When are Gord and Dave going to face Paxo?
August 30th, 2007
And what do we think of Cameron’s “make-over”?
Judging by the comments thread here last night most people thought that the Tory leader performed reasonably well in the first big set piece of the new political year - a long interview on Newsnight. He seems to have adjusted his style to reflect the new more sombre mood created by Gordon Brown and is looking a lot more formal.
He also seems to have changed his vocal approach. The voice sounded deeper and he was clearly very well prepped for the occasion.
For another aspect of last night was that this was Cameron’s first big time out since the ex-News of the World editor, Andy Coulson, took over communications for the Tory party. So in a sense it was as much a test of Coulson as it was of Cameron.
But did the Tory leader really get challenged? Wasn’t the format involving four separate journalists asking questions in turn never really going to put Cameron under pressure? Why was Jeremy Paxman not allowed to have a go?
No one can doubt that the programme’s new political editor, Michael Crick, is a formidable investigative journalist but he hasn’t got a fraction of the edge of Paxman when doing the big interviews. The others performed OK but we never got that continuous pressure that Paxman is capable of.
Gordon Brown, of course, has not faced Jeremy in years and one by product of being elected Labour leader unopposed is that he managed to avoid big set Paxman pieces that have become an integral part of other leadership contests. My understanding is that there’s an open invitation to both Cameron and Brown but so far neither has been brave enough to accept. Maybe we’ll have to wait until a general election campaign.
How leaders perform in such circumstances matters enormously. For most voters their only involvement in the political process is when they get a fleeting glance of extracts from programmes like Newsnight during the campaign. Television plays a huge part in shaping views.
To see the whole interview click here
On the betting markets the latest ICM poll has led to more money going on a 2007 general election.
PBC Poster of the Year. If you have not voted yet then you have until 6.30pm to get your votes in. The online voting is here.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I have to say that I thought cameron performed very well and gave the best answers he could considering some of the imo daft positions the tories have taken e.g
You say you support helping those at the bottom to do well, but it seems your flagship proposal at the moment is a tax cut which only effects 6% of estates…….
Stjohn - my rival:wink: - said that he didn’t fear Cameron as P.M. Well that maybe the case for many people but people like Fox et al will put many off who would be drawn to cameron. Until he changes this I think he is going to struggle on, it takes a team not one man.
While Cameron answered his questions well I think there is a danager that he may have let slip a few things as you do under that sort of interview, I think that Labour may go on t he attack when they go through what he said with a fine comb, there were quite a few things that he said that pricked my ears.
The one thing that did prick my ears most though was not said by Cameron, I won’t mention it on here but as far as I am aware no one else picked up on it……..
Election timing hint RF? I didn’t see the show.
2. Nope
Frank Luntz does one of his focus groups on John Howard:
http://tinyurl.com/ypzz79
Frank Luntz does one of his focus groups on John Howard:
http://tinyurl.com/ypzz79
Two things I have come to feel about my constituency mp
I remain unconvinced that over a 3 week election campaign he has the gravitas to sound a convincing potential pm. I felt the same about John Major, who did win an election, but from the position of already being pm. David Davis would have been a better choice
That in power,he will aim to shift the political centre significantly to the right on issues such as universal services.
In an imaginary political “dragon’s den” I’d be saying “I’m out”
It will be very interesting, to see if Cameron can ride two horses at once. Can he keep the Liberal/left, while appealing to the right? My bet is no, something will have to give, can a political party contain Goldsmith and Redwood, I dont think so!
How will the voters see all of this, cynically I should think.
How Milne in the Guardian sees it.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives/comment/0,,2158622,00.html
I was actually surprised at just how poorly Cameron did, and I’m not saying that out of partisanness (!?)
He seemed ill prepared, came close to getting cross a couple of times, and never really seemed to show any confidence in his own strategy - he’s riding two horses and he knows they want to go in different directions, yet he can’t decide whether to try and control them both, jump on one or other, or fall between the two.
On this performance I think it’s safe to add Cameron’s name to that of Brown on the list of people who will do anything to avoid a Paxo stuffing.
3 reasons for never going in front of Paxo (apply to any sane politician). Lets call them The Howard - Paxman laws of politics
1. P has limited interest in the detail only in headline grabbing hectoring
2. P controls the agenda - you never win
3. It will only be of interest to a wider world if you cock up (pace Howard)
A politician who willingly agrees to to be grilled by Paxo, when there is no need, hasn’t got the intelligence or wit to be a successful politician.
9 - Totally agree - with the exception of Galloway who trumped him imho.
I missed night but I hear he did quite well. The most significant thing though is the change of image that I posted on yesterday and Mike mentions above.
That he can so easily change from breezy jacketless ‘heir to Blair’ with tieless brightly coloured shirts into ‘Brown clone’ in the space of four poor opinion polls tells you an unhappy truth; He will follow polls and focus groups like a dog will follow lamp posts.
A coup for the ‘Chameleon’ team certainly. It’s not easy to get it so spot on after just a couple of outings but that’s what they did. Do we really want to wait for Steve Hilton and Andy Coulson to decide who David Cameron should be?
The usually excellent StJohn must have lost his marbles. We’re talking a Prime Minister here not a contestant for ‘Stars in Their Eyes’. Frankly I’d sooner have Blair back.
The Galloway caveat
Only politicians with views outside the range you need to be in in order to win elections, can beat him (an American right winger bested him as well).
You can win if you don’t care. If you care you can’t win
Off-topic, but this may be of interest to Peebies who long in from work during the lunch hour.
Interesting that it’s a private sector company that trusts its staff to behave like grown-ups and a County Council that doesn’t.
[13] That would be “log in”, of course…
Article on blogging by Scott Rosenberg
http://tinyurl.com/2dv6qw
9. Those are undoubtedly good points, but Cameron has a vested interest in doing a Paxman interview. I think one reason why Howard came across badly in the famous interview back when he was Home Secretary (Howard, not Paxman), was his political image: he was a tough guy. Paxman was - and is - a tough interviewer. It was in that way an interview of equals, which Paxman clearly ‘won’.
Cameron by contrast has a very different public image, or at the very least is aiming for it - that of a decent guy, caring about the environment and society, and so on. In that context, it will be much easier to disrupt Paxman’s interviewing style by making it seem unfair: “I’m trying to explain my party’s position and all you’re doing is interrupting: how is the public to learn anything from that?” Howard probably couldn’t get away with that kind of approach; Cameron probably can.
And if Cameron gets a Paxman interview, Brown will have to or be accused of running scared - a charge that wouldn’t be too hard to make stick given his Macavity-like tendency when the going gets tough. The obvious benefit from the Tory point of view of trying to force Brown into a Paxo match is that there’s so much more meat for Paxman to use against Brown, as there always is when interviewing a leader of government as opposed to a leader of the opposition.
As an aside, I don’t particularly like treating interviews as boxing matches as it tends to render them meaningless in terms of the viewers finding out anything useful if the politician is good enough, as they’ll be instinctively defensive throughout, but in Paxman’s case it’s probably appropriate.
I thought Cameron did OK on Newsnight (as he should do). Interesting comment in the intro from Mike about Dave’s visual and vocal approach. It probably shows how Labour is still setting the agenda in some ways: the open-shirt thing was fine when opposing Blair; Brown needs a different approach - but that approach is essentially reactive to the Labour leader.
O/T. I have laid off my bet on Hillary for the Democratic nomination. 1/2 is short enough with the full primary season ahead, especially having originally backed her at 5/4. The early caucuses and primaries often cause upsets and that may well be the time to get back in.
I thought DC did well on Newsnight. He (or any other political leader worth their salt) should not be too troubled by this “grilling”, as they are usually so well prepared. He came across as serious and he was nicely turned out. Thinning on top though…………
BUT - I agree with Roger. He has a very thin veneer of calm and he can loose his temper quite quickly. This is something for Gordon etc to work on. Whatever happened to the tieless look? Not appropriate “post-Blair”, eh?
Regardless of his appearance, most of what he said were bland slogans ANYONE could support. I remember him saying “I am unashamedly for the family” - who the hell isn’t? If he is so interested in the family, why is he intent on giving married couples £20 per week regardless of their child status, and removing workers rights by opting out of the Social Chapter? MMmmmnnn.
I would love a politician to say to an interviewer, “I hate the family in all its forms and I am eager to see its destruction”. At least it would make a change.
17
I would love a politician to say to an interviewer, “I hate the family in all its forms and I am eager to see its destruction”. At least it would make a change.
And to follow that with, ‘If elected I intend to make Satanism the state religion’
David H - its a risk v reward calculation
If you come off well v Paxo, then nobody knows.
If you come off badly v Paxo - it becomes a zeitgeist moment
Why do it? Better to be on Richard & Judy
My query was - but what will he actually do for the family. Unless I missed it, he was not very clear. As we saw on here when the family tax break issue came up, it is highly contentious once you get into the detail.
Does “family” = two adults with children living at one address - married or not and heterosexual or not
12. Portillo silenced Paxman as well during the 1997 election night interview when he too realised that he didn’t need to ‘play the game’ after he’d lost.
By contrast, Galloway’s performance was undoubtedly boosted by the fact that he’d just won an election and had over 15000 votes behind him - and they were more-or-less all votes for the man ahead of the party (in that the man is the party). Paxman was therefore on tricky ground asking if Galloway was proud of having defeated a black woman: it was effectively asking whether he - and by implication his constituency - should be ashamed of putting their beliefs ahead of racial and gender-based quota type representation. Not too tricky to argue against.
19. Having not watched British television for a while, does Ed Vaizey still go on The Wright Stuff? Is the Wright Stuff still on Ch 5? I thought that was smart politics.
19. Everyone in the Westminster village will know. They may be few in number but are vital in determining the political agenda and assumptions. Once an image starts to settle on a politician (or indeed any media celebrity, as it’s the same dynamic), it’s difficult to shift positively.
Obviously, neither man can afford to mess up badly - but then they’re both in jobs where they can’t afford to mess up badly in a whole range of areas.
The Stephanie Flanders moment was wonderful and it caught Dave by surprise (why didn’t his researchers warn him?). I loved the way she treated him with icy disdain. If he persists with his daft policy of tax breaks for married couples he can expect to be embarrassed on this time again, for instance by again by
-unmarried couples, especially if they are Tory supporters
-gay couples, especially if they are Tory supporters
-well-off married couples without children who say “why should we get extra money when there are people with children who are more deserving”.
Agree with Roger that he is back to Chameleon mode, but then people have had enough of a certain chameleon over the last 10 years, they would be happier with a curmudgeon they can trust.
16 - Small point, but didn’t that famous/infamous interview take place after the Conservative landslide defeat, and during the subsequent leadership campaign? So Howard was an ex Home Secretary in a govt which only a few weeks before had been so conclusively rejected, and thus put him(rightly)very much on the defensive before the grilling had even started?
Also, didn’t Cameron do rather well against Paxman’s hectoring in their interview prior to the 2005 leadership election?
Afghanistan, Iraq, 20b£ wasted on preschool reforms,pensions, higher taxes for lowest paid, crime/murders, hospital closures: ho hum.
Cameron swaps tieless coloured shirts for a suit: the bastard !
Surely Mike, we are not going back to “formal = good”? One of the strong opinions that has come through in recent years is that male politicians (in particular) are seen as part of “the suits” culture, and along with a number of other signals - the language they use, the places they appear etc - has contributed to disconnection with ordinary people. As a PPC, I was regularly assailed by a group of activists I called the “Tim must wear a tie brigade” on the occasions when I did go tieless (not always!) I was very pleased that someone like “Dave” was prepared to make a similar statement, and regularly made a joke out of that similarity!
I thought he came over relatively well last night, although he had no real answer to Stephanie’s question “Are you telling me I should be married?” And I thought he floundered considerably with some of Mark’s questions on international relations. I felt the Newsnight team did not push him at all on the environment, and I believe he might have fallen apart had they done so. Even so, an interesting and enjoyable Newsnight session.
Anyway, I hope the “Dave” image hasn’t gone completely.
25. Yes, having checked it, you’re right - it was after the 1997 election. That doesn’t really change my point that Howard was not helped in the interview by his political image at the time, and that this would be less of a problem for Cameron. The main thing Cameron would need to watch out for in a Paxman interview would be getting riled or visibly angry without apparent justification.
For those who want to see the Howard interview, there’s a link on this BBC page: http://tinyurl.com/dhqm2
16 David
Funny you should mention Hilary’s odds. I’ve been laying her off myself, purely on the basis that 1/2 is way too short at this stage. I was wondering if I was making a mistake but now that the World’s Greatest Conservative has said it, I know I am not.
Voted yet?
Given the passage of time, even the most hated of politicians seem to be revived and turned into a loveable bloke/gal who is a bit kooky but stuck up for his/her opinions etc. See Benn, Tebitt et al.
Apart from Thatcher, of course. She still sups from the devil’s teat.
7. Good article by Milne if you’re one of those whose opinion of Cameron falls short of excitement
Meanwhile …. In the PB election, Beaconsfield supporters of Jack W prepare for some gentle canvassing along the High Street :
http://www.highlanderweb.co.uk/culloden/cockade.gif
******** The Vote for ColinW Campaign – Breakfast News Conference. **********
There were chaotic scenes this morning when the Vote for ColinW News Conference was abandoned halfway through following a series of bomb threats. Dr W’s security spokesman attempted to play the incident down by insisting that ‘these things tend to happen to Colin. To be honest we were expecting it.’ Adding ‘Is that your brief case under the table? Oh no, not another one.’
Controlled explosions were carried out on 17 suspect packages, with initial reports suggesting that at least 12 of them contained what the police described as ‘viable devices’. An attempt to reconvene the news conference in the bar of the local pub ended in farce when it emerged that Dr W had been banned from the premises several months previously for what his campaign team described as ‘indeterminate reasons’.
Dr W bravely shrugged off the latest in a long series of attempts on his life, describing the perpetrators as ‘b*stards’. Initial reports suggest that the police have drawn up a short list of 59 million names.
As a result of the incident, this mornings campaign visit to the local Zoo has been postponed.
My memory may be playing up, but as mentioned at 25, didn’t Dave face Paxman when he was running for the leadership - and did very well too?
‘No one can doubt that the programme’s new political editor, Michael Crick, is a formidable investigative journalist’
Really? I would have said there were considerable doubts about that.
Cerrig. Very good!
Indeed, the gloves were off last night, but here’s a hypothetical Paxo question
” you say your mission is to “fix our broken society”. Can you give us an example of a society that’s already “fixed”? You often mention the US as an example of a country where they do things better. Don’t they have problems with guns, crime and murder? “
Meanwhile II …. Jack W’s get the vote out operation in the Alps moves into top gear :
http://blog.modernmechanix.com/mags/qf/c/PopularScience/6-1940/med_shout_o_phone.jpg
36. Have you read his Archer biography? It’s as good a piece of investigative journalism as you’ll get
Here’s another hypothetical Paxo question
” you say that you are an “unashamed supporter of the family”. What about your London mayoral candidate - is he an unashamed supporter of the family too, or can I describe him as “shamed” “?
Meanwhile III …. The phone lines at Jack W’s HQ are red hot :
http://home.inreach.com/bgoff/entryphone.jpg
As I noted last night whilst watching it, I didn’t think it went particularly well at all. So I’m quite surprised to read all the generally positive comments from everyone else!
Although I’m still a Dave fan (although less than I was…), I thought he looked evasive and lacked any clear message. To hear him talking up new green taxes, curbs on airport expansion, petrol tax up etc is not what your typical Tory or Tory-inclined voter wants to hear. I agree he did have more gravitas than usual, and if you didn’t actually listen to what he was saying, you’d agree that he beats Gordon into a cocked hat presentationally.
But what was he saying? There’s still no real meat, just fairly bland and green-tinged nothingness. Come on Dave, give it some welly!
Cameron did a very good job against a mainly anti-Conservative group of interviewers. Newsnight as a brand lost any pretence of being neutral through retaining Labour luvvie Ms Wade after her holiday friends.
As to the Paxman interview, Cameron did one in 2005, has Brown down one in 05 or since? I therefore agree with the point made by David Herdson (in 16) that Cameron can do a Paxman interview in the election and show up Brown as a coward for not doing the same.
Brown’s weakness is that he has avoided tests in tough interviews, parliamentary questions and a leadership campaign. He is not as “battle hardened” as he ought to be.
Agree with John Wheatley’s view on Paxman interviews - a hiding to nothing with an interviewer who (as his book on politicians IMO showed) knows everything about politicians and understands very little about them - in fact he admits he can’t work out why people want to be MPs. Like PMQ, Paxman interviews are entertaining but they’re too combative to be useful. The format described sounds better. I didn’t see it myself, though the Evening Standard have just been on to ask if I was the “Nick Palmer” who posed a question about his standing down if he lost the next election.
On a related issue: we nearly all agree that DC has a generally pleasant manner, he’s been on the box a lot recently, and that ought to be having a positive effect for him and the Tories. Is there a point of diminishing or even negative returns? For backbenchers who don’t get much exposure the rule is never to say no (I even went on the notorious Central Weekend programme where the producers allegedly used to get the audience drunk in order to heckle better), but I wonder if it’s quite true that one can’t get enough TV time?
24 - exactly right - Stephanie Flanders just totally exposed him.
However there were several moments that stick in my mind where he came close to stumbling:
a) as said - the ‘govts must not moralise about people’ vs ‘the govt must reward familes (ie those who conform to the morals we approve of)’
b) to end the ‘benefits culture’ of penalising families: is he suggesting that the couple rates for all benefits be abolished and both parties receive the single rate? If so that will costs a massive fortune! Where’s that money coming from? his airport tax? (see below).
c) the tokenistic £20 a week for families - in addition to the already non-means tested child benefit and Tax credits? Again Flanders ridiculed this with the point that he would simply be giving extra money to those who are already giving their children an advantage in his terms. And who will be paying for this freebie?Or is that also coming out of his green taxes?
d) Yes to more airmiles, yes to airport expansion - well, his proposed green taxes look less like genuine attempts to curb emissions and more like a means of taxing people to pay for his ‘family friendly’ tax policies. Fly as much as you like - but give us more money for letting you do so is not really a sound green strategy!
e) Export democracy, but here’s a list of areas where actually it’s not gone right and yes, actually, although I don’t want to say out right - democracy isn’t working as we want it to but I will continue to pretend to support it.
f) Inheritance tax? Oh please, let’s move on - it sounds good and fair to abolish it, and I really don’t want too many people realising that hardly anyone stands to benfit from it. Oh and look, I want poor people to do better, but let’s leave the very rich out of it as well shall we - don’t want to curb aspirations and all that - I mean hey - look at me and my multi-job shadow frontbench buddies - haven’t I done well to make them spend time on politics when they’ve got all these other exciting profitable things to be getting on with!
21
I warmed to Portillo when he said that to Paxman, ‘I don’t have to answer idiotic questions Jeremy, I’m not a politician now’ superb!
‘You ask me what I intend to do about street crime? simple! scrap the police force and hand the whole thing over to the Mafia, if that lot can’t eliminate street crime no one can’
David Herdson
I hear all the arguements but, can’t get over the fact that appearing on Paxo is a high risk strategy whereby the best you can hope for is a bit of kudos with the other politicos, but the worst could be serious egg on the face. If the prize was a mass audience maybe it would be worth the throw.
If I were Coulson I would see “sofa tv” as far more important in terms of votes
As the Newsnight programme has grabbed a lot of space in the media this morning, the strategy seems to have worked for the Tories. However his interviewers gave him the space Paxo would not have I suspect. The same intervierw with him would not have half the impact I venture (but can’t prove needless to say)
I see appearing on Paxo as a sign of weakness not strength.
My second favourite Paxman momen, after the Howard grilling, was when he called David Davis a “sh*t” during the Tory leadership contest.
As pointed out by 25 Cameron was interviewed by Paxman in 2005. I recall Cameron did better then than yesterday evening and effectively controlled the interview.
7. Yes Cameron has to ride 2 horses as once and this is problematical but perhaps we should not ignore the fact that Brown to keep an overall majority needs to appeal not just to the Guardian/Mirror readers but also to some more “right wing” readers e.g. his recent attempts to influence the Mail - their Brogan article makes interesting reading:-
brogan.blog.dailymail.co.uk/2007/08/strong-cameron-html
Re 9, John Wheatley, “reasons for never going in front of Paxo (apply to any sane politician). Lets call them The Howard - Paxman laws of politics
1. P has limited interest in the detail only in headline grabbing hectoring
2. P controls the agenda - you never win
3. It will only be of interest to a wider world if you cock up (pace Howard)
A politician who willingly agrees to to be grilled by Paxo, when there is no need, hasn’t got the intelligence or wit to be a successful politician. ”
I agree.
Re 10, Pimpernell “Totally agree - with the exception of Galloway who trumped him imho.”
Yes, whilst I loathe Galloway’s politics, he is good value for entertainment in a bare nuckle fight.
This on Conhome, the main Tory tactic at the moment is geared to preventing an autumn election: why?
http://tinyurl.com/2qpj6w
38. 41. Why not send your suggestions into Paxman and see what he thinks of them, Captain? Come to think of it, why not script some stumbling answers from Cameron as well, then publish the whole thing as a Labour leaflet?
OT. I had dinner last night with someone who was a friend of Gordon at Edinburgh University. Apparently Gordon was rather middle of the road compared to the serious lefties (like the guy I had dinner with) and though he joined the (apparently) famous ’sit in’ at the administrative building he was no firebrand and though he was student rector (sounds like a suppository) my dinner companion didn’t think he had the charisma for what was to become his glittering political future.
Re 12, John Wheatley “The Galloway caveat
Only politicians with views outside the range you need to be in in order to win elections, can beat him (an American right winger bested him as well).
You can win if you don’t care. If you care you can’t win ”
Another very interesting observation.
[52] I’m so glad to see that our Benny has come out against the murder of bus drivers. This must surely mark the turning point for the Tories, who will now be the toast in every bus garage in Sussex.
A pedant writes: There seems to be a stray definite article in that last sentence…
Roger
Isn’t there a reverse law about this.
Those that plan for and look to be heading for the top job - don’t make it - Heseltine. All leaders are suprises - all our last 5 in fact
Benedict. Instead of posting in it’s entirety the message you want to comment on can’t you do a URL (if that’s the expression)? I start reading your posts and then realize I’ve already read 90% of it
John at 57. I can’t think of five. Are you talking about Prime Ministers or party leaders?
Interestingly he told me that there was a political activist at Edinburgh at the time who everyone did believe would go all the way only to vanish without trace.
I think that David Cameron did well last night and none of the highly paid (publicaly funded) BBC journos laid a glove on him - even Flanders, who we mustn’t forget worked for the Clinton administration in the 1990s.
It seemed to me that even they were bored with the vacuous and repetitive “lurch to the right” spin from Labour and so didn’t press it too hard. To give him his due, even Nick Palmer regards this dated campaign as risible and past its sell by date, but still trots out the Plan B line: “DC is vacuous, weak…blah blah blah….
Where David Cameron was successful is placing the recent policy announcements in the proper context of an analysis of societal problems which need long term solutions. By contrast, Brown has no new original ideas other than those he pilfers from Conservative policy groups.
Rumours of David Cameron’s political demise were excessively premature and the next 6 months will be eyeball to eyeball - with the big losers inevitably being the irrelevant and invisible Lib Dems and their Leader.
58 Complaining about the voters is no way to advance your campaing, Roger. As a PR man, you’re useless. The new slogan you suggested for me had absolutely no impact and the Italian Stallion is now miles ahead of me in the polls.
You’re fired.
I am surprised at myself - I don’t think I’ve ever paid so little attention to politics for such an extended period.
Reading the above about Cameron’s “new style” - if Mike’s interpretation is right - surely he’d really rattled now? First he copies Blair, then he finds he needs a new persona so he copies Brown? How can this man be a serious contender for Prime Minister?
Having read his comments about his wealth, upbringing and “great school”, I think that was a mistake. By acknowledging these attacks on his background, I think he gives them so legitimacy. I think those who really take issue with those things won’t vote for him anyway, and those that don’t just see it as politics of envy and fairly underhand. Those few people who may not have a strong view either way will now perhaps see it as a real issue, as Cameron himself has seen fit to strike back.
PS. Jeremy Paxman is a t.osser. There’s no need for his ego to be given a further boost by elevating him to a status where he makes or breaks politicans. I think no less of Cameron for not “facing him”, nor would I think any less of Cameron is he did and was hectored and hangbagged by a whining tit with a big nose.
52 - because they’d lose it?
59 Roger - done in a hurry - All our last 5 pm’s were “suprises”
GB on the prison officers from the BBC website. Hang on, I thought Alistair Darling (HMV) was Chancellor?
“Gordon Brown has warned prison officers that delaying part of this year’s public sector pay rise was “an essential part” of tackling inflation. The prime minister said he would “do nothing to put” economic stability or low interest rates at risk.”
4,5 Alexander - sorry, but anything printed in ‘The Australian’ as close to the election as we are now should be taken not with a pinch of salt but with a sack-load, it is that one-sided. …mutter mutter Murdoch mutter… If you are using that rag to guide you as to the likely outcome, then …. well good luck to you, coz you’ll need it! All the best!
66 Chris, they’ve obviously got you fooled. Alistair Darling doesn’t actually exist. His picture is shown to us mere mortals from time to time, but in truth he is only a hologram, remotely controlled from a nearby dwelling-house.
I thought GB was supposed to be MaCavity - not in this case
I notice Prisons are the responsibility of the Ministry of Justice as well - is Home Sec “Homeland Security” by another name
66 delaying the pay rise was an “essential part” of reducing it from 2.5% to 1.8% this year!
61. No one said it was going to be easy! Andrea’s quite an operator. Notice he hasn’t been seen since nominations opened. It’s called the Garbo technique
How about “Punter-Vorsprung durch Technik”?
66: I was surprised by this. I don’t normally have much sympathy for striking workers, but this staging of a recommended pay rise seems particularly harsh. And surley it can’t be that much of an inflation risk? 2.5% is hardly a windfall.
The elephant in the room however is the gigantic disparity between public and private sector pensions. Someone should work out how much extra salary the pension provision of the gold-plated public sector pension is actually worth in salary terms. Might shut these public sector whingers up a bit!
If it was me i’d give them a 10% pay rise but say “sorry people, but you just can’t have your unsustainable and unfunded pensions any more”. Instead we have a craven climb-down from Postman Johnson allowing public sector workers to continue to retire at 60, which is barely middle age these days, whilst private sector workers must carry on until 65 or even 67 and get far less pension at the end of it. Pensions apartheid is only slightly too strong. Without excpetion all the news coverage of this has focused on salary alone, no mention of the other considerable remuneration in the form of a fantastic pension.
71 Like it! You got the job back.
Should get SeanT’s vote at the very least.
Btw, you’re right about that Milanese Muppet. He’s hardly been spotted since voting began. Probably roaming the streets looking for terminals from which to vote anonymously.
16 . The obvious benefit from the Tory point of view of trying to force Brown into a Paxo match is that there’s so much more meat for Paxman to use against Brown…
And so it can be guaranteed that it will never happen.
re 73. I had thought of handling the voting along the lines of the Tory “primary” for their canddiate for Mayor of London”. You pay £1,50 for a premium rate phone call and I pocket a nice profit.
OT For those who take an interest and you knwo who you are, appaerently Joan Burton will not go for the Irish Labour Party leadership.
Welcome to another MP posting under his real name.
Stewart, I would be interested in your views on tax breaks for married couples, which I assume is now official conservative policy - or is it?
Do you think highlighting the virtues of the family in such a prominent way as Dave did last night might lead to charges of hypocrisy if and when Tory politicians go astray?
I am thinking, for example, of the Norris/Boris syndrome – the second [alleged] serial bonker that the conservatives have put up as London Mayoral candidate.
76 Thanks Yokel, but judging from the Betfair odds I should say you and I are not the first to know.
Sadly, the betting on this market now looks like a non-event. Again, if Betfair is anything to go by, Gilmore has it in the bag.
I think we need to start working on our Australian portfolio. What are the latest soundings from Parramatta?
77 - I understand that you are a Labour supporter, so expect the line of questioning.
Of course I support tax changes which support the family.
Your “Tory sleaze” insinuation is rather desperate and about 15 years out of date and has nothing to do with a reasonable, intelligent discussion about the social problems facing Britain, based on empirical evidence, as contained in Iain Duncan Smith’s superb report and articulated since at least September 2005 by David Cameron.
Perhaps you might like to elevate the debate by discussing important issues - rather than rehearsing the vicious personalisation as practised by Alastair Campbell et al?
Peter
Gilmore can stilll be backed at 1/6 with Hills….if you take the view he’s home and hosed a la Brown…
75 For that sort of money, Mike, I think you would have to be prepared to talk dirty to the voters for a bit.
78. By the way I take you have some profit on this due to that even money bet on Gilmore?
79 - Stewart, so do you support £20 a week for married couples (regardless of whether they have kids or not)?
Re Brown V Paxo. I remember when Brown faced Cameron at his first PMQ and said “he forgets I’ve only been in this job for five days” and everyone said it was a disaster! I thought the opposite. He sounded human and his critics sounded programmed.
His ratings soared and all the talk was of an unspun politician. If someones reaction seems natural the public recognize it. If it’s fake and on camera the public can spot it a mile away.
Howard’s problem wasn’t Paxo’s questions but the fact that he looked shifty when answering. If Brown is honest however many ‘have you stopped beating your wife’ questions he gets-the public will respond positively
Am I the only person who finds the real time polling data, in the thread below, oddly compelling? You can watch votes stack up, as they are recorded.
I see Roger is now only 7 votes behind “Henry G”. Meanwhile Sean Fear is embarrassingly far ahead in the Tory category. And the Lib Dem poll looks like Disney’s seven dwarves all lining up to be patted on the head by the Snow White of Electoral Fame.
If only we could have similar realtime data in general elections. Just click on and watch how votes are stacking up across the country - as they are actually counted! Imagine!
I used to be into sex drugs and rock and roll. Now it’s exciting new internet polling techniques. Aiiii….
80 Yokel - Famous quote from the legendary JP McManus:-
“If you have six, you don’t need one.”
Ah Ive taken it anyway, smal amount but it boosts my profit, theres only him and Mcmanus..maybe..left and both are winners in my book.
Just as an aside, take a look at Spreadfair & Sporting Index’s rugby world cup torunament indexes…notice any oddities?
O/T.but congratualations to Lord (Denis) Healey,who celebrates his 90th birthday today.I possess his autobigraphy,which is regarded across the political spectrum as an excellent work
73 - Peter, I think your campaign team has really missed a trick by not subtly exploiting the Mighty Fella connection. He is, after all, your USP.
Might I suggest something canine caring and compassionate, perhaps on the lines of “Vote PtP or the Dog gets it”.
Am I the only person who finds the real time polling data, in the thread below, oddly compelling? You can watch votes stack up, as they are recorded.
I see Roger is now only 7 votes behind “Henry G”. Meanwhile Sean Fear is embarrassingly far ahead in the Tory category. And the Lib Dem poll looks like the seven dwarves all lining up to be patted on the head by the Snow White of Electoral Fame.
If only we could have similar realtime data in general elections. Just click on and watch how votes are stacking up across the country - as they are actually counted! Imagine!
I used to be into girls beer and rock and roll. Now it’s exciting new internet polling techniques. Aiiii….
88 Hmmm, might have done but the dog already got it. It was very sad, but we needed the campaign funds and the local Chinese offered us good money.
72 - “I don’t normally have much sympathy for striking workers”
How can you possibly make such a sweeping statement?
79 - you appear to have adopted a totally uncivil tone already. Well done. It didn’t take you long.
Giving tax money back to people simply for having kids isn’t “support for the family”, it’s discrimination against those who don’t want to or can’t have them.
Policy conundrum for the wonks out there
1. All the statistics suggest that crime, education and health figures are improved where the family is strong; that family break up is a common factor to poor performance by the UK as a society
2. Any financial incentive to encourgage the family unit is deemed unfair and needlessley judgemental toward people who are already disadvantaged by being single parents. It’s another middle class tax benefit in other words
3. In order to sweep up all the part today’s fragmented society, the definition of “family” has to be cast fairly broadly - but how far?
I am interested in this, because governments (like successfull military commanders) should follow success rather than shoring up failure. But I am buggared if I can see what is the policy implimentation to go with that desire. £20 tax breaks just irritate and change nothing - you have to be bolder than that
“And the Lib Dem poll looks like the seven dwarves all lining up to be patted on the head by the Snow White of Electoral Fame.”
Can I be Grumpy?
I seem to have fallen behind overnight, the international vote clearly going somewhere else. Too late to drop the uk bit of the ‘nom de plume’ I suppose….
******* Vote for ColinW Campaign – Breaking News *******
The Colin W campaign mini-bus has been involved in a traffic accident outside Threshers. A spokesman for Dr W insisted there had been no casualties, but the driver of the juggernaught claimed to have hospitalised at least 5 of Dr W’s campaign team. The driver, initially arrested by police, was freed when an angry group of protesters (numbering several thousand) broke him out of custody. He was last seen being paraded through the high street on the shoulders of cheering locals.
Suggestions of splits in what remains of Dr W’s campaign team have been rejected by Dr W himself as ‘b*llocks’.
79. Stewart, it’s the reptiles of the press who are sometimes “vicious”, not me. If you think that in the course of the last fifteen years they have become gentlemen, and will not probe into your private lives as they did in the Major years, it’s up to you.
You say “of course I support tax changes which support the family” but do you mean, specifically, tax breaks for married couples? Labour has introduced numerous tax and benefit polices which support children over the last 10 years. What Dave is proposing is a tax break for married couples (whether or not they have children), to encourage the institution of marriage.
Do you support this? Is it actually conservative policy yet?
86 Oh yes…France…Australia…and…OMG ARGENTINA!
Thank you Yokel, I’ll vote for you again, just as soon as I’ve placed my bets.
SeanT - it’s going to get even more compelling for you in the final round where the voting starts at 6.30pm.
You are not alone on the general point - there’s been a big boost to our daily traffic with many more people than normal for an August Thursday coming in and out to see how the elections are progressing.
The big battles at the moment are whether Roger can just get enough support to squeeze HenryG out of the top two; and in the Lib Dem race whether UKPaul can overhaul Stodge for the second slot.
Captain S @ 96 - you might add that how does such a tax break help those beneath the tax threshold - who most need the help. At least Gordon’s stuff gets to the very poorest to some extent
And I say that as someone who intuitively believes it is profoundly in our interest to provide a framework whereby couples with children should be encouraged to “tough out” the viscisitudes of being in a “family” no matter how you define it. Remember much of the family breakdown is blokes having the good bit and then ducking out of the harder bit that follows
Can I just say, off topic, how disghusted I am by the scum at ‘The Sun’ (yes Ms Wade that means you) and other normally sane papers in their witchcunt of Christine Ohourogu who won gold yesterday in the athletics.
They clearly know absolutely nothing about the situation and just want a pathetic, tawdry headline. She missed a test for good reasons and was tested negative just before and just after. When we have young killers and real drugs on the streets among today’s youth this disgusting sort of tabloid kneejerk reactionism should be stamped out. I hope that Ms Wade and her cronies don’t sleep at night but I doubt that any humanity resides in their soul. It’s time t hat people fought back against the press (the Murdoch variety in particular).
Is there a dwarf named Angry?
97. Ive taken a look at the points systems and I dont think it actually affects the Argentina position to any effect down at the bottom end but i thought I’d let you decide what you think.
98
I’m missing all the fun. (And people are missing my votes - clearly tragic…). It would seem that web polls are considered a frivolous waste of time ‘This website is considered not business related and is thus blocked’
er, disgusted, not disghusted…
UKPaul 100 was the use of the c word a deliberate error or an accidental joke
Agree with the sentiments tho’
104 - Oh dear, sorry John, that was a typo. My eyesight and typing combined I’m afraid. I’m surprised that got through the filter anyway!
101 Yes there’s a small mismatch in the points systems which could hurt if you were very unlucky, but the arb is so huge it’s worth chancing.
Cantor are effing me about at the moment - they seem to want to see the color of my money for some reason - but I should be on soon. At £40 per point, I make that a neat £210 profit.
Sure beats working. Thanks again.
100 - ukpaul, I confess to not knowing an awful lot about this, I just assumed it was an instance of her not showing up for tests and then claiming innocence in a way we’d all scoff at if some nefarious cheating foreigner did it - care to elaborate a little further?
106. Cheeky sods. Dont they know your reputation?
107 This General Melchett (Stephen Fry) in Blackadder 4 - something like
British spies - fine upstanding fellows
German spies - dispicable treacherous huns
91:
It is a fact! Looking back on all the strikes I can remember, and caluclating the number of times I have had sympathy as a fraction of the total. I am not pre-judging any future strikes. Most often I am fairly indifferent, usually because I don’t know enough about it.
Sometimes they seem to be organised by unions with little or no grasp of reality however.
In this case I would also be aggrieved at being offered a low pay rise and then to have to wait half a year even for that, so some sympathy. But no sympathy for public sector workers if they were to strike over pensions seeing as they don’t apparently know they are born.
Morning all
First, apologies for not being around the last two or three days. Mrs Stodge and work commitments have kept me away from the PC and even now I’ll have to be marginally less verbose than usual.
Thanks for the nominations for LD poster - as with all the categories, it’s not easy to choose. I can only ask those who have not yet voted to consider voting for me but I won’t be throwing myself off the top of the Beckton Alp if I fail.
I will tell you who I have voted for:
Conservative: honourable mentions for David Herdson and Benedict though the fact the latter doesn’t have a blog counts against him a wee bit. Marcus is also a strong poster but my choice is Sean Fear. His Friday columns are hugely informative and impartial and he is prepared to debate without retreating into partisan blustering.
Labour: Nick Palmer is the choice here - his posts are never less than informative and he rides the various jibes well. He doesn’t deserve some of the more vituperative comments but always responds constructively to well-argued debate. Honourable mentions to Roger and Snowflake.
Lib Dem: There are times on here when the LD poster is being double or triple-teamed by the Tories. SeanT claimed the other day that the Internet was some wonderful right-wing individualist tool which was couched in his usual over-elablorate linguistic waffle. It’s also wrong - it’s a good place for frustrated Opposition activists to vent their spleens individually and collectively. Two or three years into a Conservative Government and I suspect the Tory posters will be outnumbered by Labour and LD posters so the pendulum will swing.
As for the blogger, if not me, then Mark Senior, who fights the good fight well with an honourable mention for Icarus.
Specialist: For me, the toughest category of the lot. Sea Shanty is a late runner and I’m put off French Chris by his obvious right-wing leanings though I can’t fault his observations on the French Presidential election. He was with Sarkozy throughout. Everyone in this category enhances pb.com for all of us. Andrea’s encyclopaedic contributions have been a regular part of this site so that’s where my vote goes.
Anyway. best of luck to all and thanks for running the competition.
Lib Dem:
100. Paul. I agree with your sentiment but late last night on a longish drive I heard the whole story and it isn’t quite the simple affair you are suggesting.
Sean’s right! Watching voting is the way to go! Unfortunately my picks are going nowhere! Tyson and ChrisD haven’t given it their all. Tyson being Old Labour obviously wants to lose-nothing as bourgeois as winning elections- but what’s ChrisD’s excuse? I know it’s school holidays but can’t you get your kids to pop round to the Internet cafe?
On the £20 tax break for married couples thing, does anyone know how much it costs? Something like £6bn per annum - a massive amount of money.
You could ‘end’ child poverty through redistribution with that, and still have a bit left over!!!!
IMHO the tories would be crazy to go with that policy - its completelty inconsistent with their stated ‘ambition’ (not commitment) to end child poverty.
Ending the couple penalty would be far less controversial.
I still think Nick P should not be included in the vote as he is insider trading.
In the nicest possible way (because it is pb.com after all)you are all just sucking up to him because he is an mp! (smiley thing).
Vote for one of the free spirits - snowflake5 (my choice) or Henry G
Government’s of both parties would love to break the power of the P.O.A. The P.O.A. has blocked all attempts of reform of the prison system. The main reason to protect the shift rota, (police similar) the rota is in the main an overtime generator. Number one throw a sickie at weekends, particularly on the night shift, this gets covered by your oppo, who picks up a very lucrative o/t payment, next time round oppo goes sick etc etc.
Spent all my working life on shift, studied various shift rota’s they are all open to abuse, some more than others.
Some organisations even have two rota’s the official and the unofficial, its the unofficial that gets worked, not to the advantage of the employer or the taxpayer.
Slightly OT but…
This comes with 2 caveats - namely a) my insdier info re the leadership turned out to be totally duff b) some of the people who I’ve been talking to either know or suspect I post here - then again some don’t.
Against all my views and arguments, I have to say the message seems to be to get ready for a snap election. The thinking appears to be partly along the lines that Cameron is just not ready for the top job and people know that. Give him a couple more years and people might feel he is ready for it.
Leave the Tories with another defeated leader and they’ll struggle to work out what to do next or where to go. It’s also felt unlikely Cameron would stand down if he was defeated, but it would drag the party into conflict over future directions and they’d be at least 2 years trying to recover. Which will be too short a time to organise for 2011.
Personally, I think this is all guff, and Gordon shouldn’t go until at least 2009. But then again I have no focus groups to hand.
100- I’m sure if she was American or Australian it would be a “Brilliant Comeback” headline. An Englishman/woman doing well at sport? Can’t be having that, Murdoch will always find some way to spin it.
Channel 4 News would have too, but shes Black, so that confuses those poor ‘Anybody but England’ types that infest Channel 4 News.
re 110. The NHS got exactly the same pay deal (at least those of us in England because the Scots, Welsh and N Irish governments have accepted the recommendations of the independent review body and paid up in full) so would your sympathy extend to us.
It was this government which decided to take the politics out of public sector pay awards by setting up these reveiw bodies, and then at the first opportunity ignoring their advice. Perhaps someone (Nick P, Roger perhaps) could tell me what we’re paying the vast salaries/admin costs of these particular quangos for?
I have lost faith in Cameron. He sounded tougher last night, but that’s a u-turn! He’s good on tv and not bad at interviews. The problem is he was either trying to explain he doesn’t have specific policies or trying to defend badly thought out ones on tax (marriage and inheritence). We then have the astonishing claim from him that the public are only concerned with the gap between the poorest and those in the middle. He made no attempt to engage on the issue of inequality and city bonuses. Although to be fair neither has the government.
I didn’t like his manner during the crime debate, using individual examples, but the electorate may like that. However he had no answer to Crick’s point about falling fatalities from stabbings and shootings.
He has completely lost his way over the last 6 months, but saying that, the Party may be unleadable and need to start looking at themselves rather than just blaming their leader all the time.
Speaking of strikes, is there any chance that the Police will really go on strike as is being hinted? Talk about winter of discontent! Best get the election over now Gordon!
It is a relatively simple story Roger, obfuscated for nefarious reasons by some, and The Sun’s attempt to confuse in people’s minds something like this and the real problems of today’s youth are disgusting. It’s bad enough them to rail against druggies/immigrants/paedos whatever without giving any evidence of thought or measures to improve this country. When they try and yoke that elsewhere by attacking people who are trying to be positive and to provide others with good role models that really does grate.
I’m surprised that anyone voted for me given that I’m the non-activist, anti-politics, grumpy to angry scourge of insiderism/tabloidism/corruption. Hold it, actually there’s my USP, vote for me, your ultra liberal candidate!!
“She missed a test for good reasons….”
She did? Having missed two previously, not being in the place you had nominated is entirely her fault. A good reason would be illness, traffic accident etc, not “we went training somewhere else”. Why would you risk your entire career when you’re on third strike?
Whether she later passed tests doesn’t really matter - the drugtesting system needs to be strict or it’s easy for the real cheats to avoid it. Let’s face it, track and field has been just as riddled with dopers as cycling over the last 25 years. Personally I wouldn’t even give them a 3rd chance.
Been away on hols…
voting for seanT overall cos I read his book on the beach and think he needs some cheering up to stop him playing with himself so much. (Sean, did you marry the girl in the end and is she still around?)
I’m interested in how much of the Brown bounce is down to increase in likelihood to vote. The MORI August poll has ‘certain to vote’ at 53% - that’s up 3% on where it’s been for the past couple of years. Is this enough to explain part of the bounce - which is my gut instinct - on the basis that Brown is not Blair and a lot of Labour backers are returning? Also, Brown’s fortune in being able to show himself as a ‘good man in a crisis’ seems to have been a factor. Both of these have the potential to wear off. Any thoughts?
[As always I plead vested interested - Tory activist and x-Councillor/PPC etc with money riding on Tory seats.]
122 - I disagree wholeheartedly, given that the great Michael Johnson seems to have no problem, and he was the biggest anti-drugs critic, I would think that those who have been there should be listened to.
Being scatterbrained is not a crime. How about a tabloid campaigbn against named drug dealers/gang leaders or are the gutter press all mouth and no action?
122 - (1) Athletics is nowhere near as riddled with doping as cycling! GB athletics in particular is relatively clean. (2) She missed the tests and there are no good reasons for that. But she served her ban and has come back to win and has won clean. Most importantly the 9/1 that Ladbrokes were offering on a GB 4X400m relay win just two days ago is looking very good value now
And on thread…
Cameron always wears ties for studio interviews.
He monstered Paxman in 2005, who in turn took David Davis apart.
No-one but hacks and obsessives watches NNight, but they are the ones who write the papers and set the mood, so a polished performance when you are ‘up against it’ is a worthwhile risk.
Appearances on NNight should be rationed, but they should be done. Hague lost out by boycotting the programme; there really aren’t enough serious current affairs programmes around for an opposition leader to be too sniffy. It’s different for PMs. Blair didn’t do Paxman as PM, if I recall correctly, only as Oppo leader.
Busy at work today, so can’t engage in a “prolonged debate” but….
(1) Married couples: The point here is that the state currently discrimates *against* the traditional family unit and in favour of single parents via the way it distributes benefits. Some claim this has no effect on peoples lifestyle but, particularly at the low end of the income scale, fiscal incentives can have a huge impact on whether couples choose to (or even can afford to) stay together. All of this is described in IDS’ report.
All the evidence points to 2-parent families as being the best and most stable environment to raise kids, so the benefits system should be *at least* neutral, at best shift the financial incentives towards married couples. Will it solve all the problems? No. But it’s one of the most constructive things government can do.
(2) Prison Officers. Has anyone wondered how much of this “strike” might be to do with hugely overcrowded jails and the consequent additional stress and workload prison officers are under? Pay is important, but if the day to day working conditions are getting worse AND your salary isn’t being raised. You’re going to be pretty hacked off. That is the fault of the government.
Also in my experience in business, people react according to their expectations. I.e. If they get a 20% pay rise one year, they get disappointed if they don’t get a 15%-20% pay rise the next year - they get used to the step in income. But if you raise their pay by, say, 6%, 6% and 8% in subsequent years, they are getting a real rise each year and are overjoyed when they get a modest rise to 8%, because its above their expectations.
If the government could ensure their annual pay settlements were more regular and consistent. They might avoid these problems in the future.
127 - “If the government could ensure their annual pay settlements were more regular and consistent. They might avoid these problems in the future.”
Matching inflation might help too.
100- ukPaul- after Man City- 2 things in common- an excellent post.
107- Roger- may be more to the story- but a black, working class lass from London achieving this kind of success is pretty special. Never got over Fiona May winning an Olympic Gold for the Italians.
Just caught the voting- I fear Roger my plug for you yesterday may have caused you some damage. A bit like when Redwood jumped on the Clarke band wagon circa 1997. I think if I could transfer my votes your way it would bring you into the seconds- then anything could happen as they say.
Mike-Can the wooden spooners in each of the catagories go into a competition of their own? Now that would be a interesting play off!!
BTW- can anyone explain why poor Martin Day had a psychotic episode before our eyes on last nights thread?
O/T Yokel, and other followers of the nags…
There’s an interesting runner in the 2.40 at Musselburgh - Malaprop. It would definitely be a value ew bet at 7/1 or better BUT there are only 12 runners declared so the place percentage drops if one is taken out.
I have had £25ew and will double it if all 12 go to post. Managed to get 8/1 with VC, but for all I know it’s as likely as not to drift.
Have a look and see what you think.
125: It isn’t? Look at the number of olympic medallists/world champs who’ve later been found to be cheats. From Ben Johnson and FloJo in