowed a faulty premise to undermine their blinkered view before. The Lib Dem immigration policy seems to combine the best of open armed liberalism with the worst of the BNP. It seems rather strange to think of passive internment as beneficial, and is repugnant when imposed on racial grounds. If the Lib Dems keep this up I may have to stop calling myself 'racist'.
Quite what their infatuation with the Euro is about no one can fathom. It must be the way children are fascinated by fire, and without nuclear energy or dirty fuels it'll take a lot of hand rubbing to keep warm during Lib Dem winters.
In spite of this I see the Lib Dem's intervention as a positive influence in showing up that, in conflict, Gordon and Cameron have minimised their differences so as to become largely indistinguishable from each other. It would funny, if nothing else, if in concentrating on each other they allowed 'David' (Nick Clegg) to run off with the prize.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
just watched the parliament channel on the BBC. It was about the lecture which Brown gave to the OU. In the lecture he refrred to the great religions of the world, and their beliefs. I felt like shouting at the screen when I thought of the ten commandments, especially the one thou shall not kill. Then I thought of Iraq and Afghanistan, and I really felt quite angry about Brown. He just doesn't get it.
He also talked about human rights and freedoms, and I felt like shouting at him about the High Court injunction against a very close family member of mine, and I am outraged. There is no democracy in our country, there are no freedoms, no real democracy, no real freedom. They are all as bad as each other.
I thought that the questions which you put to Clegg about his expenses were brilliant, they really are all caught up in this, it is still NOTA.
Complain about this comment
#88
please note that I have just gone into the internet to look at the issues in my local newspaper down here in Exeter. This is what is happening down here in the lovely democratic south west:
“But we had a number of objections from the Labour and Conservative candidates who said they would not share a platform with the BNP. In the interest of the client group we had to take the decision to ask the BNP candidate to stand down.”
Are there instances around the country were democracy is under threat, or don't people care any more in that the ends justify the means.
Complain about this comment
So Clegg sprang another surprise on all of us today. His house belongs to us, the voters, and he has been keeping it in good shape by means of his generous expenses. What he probably means is that when he re-sells it he will hand any profits over to the Treasury. Whether the profits will somehow be adjusted (redused?) to allow for various factors, and whether his total expenses will exceed his adjusted profits - who knows? I wonder if it was an off-the-cuff response and whether it will catch on with other MPs.
I'm not clear about the difference between the Lib-Dem and Tory immigration policies. The Tories say they will, by consultation with local authorities and businesses, tailor the numbers to the needs of the country for essential labour, which by implication says that these immigrants will work for specific companies for the time required.
The Lib-Dems seem to be saying the same thing, but without the consultation, and putting more emphasis on making sure that the immigrants stick with the jobs they were allocated to.
The only difference seems to be an element of supervision, possibly unworkable, and possibly more open to scams if there is no prior plan based on consultation.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
the Baha Mousa inquiry has reconvened, and I would refer commenteers to the following evidence given yesterday by SO56:
'I joined 1BW in September 2002...and took part in some exercises in preparation in some exercises in preparation for what the public, and the military considered a growing rhetorical and potential for was (conflict) with and invasion of Iraq'
Now considering the cable which I refrred to in earlier postings with reagrd to Afghanistan, dated 2nd September 2008 where is said 'we should think of preparing our public opinion' for a benign dictator, then I think that I have every right to be angry about the Iraq war.
I think that some of those giving evidence to the Baha Mousa Inquiry should also be called to give evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry.
Complain about this comment
I doubt that polls are going to do much more than give political leaders dyspepsia during this election campaign, and for that reason alone I must commend them.
I suspect that they will be pretty worthless as a guide to the final result but much like climate forecasts, as they are all we have, people will still give them credence.
Complain about this comment
The almost pop star hysteria surrounding Nick Clegg has given me a dejavu experiance. We saw all this in 1997 and were swept along by the Blair spin. I was one of them. Oh how I have regretted it since. As to the debate, I did not expect Brown to transform himself overnight. However Cameron was certainly less of his usual self. Clegg was no better than a schoolboy at a debating society with no substance but plenty of enthusiasm. We do not want another Blair. This is the man who plotted against his leader and then enthroned Ming Campbell on a quick release trap-door so that he the 'Young Pretender' could make a bid for the throne.
Complain about this comment
#91
Is Clegg a member of the National Trust. Can we all get on a bus with Andrew and visit, to see the wonderful new kitchen, the cushions, I think we should be told.
I have often thought that I have problems with the National Trust, also those people who leave their best pictures to the treasury in lieu of taxes, and then say that the only time it can be seen is the 29th February when it falls on a Wednesday.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
Cable was asked about stock markets, and he gave an answer about international companies and local companies. Please remember that Cable used to work for the well known international oil company, Shell Transport & Trading Company Limited, as it was known then. Now maybe the political opponents to the liberals might just ask him about his history with that famous oil company, just like he ought to be pressed on his previous liking for labour.
It is the same with Goldman Sachs, who was a previous Chairman of the BBC, and who had that person previously worked for. Also who was a secretary to Gordon Brown and who was she married to?
Actually others can look up for themselves the links between Gavin Davies, Sue Nye, Anji Hunter, and Adam Boulton. Also look up for yourselves Baroness Upholland, that is Catherine Ashton, who is actually married to, why Peter Kellner of YouGov.
I think that it is a disgrace that the second in the series of debates should be on a pay for view channel. It is also confirmation, if any were needed, that we need a directly elected Prime Minister, who is in all but name a president. We must also be able to have people appointed to the government, after going through a thorough select committee questioning process, without going to the Lords. I would love to be able to cast a vote for mandelson, only I can't, and even if labour lose power he will still be in the Lords, unless he does the honourable thing and resign of course, like all the others.
Complain about this comment
The programme did a short piece today on the SNP's election manifesto launch, by interviewing Alex Salmond. I have to point out that this programme has never ever done this sort of piece without insulting the SNP with some sort of sarcastic remark/s. Today it was Coburn's parting shot about "Alex Salmond dreaming".
This kind of reponse whilst being very insulting (a trademark of the programme), demonstrates how worried the pro-unionist BBC are worried about the upsurge in the SNP's popularity.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
further to my Number 90 in that one of the reasons why the BNP were not invited was because they did not know the name of the candidate, or some excuse like that. What I would point out is that nominations for the General Election do not close until 4pm today. I am ever more convinced that it has to be NOTA, None Of The Above.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
Why in the various programmes that you present do you never miss a chance to refer to Mr Brown as being 'unelected'.
You must surely be aware of how a PM emerges,and that in democratic organisations it is very common for people to be elected unopposed.
Is it not time that you were abandoning Murdoch garbage?
Complain about this comment
just watched the policics show debate and the message that i get from the lib dems is that they will reward people for being deceitful ie illegal immigrants , there will be no short term prison sentances, and it is acceptable to carry knives. forgive me if i am wrong but i have watched it twice and clearly heard Chris Hune say this. What message does this send out for the youth of today nevermind the yobs and criminals god help us if they win we will be the crime capitol of the world
Complain about this comment
Good afternoon each & Andrew.
#100 mark
This is simply Government of the people by the people. Done the old pseudo-democratic way.
There was a headline the other day about a
61 yo man who did not fail a breath test BUT did have a Swiss-army knife in his glove box.
Conviction. Result.
Each of these partys are yet
up-to-the-minute and an age behind at all times.
I wonder what the next headline will be that will decide the election for us?
Complain about this comment
Nick Clegg doesn't appear to understand what racism is. Racism isn't limiting entry of forign people to your land, otherwise many Commonwealth countries including Nepal and Sri Lanka would fall foul of that definition. Racism is treating people in your country differently according to their race, which appears to be exactly what Nick Clegg is advocating.
The bottom line is that it is entirely unworkable and wouldn't stand the firat challenge. I could give hypothetical examples, but it's not worth the effort to undermine such a palpably silly idea. The idea ofmaking the employer responsible for policing the policy appears to represent a new era of feudal serfdom that seems so voguish to modern politicians.
Amazingly Nick Clegg is the only one to have held Gordon responsible, correctly, for overseeing the banking fiasco and free for all that Gordon appears to have successfully defended so far, on the basis that it nearly trashed the whole planet. He's only responsible for what happens within our borders, so we can't add culpability for the worldwide catastrophe, but allowing him to act as if he was an innocent bystander is an outrageous exhilbition of inability to accept responsibility in an area in which he is supposedly the supreme expert. To watch him continue to flounder impotently against the banks is pathetic, and I think Cameron would find it hard to be less effective even if he tried.
It almost appears that Lib Dem policy was designed on the basis that they would never win. They're now lumbered with some policies I bet they wish they could change.
Complain about this comment
#102 GomerPyle
This global financial disaster is no sort of blanket that covered all. Rather it was like one or two stars which not only attracted poor investments into their orbit but drew in 'matter' from further afield to feed the whole system. One of those stars was a Brown-Dwarf.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
brilliant news. I have just been watching theBBC News channel and saw Adonis on the steps with Dame somebody or other. Aopparently, all the Britsih airfields are now to be opened. This is absolutely fantastic news, I am beside myself with the excitement.
In the meantime yesterday Brown was next to Adonis and said that the coaches were in Spain, they were not, they maybe now, but they weren't. So in the most serious financial, sorry transport, disruption since time began we can now be sure that safety, which is paramount, is ok and we can all fly with complete safety.
In the meantime another day passes and I am glad to say that I have heard of another day with no deaths in Afghanistan of our brave and courageous soldiers. I wonder if the government would like to say that the safety of our soldiers is paramount, and that they have not been confined to barracks during the election period. Nobody else seems to have anything at all to say on the Baha Mousa Inquiry, nor Afghanistan.
Complain about this comment
Is there no world calamity Gordon can't save us from ?
The captain of a ferry who pointed out that his ship could hold two thousand passengers in comfort against a warship holding two hundred unconfortably, left Gordon unable to pull another world saving masterstroke. I can't help feeling we've undergone another swine flu type crisis.
"Airports Council International (ACI) Europe and the Association of European Airlines (AEA) said they were "questioning the proportionality of the flight restrictions currently imposed".
AEA secretary general Ulrich Schulte-Strathaus said: "Verification flights undertaken by several of our airlines have revealed no irregularities at all."
In the banking calamity, I just can't understand how Gordon managed to kid people he saved the world when the job he's paid to do, and which he unquestinably failed at, it to protect the UK. It seems that Gordon is always out pruning the roses or creosoting the fence whenever anything dodgey's going on. Perhaps a few less international jamborees and treating PM like a full time job would be helpful.
Insiders are trying to make the term 'banker bashing' into a euphemism for being horrid to bankers, when all we ask is that they attempt to adhere to the law of the land. Those banks that cannot do this should have their licences revoked and those individuals who perpetrate illegal activities should be slung in prison. It's what happens to benefit cheats and apart from the massive difference in scale, I see no difference. The fact that they would not receive valet service inside prison should be no excuse to avoid proper and fitting punishment.
I'm not holding my breath. Gordon's holding an inquiry, and we all know what they do.
Complain about this comment
I am quite disappointed that the skies are to be filled with planes again. It has been joyous to have blue skies unpolluted by vapour trails and no noise.
I live 15 miles as the crow flies from Brum Airport and can often hear the roar of jets from there. Military Chinooks have also been absent as has the loudest of them all the police helicopter.
It must have been heaven for those living very close to major airports.
If hundreds of motorcyclists rode the same route every day up to 24 hours a day there would be hell to pay. If the motorcyclists wanted a bigger road and proposed to knock down your house/village to get it they would be laughed out of town.
Why is aviation allowed to do such things ?
Funny old world.
Complain about this comment
107 Xtun
I am with you, I live in the flight path to a major airport and in the summer you can watch the multiple vapour trails slowly turning into clouds before they dissipate. The clear skies have been a delight.
On the other hand I cannot get hold of supplies because the materiel I need is no longer made in the UK [my favourite rant again]- will we ever learn to protect our industries?
Complain about this comment
"I want to create an anti-Tory alliance" says Brown
"Brown is just so desperate" says Clegg
Is Clegg just being coy like a Victorian maiden?
Or is he saying,not with you in charge matey!
So nice to know that Brown believes in democracy!
Complain about this comment
Good morning Andrew!
(I'm only writing this to beat C2 to it, to make him irritable for the rest of the day).
Complain about this comment
GP 88 Human beings breathing out CO2 24hrs a day, and trees they do it too. But not cyanobacter or all those lovely anaerobes that live in green slime and our bowells, which the greenandslimeys so love to cultivate, unlike clean and green. Maybe the greenies should put their back end where their mouth is and eat that no-fart food developed for cows.
Complain about this comment
Just to be clear, I don't mind the CO2 reductions for legitimate tax reasons, but as a moral or belief?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#109
Oh I am distraught, you have beaten me to it, shame on you, playing games, I am almolst lost for words only I am not.
Listening to the Today programme and the problems with Greece. Is anybody from the government going to the various meetings to represent our interests. Now previously Brown has said that there will be no direct payments to any bail out for Greece, but I struggle with Brown when he says direct, it leaves open the possibility of indirect payments.
So, let us say that the IMF make the payments to Greece, together with the Eurozonites. Now we make payments to the IMF, large ones, so as to keep us on the top table, so the IMF then contribute, or guarantee loans. So, we make indirect payments to the bail out, the British taxpayer is involved in the Greek bail out. So, who is going to the various meetings to represent our interests.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I do love proof readers. Take a very well known Daily Newspaper which is reporting on the new bankers tax.
In their headline they refer to five million a year, whereas when you read the actual article they refer to five billion a year. Now I am not perfect in my contributions but then I am not paid to comment, others are paid to proof read, and to get it right.
I hope that this tax goes to a central pot, and cannot be used for any purpose other than as a form of insurance. I can see this 'tax' as going to the Eurozone, rather than our Exchequer.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
21st April and and the Queens birthday. What is brilliant is that it is another day with no deaths of British soldiers from Afghanistan, none since the 7th April. Is this now the longest period for some years when there have been no reported deaths of our brave and courageous soldiers. This is getting seriously weird, it seems that every Wednesday the House was consumed with grief as Brown had to make his sombre announcements, the House was temporarily subdued whilst all the leaders told us the names, read out the regiments, and Brown even had to find the time for his letters of condolence.
In the meantime though the rabble of the pathetic parliament soon resorted to type, shouting down the opponents, jeering, waving papers.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
down here in sunny Exeter, home of the Met Office, I look out of my front window across to the Moors, with a lovely clear blue sky.
As I look out of my rear window, there are so many vapour trails that I can count them, the sky is full of vapour trails. I am basically appalled, how can the policy of no fly zones have been reversed so quickly. What is amazing is how quickly BA got their planes back into the UK. Surely they did not just take off, therefore forcing Adonis to announce a volte face so quickly.
Complain about this comment
#116
should have said 'cannot count them, not can. You see it confirms what I said about proof reading. I'll never make a journalist.
Complain about this comment
Catch22
I note your comment on so little information/news emanating from Afghanistan so I have searched for other news sources. Michael Yon is usually one of my favourite sources though at this time he is at home in Florida. KabulPress.Org has an article entitled "Military and Political Efforts in Afghanistan flounder as no one is in charge" written by a Matthew Nasuti on 15/4/2010
This tells a tale where disparate agencies across different NATO countries essentially do their own thing, and that even General McChrystal does not control all the NATO military units. What is amazing is that US Special Forces and CIA paramilitary forces operate independently of the General, and he has only numinal control of the US Marines! Yet the General does control UK, Australian and New Zealand Special Forces - is this a reenactment of the "Mad Hatter's Tea Party"?
http://kabulpress.org/my/spip.php?article6181
How valid is this story? Who knows, yet any story that the UK MSM produces often cannot be verified independently anyway.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
nobody believes me when I assert that your blog, and the resultant comments, have much more influenece than many realise. Take my #82 yesterday, now the papers have at last realised what is going on, as have the editors of the Today programme, well so I have heard it said around and about.
What must not happen is that if we are to believe the televised debates, that we are voting for the leaders. Now here I have a problem. We had Blair saying last time that he would serve a full term, he did, but he didn't if you get me in that he resigned his seat as soon as he handed over to Brown after the coup. Now Brown has always lacked any legitimacy as PM, that is a given, so if we vote in a parliament, a balanced parliament, then there is a problem. If labour do retain a majority of MPs but the liberals will only agree to serve in a coalition without Brown as leader, then there must be an immediate general election. Brown will not be another Ramsay McDonald, so who will be the PM in a coalition government, or a balanced, hung parliament. It must be a goivernment of all the talents, a government of national unity, but Brown, nor any of the current leaders is suitable as PM.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
there needs to be a statement from all the political parties about the armed forces. I would like to see them all merged into one military force, one set of officer, not as there are at the moment, generals, admirals, air commodores. We are told that they are all sort of integrated at the moment, well formalise it. Forget tradition, if we started a military force now it would not be set up as it currently is.
I know that this might upset a few die hards, but it cannot continue as it is. After all if that is what they are ordered to do, then they must follow orders, mustn't they? It is only a very few number of individuals who have the courage to refuse orders, if a soldier is ordered to do something by a naval officer, then he follows orders. It is however a bit different when some of our soldiers fall under the command of an American officer.
Complain about this comment
#118
with regard to Mr Yon he has actually been unembedded, if that is the right word.
In the meantime this is the media today from across the pond:
'The Washington Post identified the reporter Drake allegedly leaked classified information to as Siobhan Gorman, who worked for the Baltimore Sun and published a series of reports in that newspaper which focused on poor management at the NSA and the agency's failure to set priorities.
Ah the land of the free, a free press, as long as it does not conflict with National Security. Please don't forget that government control of our newspapers started in WWI, when there was massive censorship. If you want to see the powers which the politicians have then just look at the agreement of the press barons not to print anything about Harry 'we do bad things to bad people' whilst he was in Afghanistan. Will never forget him calling up an air strike which resulted in a number of deaths.
In the meantime the inquest continues into the deaths of three of our brave and courageous soldiers killed as a result of 'friendly fire'.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
nobody believes me. The Today programme within minutes of my post talked to a politician about the bank tax, which is either £5 million a year, or £5 billion, if you look at the online Daily Mail, headline one thing, article another, hey wahts a billion billions when we talk about the deficit. Anyway the politician who was interviewed said that the money raised from the banks should go into the 'general taxation pot', we need a formal statement from the politicians.
Complain about this comment
108. At 11:13pm on 20 Apr 2010, sevenstargreen wrote:
"I want to create an anti-Tory alliance" says Brown
"Brown is just so desperate" says Clegg
Day by day it gets less clear who might agree with Nick, or indeed, perhaps more crucially, who he might agree with.
I await his foot soldier's knock at my door, as I am sure that as a good independent minded PPC she will have her own views and not trot out a party line worth about as much her 'Labour can't win so really you only have one option, ps: aren't bankers beastly' leaflet.
Complain about this comment
Interesting that today's Times has a long article on Nick Clegg's privileged background - father a wealthy banker, choice of education at Eton or Westminster, chose Westminster, then Cambridge, helped and advised along the way by the great and the good, etc, etc.
Will Brown brand him a toff, like Cameron? I don't think so. And I bet Brown is regretting the number of times at PMQs that he ridiculed the Lib-Dems and their policies as being fringe nonentities.
Brown's behaviour now is quite unedifying - cosying up to the Lib-Dems in the hope of keeping Labour in office and himself as PM. The giveaway is his proposed alliance specifically to keep the Tories out. He knows that such a situation would probably give Labour the most seats. But after that, can anyone believe that he'd do anything other than scheme and manipulate to get his own way on every matter? Promises? What promises?
Look out for a Tory poster saying 'Vote Lib-Dem, Get Brown Again'.
Complain about this comment
** THE CLEGGIAN KNOT **
Imagine Lib-Dems holding power in a hung parliament. Clegg does not want to prop-up Brown, he says. But if a condition of working with Labour is that Brown goes, than Labour MPs and Unionists will be choosing our new PM just after a GE! Yes, they would not have even appeared on the TV debates. It would be an a disastrous position for Clegg to uphold given he wants to clean up politics.
THEREFORE, given this scenario, either Clegg works with Brown or Cameron. Clegg says he won’t prop-up Brown. I don’t believe him.
There is a third possibility:
Labour accept Clegg as PM. This could only happen if Lib-Dems win more seats than Labour - otherwise our PM would be the leader of third smallest party!
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
just watched the Liberal press conference with Clegg. I will also now refer to them as the liberals because he referred to the 'fact' that liberals have been calling for House of Lords reform for over 100 years, so he is now confirming that we can officially drop 'democrat' from their party name.
In respect of Lords reform he was asked specifically about any new intake into the Lords, should anybody be sent to the Lords whilst it is awaiting reform. Think about the ones who might go? You know who I might be talking about, should these people really be ennobled, it was bad enough with the former Speaker. Of course there must be a fully elected House of Lords, and any government should be able to call in experts to assist during this crisis, they must never be cabinet members.
Consider the size of the cabinet, during the period of the Government of National Unity, there were only ten cabinet members. My simple message is to keep it tight, a lean cabinet is what we need. There are, like in the forces, too many chiefs and not enough indians.
As for the unemployment figures, I think that I am typical of my age group, I have a modest private income which means that I am not entitled to job seekers allowance, so why on earth would I sign on. The experience of signing on is a disgrace, no privacy, called in by name, so everybody looks and make their judgements.
I used to do some 'work' for the Community Volunteer Service, unpaid 'work' which actually is nothing other than a form of slavery. This is no different to Greek philosophy, you have to earn an entitlement to live in a City, to become a citizen. I know that we are meant to be in favour of change, change back to Greece in the period before Christ is that what people want to do.
Complain about this comment
#125
Is it not obvious that none of the leaders should be allowed to get away with the hypothetical situation resulting fron the general election. There will be riots, trust me, if these politicians do not say what they will or will not do in the event of the balanced parliament. We need to see the implications, we need to be told the constitutional effects, in advance of the election as to what will or will not happen. The situation is developing into a national disaster. I pointed out previously that the USSR was there one day and then it was gone.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I am listening to debates on Radio Five with regard to immigration, live from Luton. Next year there is to be a census. Historically, I have found that in the last century my family somehow disappears, they are nowhere to be found. So, with regard to illeagl immigrants, how will the census ensure that people comply fully with the law. Will there be a situation with mass civil disobedience, maybe that should be the way forward, mass disobedience, do not complete the census form unless they can guarantee that everybody conforms.
Some very important issues depend on the census being correct, education, health, law and order. So, I am not only a NOTA, None Of The Above, I am also going to not complete the census, not without guarantees.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
watched the conservative press conference. I thought that Clarks comments about Clegg were, well quite brilliant. It is such a shame that Ken has never been PM, I think that there is till time, bit like Churchill whose finest hours came late in life.
I loved the piece where Ken referred to working for Nicks father, at Daiwa, as for Nick himself, surely he is a toff, I mean how can we define 'Toff' was he not a character in one of the chldrens comics, that's right Lord Snooty. Taking into account Browns habit of picking his nose and eating the result whilst sat behind Blair, I could come up with an alternative name for Brown, I know snooty and snotty, what a pair they would make.
I hope that others have also picked up on Brown and the handshake. I first pointed out Brown and the failure to shake the hand of the police officer on the doors of Number 10, when Obama did. He now shakes the hand of everybody, you can't make it up, or so I have heard it said around and about.
Complain about this comment
Catch22 #127
Quite.It is obvious that the leaders of the 3 main parties should be
addressing the issue of a hung parliament should that scenario come to pass.One could say that Brown has already stated his desire for a cosy
little pact with the Lib Dems,but that to me only demonstrates that he has given up on an outright Labour victory.As well he might.
Browns wooing of Clegg in the last debate was risible,with his yes Nick,
I agree with Nick,3 bags full Nick,we have so much in common Nick.Its no
wonder that Clegg now calls him "desperate".Brown is desperate,desperate
to stay in power,desperate to remain Prime Minister,and he will have no
qualms about the method used to bring that about.
And yes mike-jay #124,how galling deep down for Brown,to suddenly want to
be Cleggs new best friend after all the contempt previously shown him at
every opportunity.Surely Cleggs price for a pact with Labour would have to be Browns removal? Followed very quickly with electoral reform?
So many people seem now to be welcoming the thought of a hung parliament
in the belief that the politicians will all be happy,jolly comrades,all
devoted to doing the best for the country.I cannot agree,there will just
be even more opportunities for disagreements,soundbites,and bleatings of
"I am right,he is wrong,its not fair and Im not playing anymore".There
would be another election before the year is out.
So,serious questions need to be asked and answered.
Complain about this comment
Cable claims ( he just said so on TV on a Liberal broadcast )that doing away with tax for earnings under £10000 will save everyone £700. Perhaps he can explain how someone earning £7000 p.a. can get the £700.
Just wondering ..like most of his words and figures they just don't agree...He is just saying again what he thinks will bring him popular opinion.
Lightweight - get sucked in at your peril.
Complain about this comment
Slight mistake on my part April 17 - LibDems have 30 seats. No, 62. But the theory is the same. 10% increase in vot = +6 seats. Unadjusted. But the YouGov chap on DP said it need to get to 38%+ really for that.
Complain about this comment
Andrew:
That was a pretty impressive demolition job you and Steph just did on St Vince and Badger in the Chancellors debate. Very impressive. Lib Dem HQ will not be impressed. Not a good 24 hours for them!
Ever thought about running for Speaker Of The HoC???
Complain about this comment
catch @ 129
"I hope that others have also picked up on Brown and the handshake. I first pointed out Brown and the failure to shake the hand of the police officer on the doors of Number 10, when Obama did."
I wonder if you're making a little too much of this. To me, it was like when you go round for dinner to someone's house and (as a polite guest) you praise the way they've arranged the furniture; say how nice it looks, what a great colour scheme ... you know the sort of thing ... but you don't really expect the host or hostess to do that, do you? Would be a little odd, in fact, if they did. That's my take anyway.
Complain about this comment
Oh Andrew. You said that 99.9% of those viewing todays Daily Politics Programme, that the NI increase was the same as Income Tax. WRONG, I am a Pensioner who, like millions of others pay income tax and we do not pay NI. Do not Students, people out of work and possibly others who this will not effect watch your wonderful,normally unbiased and correct programme.
I am not a Labour voter, but I think that the NI increase only applies to those who can afford it and therefore is fair.
At the moment I am in limbo when it comes to voting for the next Government. Cameron is a salesman who cannot close a sale, also Change, Change, Change is boring, boring, boring. Clegg, although he appears to be fairly able, does not strike me as a future Prime Minister, also he is a bit lightweight. Then there is Brown. If Cameron is boring Brown is dull. His only consolation as far as I am concerned is that Gladstone was also not exactly a laugh a minute, according to Queen Vic, but he was a pretty good PM.
So soon I will have to make the choice and in my case it is important as in the UK I live in the Hall Green, Birmingham. Even with the new boundary's it is supposed to be a safe Labour seat, but because of the 'Clegg effect' the LibDem candidate, a local and well like Birmingham Concillor is in with a great chance. Here's to May 6th when I am back in the UK. Wonderful Country, pity about the terrible weather. If you think the UK Politians are bad, come and live with these French idiots.
Have a nice day. Here it's sunshine all the way and 25c in the shade.
Complain about this comment
The more I listen to Clegg the more I dislike what he's saying. Its odd that Mandleson is not saying very much - where is he, what's going on. I would have expected to be commenting on the usual tripe he seems to utter at every twist and turn by now.
If we are in 'hung parliament' land - and only a small percentage actually vote - it won't really be a parliament truly representative of the people. Surely the message is clear. None of them will do. We need governing in a different way - is this not what we, the people are really saying.
Complain about this comment
C2 113
Ha ha C2, got you there!!
As for unembedded, according to the pages of 'un'-s in the dictionary you cab say unanythingyoulike, there are no rules anymore.
Complain about this comment
Gerry Mandering 133 .... absolutely..glad I posted my lightweight comment, just ahead of the debate. The questioning proved him to be just that...
The 4 examples of changed positions major issues was the coup de gras - well done Andrew for highlighting those.
I'm glad others may now see him for what he is.. I've been swimming against the tide of a Vince Cable policy love-in for ages and felt very much on my own. The truth is now at last becoming obvious hopefully to the many once you begin to look deeply at detail outside his populist headlines that got him so much of the attention from the press.
Complain about this comment
Regardless of any flaky policies the LibDems may have, it gives me some satisfaction to see the plans of Labour and the Tories in disarray... I remember whenever Clegg stood up to speak at PMQs he was never given any respect by the other two main parties. Nor did Speaker Bercow ever make an attempt to silence them. If Brown continues with his 'I agree with Nick' line in the next debate, Clegg should quote a few of Brown's best LibDem put-downs from PMQs back at him.
Complain about this comment
Good afternoon each & Andrew.
#136 Japanbytes
I agree. If we are to move forward there could be no worse place to begin from that here. We are faced with no more than varying shades of Blue.
In one of my moments of weakness I dreamed this up as a platform for Democratic progress. I have from now 'till the next election to make this happen.
Day ONE.
Item 1.
Date of next election + that such election will NOT be under FPTP
Item 2.
Downward reappraisal of Salary and benefits of upper echelon of those paid by the public purse.
Item 3.
Immediate abolition of The House of Lords.
Item 4.
All bonuses to be taxed in excess of %100.
Item 5.
Banking split;hight street, other.
[P.S. I am sorely tempted to apply the Gaming Act (2005) to ALL who profit by speculation]
I feel better.
Complain about this comment
sky news election buz seems to be telling a different story to the polls
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Politics
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
there must be an English parliment, there will be no alternative. Kick out the foreigners, namely Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish. Now that is a referendum I want. Should we English have a referendum, after all which Scottish bank looks after the financial interests of the Queen. Surely not the Royal Bank of Scotland which owns Coutts.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
there is a simple anglo-saxon term which can be applied to this election. We are so ...... it really is as simple as that.
Complain about this comment
"Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government." It seems that (new)labour and (re-born) tories seem more exited about this prospect than the Lib Dems - they are perhaps quietly confident. They know that having the advantage, unlike the media, are playing it cool. Although, "It should have been me!" was played on PM today for the benefit of David Steel, I can see a duet, Dave and Gord, outside number 10 busking with the same song. Wot larks we are having. No one has been here before. What do the social scientists call it, a state of anonmie, normlessness? Cor blimey, no one knows how to react. Don't worry boys, the great British Public will do right by you and tell you how they want you to behave. It may eventually come as a big shock to your system. But is that exactly what is needed? As someone said, not too long ago, "if it isn't hurting it isn't working!" Perhaps more relevant to the current sitution, another eminent politician talked about the inevitabilty of, "sea changes." The only question remaining is who will eventually be all at sea and who will be home and dry? We live in interesting times.
Complain about this comment
catch 22,
"Kick out the foreigners, namely Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish."
Kidding or not?
Complain about this comment
me 122 said
Nick Clegg's theory about his house - it's on loan - isn't new, and all Mp's have to keep their property properly maintained. And in fact so do all of us. Repaying the gain won't resolve anything.
Paying for the MP's home means anybody can be an MP, not just the rich, that's the theory. Will Clegg be able to afford another house if he pays back the gain, is it a rich man's game, or what? Other people maintain their homes out of their salary, he seems to be saying it should be given back because of the expenses. ??
In effect he wants the previous system back, but won't go that far. His idea is far too complicated and couldn't possibly work. I don't know how The Revenue would ever pass it. I seem to remember the LD's saying it would, but I cannot see a way.
---------------------
Then today GOsborne says 'In my hand I have a piece of paper' -(or similar words)- and on it was a former IR employee saying Cleggs sums don't add up. I couldn't be definate he was not including the house stuff as sums that don't add up.
Complain about this comment
There is a wonderful example of how differently and bizarrely the government views and assesses risk when they imposed a blanket ban on aircraft flying in volcanic dust clouds, and yet after having watched the banking system destroy the world economy, they gaily allow them to continue functioning unhindered, without any evidence that they aren't still playing the same games.
Gordon's justification for inactivity is either evidence of his total ignorance, or an indication of his intention to remain inert. How Northern Rock came to grief is irrelevant as an example of what caused the crash, as the scale of the crisis was always going to cause innocent victims. It's rather like refusing to ban the holding of handguns because muggers rarely use them. Selecting a bank that didn't sink because of dealing in toxic securitites as an example, is not demonstrative of anything, other than the fact that it is not an issue that can be ignored by any competent politician or Chancellor.
Has Gordon actually managed to discover what caused the catastrophe ? It might help him work out a solution, but his obsession has been to stuff banks with cash until it pumps out of the seams into banker bonuses. Cameron's approach of wanting to levey an 'insurance' tax on banks and then spend it on increased marriage allowances, has a flaw in it I won't even bother explaining.
It's a little bit frightening that Clegg is the only leader who has made any noise about addressing the root cause of the 'crash' in view of some of his other policies. If I were Cameron, I'd play the long game and look forward with some relish to a Clegg/Gordon coalition government, and just imagine all the fun Lord Mandelson would have.
Complain about this comment
GP NClegg HAS dyspepsia the LD's will have him in a clinic or an old peoples home ASAP, that's the usual way they get rid of their leader, a burp is all it takes.
Complain about this comment
I've analysed 'the election's debate 'Clegg effect' ' and at first glance I thought it should be -the election debate's etc. But, then I couldn't decide if it actually should be - the election's debate's etc.
And then there are printing conventions...etc etc
After the 22nd debate we may start to lose the drag-on effect of the LD surge. Could've just spent the week asleep really.
Complain about this comment
ref 149 There's too much room for spelling errors in all that.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
let us agree that there will be a 'hung' parliament, a balanced parliament, or a Government of National Unity, a coalition the Thesaurus Government, where somebody tries to find an alternative word to describe a horse. Read Dickens Hard Times, what is a horse.
So, in a government of national unity, only one person can be chancellor, now we have Darling, Osborn, and Cable all wanting to be chancellor, and maybe we should include others who want to be chancellor as well, Balls, or even Clark, so there is one job, but so many candidates. So, who will select the best man for the job, who will be disappointed. That is what people need to be thinking about.
If we accept the situation with regard the chancellor, consider all the other posts, which politician wants to be part of a political party, that 'wins' the election, then finds that they don't get the job the potential PM offers them for their support. Now Brown overthrew Blair in a bloodless coup, the machinations behind the scenes will be wonderful to behold.
In the event of a 'hung' parliament it is the personal desire for power which is the problem, no MP wants to be denied power by giving a powerful job to a political opponent, there will be no unity, there is politics, and politics is about power, nobody 'wins' power then just gives it away. This is the issue which must be raised, and faced.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Andrew,
surely in respect of the expenses scandal what I would like asked of the politicians, have you or have you not declared to the HMRC the sums of money which have been spent on those items which have been bought for their homes. Namely any kitchens or cushions, can openers, work on trees, the lot, because surely taxes must be due on these items. They might be within the rules of the commons but surely the tax office must never allow these as legitimate expenses. Are the items solely for use in course of their business, by the way are MPs self employed!
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
why am I so not surprised that somebody has referred my posting #152 to the moderators. The tentacles of a giant squid encircling the globe, but at least you guys know that some of us do have a clue as to the big game being played. My problem is that yesterday I went to view the new Polanski film, and I had better be careful when crossing the road.
I can only hope that when the moderators actually read my comments there is nothing there which will get the BBC into trouble, and that they will actually allow it to be shown on your blog. But thanks anyway, because people might be able to silence others, but they can't stop us thinking, just like Mozart and the famous too many notes, we now have the problem, too much thinking. Isn't the web wonderful, research is so much easier nowadays. But isn't that the problem with Catch22, its all to do with Game Theory.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
listening to the Today programme I am glad to hear that at 8pm tonight the BBC News Channel will be broadcasting the Sky News leaders debate. Nice to have the Pistols on Today, I am an Anarchist, brilliant....as for God Save the Queen...absolutely fantastic...they are very sadly missed...such energy...if only it could be bottled and handed over to the politicians...now that would get the country moving. I have heard it said around and about that the same applies to me.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
listened to Mandelson on the Today programme this morning talking about big bang, and that the conservatives were against changes.
Now excuse me but was not Mandelson in a government which had a majority in the commons, and could have passed any legislation they wanted. Same with the now notorious dinners attended by Osborn on a yacht. Was Mandelson not there as well, staying with that very famous banking family the Rothschilds.
Maybe Mandelson might just be pressed on the relationship between the labour governments, and Goldman Sachs.
Complain about this comment
From the cautious reaction in some quarters of the politico-media establishment so far, it seems Mr. Clegg may well be Teflon enough to see facts, or direct attributed quotes, about things he has done or said, be rather oddly described (by his supporters) as 'smears'. Which I thought were bad things.
Meanwhile, after the feisty Chancellors' debate, we come to tonight's latest Royal Propriety Show, now being 'sold' by SKY as 'fun'.
Further, it seems to have turned into yet another narrow topic-specific, editorially pre-selected, rehearsable farce, tonight 'focussed' on foreign affairs. I thought we were asked to submit questions across a raft of national topics, not what one channel is going to 'specialise' in. This morning teleprompter reader even seemed to suggest that the Bristol transport system was going to be a pressing issue... in Aberdeen?
One can only imagine what might make it through, or be edited out before even getting asked on air... 'to taste' in various suites. There could b all sorts of folk we know little about acting as mods.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
now if I am given money to pay for somebody who effectively works for me, then surely that is my income, as I am the employer. If I am the employer then I have to pay national insurance for the person as my employee. I should also declare it to HMRC as income.
If I am the donor then surely if it is my money that is being used to employ somebody then I am the employer, not the intermediary. There is something not quite right about the financial arrangements of a senior politician. In order to clarify the position then the politician, any politician, must make available the bank account which was used for this arrangement because what is the evidence that the money was not used for any other purpose than employing anybody. For example, could it have been used to buy a comfortable chair for the employee to sit on, or even some cushions.
Complain about this comment
It's impossible not to see the government operating on a feudal model, whatever claptrap it espouses as a sop to the electorate. The government have taken the place of the monarch, penniless and bankrupt, always seeking to earn ready cash from its barons (the banks) by means of favours and grants offered by means of the powers it has vested in it.
The only difference was that the monarch always found that barons abused their positon and got overly ambitious, seeking to usurp the position of the monarch for themselves. The natural recourse of the monarch was to imprison them in the Tower or to remove their heads.
The banks appear to have learned from this historical precedent and keep their ambition restricted to the accumulation of wealth and operating the levers of power unseen. The government are impotent, inept and defer to the banks, acting more as their protector than representative of the people.
Sticking a pin in bankers may seem slightly cruel, but if you consider the way that they are bleeding the world to death for their own enrichment, I think something more effective is actually necessary, like emasculation.
Perhaps Boris Johnson, apologist for the City, might like to educate us as to the benefits to the UK economy of shorting complex securities and funny money deals. Something specific rather than his usual mouthful of blather and bluster. Hearing how many jobs in the UK are banking related is interesting, but irrelevant or the 'red light' industry could claim greater prominence on the same basis.
Until the banks are under control, politicians don't have a significant role and aren't actually offering much to the electorate when they put themsleves up for election. No wonder people don't bother to vote. The real decisions are made on sun loungers beside pools in private holiday chalets or on luxury yachts. The electorate are given Union Jacks to wave as part of the crowd supposed to cheer the result, and the government complain we are letting them down. Perhaps if they could fullfil their role more credibly we might feel that there was something worthy of cheering.
Complain about this comment
One word to describe todays papers and the Tories - Desperate! I used to be one of the staunchest Conservative voters but the way Cameron as acted in relation to Clegg and the endless - 'I'll do anything to get your vote' is an insult. Cameron you are a disgrace! I have finally made my mind up who to vote for and I am voting Clegg as a protest vote against the main two parties. To reiterate - Cameron, You are a disgrace! And to be honest I actually don't care how much money Clegg as had paid into his account. I hope it was enough for him to go on a nice vacation with his family. Clegg you have my vote!
Complain about this comment
#160
You are indeed a very lucky man to live in the Clegg constituency...because that is the only way that you can actually vote for him...however if you do live in the Clegg constituency...then you could never vote for Cameron either...nor Brown.
I am afraid that I will vote, but it is still NOTA, none of the above, because actually you had some very intelligent young people on Daily Politics, they actually spoke sense. Maybe before anybody actually votes then they should be tested, are they suitable people to vote.
Changing the subject ever so slightly, I am becoming strongly in favour of the French and Belgians who seem to be in favour of banning the Burkha. However, there should also be a ban on balaclavas, headscarves, and other 'stuff' which hides the face, why not beards. Are there still not Navy rules about beards and moustaches, but have the rules been relaxed like when the banned the tot of rum.
Complain about this comment
#159
The whole problem actually started in 1694 with the Tunnage Act, which established the Bank of England:
'An Act for granting to their Majesties several Rates and Duties upon Tunnage of Ships and Vessels, and upon Beer, Ale, and other Liquors, for securing certain Recompences and Advantages in the said Act mentioned, to such Persons as shall voluntarily advance the Sum
of Fifteen hundred thousand Pounds towards carrying on the War against France'.
So, there you have it, and its gone downhill ever since.
Complain about this comment
Tory press - concerted group effort to smear Clegg. Awful.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
listened to Peter Mandelson on the Radio 4 1 oclock news. His comments were amazing, especially after his comments previously about Cameron and his long toffee nose. I mean the man, sorry Lord, is beyond parody, if only Gilbert and Sullivan were still around, what would they make of him.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
another interesting point is that I think labour will now be referring to the Liberal Democrats, and not the liberals anymore. You see the liberals have a much longer history than labour. People really ought to remember who took us into the Great War, and which political party brought down the first labour government.
Complain about this comment
Re press attempts to smear Clegg - for example about his attempt to smear everyone in Britain.
Who is McBride working for these days? Murdoch?
At least the press don't have their headquarters in No. 10.
Complain about this comment
Jim Murphy, Alistair Darling, Gordon Brown and Andrew Neil are all supposed to be Scottish. In my opinion, this is astounding, what a bunch treasonous rogues.
They all work for a foreign power against Scotland's interests.
I see you have pictures of your three heroes, Andrew. Is this following your foreign employer’s demands to exclude Scotland’s main party leader? TUT TUT TUT. Where is he? Andrew ‘Scottish’ Neil?
In the meantime you promote foreign rule by Nick Clegg. Perhaps Nick Clegg is not the only one who needs to be held to account, Andrew.
Hopefully Scotland will soon vote to remove itself from the clutches of this evil foreign Governments claws.
If this did happen, Andrew, do you think that the EBC would need to hang on to its token Scots?
Rule Britannia, heh!
Complain about this comment
Saga, for once in your life, dont be such a berk. Youre dogwhistling again. One mans smear is another mans scrutiny.
Complain about this comment
160#
So, you were such a strong tory, but this one thing has thrown you off the path into the arms of Mr Cleggs lot???
Yeah, right. Pull the other one.
Know anything at all about politics or politicians do we, Mike? Just woken from a 12 year hibernation?
Or just a libdem troll?
Complain about this comment
Taggy, theres one other thing that binds politicians to the Sex Pistols...
at the end of the final gig, IIRC, in San Francisco, Johnny Lydon's very last words before going off stage were....
"Ever had the feeling you've been cheated?"
Complain about this comment
# 163
Why so upset sagamix ? Would you prefer the press to suppress his hypocrisy ? The more I can hear about non-Doms the better, and I've no dubt you agree with that. If it hadn't been for the publicity over that nothing would have been done. Your attitude says more about you than the foibles of the Tory press I'm afraid.
Personally. I want the dirt, the whole dirt and especially details of anything that shows he doesn't match up to his own expectations. I'm not aware of any other job that pays you to maintain a second home, and most pay nothing towards any domestic expense, so the most he can claim on the expenses front is that he isn't as bad as the others. His lobbying activities may well put his chances of sainthood in abeyance.
If you support him as being the best of a bad lot, then it's only a shame that we have such a bad lot to select from, so it isn't much of a compliment. I think that politicians have made a mistake in attempting to out achieve each other on the po-faced perfection stakes as regards expenses when none of them are untainted in one way or another. It's perfectly in order to examine his records as he has attemted to gain an advantage by smearing others in comparison with his own record.
It might be tempting to 'cut him some slack' as he's a member of the party of perennial under achievement, but now he's joined the race as a contender, he better make sure he's got the skeletons well hidden and the troops behaving.
The upcoming debate is going to be worth watching, to see if Cameron can show some fight, and to see if Gordon will change his attitude to the Lib Dems. You almost imagine that Gordon is trying to turn government into a hereditary situation that he can bequeath to the Lib Dems to assure himself in office as PM. The danger being that going too far in that direction will be seen as his televised abdication. If you're going to run the country as a feudal state, you better be certain of the consequences.
Brown and Cameron had both better change tack from last week, and the one that doesn't will lose out.
Complain about this comment
#165
It might also be remembered that the Liberal Party still exists, quite separate from the Lib-Dems and Mr Clegg. I believe their headquarters are in Coventry and their President is a Mr Wheway. So if Labour start talking about the Liberals, it could be confusing.
Complain about this comment
No wonder Labour is cosying up to the Lib Dems -- it could come third and still stay in power!
Andrew - if Labour retain power despite having the lowest share of the popular vote, then I reckon there will be an angry backlash in England, especially as the only way Labour could stay in power would be thanks to the monkeys in a red rosette Labour MP's from Scotland. Add that to the West Lothian question and you've got the scenario for riots in the streets.
About time England went independent and ditched us whining Jocks!
Complain about this comment
Gerry @170
From an interview with McLaren...
"The Iron Lady came to power as the punk flame died though and Mclaren has a sneaking respect for her – in stark contrast to the dreary world of Britian in the 1970s in which he finally graduated. "This was a failed, miserable country whose infrastructure was dying by the hour. Industry was collapsing – there was nothing," he says. But she like him was a cultural revolutionary. 'Without her, we would never have had Blair or Cameron. They are just the imitators.'"
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
let me say that if Clegg does go into a coalition with labour then there will be a price. Now we know that Brown wanted Balls to be Chancellor rather than Darling, so many would expect that after the election Balls will be Chancellor.
Now, the price that Clegg wants would be say Cable to be Chancellor. So, what will Balls and Darling have to say. The price that Clegg will demand will be seats in the cabinet, otherwise he would be selling out. These are the questions which must be asked, what will be the price which the liberals demand. One other price will be not to have Brown as PM. So will Jack Straw step forward, to save the country. This will be most interesting, the politicians keep saying that they stand for the country, so now will be the test.
The same problem applies to conservative politicians, and also the Milibands, Alan Johnson, but what job would be offered to Clegg.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
now I have edited my #152 and hope that you and the guys now find it permissable:
what I enjoy doing is looking for links in the 'movers and shakers' in our country, and so I thought that as the debate tonight is on Sky, with Adam Boulton, I thought I would look into possible connections. Apart from the fact that the debates are not even on terrestrial TV, they are on a pay for view channel, unbelievable.
Now then Adam Boulton is married to Anji Hunter, who used to work for Blair and has been described as 'the most influential non-elected person in Downing Street'. Now our Anji became Director of Communications for BP in 2001, and Director of External Affairs for AngloAmerican plc in 2009. Now AngloAmerican are a mining company, and have global connections, and I believe from listening to the BBC this morning want to develope a gold mine in one of the most beautiful areas of Alaska. As for BP, well they used to be headed by Lord Browne who resigned as a non-executive of Goldman Sachs in May 2007.
So who is a close friend of Anji Hunter, why Sue Nye who is the former diary secretary to Gordon Brown, and is I believe something called a Director of Government relations. Now Sue Nye is married to Gavyn Davies, former BBC Chairman, and former Goldman Sachs.
Then we have the very influential pollster Peter Kellner, of YouGov who is of course married to Cathy Ashton, who was elevated to the peerage and now holds a very important role in the EU, something to do with foreign affairs, or so I have heard it said around and about.
I think that the media really ought to look into the political sytem as it exists nowadays, who has the ear of the PM, who are his advisers, and what very important roles they now have. What are the connections to the media, the oil companies, the mining companies, the financial sector.
Now I listened to Mandelson this afternoon, about smears, but when does comment become a smear. When should information come into the public domain, is there freedom of speech in our country.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I am just so pleased that the BBC are in fact carrying the debates on a couple of their channels, News 24, and Radio 4, and online, brilliant. It shows that people do read your blog Andrew. Trust me, you carry great influence, you really do.
Complain about this comment
I am actually looking forward to tonight debacle, why, you may ask.
Well, because it's going to prove that my opinion of all three is correct. As 159 Gomer stated -it's power they are hungry for and they will try any which way to get it!
One wonders why they have let themselves be lead down this cul-de-sac to try and convince the electorate they are in it for our sake - it can only get worse as we get nearer, more and more digging will take place and the media will print it all for our delectation!
Trouble is, I find it hugely amusing now and laugh at them.
No amount of soap will wash away the dirt!
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I hope that none of the political leaders start by praising the selfless couarge and bravery of our soldiers in Afghanistan, and those who fought and died in the illegal war in Iraq. We were the problem in Iraq, and never the solution. The officers and politicians let the soldiers down, they mostly followed orders. However, people must look at the evidence given in the Baha Mousa Inquiry, this man died in our custody, others were shot whilst trying to escape.
It is the conduct of the war which needs looking into, and it will not be good enough for Brown to say that he has given evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry, and there is nothing more to say on the matter. What about the Bloody Sunday Inquiry, more on our foreign affairs, and how the world looks at our democratic process.
I will never forget Harry, news censorship, and his 'we do bad things to bad people' and Brown must be questioned over his back benchers and the comments of the generals, 'they are Tories' shouted the disgraceful baying mob.
Complain about this comment
Listening to NC's closing speech on tonights debate, I am now convinced more than ever, that he definately does those adverts for 'had a fall insurance', and perhaps charity appeals.
Complain about this comment
Well,theres 90 minutes of my life I wont get back.Not one of the three
said anything that I wasnt expecting,and Brown just had to interrupt as
I knew he would.
I have learnt nothing new,gained no new insights,and will be glad when
this election is over.And when it is over I suggest that all politicians
should be banned from our screens for at least a month.Seems fair to me.
Complain about this comment
Well whatever the failings of these leadership TV debates it does give the viewer a chance to analize the participants and not in just what they say but how they say it.
For my money it was another Clegg night as for me he has the sincerity angle. I could believe him whereas the other two lacked that vital edge.
This debate was a bit edgier so perhaps the next will be a real slug it out contest.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
just how much more pathetic can these so called debates get. I mean they have all completely failed in their duties over Afghanistan. As was pointed out Obama will never go the American people with his troops in Afghanistan. So, they are first of all going to be going for a military victory, they will just go for the big kill. The position of Quizling Karzai is totally unenable, corrupt and comepletely powerless. Afghanistan is not a failed state, it has never been a state, it is a piece of land with various tribes living in that space.
Still not one soldier dead since 7th April, so why did so many people have to die, we have been in Afghanistan since 2001, and where are we now, still training the Afghan army and police.
I thought that the deabte was going to be about Foreign Affairs, well what about our role in the UN, our position on the top table is completely untenable, as is the position of France. Of course we should not be there. As for Clegg negotiating with the chinese all those years ago, look where China were and where they are now, brilliant negotiator Nick, brilliant.
As for China, actually we really must not stick our heads in the sand over their expansionist policy into Africa, the Chad Cameroon Oil Pipeline project, with the effects on Dafur. Its support for Zimbabwe, is also a danger. As for how much in hock we are to them, he who pays the piper calls the tune, and pretty soon they will be extracting a price for the long forgotten Opium Wars. Which is one of the most powerful banks in the world, HSBC, or Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation, like people say with the word, conservatives, look at the name it gives it away.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
one of the problems which came from the debate is over pensions.
There is absolutely no way that pensions should be linked to wages, absolutely no way. Why because wages are falling, they are falling fast, and prices are rising, fast. Look at the latest RPI, 4.4%, whereas last October it was in minus, a huge tirn around.
As for a woman asking the question saying that she received a pension of only £59, please. Are we saying that somebody who has made their contributions for their lifetime should receive the same as somebody who has not. Now if a woman is married, it should have been a husband who provides for his wife. If the woman has not been married then she should have been paying the full stamp so that she receives her full pension.
As for pensioners credits, then make them properly means tested, especially for those people who have come to this country illegally and worked in the black economy. I hope that they will not turn around in their old age saying now look after me, having made no contribution.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
Clegg talks about his experience when working for in the EU, his negotiations with China over trade. Maybe Clegg might just wish to explain why he flew cheaply with BMI to and from Brussels, whilst receiving allowances for flying business class, strictly within the rules of course. He could of course have refused the higher sum, but chose to accept the money.
The trouble is there are two sayings, 'he who pays the piper calls the tune' and 'money makes pimps and whores of us all'. Both I regard as being as relevant today as the day they were first formulated.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
the debates last night were meant to be on Foreign Affairs. We should not only have had the questions which were asked, but which questions did not pass muster, which ones were not selected, in an era of transparency then what was not asked. The questions were in fact I thought absolutely nothing questions. I would have asked about the Baha Mousa Inquiry, I would have asked about the conduct of our brave and courageous soldiers which became the problem and never were the solution in Basra, Iraq, because we did, no doubt about it, leave with our tails between our legs, to be bailed out by the Americans.
I would have asked about Harry, censorship, and 'we do bad things to bad people' in Afghanistan. I would have pressed on Quizling Karzai, about the corruption, I would have asked why a former soldier has had to have an injunction placed on him, especially when he was instrumental in bringing to the attention of the media the problems with extra-ordinary rendition, and enhanced interrogation techniques.
We should see all the questions which were put forward, and why they were not selected to be asked.
Complain about this comment
Good morning each & Andrew.
#185 Catch22
'he who pays the piper calls the tune'
Whatever the perceived problem in any area of Governance the solution to each is plain. Plain from each of the big-three leaders and easily recognised by all. The ONLY answer to our country's ills are it's people. The work of the electorate, as with that of women, is never done.
BUT
What are we--the--people to get for these labours?
Answer comes there none!
Just; What is in it for us?
Alongside this one might ask...
Should 'X' win through at the ballot box; how could we tell?
The thrust from each of these leaden leaders is that above all else the majority must first keep the monnied classes in the manner to which they have become accustomed. For, mayhap, it is only those awash with cash that can be incentified with a positive approach. The rest (me-you etc.) respond best to fear.
"Let there never be a shortage of that."
So. Piper!
A voters' Excuse-me, if you would be so kind.
Complain about this comment
186 catch22
I think that the "debate" last night conducted and orchestrated by the incompetent and lugubrious Boulton has achieved only one thing: a redefinition of what constitutes Foreign Affairs.
Foreign Affairs is any subject matter that respectively for Brown, Cameron and Clegg falls outside the territorial areas of Kirkaldy, Oxfordshire and Sheffield.
Perhaps I am being unfair to Boulton as the three lesders were not exactly grief stricken in not having to answer questions on Afghanistan or Iraq. Who really was paying the piper then. Democrarcy in this country is in its dying throes...
Complain about this comment
186. At 08:43am on 23 Apr 2010, Catch22 wrote:
the debates last night were meant to be on Foreign Affairs. We should not only have had the questions which were asked, but which questions did not pass muster, which ones were not selected, in an era of transparency then what was not asked.
I have written to SKY to ask why, when this 'debate' was billed as broad-reaching, I was seduced into submitting a raft of broad-ranging questions when it ended up as being 'your specialist subject' on the day, and then, as you suggest, ignored in any case in favour of pre-selected populist, vague tripe that got the waffle it invited and deserved.
Are all channels really going to claim that so far, of all the very pertinent, incisive questions that have been submitted, what we have had on offer so far were the best?
Truly, we are ruled by what passes through, or lays on the floor of the edit suite and the selections of those pulling the little levers. Lord alone knows what we are to expect from an entity whose mod force included (until recently) a party PPC and whose editorial/reporting staff seem to feel adding 'These views do not necessarily reflect those of the BBC' on their nonetheless 'I work for the BBC'-bannered twitter pages and blogs.
It may be agenda. It may be ratings. It is not democracy.
Complain about this comment
I see thw Q1 2010 growth rate is 0.2 percent.
Yet, just think if the need to readjust the Q4 2009 growth rate had not existed and the original figure of 0.1 retained then the Q1 2010 figure would be circa 0.5 percent showing a definite upward trend!
Proof, if proof were needed that too much spin and manipulation of data is bad for you! But with the revised figures is the recovery tailing off?
Complain about this comment
These leaders' debates seemed a good idea at the time, but the flaws are beginning to show. Newspaper reports - and some TV and radio commentators - are assessing the 'performances' of the party leaders. Some are commenting on the stance, the dress, the hand movements, and the facial expressions.
We naively thought that the debates would provide some insight into what the various policies would mean for the well-being of the country. But it's obviously become a personality/presentation competition. Cameron has caught up ground on Clegg, Brown is still in third place, Brown looks more 'solid' and experienced, Clegg didn't buckle under the onslaught from the other two, Cameron was more assured than last week, and so it goes on.
How long before Simon Cowell or Piers Morgan or Andrew Lloyd-Webber, or (heaven forbid) Jonathon Ross are asking the questions and running the show?
It's been said that these debates are here to stay as a permanent feature, imported from the USA. But there are many more parties in the UK, and we've seen with Clegg what a bit of exposure can do for poularity. Why couldn't the same effect propel smaller parties into the running for government - UKIP, SNP, Greens, Monster Raving Loony, etc?
And I wonder how Clem would have looked and sounded against Winnie? Our whole history could depend on acting and sartorial skills. Is that what we really want - just entertainment?
Complain about this comment
#190 ecb
If there is anything that is more certain to bring us back to this present sorry-pass before you could utter 'Democratic deficit' it is the drive for growth above all else.
All is 'trickle-down' except the onus. That on-us we shall meet at the flood.
Complain about this comment
Listened to Brown in his press conference with Mandelson, Harman, and Brown. It was said that policy was being made on the hoof. Well I still remember Balir being onterviewed one morning and saying that we will match Eurpoean average spending on the NHS, then Brown hitting the roof when it was alleged that he said, and I will paraphrase 'you have stolen my, expletive deleted budget'.
As for the labour then one has to ask that why have they made no committment not to change VAT, either the rate, or what VAT is paid on. You cannot have a manifesto about what you won't do, oh that is a manifesto which says that we will not invade Iraq, or increase our committment to Afghanistan. I'm no Tory, nor liberal, I am still a NOTA, none of the above.
If you work for the benefits agency, or an awful lot of other departments, then with computerisation you will lose your job. Wages are already being reduced in local government, as for the police and schools, then is Brown seriously saying that National Insurance has been funding schools, police, and other public services. Of course the conservative proposal not to implement all of the NI increases will not take money out of the economy, it will leave it in the economy, out of the hands of government. The media are letting Brown get away with it. Press him, but it was really nice to see how labour have started calling them liberals again, picking up on our point that the liberals have been around for an awful long time.
Complain about this comment
192 Tom Austin
If the drive for growth above all else really was the "raison d'etre" the why are we not following Obams's lead by reducing income tax rates and achieving a growth rate of circa 7 percent? The rest of the G7/8 etc are not doing too badly either.
Funnily enough the two debates so far have managed to skate over this topic as well! Never mind, perhaps the BBC can entertain us next week with a thoughful debate on the merits of Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse being our next PM. Who knows we might actually learn something.
Complain about this comment
No Gerry (168), a smear is a smear is a smear and we should have contempt for it. You don't condemn it because it's the Tories (or the Tory press rather) doing it ... says a lot about you, none of it in the least surprising.
Complain about this comment
We should all wish for a Hung Parliament.
Normally, the only people whose votes really count are the potential swing voters in the relatively few constituancies which might actually change hands - a tiny proportion of the entire Electorate. A Hung Parliament opens the real possibility of getting meaningful Proportional Representation for the future. Fairer for everybody.
The second reson for wishing for a Hung Parliament is that Government Ministers could no longer take Parliament for granted. This would mean that Parliament could resume its proper role of scrutinising legislation on behalf of the people. Hopefully, this way we would get less legislation, but much better quality.
Complain about this comment
The TV debates were a necessity because people were getting bored with the pantomime of politicians trying to persuade people that their votes made a difference. You only have to match public attitudes to Europe, AGW, Iraq and Afghanistan to see that it's patently obvious that what the public get to choose isn't policy at all. You get to choose the look of the dummy who will implement pre-determined policies.
The Tories opposition to Europe is all sham and adopted to placate their Euro skeptic membership but, when push comes to shove, they've never done anything other than embrace Europe with both arms. Their treachery over Europe is as great as Gordon's. Once upon a time MP's might defect but nowadays a Tory could happily inhabit the ranks of Labour and vice versa, and see no hypocrisy. Six billion in private or public hands is another sham dispute which only exhibits how hard up they are to find something on which they disagree. Even on immigration I recall that Thatcher was as hopeless as our current Labour government at making any difference.
The politicians have decided that the X Factor format is the way to go and Labour's next leader will be selected on looks and media personna. Anything to distract us from the fact that our votes will make precious little difference to what happens. That's already been taken care of, and such things, it is considered, are best left to politicians.
On that basis, the chances of any political party with divergent views getting a look in is beyond contemplation. That could turn it into a real political debate - heaven forbid. Vote for change - and get more of the same. Gordon is a disaster and Cameron is struggling to provide anything meaningfully different.
It's like the X Factor but they're all imitating the Status Quo. Now that's exciting isn't it ?
Complain about this comment
...talking of taking care of the well-heeled.
What of the Civil List?
This most ornate of begging bowls will be out around June or July.
Complain about this comment
#195 saga
Eagerly await your condemnation of the latest smears concerning what was not in the Tory manifesto about eye tests etc.
Or are we in yet more new territory where manifestos have to state what won't be changed as well as what will be changed? I thought the idea was to save the planet, not find excuses to cut down more trees.
Complain about this comment
You have to admire Lord Mandelson's gall. He highlights what's not in the current Tory manifesto whilst ignoring the items in their past manifesto that they've never honoured. It only serves to highlight that a manifesto from our current political parties is barely worth the paper it's printed on.
Gordon and Labour have reached the end of their credibility, and in spite of attempting to spend their way into our favour, even that's no longer enough to counter people's weariness with them. They should have been much stronger in dealing with banks and the financial industry. Somehow they have allowed themselves to become subsumed into the financial establishment and have lost people's belief that they can challenge their grip. They have become part of the problem rather than proposing themselves as having the power and zeal to change the order they have established. It suited them in the good times, but have been unable to adjust to life after the crash, presumably dreaming that banks will provide the solution.
Is Cameron a viable alternative ? - No. Gordon is losing the election by his own effort alone, and the way support so quickly switches to Nick Clegg is quite stark in emphasising that the vote is going to be 'anyone but Gordon'. Any result that creates a hung Parliament with Gordon still in charge is going to be quite poisonous to the electorate, and with unpopular truths likely to be revealed and unpleasant medecines the order of the day, Cameron would be best advised to steer clear of any coalition.
Complain about this comment
My recycling bin has benefitted greatly from the numerous "vote for me"
leaflets that have landed on my doormat,and even as I write the letterbox
has just delivered some more fiction.
However,I was taken aback by one that was delivered earlier,and not just
by the picture of this candidate,who obviously thought that scowling at
the lens would somehow make him attractive.
This nasty little offering is from the National Front.I had no idea that
they still existed,has anyone else received one?
Complain about this comment
In the event of a hung parliament, what would be the 'consensus' decisions on Trident, £10000 tax free allowance, Afghanistan withdrawal, tuition fees, a mansion tax, a 10 year amnesty for illegal immigrants, fuel taxes, etc etc?
Or would it be a case of anything goes provided we get proportional representation?
Any bets on compromises with Gordon still in charge?
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
as I pointed out some time ago there is no way whatever happens that Brown will still be PM. The Queen could, as Michael pointed out on your show, ask anybody, even me, could you form a government. I think that we are now seeing exactly why there is to be such a gap betweem the election and when parliament actually sits again. There are some who have been aware for some time that time is up, Government of national Unity, it is the only answer to the NOTA people. It is a sahmbles, but they so deserve what is coming.
Complain about this comment
Strong government vs hung parliament:
We've had several landslide victories over the last two decades. Did they give us strong decisive governments? Or weak governments, constantly distracted by back bench rebellions, attempted palace coups, etc?
Complain about this comment
mike @ 199
I wouldn't put that sort of tiresome but fairly routine argy bargy in the same bracket as the Clegg smears - particularly the one about WW2. I was genuinely taken aback by it. Desperate and rather sad.
Complain about this comment
Having watched the second debate, I have very little doubt in mind that a Labour – Liberal Democrat coalition with be the result come May 6. The question ultimately will be what concessions will both sides make to get into bed with one another? Labour may be satisfied just to hold on to power but the price of this could mean Gordon Brown is polity asked to step down from office and another to take his place (Johnson/ Milliband).
How satisfied could we be with an electoral system which could mean that the one who polled the least amount of votes could remain as prime minister? Indeed, changing the system from first past the post to PR will be a concession that the Libs will demand.
I am actually pretty optimistic about the coalition. I feel that when looking at counties such as Germany and Scotland, countries which have parliaments where all parties are involved in the running of the state, they have managed to produce a system of cooperation rather than bickering factions. I just have one of those feelings that history is in the making and we should not shy away or be frightened of progressive politics.
Complain about this comment
#205 saga
"a smear is a smear is a smear"
- except when it's just 'argy bargy', you say.
Concise Oxford English Dictionary - smear: a false or unwarranted accusation.
I suggest there are plenty of smears flying about, such as the one I mentioned, and the Lib-Dem poster on Tory VAT, and various Mandelson insinuations (as you would expect, so it seems quite normal).
Complain about this comment
#207 etc.
Gentlemen is this not an arguement over nothing?
Nothing wrong that is said to be wrong.
Nothing right that is said to be right.
It is just as well nothings good enough for the British people.
Complain about this comment
I agree that the likely outcome is a Labour Lib Dem co-op, and the Tories are well out of that. The Lib Dems will demand a high price for their support and I'm sure that PR will be non-negotiable, with the election result strengthening their argument. If they get PR, ironically it strengthens their hand to enforce adoption of their other banner policies.
I somehow don't see Gordon, the wannabe world statesman, adapting easily to a shared role and learning the art of compromise. Whatever else he is forced to swallow, it won't be his own self opinion and the idea of Lord Mandelson operating within a consensus is quite amusing. His natural ability is more suited to undermining friend and foe alike, which will make any coalition a bumpy ride.
Cameron will have a field day quoting the broken manifesto promises.
Complain about this comment
Sure, Mike (207), and I don't like smears. Any of them. Whereas you seem to dislike them unless they come from the Tories.
Complain about this comment
mike @ 202
"Or would it be a case of anything goes provided we get proportional representation?"
Reckon PR would be the sine qua non.
Complain about this comment
gomer @ 2C
If Brown stays as PM on the back of Labour coming THIRD in the popular vote, that will indeed be a hard sell.
Complain about this comment
# 212 - I'm inclined to agree, but you know the trouble they had separating Gollum from his precious, and I think irony isn't the word Gordon would use if he managed to win the prize only be forced to hand it over to a Tony clone.
I bet Lord Mandelson would have a giggle though. If he can't win the prize himself I'm sure he'd gain satisfaction from claiming he put the mockers on Gordon.
A Lib Lab coalition is going to have so much more on its mind than just running the country.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
this morning I listened to Brown telling us at a press conference that he was somehow going to save a billion on administering child allowance by putting the system on to computers. This afternoon and this evening I have heard the BBC reports that the cost of administering child allowances was £74 million, so I wonder how many years it will take to save a billion, when the annual cost is £74 miilion. I think that a letter of clarification like what Brown had to write to Chilcot might be called for. You know just clarifying the position.
May I remind Brown that in no labour manifesto was there the 'we are going to war in Iraq, for regime change', so can we now expect the labour people to be asked will you go to war in Iran!
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
apparently Clegg is going to be reunited with his family after they were caught up in ash chaos. This is fantastic news, and it is great that that Clegg says:
"I'm going to take a small break off from the campaign tomorrow.
"Three weeks is too long."
Now this is a man who, if we are to believe the TV debates could be the next PM, and he finds that 'three weeks is too long' so we can expect him to take a break if he is apart from his family fo too long, so much for being in parliament to serve the country.
Now I also so him on the parliament channel being interviewd for Radio 1 by some young people. I think that these people could teach some of the media a trick or two. Now Clegg said, and I paraphrase, that when I sell my Sheffield home I will return the profit to us, the country. Now, I wonder what his wife has to say about this. Is she not contributing to the house, why should she have to pay anything, depriving her and her children of their hard work.
You see I go back to Blair and the comments he made about the NHS, did Clegg clear all this with his partner first, what are the arrangements. I think that these are fair questions because it is he, Clegg, who is raising these issues, not me. As for the cake tin, and the cushions, and the kitchen, will he give us these back as well, and what has he put on his tax return, we are entitled to ask, even if he does not have to answer. I defer to none of these people anymore, it is NOTA, still.
Complain about this comment
A Happy St Georges Day to you all.
Juat thought I would show you this in case you missed it. The Telegraph says The English Democrats are the fastest growing party in the whole of the UK.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/uk-politics-video/7625708/General-Election-2010-rise-of-the-English-Democrats.html
Some news is just too good to keep to yourself :)
Complain about this comment
Hi SA. Really? I've just watched their PEB ... "we're not left, we're not right, we're just English". Catchy enough. The flaw - the fatal flaw - in their offering is that you can't have an English parliament AND a UK one. English parliament means English independence and that in turn means forcing independence on the smaller nations. It's not right to do that unless and until they themselves want independence and demonstrate this desire by referendum. Thus independence and a parliament for England can only come about by way of the smaller nations breaking away of their own volition. I know it seems unfair - is unfair - but that's just the way it is. It's the logical and unavoidable consequence of us being so vastly the biggest part of the Union.
Complain about this comment
217 Saga
Do you not think it is also a consequence of letting the conquered forget their place?
Indeed encouraging them to do so by granting them sops of Micky Mouse legislatures ?
Complain about this comment
What you say is illogical sagamix. There's no reason at all why England cannot have a Parliament with the same powers as Scotland. You appear to be assuming that the UK and English parliaments would be the same entity, which I don't believe is the intent at all.
The quickest way to get an English parliament would be for the English to set up their own party. It worked for Scotland. The stablishment of the Scottish Parliament had noting to do with altruism. It was purely naked self-interest.
Complain about this comment
Well I'm not going to say the "conquered" Tun (218), that's for sure! - but if your point is that devolution has produced tensions, then yes I agree - however, as a staging point to full independence I can see it makes all the sense in the world; it's just that (as I say) it has to be the smaller nations who take the decision to break away. In the period between now and them doing so - IF they do so - we just have to put up with one or two things which seem a little unfair. I don't think it's a big issue. Certainly not compared to some of the other stuff we have to worry about.
Complain about this comment
gomer @ 219
"You appear to be assuming that the UK and English parliaments would be the same entity"
Me? Illogical? C'mon!
No, I'm saying an English Parliament and a UK one (co-existing) doesn't work because England in itself constitutes almost all of the UK. An English Parliament would render the UK one meaningless, thus it's tantamount to independence for England ... this would be de facto imposing independence on the smaller nations and (IMO) that's not on unless and until they vote for it themselves.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
surely there is a very simple solution to an English parliament. Why not merge all the regional assemblies into one. Or have the regional assemblies already disappeared. We have been broken up by the government into the same regios as existed during WWII, so the structure is already in place, just merge them.
As for the comments by Cameron about Northern Ireland, and the North East, well I would say to commentators and the media that it is about time. Look Does anybody really think that if the Northern Rock was not in the North East that it would have been nationalised. I mean Darling had a mortgage with them. They are the only 'bank' which has been nationalised, and where were most of the mortgages. As for RBS, and Lloyds Group, they have not been nationalised, we have shareholdings in them, which is like the fascist Italian model, that was how Mussolini worked.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I was listening to Radio Five this morning and reference has been made of Clegg and him taking the day off to be with his family. This is the trouble is it not, the life of senior politicians means that you lose your family life, your private life. In the middle of an international crisis you can't just spend more time with the family. It is like the lonlieness of the long distance runner, you are really alone, and yes I used to be a very good long distance runner.
If I am electing a PM, which we are not by the way, then I am not electing his wife and family, I am sorry Clegg, your decision to take time off and spend time with the family shows that you are not fit for purpose, let us say that we are on the edge of Armagheddon, a national crisis, what would he do, go off and say that this is time for my family, I'm sorry but when elected to positions of high office, then you lose that side, it's sad, but does he think that all those fighting to get liberals elected are sat around saying, ahhh, I miss my family, I take the day off to be with them. That is one of the reasons why I am not a politician, I need a real life.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
have people not learnt about the North East, the problems with senior politicians up there, corruption and the Poulson Affair, T Dan Smith and all that.
When Northern Rock were nationalised who had mortgages with them. Who and where were most of the staff employed. Why has a nationalised bank been allowed to spend money on sponsoring a football club in the north east giving them an advantage which has in part enabled them to fund their success in achieving promotion. With Northern Rock being nationalised surely the employees are now civil servants, so to return the bank to the private sector will reduce the numbers of civil servants.
Consider what jobs there are in the North East, where do you think all the records are filed in respect of National Insurance. Take Wales, one of the biggest employers is DVLA, take Exeter, with the Met Office, yes they are down here in Exeter, where the housing market in the South West was completely distorted by the influx of people cash rich at the time with the government effectively buying their properties in the South East for cash, through agreements with agencies.
It is about time that somebody really did get to grips with the situation. I think that there now exists the equivalent of the rotten boroughs of old, this has been a rotten parliament, it is time for change, it is about time that government was stopped from bribing voters, with taxpayers money. Take the cabinet meetings which the government held around the counrty. There was one held near Exeter, at a racecourse in Teignbridge. It was all about getting cheap publicity at the taxpayers expense. I live in a very deprived ward in Exeter, one of the most deprived, and millions of pounds are being thrown at it, but nothin g really changes, all that happens is that people become dependent on the state, rather than themselves.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
how many times in the past have politicians taken the route of the spot light by saying that they want to spend more time with their family.
I have read an article by one of the national newspapers relating to Clegg. Good grief is his past being shown, a different kind of politician, please, as Brown would say 'get real'.
I am not surprised that Clegg is going to spend more time with his children, how many people will be surprised when he does not attend any pre-arranged meetings. All the protection services which will no longer be required, all the activisits informed that he will not be coming to see them.
As for Brown, well please, out amongst the people, this is beyond parody, where will Mandelson be, that's the question which must be asked.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
surely somebody must ask the question how is it that no soldier has been killed in Afghanistan since 7th April, the day after the election was called. It has been pointed out by Brown that in the past the Talibhan went and changed their tactics, that they stopped taking the occupation forces head on. Well did we not we change our tactics. I mean in the first wave thre was actually no problem, how many of our soldiers died, in the first four or five years, at the hands of our enemies?
What did Brown then fund, the war in Iraq, and was that not a change of tactics by us, we did not finish the job in Afghanistan. As for Iraq, it is now known that we were not even meant to be in Basra, we were meant to take the North, only Turkey was against that. What did Turkey subsequently do, it invaded the North whilst we were occupying the Basra region. For Brown to assert that the Talibhan changed tactics, please, is he not changing his tactics with regard to the election, if you are losing you don't just carry on with the same tactic.
So, why have so many young men been sacrificed on failed tactics in Afghanistan, so many dead and injured, and for what.
Complain about this comment
An English Parliament deciding matters that only affect England is quite logical and Scotland has set the precedent and proven its viability. It's irrelevant how large England is, unless you apply the 'tail wagging the dog' principle.
It was the only way Gordon could keep hold of his vote in Scotland.
PR is going to have some fun implications, and serious ones too. Many sole interest groups will get a voice and take away support from the major parties, including the Lib Dems. Think of Muslim groups who will have their own voice and be able to directly oppose the BNP. Political parties that ignore the electorate are going to be punished much more readily than happens now. Think of Europe, AGW and those other issues that have fired up the electorate and been ignored by politicians.
PR is the Holy Grail, but even for the Lib Dems it will a case of - beware of what you wish for.
Complain about this comment
#227
I think that labour will split apart. It will be destoyed. Some labour will actually join the conservatives, some will join the liberals. Consider this. When he was a young man maybe Clegg would have been a traditional conservative, but saw that he lacked something, but also saw that labour were a closed shop to him, he would never be another Blair, or Brown, so chose the third option, the party where if he applied himself then he would rise seemlessly to the top, with his connections, and wealth. So he joins the liberals, as the easiest option. Now the liberals are stuck with him, so there will be another challenge to his leadership.
Remember that Cable used to be with Shell T&T or bang bangs as they were were known on the floor of the Stock Exchange, and also a member of the labour party, just as Clegg apparently was a conservative for a time, although best forgotten. So Clegg actually has more in common with Churchill than some care to imagine, to change political parties for his own needs. Finally, the liberals as others are now pointing out as well that the liberals have been around for an awful long time, you can change the name as much as you like, but a horse is still a horse, whatever colour you paint it, just read Hard Times because that is what awaits us, hard times.
Dickens however, is far more interesting than Shakespeare, now where is Grandgrind. Bought up in the gutter I was, an abandoned fledgling, that is what I am, saved, by my middle class parents I was, changed me life they did, honest, in the gutter I would be without them. What what I hear you say, men in white coats at the door, take him away, the lunatics have taken over the asylum. Stop picking your nose, you're not an aspidistra you know.
Complain about this comment
Morning Gomer. I know it’s technically possible to have a devolved English Parliament (i.e. without the break up of the Union) but the dynamics of it would seem (to me) to say otherwise. In practice, I can’t see it. We’d have a PM of England AND a PM of the United Kingdom and they’d be different individuals. The English leader would be so powerful that the UK position would be rendered untenable. Although I don’t like the idea of a regional model – England administered in devolved semi autonomous regions – I can at least see how this could work. But an English Parliament within the UK, no, can’t see that. *** On PR - yes it could get a bit silly, couldn't it? I'd favour a de minimus (5% say) whereby you have to reach that level in the popular vote before you can gain seats.
Complain about this comment
# 228 - I have pondered if Labour joining up with the Lib Dems is potentially dangerous for them as the Lib Dems are closer to the aspirations of Labour of yesteryears than Gordon, who is rather more comfortable in the company of banks. I could easily foresee some MP's crossing to the Lib Dems from Labour.
Remember that in spite of working together they will also be manoeuvering to best each other at every opportunity. That's why I believe that the Tories have more to gain by staying out of it. In a Lib Lab coalition their major opponents will be each other, and whoever faces them across the chamber will have a field day. It'll certainly be harder to bring in cuts, especially after Gordon's pre-election and manifesto pledges. The NHS can't match up to the old cancer pledges and Gordon's current promises are ludicrous. As far as I can tell Leicester, Northamptonshire and Rutland NHS have given up on cancer follow up checks, but I'm making enquiries and escalating through the system to get a response on that issue.
I can't wait for a coalition. Cameron and Hague will be able sit back and munch popcorn as the shambles unravels. It would be worth watching just to enjoy Mandelson at work.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
just how pathetic can it get, what with labour referring to George Brown as GB. GB, George Brown, Great Britain, wow how original is that masterstroke of subliminal advertisisng.
I mean how pathetic has this election come. Some woman was interviewed and she said she would not vote for Cameron because she didn't like his lips. I mean has it really come to this, the lippy election.
There really must be a system for questioning the capability of someone to cast their vote. The people of this country would seem to have been moronicised.
In the meantime change of tactics, still nobody reported as having been killed in Afghanistan. But the killings in Iraq still rise, when will there be a government in Iraq. Don't mention Iraq, they all have blood on their hands. It is not good enough for the liberals just to say we were against the war, yeah right and what did you do. I have a very close family member who has an injunction against him from the High Court, because he spoke out. About extra-ordinary rendition, about enhanced interrogation techniques, about American soldiers being trigger happy, and even more.
Now he was granted an honourable discharge, so the liberals could have called for massive civil dosobedience, of demonstrating, but no, they have actually done nothing. They could have argued for, and got, the soldiers to refuse orders on the basis that the war was illegal, therefore our soldiers on following orders are just as guilty as the soldiers who fought for the Nazis were war criminals. Only their leaders paid the price of formal execution, but the soldiers died on the battlefields, following orders. The liberals are caught up in the war mongering just as much as those leaders who gave, and give, the orders.
People must actually listen to the argument put forward by the BNP, they may be accused of being racists, that is as may be, but is it the BNP which have got us into a war, an unwinnable war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan, and formerly Iraq. It is not the BNP which actually arms, and orders our soldiers to kill Moslems, it is labour and conservatives. Whether the political leaders, and the members and voters for the main three parties like it or not, they are the killers of the foreigners, as Harry said on his cap, 'we do bad things to bad people'. This is what I have heard it said around and about, and no doubt this one will also be moderated, but as I have said before nobody can stop us thinking. If these sort of comments are moderated out then it just adds further evidence that there is no freedom of speech, but nobody can stop us thinking, not yet anyway.
Complain about this comment
222 Catch22
Interesting isnt it that if a Parish Councillor fails to register a prejudicial interest in a matter before them and withdraw, taking no part in the debate, then he/she is in serious trouble. This can be something as simple as planning permission for a near neighbour for a minor property matter that affects the Councillor not one iota.
Yet Darling can rescue a failed B.Soc with whom he has a mortgage and its ok !!!!!
Funny old world.
Complain about this comment
#232
It is indeed a funny old world. What still nobody seems to be asking is what would have been the effects on the Royal family, in particular the Queen, if the banks had failed. In particular what about RBS who owned Coutts, and for those who want to remain ignorant, Coutts were, or are the bankers to the Queen, and other members of the Royal family. Or so I have heard it said around and about, shame about you coming up with that one Harman.
Complain about this comment
There's no obvious reason why the UK couldn't operate as a federation - similar to the EU but on a smaller scale. Thus each of the four countries could be 'independent', with the central government functioning like the Brussels outfit.
Having said that, it would be a clumsy solution. Scotland already almost wants complete independence, N. Ireland has long had its own parliament and could logically go independent (possibly with a closer liaison with the rest of Ireland). Wales is more of a problem and is more closely integrated with England than the others.
The optimum solution would be independence for Scotland and N Ireland, leaving England and Wales as the new UK, administered from Westminster and Cardiff.
Complain about this comment
gomer @ 230
"I can't wait for a coalition. Cameron and Hague will be able sit back and munch popcorn as the shambles unravels."
You want to see a shambles because it would benefit the Conservative Party?
Complain about this comment
233 Catch22
I have a friend who on demob from the RAF was given his gratuity in the form of an amount paid into a Coutts account opened in his name. He quickly withdrew the money and closed the account but now wishes he had left a pound in it just to have the cheque book as a conversation piece. I wonder how mant ex-RAF types still have accounts ?
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
now I was listening to a programme on Radio 4 about the news. Now during the debates Cameron had said that he went to Afghanistan to visit the troops, and in praising the troops he said that he was 'blown away'.
Now during that actual debate it did cross my mind that it was not a really good phrase to use. So, if I had been Clegg, or Brown, then I would have said to Cameron, there and then, that would you like to repeat that David. Well if I was listening then I would have picked up on that immediately. So, they were either not listening at all, which is what I think, or they are exceptionally dim witted.
I know that Cameron had been visiting soldiers down here in Exeter before, and I think that I can say without fear of contradiction that soldiers would laughed their heads off at that one. I mean,hahahah, you've been blown away in Afghanistan, not the proper equipment then eh what. In the meantime still no deaths in Afghanistan. Brilliant.
Complain about this comment
mike @ 234
"The optimum solution would be independence for Scotland and N Ireland, leaving England and Wales as the new UK, administered from Westminster and Cardiff."
Could be. But being realistic, the decision for Scotland (or Northern Ireland) to leave the Union has to lie with them. England (or England/Wales) can't break away themselves, and de facto force the break up, unless and until the others are ready for independence and indicate that via referendum. This is my take on it.
Complain about this comment
#238 saga
You apparently didn't notice that I said that Scotland 'almost wants independence' (i.e. there is a significant independence party there), and N. Ireland 'could logically go independent'. In other words, it would be up to them - no forcing implied or intended.
For England and Wales to go it alone would be back the 'English Parliament' or 'English/Welsh Parliament' debate, which has already been considered.
Complain about this comment
Saga
mike-jay
There are some quite fun ramifications if these piddling little countries, ie all four,
get real independance. Opt outs from the Eurpoean Community ? Customs and border posts ?
We already have similar with the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.
Interresting times ahead.
Complain about this comment
There's a lot of debate at the moment about the pros and cons of a hung parliament - for example on Any Questions and Dateline London. Some confusion arises regarding the structure of a hung parliament. This boils down to the question of whether it means one (smaller) party supporting a governing party, or whether it means a true coalition, where the government (Cabinet and associated junior ministers) are more or less equally selected from all parties or the two 'ruling' parties.
The point was made on Dateline London that the successful coalition in India over the last decade or so was a proper coalition. In the Westminster parliament, a hung parliament more often tends to mean a single party government aided and abetted (up to a point) by a secondary party. Rather than being a coalition, the hung parliament is accurately described as a 'pact', for example, the Lib-Lab pact.
What might be of some concern is the significance of party manifestos in the event of a hung parliament. Voters wouldn't know what they were likely to get in relation to what they had voted for. How would the hung parliament be held accountable to the electorate if they could always blame their partners for policy failures?
Presumably the country would have to change its expectations and adjust to government of perpetual compromise.
Complain about this comment
I can never hide my loathing for Gordon who wears his foibles and faults very clearly on his sleeve. His character un-assassination was the most ambitious and unconvincing spin job Labour have ever attempted and even then had to re-fashion several times, eventually trying to make a virtue of what everyone knew at the outset.
The UK has had some mighty double acts in the past - Morecambe and Wise, Little and Large, Foot and Mouth, but Gordon can't play the mighty Colossus, hand in hand with Clegg, with quite the same effect.
Gordon will lose the election, and worse still, he will still become our leader. To become leader twice never having been elected is worse than unlucky, it could be the final nail in the coffin of Labour's future ambition. I cringe to think of the effect that will have on the coalition. PR will be a gimme. Should I begin gag writing for Hague now ?
Personally I only support Cameron as an antidote to Gordon. Once we have PR, then we can rip up the 2/3 party model and vote for parties who listen to the electorate. I will vote for UKIP and under PR they will become a force to be reckoned with. See the Euro result for evidence.
I will listen to other parties who are considered marginal at present. It almost makes me wonder if Labour won't try to persuade the Lid Dems that PR could be against their best long term interests, but in any event, I relish what lies ahead politically, even if economically we're heading for the crash barrier.
Complain about this comment
#241
Actually there has been debate on a 'hung' parliament on this blog for some time. The trouble is will it be a coalition, or a government of national unity. The problem will be that that the Queen will ask somebody to form a government, but I think the question which needs to be answered will be who will be in the cabinet. Will some politicians put their own career before country. I will not name them, but for some this could be the making or breaking of them. How far will personal ambition be stifled, in the cause of the country.
Complain about this comment
#243
It would be new, unexplored territory for virtually all of the current batch of MPs (were Straw, Ming Campbell, Clarke around on the last occasion in the 70s?). Some of them would be incapable of adapting to a new way of working, others would cope better.
The question is which type would predominate? This would determine whether the coalition/hung parliament/pact/balanced parliament succeeded to an acceptable extent or failed as a result of in-fighting.
Complain about this comment
243 catch22
When we vote for our constituency MP, is it for the person or the party? Where do we draw the line at a politician's personal ambition? Should Mp's be banned from crossing the floor without having a bye-election first? Can personal ambition actually thwart basic democratic principles?
Sorry, lots of questions but it is a bit of a conundrum.
Complain about this comment
I believe that Gordon gets first chance to form a government whatever the election result, on the basis that if the Tories have a clear majority he wouldn't be so daft. Whether it's a pact or a formal coalition is likely to be down to the scale of Gordon's loss and the seats held by the Lib Dems. It would probably be smarter for the Lib Dems to adopt a hands off approach and avoid getting too close to Labour. Their tactic would be to appear to be a reforming influence, which puts Labour in the invidious position of having two enemies, one of which they're in bed with.
Maybe the Lib Dems would be tempered by their quest for PR but I doubt Laour would be allowed any scope for prevarication, and indeed they stated that Constitutional reform would be their first priority after the election, so they've boxed them selves in on that score. If they baulk on such an important issue the Lib Dems could bounce them into another election purely on their failure to honour that pledge and seek to wipe Labour off the scene.
I can even talk about Gordon becoming PM without undue suffering, knowing what a tricky situation it will be for him. The Lib Dems will know that it would be fatal for them to become too closely associated with him, and Labour would be smart if they chose a new leader, but I don't see that as being very likely.
Cameron losing and Gordon forming a coalition as PM with the Lib Dems, I see as ideal. Gordon and Labour would be under unbearable pressure if they remain in office as third place losers and it virtually assures them of a short term, and one that ends that ends in acrimony. That will inevitably hurl Labour into another election with two opponents blaming them.
"John Curtice, professor of politics at Strathclyde university, said: "The Prime Minister is in danger of leading his party to its worst electoral defeat since 1918. At 26 per cent, the party’s poll rating is even less than the 28 per cent it secured under Michael Foot’s leadership in 1983"
It would be damaging for Gordon and damaging for Labour to attempt to keep him as PM, but who dare wrest his fingers from the arms of the PM's seat ? - and wouldn't removing him from office be equally damaging ?
Imperious as Chancellor - but a disaster as a leader.
Complain about this comment
Saga my friend
There is only one flaw in your argument and that is the idea that a Parliament for England would enforce Independence on the other Home Nations.
It makes the assumption that whilst in the EU any country is Independent.
That is clearly not the case and should England gain a Parliament Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland will not be forced into Independence if they remain in the EU.
Complain about this comment
SA,
"It makes the assumption that whilst in the EU any country is Independent."
The EU is made up of sovereign states, i.e. independent ones.
Or are you being satirical?
Complain about this comment
gomer @ 242
Yes, I get you.
and at 246
"Gordon gets first chance to form a government whatever the election result, on the basis that if the Tories have a clear majority he wouldn't be so daft."
Wouldn't put it past him.
Complain about this comment
mike @ 239
We would seem to be at one on this. Just going to have to agree to agree, I'm afraid.
Complain about this comment
xtun @ 240
"Piddling" little countries? You're hoping a Scottish poster drops by, aren't you?
Complain about this comment
251 Saga
Just casting pebbles my friend.
Complain about this comment
The government can, and does, devolve powers to anyone it pleases, be it Scotland or Barking Borough Council. I'm not sure it's affected the rest of Essex as regards its sovereign status but any opinion as regards an English Parliament affecting Scotland, is just a personal opinion, and an incorrect one too.
If the certain price of continued power is PR, then Gordon will have to face a changed situation, one where he (and other politicians) has to listen rather than pontificate and rule by decree. That is presuming that the Labour vote hasn't collapsed too far by the time of the election. That would throw my plans into chaos.
Gordon walking the Maggie path - delicious.
Don't you give up on Labour sagamix - please.
Complain about this comment
251 Saga
My 252 was less than expansive but I was in a hurry.
I did say "all four" which includes England. In the scheme of things even as a Union we are very small, hence our awful population densities.
Split into our constituent parts we are very small. Not quite Monaco sized but certainly lacking the cachet of there or San Marino. Even the Channel Islands are better equiped to do their own thing which they do now very nicely thank you.
The Union has been punching above its weight for a good few years. Split it will hopefully adjust to its rightful place and much reduced and more real power base.
I still think the potential for borders and customs etc twixt the ex union countries is hillarious. Unless NI, S & W stay in the EC and sign the Shengen Accord to which we are not a signatory , hence out customs and border patrols giving Brits a hard time getting back in with fags and booze.
Fun times ahead.
Changing the subject, seek out the Elvis appearance at Browns hustings on the Beeb. It Is really funny as the words Elvis sings can be taken in different ways, not necessarily complimentary.
Complain about this comment
Gomer,
Don't give up on Labour? No I shouldn't, you're right. I'm planning to vote Lib Dem at present but I live in a knife edge 3 way marginal - a genuine 3 way marginal, one of very few in the whole country - so I don't know.
Tun,
I see what you're saying, yes. On balance I'd rather the UK stayed together but (as I keep saying) I think the decision lies with others. I'll look up that Elvis thing. Watching a prog on Malcolm MacLaren right now ... "Cash From Chaos!" ... like investment banking.
Complain about this comment
Re :248
Saga my friend when have you ever know me be satirical. The EU is a country, that is what the Lisbon Treachery made it, if it wasnt you couldnt be a citizen of it could you? After all you cannot be a citizen of a place that doesnt exist.
It follows then that if a nation signs up to membership it becomes a region of that country rather than a nation state doesnt it and therefore no longer Independent.
On another note I looked at the voting list for my ward in the local elections. It was illuminating to find out that whilst the current Labour councillor couldnt be bothered to live here the UKIP, BNP and Conservatives one do.
Complain about this comment
The EU isn't a country. It's a union of independent sovereign states. May become a single state one day, but that day is not today.
(don't go voting Tory just because the candidate lives next door).
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#248 saga, 246 sa
It's getting complicated. Nominally the EU countries are seen as sovereign, independent states, as saga says. The Lisbon Treaty supposedly pulled together a host of former treaties to make 27 independent countries easier to govern.
That seems to be a contradiction in terms, but effectively those independent states handed over most of their independence in signing the Lisbon and former treaties.
Like sa, most of the English - possibly the Scottish, Welsh, and N. Irish too - have serious misgivings about the way the EU is going. The Lisbon Treaty itself was a travesty regarding independence. The countries who rejected the Constitution were carefully prevented from further referenda. The Irish rejected it and were then prevailed upon to get the 'right' answer at the second attempt. Most of the other populations never had a chance to express their views, and Labour sold out the UK by not honouring its manifesto promise - they were the only party in a position to take action.
The Common Market that we joined has become a bureaucratic monster, driven by eurofanatics who care nothing for history and cannot see the pitfalls ahead. (Maybe Greece is giving them a taster). UKIP seems the only realistic option. Maybe they'll eventually achieve the exposure that's been handed to Clegg, with a similar rise in the polls.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Andrew,
now many on here know that I can have a wicked sense of humour. However, I learn from the media this morning that the Foreign Office is having to apologise for a memo which was circulating about the visit of the Pope in September.
Now then I am sorry but I could possibly have said 'stuff' about the visit, but excuse me can we take it that the people who put the now infamous memo together are actually paid to do this. Is this what they can find to do with their time. Is there not a famous saying that the Devil finds work for idle hands. Well there would seem to be some idle minds at work in the Foreign Office.
The people responsible must actually be sacked, all of them involved and I will explain why. It is public money which has been abused here. Even if somebody was at a meeting where this was discussed, is this what they do with their time, think that are with some sort of show, a destructive show which is snide and pathetic, that thinks nothing of the hurt which they might cause to a very large percentage of the population of my country.
We often hear about the problems within the Muslim community. Well in my City of Exeter, there is a cathedral, with a green outside of it. Yesterday I was walking past this green and it was covered in litter, it was a disgrace, but also there is a war memorial, which now has to be protected by having a fence around it. In front of this monument young people were kissing and cuddling, people were playing football on the green, showing absolutely no respect to the environment. There is a large public park around the corner, but they let these people 'desecrate' the area in front of the former catholic church which is now a Church of England Cathedral. It is no wonder that people feel that they can put together such memoes, it is not good enough to move the people to other jobs, or whatever action has been taken.
The memo referring to the Pope is a national disgrace, it really is and is a sympton as to what has gone wrong with our society. It is not good enough, it really isn't. How dare these people do this. Mind you this is the government which welcomed some Chinese people to our country, despite the atrocious actions taken by that country in respect of human rights, mind you we need their money don't we. The ends apparently justify the means, and if people want to say about the involvement of the current Pope in respect of the problems which the church had with paedophiles please note that he was not the Pope at the time, it was Pope John Paul II.
Complain about this comment
Hung Parliament speculation is rife as it becomes more and more inevitable now that there ia a Lib Dem resurgence. I bellieve that Labour have a 'glass ceiling' on their support with Gordon as leader, and no matter what they try to do with his delivery, the more people see him, the more his popularity wanes.
Lord Mandelson's comment that flirting with Clegg will bring Cameron to power is a sign of just how worried they are at the possible outcome. It is the conventional wisdom that the Lib Dems take support from the Tories, so Labour should be pleased at their progress, but I think he sees the unfolding dilemma.
Nick Clegg should allow Gordon to remain PM if they find themselves supporting a Labour government, as I feel that Gordon will fill the 'Maggie' role as focus for discontent over the bad news we'll be facing after the election. Gordon wins the prize but gets to fill the role of Aunt Sally in an emasculated government - not an enviable situation.
The brutal truth is that to ensure a long term future the Lib Dems must take the place of one of the others, and with Labour in government and Gordon as PM, Labour will be vulnerable. With an unpopular leader and bad news deferred until the election is over, Labour will be punch drunk with criticism.
Clegg could make immediate passage of PR as part of Gordon's promised constitutional package his sole demand, and once that's passed he has no need of Labour any more. If Gordon tries to prevaricate Clegg has good reason to bring the government down on the grounds that they are an unpopular minority government welching on their pre-election promises.
A hung parliament will be unpopular with politicians no doubt.
Complain about this comment
#262
I would wager that even as we speak the senior politicians are asserting that if there is a coaltion government then who will get the ministerial jobs. You can just imagine them arguing, gimme, gimme, gimme, I want the top job. As for the weasal words of the liberals, what mandate, the most number of seats, or the most number of votes, or any such combination. They must explain now what they will do. It is no longer acceptable to hide behind we are going to win, we are not going to enter into hypothetical situations. Well sorry media you are going to have to press them.
If they do not discuss this then the media should leave the press pen, and stop being used. I refer back to Harry in Afghnaistan, where the media allowed themselves to be silenced, they must not fail the people of our country again. They must press the politicians for answers. As soo as they refuse then just terminate the interview, just say ok, over, we'll talk to you when you come back with the answers, until then goodbye. This is no longer about policy, it is about what will you do in respect of a thesaurian parliament. Balanced, hung, coalition, government of national unity, whatever you want to call it, we know, so get some answers.
Complain about this comment
Andrew,
I have said before that my MP is Ben Bradshaw, who is in a civil partnership. Now his status on Facebook is shown as 'married' which he is not, he is in a civil partnership. Now when I point this out there is no status called 'civil partnership' so why not. Taking into account the memo circulating about the Pople then surely Facebook must offer the status of 'in civil partnership' so that anybody can correctly describe their status. I mean they have 'its complicated' so why not in Civil Partnership. That is unless Facebook does not want to cause upset.
Complain about this comment
Re :257
Saga my friend the EU has all the attributes of a country. Its own President, Parliament, Legal Identity, Justice System, Police force, Foreign Service, currency, flag, anthem, citizens etc etc.
Please explain in what way it isnt therefore a country in its own right.
Complain about this comment
265 SoupeA
I suppose the EU is a bit like the UK, several nations under one flag,(at the moment).
So yes it has all the trappings of a country composed of nations joined together by agreement rather than war. Quite nice put like that dont you think ?
So if it looks like a country , acts like one and is treated like one by others it must de facto be one. By stealth tho.
Complain about this comment
261 catch22
I could not agree more. If I had uttered some of these sentiments aloud let alone written a memo, in the two FTSE 100 cmpanies I worked for recently I would have been shown the door in very short order indeed. Both firms have strong Scottish connections and Sectarianism is an evil that must be wiped out.
That the Foreign Office allowed this must mean the Civil Service rule book has been torn up and thrown away under this rotten administration. Utterly deplorable.
Complain about this comment
Re :266
xtun my friend you make my point perfectly as usual.
Complain about this comment
#266 xTun
It may sound nice the way you put it, but be under no illusions. The 27 EU countries are in it for themselves, not for reasons of unity or altruism. Nationalistic beliefs and ethnicity are virtually impossible to eradicate. They might be subdued under repressive regimes like the Soviet Union, but rise like the phoenix when the yoke is removed - look at the turmoil that has erupted since the end of the Cold War.
Any dreamer of a single, happy country called the EU should take a glance at the UK and its history. Centuries under one flag and one government, but Ireland gained its independence and Scotland is pushing in the same direction. If the UK can't manage it with only 4 countries, what chance has the EU with 27?
A loose, friendly association of independent free states is one thing, but take it a few steps further and it can become another thing entirely.
The theories of Waltz and Mearsheimer on 'defensive realism' and 'offensive realism' make interesting reading, especially the latter's controversial opinions on future upheaval in Europe.
Complain about this comment
The shame of the FO memo is that it demonstrates an infantile state of mind in people we probably pay vastly inflated salaries to employ. If they have nothing better to do than engage in 'blue sky thinking' more suited to the back row of class then the whole lot should do some fact finding about life on the dole.
I see no reason for government to 'kow tow' to any religion, and it is their job to challenge beliefs and practices that are no longer fit for the modern age, but to do so with schoolboy smut demeans the government and country. The Catholic Church has much to be ashamed of, and it doesn't help anyone if the government renders itself unfit and unable to challenge it by its puerile and grotesque behaviour. There is a place for 'Have I Got News for You' behaviour, and that's TV light entertainment, and if the FO have employees who feel the talent to find a role there, they should be enabled to embark on a new career forthwith.
Can we look forward to similar challenges to the Muslim faith and Hinduism ? I have some intelligent points to make about them, but our government has absented itself from any ability to connect on such issues. When the Catholic Church is being challenged for its past behaviour our government finds itself grovelling for its forgiveness.
Doesn't it just make you want to cringe in shame ?
Complain about this comment
There are now rumours that if Labour retain government in a power sharing arrangement with the Lib Dems, they will drop Gordon as PM in favour of David Miliband. That would be a very dubious move, to foist a second leader on us who has never faced the electorate. I know that the electorate don't elect leaders or Prime Ministers, but I don't think that will have any traction with the public.
Labour have manoeuvered themselves into a 'no win' situation and they chose their 'flag bearer' some time back for good or ill. They now seem to have the unerring capacity to avoid disaster by selecting catastrophe. Whatever Miliband's good points, and off hand I can't think of any, weathering the storm of becoming the usurper is more than he'll be able to handle.
Labour's election strategy has failed, and flailing about wildly at this late stage is only going to make matters worse. They could end up having three different leaders in a year, and where would that leave them - replacing the Lib Dems as third party ?
Complain about this comment
269 Mike-Jay
I tend to agree that whilst the outward appearance is that of nations joined as one the underlying thrust is, and always has been, what's in it for "us".
When Ted Heath took us in it was basically a French run club. Always been disappointed that when De Gaulle told Ted "ici en parle Francais" that Ted didnt know the French for Yes but if it wasnt for us your would be speaking German.
One of the major difficulties we have with the EU and all its regs is our jobsworth beaurocracy. For example when the EU slaughterhouse rules came in and you had to pay a qualified vet to look up a dead chicken all of our little abbatoires behind the butchers went overnight. They didnt in Germany. Our lot are more interested in finding ways to interpret the regs so as to penalize. Not so the French and Germans they look at how they can be interpretted to their advantage. We even manage to import jobsworths. A friend took some pigs to a slaughterhouse and the Polish vet was horrible. She couldnt cope with the pigs being owned by the son and his mother driving the vehicle as he wasnt old enough to drive it. I think she didnt know who to threaten with being boiled alive if the vehicle wasnt disinfected.
Still think it would be nice to have a EU country in all ways .
Complain about this comment
super,
"the EU has all the attributes of a country. Its own President, Parliament, Legal Identity, Justice System, Police force, Foreign Service, currency, flag, anthem, citizens etc etc. Please explain in what way it isnt therefore a country in its own right."
Well let me put it this way. If you do a little tour of Europe; sip a beer in Berlin, nibble a pizza in Pisa, take an evening promenade in Paris – and have a multilingual chinwag with the locals as you go along – I think you’ll conclude that these places (Germany, Italy, France, Spain, the others) are countries, and that (EU notwithstanding) they are overwhelmingly likely to remain so.
Your position seems very hardcore to me. I thought you just wanted an English Parliament and the breakup of the UK in order to get your nirvana ... your England ... but now it seems like that’s not enough; seems that you won’t be happy until we’ve broken away from the United Kingdom AND we’ve pulled out of Europe too!
Little Englander.
(and proud of it).
Fair enough.
But not for me, I'm afraid.
Complain about this comment
Re :273
"Well let me put it this way. If you do a little tour of Europe; sip a beer in Berlin, nibble a pizza in Pisa, take an evening promenade in Paris – and have a multilingual chinwag with the locals as you go along – I think you’ll conclude that these places (Germany, Italy, France, Spain, the others) are countries, and that (EU notwithstanding) they are overwhelmingly likely to remain so."
Saga my friend much of what you say could be applied to the dialects of England or the foods in different parts of England.
And as for Little Englander which is ususally meant as an insult I prefer Proud Englishman thank you. Proud of my country and its heritage with no appologies made for it either.
Complain about this comment
#274 sa
To call someone a Little Englander is a sign of sheer desperation. England has long been way ahead of nearly every other country in worldwide exploration and trade. It should continue that tradition.
It is far more appropriate to refer to the inward looking eurofanatics as Little Europeans.
Complain about this comment
No it can't be a sign of desperation because I'm not desperate.
Meant it as a slight putdown - bit of needle - but not an insult. Don't deal in insults.
As for being a "proud" Englishman, that's great. Doesn't mean you have to isolate yourself. To me that's more a sign of insecurity. You know, the "floating bulldog" thing.
Not the way to go.
Complain about this comment
Re :276
If not being in the EU was a way of isolating yourself it would mean that the USA China India etc etc were all "isolated"
Saga my friend I am sure you can come up with a better argument than that regularly rolled out by our inept politicians.
Complain about this comment
The usual sign of insecurity is a belief in 'the safety of numbers' - not quite compatible with the 'isolation' line of argument.
As for desperation, protestations don't negate the evidence.
Complain about this comment
Super,
You have a logic flaw - if condition A causes effect B for entity C, it doesn't follow that condition A causes effect B for entity D.
A very pompous and up myself way of pointing out that those countries are:
(a) massive, and
(b) not in Europe.
Mike,
There is no usual sign of insecurity. There are many. And it depends. Staying at home all the time and never going out, for example - this could be the confidence and contentment which comes from being happy with your own company; or it could be fear of mixing with strangers.
Complain about this comment
Re :279
A very pompous and up myself way of pointing out that those countries are (b) not in Europe.
Neither are we We are an Island nation off the continent of Europe.
Complain about this comment
super A,
"Neither are we"
We are - unless we pull out of Europe and isolate ourselves. Then we will be just an "island off the coast" - as you put it (aptly).
We're doing the "going round in circles" shuffle.
Complain about this comment
#279 saga
If there is doubt about the sign of insecurity, why mention it in the first place?
As for the fear of 'mixing with strangers', you obviously didn't bother to read what was said, namely that we have always been a worldwide trading nation, not just confined to little Europe. You can't get more 'mixing with strangers' than that.
Complain about this comment
Mike, well I did say "to me", it's a sign of insecurity. Not a fact or anything. But yes, I take your point. As regards our trading ability, are you saying that EU membership is a handicap? Seems to be at odds with the business consensus which is that we're better off in than out. Not that the business consensus is always right, of course - they want a tory government, for example - but in this case I share it, so it probably is.
Complain about this comment
#283
EU membership, as it is at present, has too many disadvantages. A massive and growing bureaucracy is being created, which is a recipe for corruption, waste, and career pocket-lining politicians. The basis on which we joined - as a Common Market, with free trade, etc - was fine, and would probably be quite acceptable to business in general. What would be to their disadvantage? And such a Market would require only minimal co-ordination/supervision.
If you note my earlier comments, I also have misgivings about the long-term viability and stability of the EU in the way it is developing. The 'movers and shakers' are trying to create a single entity, but they are living in dreamland.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS