How one punter reacted to the bombings
July 8th, 2005-
Cheadle by-election price - Lib Dem RED: Tory BLUE
-
Is the outrage going to help the Tories?
The above chart shows the dramatic movement in the odds on the Cheadle by-election yesterday before and after the bombing in London. This is on the Betfair betting exchange where individual punters back and lay without a bookmaker to set the prices.
So far the Cheadle market has attracted very little intetest and even though there is less than a week to go barely £2,000 worth of bets have been matched. That’s small beer and why we think that yesterday morning’s price change was the result of a single punter who concluded that that terrorist attack would help the Tories. From our reading of the market he - and we assume almost all political gamblers are male - probably risked less than £500.
As can be seen the Tory price had been trading at 4/1 to 5/1 while the Lib Dem odds had been in the region of 0.18/1 and 1/5 until yesterday morning’s events. Now the Tory price is 2/1 and the Lib Dems are on 0.26/1.
-
Whether this view of the by-election is correct we will know next Friday morning - certainly, as the punter concluded, it could be used by the party’s opponents to attack the Lib Dem law and order policy portfolio.
I had been monitoring prices closely anyway and was planning a piece on the lack of interest in the Lib Dems. There do not seem to be many takers at these prices which indicates that holding the seat is not seen as a certainty. Whether the latest prices represent value I do not know.
Olympic betting. The idea that betting prices are a good guide to election outcomes was knocked on the head on Wednesday while the members of the IOC were voting on the 2012 games. Paris remained at about 1/2 right until the end and you could have got 3/1 on London thirty seconds before the announcement was made. Well done to the IOC for keeping the result secret.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Mike, Actually as far as I can see only £8 has been traded at 2/1 which means that a bet of £4 (probably 2 @ £2 each). The total traded on the conservatives is £276 mostly at 3/1 or 4/1 - The Betfair money traded means the cash at risk so if you bet £2 at 4/1 it says £8 traded (which to be fair is what is at risk). So bets made total about £60 or £70.
In the general election I wasted about £10 to make the odds on the Harborough election look as if there was a sudden swing to the Lib Dems. It may be that I have a Tory doppleganger (a sort of evil Icarus)!
I will be happy to take Tory money to repay my costs at Harborough! Will be at Cheadle on Sunday to see what is going on.
Icarus 1. I was looking at both the Tory back and the Lib Dem lay prices which both moved towards each other. Before the bombings - at about 7am yesterday morning - I noted that about £1250 had been matched. It’s now about £2200.
The general point is that in these very low liquidity markets the actions of a single punter can have a dramatic effect.
I wonder if the Labour vote will increase markedly (the rally-round effect) and this might benefit the Conservatives. I would imagine that the local campaigns of all the parties will now be more restrained.
I think we will see a pretty subdued remainder of the campaign there.
I think that the attacks will help Labour to go up (everyone united with the government and these type of feelings) and the switchers will come from the Libdems. The tories couldn’t go down from their position because they are left with their core vote.
Maybe the bet was partly owing to the call for Kennedy to quit? These bets don’t, after all, have “I did this solely because of 7/7″ stamped on them.
To be honest, events like yesterday’s tend to bring people together rather than press them apart, which makes it doubly hard to fight an effective campaign. Its been my opinion that Cheadle would be far closer due to the turnout effect (Tories are always better at others at GOTV) - for all the reason above this makes it doubly so. To be honest, the only thing that might make a difference is a pro-Patsy sympathy vote. If people are wanting to bet I would suggest the Tories represent a good punt.
On matters in London: some people have made reference, perhaps obliquely, to the “Spirit of the Blitz”. They may care to read this excellent article that debunks this myth quite effectively.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwtwo/blitz_03.shtml
Morale suffered badly; the government was incompetent; people profitted whilst others died. There are salutory lessons to be learned. I think the point I’m trying to make is that whilst horific the scale of yesterday’s attack was tiny compared to that suffered during 1940/1, and it wouldn’t take much to stretch the fabric of society to breaking point.
7 - yes, but we do, after all, have a romantic side, and the myth of the Blitz is part of our collective imagination which in some small part sustained us yesterday. I really do think that the bombers utterly failed to spread any terror yesterday.
Of course, some of this is due to their rank incompetence. If, after 4 years of trying, the best they can do is 10 deaths per blast, they are pretty inadequate in more ways than sexually.
Re 7 above - I’m in no way trying to belittle yesterday’s event, just trying to point out that despite outwards appearances, the British are no less human than anyone else (and that, I think, is the point). Therefore, whatever the pressure we should keep this in mind; people react to events in different ways not according to some national myth, but as human beings, and in messy, complicated and not always 100% pure ways.
I’ll shut up now.
10 - don’t worry, I didn’t read anything as belittling yesterday. Of course people react as humans, but I’m not sure that myths have absolutely nothing to do with it.
Fair point, Phil. Its the historian in me I guess.
7. but what could the government have done against the attacks?
At least London had an underground.
12 - Andrea, its about an establishment attitude stretching back many centuries that basically didn’t give a damn about “ordinary people”. The kind of attitude that thought that providing deep shelters in the East End might harm the war effort (whereas the similar deep shelters under the Ritz were necessary to protect the elite). This kind of thinking meant that WW1 pilots went into battle without parachutes (which might harm a pilots “offensive spirit”), WW2 pilots without back-armour (it “spoilt the trim of the aircraft”), and numerous other examples.
13.ok, I understand the problem now.
but how many people were still in London towards the end of the war? I suppose many of them were moved outside London, especially the ones who lost their house under the bombs. Were the attacks only in the night, right?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4662809.stm
What was that about profiteering again Steve?
14 - no. Day and night
14 - by the end of the war (1944) most of them had moved back. Allied Air Superiority meant that most attacks had become “nuisance raids” by that time. However, the commencement of the V-Weapon offensive after D-Day reawakened concern.
Its also interesting to study the German experience. Allied bombing strategy was predicated on the basis that the euphemistic “de-housing” of German workers would lead to a collapse in morale and the fatal undermining of the German war effort. We can debate the rights and wrongs of Strategic Bombing but its fair to say that this aim was not acheived - yet the Germans had to put up with far greater dislocation to their cities than anything experienced in Britain whilst actually managing to raise their military/industrial output during 1944 when, to all intents and purposes, most of their major cities were ruined.
15 - I had that in mind when writing the original post.
16 - not strictly true. The “classic” Battle of Britain (July-Oct 1940) was the period when the Germans used daylight raids to bomb Britain. When it was clear that their losses were unsustainable they moved to night raids starting IIRC on 7th Spetember 1940 and continuing to most British cities over the winter of 1940/41. The BRitish learned a similar lesson and drew the same conclusion. The problem with night bombing was that the results were hopeless from a military perspective - British analysis of 1941 found that only a tiny percentage of bombs fell within 5 miles of the intended target. Harris’s “Area Bombing” strategy made a “virtue” out of necessity - they couldn’t hit the proverbial barn-door so basically bombed in the general area of a city.
[This closely related to my thesis topic - airborne radar in WW2 - so forgive the overly didactic nature of my postings]
Tabman that link that you give above “debunking” the “myth of the Blitz spirit” seems to me to misrepresent what the blitz spirit was. I never thought that it was about young and old, upper and lower classes muddled through together with high morale under the onslaught of the Nazis. It was about the way that the East End of London coped with what was thrown at them, and afaik nobody was under the impression that the East End was populated with rich people. It is known that Hitler deliberately targeted the East End in a bid to forment revolution (he was obviously influenced by Marxist thinking), whereas had he targeted the West End the outcome of the war could have been very different.
Steve, when and where did you complete your thesis?
Steve @7, 9, 13, I think you are possibly overstating the case. That there was government incompetence and neglect is undisputed, and morale in the East End during September 1940 was low in those early weeks of mass bombing of civilian targets.
But the fact remains that no serious disturbances or protests did take place during the blitz - and don’t forget that the Communist Party was then essentially opposed to the war slavishly aping the Moscow line. The appointment of Herbert Morrison, Labour Leader of the LCC, as Home Secretary in October 1940 led to significant improvements in conditions and thus morale.
Overall, I don’t think comparisions to Londoners’ spirit of the blitz are misplaced. But I must re-read Angus Calder’s absolutely masterful ‘The People’s War’!
19 - again, I’m not sure about “deliberately targetting the East End”. Most of London’s miltary targets - docks and factories - were in the East End, and as I’ve said above 1940s military technology did not permit “smart” bombing; people and houses were also going to be hit as a result. Furthermore, the East End was closer to German bases so permitted fighters to spend longer amounts of time defending the bombers (IIRC German fighters had about ten minutes combat time over London before they had to return due to shortage of fuel).
The Blitz Spirit Myth to which I refer is exactly that. Not everyone behaved with equanimity (though many did) - there were many people whose morale was stretched to breaking point.
I think you are right that a concerted bombing campaign of leafy West London might have had a different effect, though.
20 - Chrisco - sent you a PM.
21 - John, possibly, but I’m just trying to say (and you’ve kind of supported me here) that we can’t just pat oursleves on the backs and say “Aren’t we wonderful because we’re British”. We have to remain constantly vigilant both of ourselves, our attitudes, and over those with whom we have charged our protection. Similarly as you point out changes in 1940 to the way things were organised did mitigate a bad situation.
17.”Its also interesting to study the German experience. Allied bombing strategy was predicated on the basis that the euphemistic “de-housing” of German workers would lead to a collapse in morale and the fatal undermining of the German war effort”
yes, they used the same tactic over Milan. The bombs’s aim was to demoralize people and their faith in fascism too. But the bombings were only at night. They bombed Milan only twice during the whole war in the day. The first time they bombed Milan during the day, people allegedly failed to understand what was happening, because they never had bombs during the day (only the Italians could do something like this). The bomb alarm even sounded on late (or RAF was quickly to arrive).
yes, it makes sense that people went back to London at the end of the war, because UK was winning. Here people started to leave Milan in the second part of the war, because nazis/fascists were losing.
That’s a fairly tendentious account on BBC History. Of course it’s a myth that all classes cheerfully mucked in, and merrily went about their daily business despite the bombing. It’s not a myth that most people learnt to cope with it (as indeed they did on the other side).
WRT the attitude of the Upper Class, it was a fact that in both World Wars, casualty rates tended to be highest among junior officers, who were disproportionately drawn from that section of society.
Steve @23 - Yes, I agree.
Andrea - bombing Italy was actually quite difficult until the opening of the second front and the establishment of bases in France. Getting to Italy involved flying over the Alps which caused aircraft to ice-up and proved dangerous (this could lead to crashing). Similarly, only with the advent of four-enginged bombers could aircraft fly to Italy and return to the UK the same night - before that they had to fly on to North Africa, refuel, and fly back again, which took two days at least.
Despite these natural difficulties it was recognised that Italian air defences were not as dangerous as the German equivalents (the Ruhr, for example, was ironically known as “happy valley”). Consequently a trip to Italy only counted 1/3 towards one of the 30 trips required to complete an operational tour. Also, Italian missions were represented by painting an ice-cream cone rather than a bomb symbol on the side of the aircraft (apologies - but attitudes towards national stereotypes were somewhat different amongst my countrymen in the 1940s).
There is a wonderful quote about the second world war on the lines of “people speaking to each other on the streets of london without having been introduced”. Personally I think this is probably the idea we have of the wartime spirit.
23. Thanks Steve, and I do agree with what you are saying about the myth of the Blitz, but to a certain degree I think the problem is about how the media remember and report the ‘Blitz Spirit’. It was not, as you rightly point out, a London-wide and cross-class phenomenon, but it was a working class phenomenon, and an incredible example of class solidarity, the working class making do precisely because they had to due to neglect and incompetence. Most of us on here know that’s what it was about, but it was appropriated as a ‘national myth’ by the Establishment.
That said, I happened to be in Washington D.C. earlier this year when there was a terror-alert in the city and the Capitol was evacuated. People were running, there was mass panic with Police officers shouting “run for your lives were are under attack.” Contrast that with yesterday, and the astonishment of an American Tourist who was in Tavistock Square, who was quite astounded at the fact that there was no panic, that people seemed to know what to do (telling her to get behind a large building for safety in case of secondary blasts) and what she called the “calm response” of the Police. That, I think, is what the press mean when they lazily refer to ‘the Blitz Spirit’ and it is something we Londoners should be proud of.
(Though, to be honest, I had the TV news on yesterday morning as everything unfolded and freaked out a bit after the first reports of the bomb on the bus as I frantically tried to get hold of my flatmate who had, like been everyone else, been dumped off the tube, in order to tell him not to be getting on any buses…)
Now that was certainly not happening yesterday - in a way that was what gave me a comforting sense of the swift return to normality. No panic, just a quiet dealing-with-it.
30 referred to 28.
25 - I think you’re mixing up cause and effect here, Sean. You’re absolutely correct about junior officers but that’s more to do with the position that such officers occupied on the battlefield. Alternatively, you could argue that it reinforces the assertion of deliberate callousenss given that it was members of “their” class who suffered disproportionately on the battlefield.
As it happens I tend to subscribe to the “cock-up” rather than “conspiracy” view of events; incompetence was just that, but tended to be exacerbated when combined with disregard for the outcome of that incompetence.
28, 29, 30 - not having been in London yesterday (most fortunately my meeting was moved to Essex earlier in the week, otherwise I would have been passing through KX/St P at about that time) I am heartened to hear about the calm that prevailed.
There are too many unknown factors regarding Cheadle for anyone to know what’s going to happen.
1) Will there be a Patsy Calton sympathy vote?
2) What will the turnout be?
3) Do terrorist attacks make people more likely to vote right wing?
On paper it should be an easy Lib Dem hold but I’m not convinced, it’s worth remembering that this was a seat that stayed Tory even in 1997.
29 - Chrisco, you raise an interesting point. I have seen it written that often the British (and Northern Irish) put up stoically with situations that would have other nationalities rioting. As the American jounralist pointed out on the other thread, this is great when dealing with an emergency but perhaps also explains why we don’t have continental standards of health care or public transport.
O/T but Sean’s posting @23 reminds me of one of the most prescient, tragic and courageous MPs, of whom few have ever heard let alone remember.
And that is Major Ronnie Cartland, Tory MP for Birmingham King’s Norton elected in 1935 and thus one of Neville Chamberlain’s neighbours (and I think a relation of Barbara Cartland!). A passionate anti-appeaser, he was howled down by his loathsome colleagues in August 1939 for opposing the adjournment of the House was the declaration, which astonishingly Chamberlain had made a vote of confidence. Here is how Harold Nicholson recalls the occasion:
“…Ronnie Cartland says the PM has missed a great opportunity by not showing his faith in this great democratic institution. He goes on, “We are in the situation that within a month we may be going to fight and we may be going to die’. At this, Patrick Hannon [Tory MP for Birmingham Moseley] laughs, and Cartland turns upon him with a flame of indignation and says, ‘It is all very well for you to laugh. There are thousands of young men at this moment….”. The effect is galvanic and I have seldom felt the temperature rise so rapidly…”
Nine months later, Cartland was one of the first MPs to be killed in action, being shot in the head at Dunkirk. He was 33.
Well, they say that the best way to put two fingers up to terrorists is to carry on as normal - and in that spirit I would like to ask Tory posters to the site whether they are prepared to defend the hoteliers’ actions as an example of the free market in action, and if not why not?
Tabman - I wouldn’t be so sure about this. You’ve already pointed to German fortitude. I received a message of condolence this morning from a maltese colleague - and they have form on fortitude as well.
Am I the only person to be irritated by the almost wholesale rejection by the Press of any link between yesterday and Iraq? Or Madrid and Iraq? Or 9/11 and Saudi Arabia? Or any of these and Palestine? The idea that these people seek to destroy our civilisation simply out of jealousy and pure hatred is a lazy and cheap response and does a disservice to how we comprehend, and then combat the terrorists.
38 - agreed.
Am I the only person to be irritated by the almost wholesale rejection by the Press of any link between yesterday and Iraq? Or Madrid and Iraq? Or 9/11 and Saudi Arabia? Or any of these and Palestine? The idea that these people seek to destroy our civilisation simply out of jealousy and pure hatred is a lazy and cheap response and does a disservice to how we comprehend, and then combat the terrorists.
35 - unless those situations involve tax, viz the fuel protests in 2000.
That was slightly facetious but I think the public services issue is about the scale of priorities being different between the UK and continental Europe over the last 20 years, than any kind of stoicism.
Am I the only person to be irritated by the almost wholesale rejection by the Press of any link between yesterday and Iraq? Or Madrid and Iraq? Or 9/11 and Saudi Arabia? Or any of these and Palestine? The idea that these people seek to destroy our civilisation simply out of jealousy and pure hatred is a lazy and cheap response and does a disservice to how we comprehend, and then combat the terrorists.
I was not so irritated as to need to post 4 times. Apologies…
As I understand it there was a considerable campaign of misinformation to the effect that the V weapons WERE landing in W London. The Germans accordingly shortened their range and ravaged the East End which was thought by us to be of limited importance in military terms.
Was there really a rejection of a causal link, or just of a moral justification? I do agree we need to look at Saudi Arabia’s role in bankrolling those who spread this poision among the young.
42 - fair point, but it goes slightly deeper than that. I had a friend who’s parents owned and ran a restaurant. One day we got onto the topic about sending food back. He commented that it rarely happened, and frustrated his parents. The likelihood was that if someone hadn’t enjoyed their meal they would say nothing at the time, and not return in future - whereas, of course, the owners would far rather have had them complain so they could put it right and thus help to preserve repeat business.
This touches on something in the national psyche. Its partly “not wishing to cause a scene”, and partly as a result of years of patrician “you get what you’re given and be greatful”. This latter is becoming eroded but the vestiges are still there.
On a related note, I heard an American commentator opining that the British celebrated failure because the class system prepared them for a lifetime of failure; they were, as a consequence, inured to it. OTOH Americans were taught that success was their birthright. (I think this point was being made in relation to the Olympic bid success shortly before news of the bombs yesterday).
Sorry about the ongoing technical issues; I added a new spam filter, and it seems to be causing some system instability… Hopefully this will be sorted shortly (i.e. Sunday afternoon).
47 - yes, in face to face situations, but I’m not sure it applies in the ballot box. In fact I would say that when it comes to political culture, we have moved far from “you get what you’re given and be grateful” to “something ought to be done about it”.
Jonathan Calder was good on this earlier in the week:
http://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2005/07/simon-jenkins-is-mad-as-hell.html
34 - this should be an easy Lib Dem hold - why? I’m not necessarily disputing this, but when we say that a seat should be an easy hold on paper, we normally mean that it has demographics favouring one party or the other - large amounts of council housing, ethnic minorities or unskilled manual workers for Labour seats, or high degrees of owner occupation or rural base to the seat for Conservatives. What demographic or geographic characteristics make up a safe Lib Dem seat? And for how long has this been the case?
Thankfully, I think we have moved beyond “you get what you’re given and be grateful”. Sadly, my interpretation of the national psyche among the younger part of the population is “I’m entitled to everything I want, but don’t want to have to work to get it.”
37 - I think you’ll find that to a lot of Tories unrestricted free trade isn’t the be all and end all. I think most people would be quite disgusted at anyone profiteering from an atrocity like the one we have witnessed. To be totally honest I find that post quite insulting. You could equally have asked it of economic Liberals.
45 - Jon, it might also have had something to with the fact that as the Allied armies moved Eastwards through France and Belgium, the V-Weapon launching sites were over-run and/or moved Eastwards (thus shortening their range). This is quite interesting: http://london.iwm.org.uk/upload/package/4/dday/pdfs/VWeaponsCampaign.pdf
49 - agreed. I was thinking more of people sitting incasualty for hours waiting. Although I believe stroppiness in such situations, and violence on medical staff, is increasing.
50 - there aren’t realy any “natural” Lib Dem seats. I think the comment is more in relation to it being a by-election which the Lib Dems are, judging on recent performances, pretty good at.
50, 53. (Outside of London) urban seats with high numbers of professionals are now often good for Lib Dems? Cardiff Central, Sheffield Hallam, Cheadle, Hazel Grove etc?
54 - professionals, or pubic sector professionals?
37 - Aren’t we all in favour of the free market these days?
55 - well it is the oldest one!
55 - I promise that wasn’t deliberate!!! I meant “public sector”.
Lib Dem support is higher among sublic sector professionals. But they don´t live in segregated areas!
We both seem to have unreliable typing skills today!
What sort of self-respecting spam filter lets the word “pubic” through?
59 - you haven’t been to my house
That reminds me of a friend who published a biography of John Buchan and failed to spot a reference to Buchan’s dislike of “Pubic libraries” when the books came back from the printers. The reviewer commented “I’m not entirely sure what these are, but I share Buchan’s doubts.”
55.” or pubic sector professionals? ”
So this type of performances are required to all workers in the public sector now.
56, 37 — I hope so. As a Lib Dem I’d be shocked to hear of any fellow Lib Dems speaking *against* the free market. Surely the point is that the reputational risk to hotels of upping their prices yesterday far outweighed any marginal revenue gain, making any profiteering a poor commercial judgement…
Back to the subject, I layed £200 at 1.22 on Wednesday night on the basis on value. In a seat that had a 33 majority before the election and an MP with a large personal vote, 1.22 is no value.
I went canvessing for the tories last night, Not a bad result. Tories saying they would come out and vote a few liberals are waivering.
On the issue of posters ours are rubbish, Blue on white. You can’t see them till your sat on one. However there is a ex lib dem councillor, who spends a lot of time in Ireland, who is tearing down posters of both tory and labour. I spent the previous day putting up posters that I have put up 3 or 4 times previously in the past week. Would appreciate if it stop and the burning of our posters too. Bloody white plastic dripping down trees in Gately and Bramall
Lots of Lib dem posters in Bramhall, strangley not that many in Heald green and Cheadle Hulme, the latter two areas being their best areas as well.
50 - I was merely referring to the General Election majority of 4,000 and the Lib Dems track record in by-elections, I wasn’t thinking about demographics.
67.”Would appreciate if it stop and the burning of our posters too.”
maybe Claire Curtis Thomas’s husband was around.
George Galloway was the first MP to remind people that the security services warned that attacking Iraq would fan the flames of hatred and act as a recruiting sergeant for Al-Qaeda. I hope others follow soon, before Blair uses the terrorist atrocities to support his case for ID cards and the police state he seems keen to create.
Andrea Re69
I hope not, It always annoys me that people do this I had the same problem in Bury South. We are suppose to be mature people, I don’t do it to their posters why do they do it to mine. I suppose it shows there scared though. Talking to a liberal acouple of days ago who was very sorry and disgusted by it, so I know its only a small hardcore of the campaign team.
65 - I think that also Smith’s “invisible hand” was never meant to absolve market actors from moral responsibility for their actions. Smith was saying that, looked at on a macro level, the free market tended to lead to good results despite lack of intent. He never said or implied that every self interested action you take is moral. There is nothing anti-free market about corporate responsibility.
70 - Galloway was neither the first nor the only MP to say that the war in Iraq may increase rather than decrease global instability. What he did yesterday was say the attacks wouldn’t have happened were it not for Iraq (highly emotive and questionable in terms of accuracy). He also put it in such a way that it looked self-congratulatory. If you think, Printz, that Galloway’s presence in Parliament makes ID cards and other draconian measures LESS likely, you are sorely mistaken. He is single the biggest reason why a Labour MP of a small “l” liberal persuasion would bite her tongue and back the Government on these issues. Adam Ingram scored a massive hit against Galloway yesterday and the latter is behaving in a counterproductive manner which serves no purpose other than to feed his own bloated ego.
72.”He is single the biggest reason why a Labour MP of a small “l” liberal persuasion would bite her tongue and back the Government on these issues”
and this attitude doesn’t give them a lot to be proud of.
He actually didn’t say it was just down to Iraq. He included Afghanistan as well, which most people we in favour of.
73 - No and I doubt any of them will feel proud about it, but you can see their point. Simply opposing ID cards and other measures is something their careers will recover from. Being associated - even unfairly - with a figure like Galloway is political suicide for them.
75.”No and I doubt any of them will feel proud about it, but you can see their point. Simply opposing ID cards and other measures is something their careers will recover from. Being associated - even unfairly - with a figure like Galloway is political suicide for them. ”
More than being associated with Galloway I think they fear to associated with Jeremy Corbyn and the Campaign Group (the labour MPs who usually rebel) and that will kill your chance of a career. I think they really don’t care about Galloway and no one will associate them with him (or all tories MPs will be associated with him because they oppose ID cards).
76 - It is not a serious possibility that a Tory MP’s career will be damaged by following their own party line on this.
But politics is ruthless and what better way to stamp on your backbench rival than spread a massive rumour campaign that she was seen having an informal lunch with George Galloway in Bow recently - and what better way to lend it credibility than to say “of course, they were thick as thieves over ID card”? Jeremy Corbyn is an annoyance and disliked but he lacks the bogeyman factor of GG.
7: “Morale suffered badly; the government was incompetent; people profitted whilst others died.” Sounds like the USA after 9/11. Wallowing in self-pity. The entire basis of the domestic and foreign policy of the most powerful country on earth dictated by the actions of a bunch of brigands (two bunches, actually). The government that couldn’t prevent the attacks doing nothing to tackle the causes of terrorism but going out of its way to create as much more as it can. Meanwhile billions of dollars of their grandchildren’s money is frittered away on lining the pockets of Cheneyites and mercenaries.
Oh, Cheadle. Well, here in Birmingham the events in London have had little impact, and Cheadle is at an even further remove. A few sentimental types may switch to Labour or the Tories, but the more rational will continue to side with the Lib Dem belief that poking sticks into wasps’ nests is not the best way to avoid getting stung.
77. so couldn’t labour MPs have a lunch with Galloway or being friendly in private?
If a Labour MP is seen to talk to Galloway, will his/her career immediatly end?
If it’s so, I would never be in a party like this.
39,41,43 Chrisco - Agree with you entirely.
Everybody does something for a reason. People may or may not agree with the reason but there always is a reason.
Surely far more time should be devoted to both reporting and debating the reasons.
72 - I believe Tony Blair will use these terrorist attacks to help his own agenda.
As Bush did, I believe he will use fear to achieve his own ends.
My knowledge of Galloway’s statement is from ITV News last night and his own statement on the Respect Website.
Like it or not, George Galloway is one of the most powerful men in parliament.
He is in tune with millions of people, myself included.
He commanded respect from all around the planet after his visit to Washington.
Per seat, his party outperformed the other minor parties.
Respect is probably already the fourth biggest national political party in Britain, and could make or break Labour’s chances in future elections.
Respect is a party that will make political capital out of ID cards as it has the War on Iraq.
81 - “Respect is a party that will make political capital out of ID cards as it has the War on Iraq.”
…And now out of the London bombs as well.
Galloway is not “one of the most powerful men in Parliament”. He is an opportunistic demagogue who makes headlines but has never achieved anything. Nor is he “in tune with millions of people” otherwise he would have won more than one seat in May. Nor does he “command respect from all around the planet” - he amused those few people who saw it (me included) by humiliating a bunch of pompous senators but that no more makes him respected than the kid who famously yawned throughout one of Bush’s speeches last October. Nor is Respect the “fourth biggest national party” - it is easy to pile up votes in those seats which are demographically good for you and not stand elsewhere; at least the Greens and UKIP make some attempt to reach beyond that.
82 - exactly. Respect would have got a negligible number of votes in the constituencies it didn’t fight, so the “per seat” measure is utterly spurious.
82. James, I see a lot of anger there like Galloway is an horrible monster and all other politicians are pure virgins.
Many politicians are opportunistic demagogues, not only Galloway.
Reacting in this way to his statements, you are giving him the importance you don’t want him to have.
In seats which did not have large Muslim populations, Respect’s vote was derisory.
In terms of overall numbers of votes, it came well behind UKIP, Greens and BNP. Its support is confined to Tower Hamlets, Newham and parts of Birmingham.
84 - There is an element of truth in what you say. But I believe the vast majority of MPs sometimes do the wrong thing for the right reasons (or at least understandable reasons). I don’t believe that is true of Galloway (or a handful of other politicians, such as Nick Griffin and some although not that many Northern Irish figures).
86. It’s better to ignore him if you don’t want him to gain importance like nobody now pay attention to Clare Short anymore.
87: Is Ann Clwyd any worthier of our attention than Clare Short? I don’t think so.
88. No, infact she is not on newspapers everyday.
82: James wrore: “Galloway is not “one of the most powerful men in Parliament.”
Please give a list of MPs you think are more important than Galloway. Obviously Gordon Brown and Tony Blair are at the top. But what actual difference do the rest on the Labour bencehes really make as individuals?
I would certainly put Galloway in the top 20 of all MPs at this time. He IS an MP who is in tune with millions who opposed the war, with millions who marched against the war. Respect IS in tune with our own security services that said invading Iraq would fan the flames of terror. Respect is in tune with those who say Blair lied over Iraq. Respect is in tune with those who remain loyal to socialist principles and CND and those who do not want to hand more power to Europe.
The fact is that Respect is a brand new party that came within a few thousand of winning two seats and is set to make substantial gains in local elections. I believe it will not only take control of its first council in May, but will see mass defections from Labour.
re 90 - I dont’t think you automatically assume that opposistion to the war is the same thing as support for Galloway - I was against the war but i’m struggling to think of many people I despise more than Galloway.
91 - quite. Galloway does not speak in my name.
90 - “Respect is a brand new party”. Rubbish. A continuation of the long-standing SWP with a few Islamofascists brought into the tent.
Quick test: spam is overwhelming us…
Just testing to see if commenting is still working!
90 - “He IS an MP who is in tune with millions who opposed the war, with millions who marched against the war.”
Don’t lump everyone who marched against the war together in your extreme left tent. A lot who marched wouldn’t spit on Galloway if he were burning (they may if he were drowning, but it would be a tough call as it may be a waste of valuable phlegm).
RE: The Spirit of the Blitz.
My parents lived through the Blitz, and were bombed out once. I have talked extensively about it to them. Their memories do not match exactly what has been said here so far.
During the Blitz, they reckon that Londoners were a long way from cracking. However, things were very different in 1944 during the V1 campaign.
The V1 was cheap and easy to manufacture. The guidance system was primitive in the extreme. You pointed it in the right direction, and gave it just enough fuel to reach the target. When it ran out of fuel, it dropped onto the target and bang.
At first the Allies could do little to stop them, and resorted to fake newspaper reports that they were overshooting London to convince the Nazi’s that they were putting too much fuel in them. Nazi agents passed the newspaper reports on, and thereafter the V1’s were re-targeted for shorter range. However, as the V1’s had such a primitive guidance system, many still reached London, and logically landed on the part nearest the launch sites, viz. the East End.
The V1 was strategically irrelevant, but a superb terror weapon. The throbbing of the pulse-jet engine had the same impact as the music in Jaws. When the throbbing stopped, everyone for miles around starting counting, as they waiting for the explosion.
My parents remember clearly the terror that they brought. They were indisciminant, made a terrifying noise, and unlike the bombers, came continually night and day. People had their sleep interrupted repeatedly, and as we discovered in N.Ireland, lack of sleep will break anybody.
My father insists that the “people were that close to cracking” during the V1 attacks.
The V2’s had nothing like the impact, mainly because they were supersonic. You heard nothing before the bang.
Galloway may believe that Iraq “fanned the flames”, but then he also opposed Afghanistan for the same reason - and lumped them both together in his speech yesterday. Most people who opposed taking action in Iraq supported the action in Afghanistan.
STILL loads of sirens here. But they are already becoming part of the rich urban tapestry of London, like dirty pigeons, or the homeless. And thus they are being ignored.
And so life goes on..
98 - ambulances or police?
I think it is very unlikely Respect will take control of a council - surely the only chance would be Tower Hamlets - but it’s very difficult to see them prising Labour out of some of the poor white areas or the LibDems out of strongholds like Bow which are pretty affluent and getting more so (will be the Chelsea of the East once the Olympic stuff gets built I hope).
“That said” I would have thought LBTH is a dead cert to go to NOC.
96 - lancelot, the lack of sleep thing is interesting. That was also part of Bomber Comand strategy against the Germans - they would often send nuisance raids of a few aircraft just to set off the sirens and force everyone down into the shelters.
Back home from work , still a police presence at every station in Sussex but reduced from 3 burly policemen last night to one young policewoman at Newhaven and similarly elsewhere . I am still unclear as to the purpose of this .
Regarding Respect and its chances of winning many seats outside of a very few areas . At the moment , I think the chances are slim but as I have mentioned before , there are a large number of working class voters namely smokers whose enjoyment of down the pub for a game of pool or darts , a beer and a smoke is under threat from the proposals to ban smoking in public houses . With all three main parties seemingly prepared to forget their free market principles and principles of freedom of choice and allow market forces to satisfy the supposed demand for non smoking pubs , the opportunity is there for a party such as Respect to campaign on this issue and win many votes in Labour areas .
Just back from Cheadle. New leaflet of ours is quite close to the bone for my taste but then again so are the liberals. Interestingly they have quotes form people saying why they’re not voting liberal followed by their picture and name and area. Some young good looking couples mainly caught in the pub and some old chap with his shopping bags, interestingly there not tory activists either, think Stephen is doing a Lembit and canvessing in pubs and clubs. Still think our latest leaflet is a little too savage though.
Printz at 81: Interesting to see you’ve transferred your affections from the LibDems to the Tories to Respect. Anyone but Labour, eh? But not only is George Galloway not ‘one of the most powerful men in Parliament’, he is actually quite rarely seen in Parliament at all. Bearing in mind the Dreadful Libel Warning on this site, I’ve just checked “theyworkforyou.com”. He’s attended 9% of votes so far, spoken twice, and put down zero written questions, making him, according to the site, the 515th most active MP. On nine separate occasions, according to the site, he failed to vote either way on motions indicating opposition to the war in Iraq.
A seat non contested by Respect in May where they could do well is Birmingham Ladywood. I suppose they didn’t contest it becuase Clare Short is anti-war.
I don’t know what could have happened if Respect would have contested it. With more switchers away from Labour, Clare Short would have been in serious troubles. But maybe with Respect standing she would have had a bigger majority, becuase switchers would have gone to both Libdems and Respect and not only to the Libdems.
UKIP performed well in Birmingham Ladywood (6%).
102 - Not sure that Respect are all that free market, Mark, nor that they could fully capitalise on the booze’n'fags vote without antagonising much of their core support.
106 - I think they are unprincipled enough to campaign on more than one policy aimed at different target voters - after all the Liberals have been accused of doing something similar for years .
There probably is an opening for a minor party campaigning against a smoking ban. Overall though, a smoking ban will be popular (sadly). It appeals to one of the most powerful human emotions - self-righteousness.
104. Not a surprise. He had a low “turn out” in the last Parliament too.
He’s in last place (excluding Speaker, the deputy speakers, Sinn Fein, Patsy Calton and Rachek Squire).
The interesting thing about Galloway is that between 1997 and 2001 he rebelled only 5 times (0.8%).
Re Cheadle- it looks like a real dirty camapign, and I see the Lib Dems are tearing into the Tories for being negative and are apparently looking at legal action on one clain about closing police stations. I saw that, when I typed in Cheadle in a search engine, one of the only results was a local newspaper article from a resident saying how bad the Tory camapign is. Also, Day is in a bit of trouble for using the slogan ‘living here’ due to the cause of the by-election. Lib Dems creating an issue out of it.
As a Lib Dem, after looking on their site, I think we are slightly hypocritical, but there we go.
A huge push by the party to keep up the man-power- lots of emails from various people, Lib Dem News etc.
Does anyone know where I can see any literature? The Lib Dems have a good new site http://www.cheadle-libdems.org.uk with a front page but that is it. From the looks of things, they are playing on Patsy’s name an awful lot.
>He IS an MP who is in tune with millions who opposed the war, with >millions who marched against the war.
I’m agreeing with other people who have replied to this. I marched against the war and cannot stand Galloway. Didn’t the BNP march against the war and are against handing further power to Europe? Does that mean that the millions also support the BNP? Of course that’s not true and nor is it true about Respect.
108 - The danger is that the gap will be filled by a party like the BNP and although as you say , overall the ban may be popular , it will not be in the sort of areas that I am talking about . Although I do not smoke , my partner does and she is quite vehement in her opposition to the ban and would certainly vote as a protest for any party that opposed it .
Interestingly , much of the little opposition in the Scottish Parliament last week came from Scottish Conservatives and it would well be within their basic principles of free market and freedom of choice to oppose it nationally .
I did not think that there was anything that could persuade me to vote Conservative but this is one issue where I could be persuaded to lend them my vote for 1 time only .
I think UKIP may be best placed to fill the niche, with a line of general opposition to regulation whether from Brussels or Westminster.
My personal view is that venues should be able to allow smoking given sufficient ventilation to protect the atmosphere staff are breathing at the bar.
I agree BV. I don’t smoke, and at one level, the issue doesn’t concern me. It’s when I hear a spokesman from ASH or the BMA, or hear someone saying “I have the right to go where I choose without having them inflict their disgusting habit on me” that I want to reach for my revolver.
114 - In some of the pubs I frequent in pursuit of a game of Bar Billiards or darts , there is no need to protect the Bar staff as they all smoke anyway . I am not talking of trendy city centre pub/wine bars or restaurants which sell beer as a sideline , but the sort of establishment that the people proposing the ban have probably never been in or will go to ban or not .
I’m against a ban, even though I hate smoking. One reason is selfish though - if it was banned, my dad would be at home, rather than the pub, smoking, so I get even more smoke in my lungs
91,92, etc. Agree totally on Galloway. I attended several anti-war events where he spoke and was shocked at how many can be taken in by the moustachio’ed demagogue. Let’s hope that his unholy alliance of trotskyists and religious extremists is a short-lived phenomenon.
108. Militant pro-smokers are a tiny minority, although they will get a lot of support from the big tobacco companies. As an inveterate 20-a-day man who spends a lot of time in Ireland (where a total ban on smoking in public places has been in force for over a year), I expect that opposition in the UK will fizzle out soon after the ban is enacted.
In any case, the legislation for England is far less draconian than it is in Ireland thanks to the exemption for pubs that don’t serve prepared food, the derisory fines proposed and enforcement only at the behest of a complainant.
114. A very technocratic solution book value! Could almost have come from Brussels itself.
118 - well, I do not think you would want to dismiss health and safety concerns entirely. People choose to work in pubs much as they choose to work in factories or construction sites, which no one is proposing be liberated from all safety legislation.
118 - Yes I agree that militant Pro Smokers are and will remain few but that is not the same as not being prepared to register your views in a ballot box . In a local election or possibly a byelection given the right opposition candidate and campaign , it could easily happen .
119.”People choose to work in pubs much as they choose to work in factories or construction sites, ”
maybe if they would really have the chance to choose, they would not choose to be a waiter. They could have not found something else to do.
121 - that is kind of what I was driving at with the factory and construction site comparisons. There is some level of choice, but not between a completely unrestricted set of alternatives.
122. Sorry, book value, but I read your post too fast and so I completely failed to understand what you were saying.
119. True, the rights of bar workers is one of the reasons I support the ban despite being a smoker myself. The problem is that truly effective ventilation systems would be so expensive to install and run that they would put many small pubs and clubs out of business, not to mention the environmental impact. Try the smoking area by gates 82-90 at Heathrow T1 - the electricity bill must be enough to light up a small town.
124 - that is a point. I hope you could take a lighter touch than that kind of complete sterility so that if you combined some fairly low-level ventilation with a ban on smoking near the bar area you got to something acceptable.
Though as Mark has pointed out, plenty of bar staff are themselves, smokers.
It’s illogical, but in this case it’s the nature of the campaigners on either side that sways me. I simply find militant anti-smokers obnoxious.
I don’t think public support for a smoking ban has anything to do with ’self-righteousness’. Even a majority of smokers support it.
127 - There is a strong self-righteous element within the more…determined…pro-banners, though. Still, I agree that being for a ban doesn’t mean you’re self-righteous, but that wasn’t Sean’s point as far as I can tell - he was talking about the more “militant” ones
127 - This is a falsehood put out by those in favour of the ban . Go into any pub in a working class area of any city and ask if they are in favour of a ban . I do this all the time and I have never found one smoker in favour of the ban but quite a few non smokers opposed to it .
Mark, I have this funny image of you trying to find working class areas of town, running in, looking around for smokers, frantically asking if any of them are in favour of a ban, discovering they’re not and running off to the next pub. Maybe I have an overactive sense of imagination.
130 - Not quite GQ , usually comes up in conversation after I have lost my game of Bar Billiards or Darts and had to buy the winner half a pint of Best .
131 , Mark . “… buy the winner half a pint of Best … ”
All of half a pint…. and several straws ????
132 - This is the tradition Jack , common to all pub sports , you offer the winner half of a pint , if you look as though you cannot afford a box of matches , the winner makes an excuse and declines .
131 - I prefer my version
133 , Mark . I have this rather odd vision of you wearing :
A frayed and grubby shirt with moth eaten cardie with the odd splash of egg and ketchup . Stained and torn jeans , odd socks and holed shoes , shambling to the bar producing your small change from a little purse skwinting through broken framed selotaped spectacles.
Infact the very model of 1960s Liberals . Keep up the good work and save your pennies for the Tabman restoration and relief fund. His need is greater . Indeed he’ll need your cash for BUPA once my mother gets hers hands on him !!
126: Sean, an old and very Conservative friend of mine used to argue exactly like that - a robust chap, he disliked anti-smoking zealots intensely. A couple of years ago, he said ruefully, “Perhaps the health fascists were right - I’ve got lung cancer.” He died a few months later. I’ve no time for the tiresomely self-righteous either, but it seems a pity that when we know that cigarettes contribute to our two main causes of death, we don’t do more to discourage them.
135 - Yes in deed , Jack , I live in a far different world from you , the golf course and the 10 pound a hole match then into a tie only bar in the Golf Club for a large malt .
Actually , your descripton of my attire would have been fairly accurate until Teresa set her sights on me . Now the shirts are ironed , the shoes polished and the purse Calvin Klein .
136 - Nick , it is one thing to discourage and point out the dangers to health of smoking , Nick , but another thing entirely to attempt to take away what little pleasure many people in working class areas of the country get from their lives .
138.”but another thing entirely to attempt to take away what little pleasure many people in working class areas of the country get from their lives ”
They aren’t taking away cigarettes from them. They could smoke at home.
137 , Mark . ” …until Teresa set her sights on me .. ”
A PB.com exclusive….notable Lib Dem in love tryst with leopard footed Conservative MP for Beaconsfield . ” She’s even got me a Calvin Klein purse ” said a clearly exhausted but immaculately attired Mr Senior as he left the Rose and Crown pub with his new lover .
Source : The Brighton and Hove S&M Bar Billiards Club .
140 , Mark . I first put Pus*y footed but it got spammed !!
140. why Beaconsfield?
139 - Yes Andrea , they could stay at home but that is not how they want to spend their evenings . They want to carry on spending them down the local pub with their friends and why should their lifestyles be not just criticised but banned because it is considered unhealthy by people who want to rule not just their own but other’s lives .
140-142 , I think Jack is referring to Teresa May but has relocated her to Midsomer Maidenhead . In fact my Teresa is rather better looking and she plays Bar Billiards so a perfect match .
143. they could still go to the pub with their friends and if they need a cigarette, they could go out for a moment to smoke it.
Personally I’m pretty indifferent to a smoking ban. I don’t smoke, so it’s not a problem and people smoking don’t disturb me.
144 , Mark . Yes I’m having a bad day . First I mix Richard II with Edward II and now Maidenhead with Beaconsfield . Next It’ll be Tabman and Rik and then Nicholas Soames with Twiggy. Someone must be watering down my single malts !! I’m rarely cogent when sober .
145 - Yes Andrea , they could but they would say - Why should we , we are all smokers in here anyway .
The big puzzle is that in a free market , if there were a demand for non smoking pubs , it would have been met by many pubs changing over from smoking to non smoking , but the few that have done this , such as Tommy Cooper’s old pub in Eastbourne lost money by doing so and changed back to smoking . The premise that there is a demand for non smoking pubs ( as opposed to restaurants ) is in fact false .
Do you think - excuse me while I light up - if we asked ever so nicely, that nice Dr Palmer would put down an amendment to including nicotine addiction on those ID cards he’s so fond of?
With the Libdems you never stop to learn something new:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4655633.stm
149 - Yes Andrea , I have read that article several times and still don’t understand who said what . Perhaps it was Jack who wrote it after several large malts .
Anyone else see Galloway on Newsnight? Must confess he was putting his case really quite effectively, but right at the end he turned on the mild Gavin Esler with a sinister and menacing ‘I’ve followed you for several years’ as a