Make money on Darling not surviving 2008
February 18th, 2008
It’s 5/2 that Darling will be out this year
William Hill have put up a market, which is online, that “Alastair Darling Will Be Out Of Office By The End Of The Year? (2008)”. I’ve checked with the firm and “out of office” means no longer being chancellor.
Given the poor poll ratings that he’s getting and the growing problems he’s facing this seems like a pretty good bet. The handling of Northern Rock will be a major Tory and Lib Dem issue for weeks to come and there is always the possibility of more bad news. Also Ed Balls is waiting in the wings and he does not give the impression of being a very patient person.
All of this is in a context of a developing media narrative which does not look good for the government.
We know that Brown will be loyal to the last but if the pressure mounts then, surely, there’s a good chance that Darling will be moved or sacked completely.
The timing of the bet is good. To win a change can happen at any time between now and the end of the year.
Get your money on - this is good value.
MessageSpace Advertising
Darling’s played this absolutely right.
….sorry, you’re going to have to explain that one.
Darling has demonstrated great strength in resisting the posturing and panicking of his political opponents.
1,3 - Oh dear.
Cameron has called for Darling to be sacked!
2. It was right to intervene to stop NR going under. It was right to look for a private buy-out. It was right not to be panicked into selling early and, instead, to take temporary ownership and wait for a better selling opportunity.
This is the way any responsible chancellor would behave faced with the same circumstances.
So are you backing him to stay as Chancellor into 2009 then, Gabble?
Gabble is gabbling again!!
Darling won’t have to wait until the year end,mid year he’ll be gone.
N Rock,Non Doms,CGT & IHT all in 6 months,accident prone or just plain incompetent,either way he’s a total liability,excellent odds grab them while you can.
7. He will definitely be chancellor going into the next GE (and beyond!).
3 - on the one hand, Gabble, thank you, it’s been a trying day so far and I needed a good laugh.
On the other, could you warn us before you go into full-scale parody mode? I just spent the last few minutes wiping coffee off my screen.
I’ll have whatever Gabble is on.
5. “Cameron has called for Darling to be sacked!”
This is a massive mistake by Cameron. There is not the slightest possibility of Gordon Brown sacking Alistair Darling.
13. Or genius - perhaps Cameron wants Darling to stay being a liability and tainted. By daring GB to sack him he’s hoping he won’t.
13 Cameron knows that - he is guaranteeing that Brown will stubbornly keep the duffer in post, to the Tories’ ultimate electoral gain (but the interim ruin of the country)…..
Headline “Opposition response to Northern Rock stolen from 90’s comedy sketch.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bwk38srACrA
Jimmy-Hill is Lembit Opik with a tash.
PS In the name of balance here’s one for all you Tories out there
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnxPuidq1qQ
the most depressing thought is about who would replace Darling if he were sacked.Perhaps thats why he might stay??
13 - It isn’t a mistake but I agree that Brown is not going to accede to the demand.
13 - oh dear, a massive mistake by Cameron following Osbourne’s miserable displays from yesterday. This is quickly turning into the most disastrous couple of days in the history of the Conservative Party.
I’m pleased to learn Mike thinks the 5/2 on Darling being out this year is good value. As I’m at work and unable to check, could any kind soul please tell me if this can be placed online, or must I ring them?
17. How about that charismatic intellectual titan, James Purnell?
[from previous thread - just gotta make my point, however off-topic]
OK, I’m off to watch a movie. But here are some intriguing quotes to chew over, to remind everyone just how repellent, smelly and devious are the Lib Dems.
Andrew Duff, the leader of the UK Liberal Democrats in the EP, said this week: “The Lisbon Treaty has large potential, and will have a dramatic impact in the field of common foreign and security policy.”
Weirdly enough, the Lib Dems believe a referendum is not necessary on the Treaty, because it is relatively unimportant, and just a “reforming” Treaty. Yet their leader in Europe believes the Treaty will have a “dramatic” impact on the common foreign and security policy - i.e. it’s just about as important as you can get, I’d have thought.
How can the Lib Dems be so vile and rancid? Because their leaders in Europe are traitors.
And if that sounds like hyperbole, this is what their European leader, the fatuous Mister Duff, said in 2007, re the same Lisbon Treaty:
“If the English can be defeated then the opposition in Prague will disappear”.
If the English can be defeated. IF THE ENGLISH CAN BE DEFEATED.
Andrew Duff MEP represents Eastern England in Brussels.
21 - I think ‘represents’ may be a bit strong.
Conservative press release on NR - setting out their policy.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/files/the_conservative_position_on_northern_rock.pdf
13. I agree. I’m expecting the Conservatives to go below 30% in the next round of polls as a result.
21. He does sound exceedingly unpleasant, doesn’t he?
23 Wow, they really were in trouble after all if they felt they had to rush that out.
24 - Do I detect a hint of sarcasm in the first sentence?
21. It sounds more like he represents Nuremburg-Sud, c 1941.
13/14/15 - One of the first things Cameron ever did at PMQs was attack Hilary Armstrong from the dispatch box for shouting and being rude. By picking on her, it stopped Blair from sacking her too soon afterwards(which had been rumoured, because she was not doing too well as Chief Whip).
Consequently, she stayed in role a little longer, and Blair needed Tory support to pass the Education Bill, which was a much bigger win for Cameron than HA’s scalp.
Brown cannot now sack Darling for a while without looking like he takes order from the Leader of the Opposition, meaning the narrative is either ‘crisis lingers on’ or ‘Brown dithers over Darling’s job’.
Smart move by Cameron.
25. Eh ?
Sarcasm seems to be the order of the day today.
27. Well, he clearly thinks it’s his job to represent Brussels in the East of England, rather than the reverse. To be fair, there are and have been Tory MEPs who have the same mindset.
30 - Sarcasm? On this site?
10. Gabble - “He will definitely be chancellor going into the next GE (and beyond!).”
Indeed? Well his constituents in Edinburgh South West actually have some say in that matter too! Never take the electorate for granted.
33. I’m sure he could be chancellor from the Lords
10 - He will definitely be chancellor going into the next GE (and beyond!)
I quite agree - he should just about be able to cope with the demands of the Duchy of Lancaster….
Behold the head of a traitor. Here is the disgusting but well named Mister “Duff”:
http://tinyurl.com/2qwtmc
“If the English can be defeated then the opposition in Prague will disappear”.
If the English can be defeated. IF THE ENGLISH CAN BE DEFEATED.
What a fat little newt of a man. Ugh.
36. That must be quite close to being a treasonous remark. Mind you, once the Constitution goes through, it will probably soon become treason not to say things of that sort.
The price is now down to 7/4, luckily I got a few quid on at 5/2…….
37. It’s not close, it IS treasonous. How much more treasonous can you get than wishing the “defeat” of your own people? How do hideous insects like Andrew “Duff” ever get into power?
More importantly, what it is about English political culture that produces bacteria like Andrew Duff?
Its inconceivable that any American politician, let alone one in a senior position, would ever say “If the Americans can be defeated” in a hopeful tone of voice.
Nor can I imagine a Frenchman ever optimistically saying, no matter how disgruntled he was with France, “If the French can be defeated”. The formulation would just be impossible; and as soon as they said it they would surely be driven from office.
But the grotesque Lib Dems elect this treacherous slug to high office. And, as Sean Fear points out, Duff is not the only British MEP with such views.
Sad. It’s sad. We need to fumigate our political culture, and get rid of these fungi.
17. Byers would be a good option or if he can’t be prevailed upon to take the job I’ve heard Prescott is a bit bored. His skills aet would be useful at the Treasury.
One other person who Brown might consider is Sion Simon. He might look and act like a moron at times but he apparently loyal to GB.
37. I agree with you, in a moral sense. I was thinking in a strictly legalistic one.
But Clegg should be asked support or disown this worm at once.
39. seanT
Well, I dunno. I can actually see Gordon Brown or Des Browne saying “If the Scots can be defeated”! It is a funny old place the YooKay.
‘One other person who Brown might consider is Sion Simon. He might look and act like a moron at times but he apparently loyal to GB.’
Outrageous statement Malcolm. I defy anybody to name a time when Sion Simon does not act like a moron!!
Completely O/T but anyone watching the commons statement - who’s the women behind Jacqui Smith - dont recognise her at all?
39. I’m not really sure where English self-hatred has come from.
Malcolm, I’m sure the word you meant to use was “and” rather than “but”.
42. No, actually, I can’t see Des Browne or Gordon Brown saying “if the Scots can be defeated”, especially with regard to some serious constitutional issue. Everybody hates a traitor. So if they said it everyone would be repelled - even non Scots. It would be a calamitous error.
In fact I can’t imagine a single Scottish politician saying such a thing. Nor a Welshman, nor an Irishman.
The traitor Duff is a uniquely English phenomenon. And he is the leader of the Lib Dems in the European Parliament. What a pus-filled slimeball of a man; and what an apology for a party he leads.
OK now I’m gonna watch my film.
46,
left wing guilt over our imperial/martial past.
44. I’ve just rewound on Sky Plus and can’t see JS there at all!
Cooper, Harman and Eagle are there……..
49. Airbrushed out already!
From other thread.
The Conservatives have been supremely succesful when they haven’t been conservative. Maggie was anything but a conservative - taking a giant machete to many a sacred institution. A succession of grammar school educated leaders spoke of a party that believed it was possible for all to succeed regardless of their background. I merely highlight, without approval, that the Tories have now got to watch their step like nobody’s business and I’m afraid Osborne on Northern Rock does not inspire my confidence that they actually have a clue on this.
How anyone can think the European Union is democratic is beyond me.
Labour are clearly in a hole over this one - but please, can someone tell Osbourne to vary his attack lines. Pretty much every media outlet quotes his, “dither and delay” attack line over and over again with little else - I saw him head to head with Vince Cable on Sky yesterday and it was only when Adam Boulton threw him a rope that he realised he had to show more depth and substance in his criticisms. Attacking Labour should be an open goal at the moment but Osbourne is p*****g his chance away repeating the same tired lines. He sounds like a broken record. The conversations I’ve had with people over this run along the lines of, “But what would you do?” in response to his attacks.
Even The Sun are giving Brown the benefit of the doubt over this so to your average person in the street, the Tory response could backfire.
In spite of all Labour had been through over the last few months their core support remains around the 31-34% with the conservatives shedding a little to the Lib Dems on 37-40%. The Tories are starting to sound shrill and I can only see the polling figures remain at their current levels.
(And this from a Labour supporter who wants to see a credible opposition hold them to account, not merely oppose with grandstanding blather and bluster. Labour have f****d up recently and need to change but unless the opposition truly offer something to gel with the mood of the electorate then we’ll have the same status quo. People want change but are increasingly being turned off.)
Err… I meant Harman (front row) - so presumably Eagle in that case.
47 - Traitor he may well be but on the upside he’s given you something to get wound up by and sound off on pbc about so you cant think he’s all bad.
47. seanT
I meant in private. God no!! - they would never, ever say such a thing in public!! they would get absolutely slaughtered at the next election.
We Scots may love to have a good cultural cringe in private, but puffing out the old chest is de rigeur in public.
51.I’m afraid Brown and Darling on Northern Rock does not inspire my confidence that they actually have a clue on this.
Having just watched Darlings statement on this subject in the Commons, I am even more convinced that their emergency bill to nationalise this bank has more holes in it than a sieve, it will in due course unravel and end up causing even more damage to the governments financial credibility.
‘The conversations I’ve had with people over this run along the lines of, “But what would you do?” in response to his attacks’
Yeah, right sure they do. Mr. Ordinary just happens to be parroting the same lines as Labour spinners.
55 - I was saying something similar the other day about necrotising fasciitis. Okay, so on the con side, it eats the flesh off your bones. But on the plus side, it gives the doctors something interesting to look at. Can’t be all bad, eh?
53 Well, we’ll see. We’ve had two polls putting Labour 9% behind the Conservatives, and I wouldn’t bet on them getting better for Labour.
is there any political significance in the release of this early draft of the dodgy dossier - or is this now only for the history books
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7250712.stm
53. Totally disagree. No one other than Labour and LabDemer activists are interested in what the Tories would have done. They are vaguely aware that this is is a monumental cock up by Brown and Darlingn being reminded of how all Labour governments end when the money runs out and they are probably picking up the fact that Cable and co are supporting the government in that cock up.
I saw the same Sky news double header with Cable and thought Osbourne was very strong and clear in his alternative. Why the lefties keep spinning otherwise is obvious but tiresome.
This is very bad for Labour and bad for the yellow bellies by association.
Re 36. Andrew Duff is a friend of mine.
63. And how do you feel about his remarks, Mike?
60 Surely Sean F the point of this site is that you hope others do bet so you can take their money? Don’t put gabble of laying his cash behind his pronouncements.
63. So ban me. It’s your site Mike. I don’t care.
But anyone who can say he wants his own people to be “defeated” is, by my definition, a traitor. I can’t see any other way around it. And I do not withdraw a word. Some things are more important than a blog.
Before I am banned here is something else to chew over. The Lib Dem position on the EU Treaty is that it doesn’t merit a referendum because it is fundamentally different from the Constitution (on which they did promise a referendum).
Yet Andrew Duff MEP has just authored an official European Parliament report on the Treaty. Here’s what he says:
“The European Parliament committee notes that, despite structural differences, the Treaty of Lisbon is very similar in substance
to the constitutional treaty of 2004, and that, especially with respect to the international relations of the Union, the new Treaty constitutes a very great improvement on the arrangements currently in force.”
So which is it, Mike? Either your party is lying to the British people, or it is lying to the European parliament. You simply can’t have it both ways, not any more.
Enough of this repulsive charade. Your party is a disgrace and Duff is a quisling.
Sawadee KAP.
62 Its interesting how we see different things. I guess that’s the beauty of opinion - but to say Osbourne was strong is stretching the truth to the point of self-delusion.
58 The conversation in question was with two parents (65+), an older sister and brother-in-law (both early 40s) who all vote conservative. (I’m the black sheep in the family.)
There is a real view outside of this board that the conservatives just aren’t instilling the confidence required to be seen as a viable government in waiting. All the sound-offs here simply fail to see this.
Everyone who I’ve talked to about it (all either not that interested in politics or not affiliated with any party) just bash the government, and don’t mention the tories. They see this as bad for the government, dunno how representitive that is.
60 I didn’t say they’d get any better - read the post. I simply offered the view that they won’t change from their current levels.
I doubt Gabble puts money where is mouth is.
It’s moved from 5/2 to 7/4, but I’ve still bet. There’s an ambiguity on the William Hill betting slip:
“Will Alastaire Darling Lose His Position ( Will He Be Chancellor On 01.01.09) YES @ 7/4″
I phoned to clarify and the part in brackets should read “he will [not] be chancellor”.
68. Oh please, spare us this nonsense - ‘I talked to this bloke down the pub, and he said [insert whatever spin line you want]…’
Let’s wait for some proper polling evidence rather than trading these meaningless anecdotes.
68. totally agree with you. That’s the sense I have too.
We are a long long way from the sort of atmosphere which prevailed from 1992-7 and I still therefore think Labour represent good odds at this stage.
The key thing as ever will be the economy. If enough people think that interest rates are good, inflation low and employment good then Labour will close the gap on the Tories come the actual vote, and may very well pass them. This is where pb sentiment should be reigned in, except that I’ve made some money thanks to people on here recently … lol.
Today’s Daily Express headline is probably of more significance …
72 I had a “free £10 bet” email from Will Hill as I hadn’t used them for a while - Managed to get a tenner on Darling going as I don’t think he’ll be around by the next GE - but could only get the free bet tomorrow so missed the better odds. Who knows, maybe I’ll put the money on Cable being Chancellor in a Lib/Conservative pact.
re 66. I think the Lib Dems ought to honour their manifesto commitment on the referendum.
I also think that if it did ever come to such an election then the anti-EU factions would lose.
Ed Balls will be Chacellor by the summer, IMO.
Re. 39, 45, English (and British) self-hatred has been evident among some sections of the centre-left for quite some time. George Orwell complained many years ago that English left-wing intellectuals were unique in their hatred for their own country, and would rather be seen stealing from a churchbox rather than stand during the national anthem. And Orwell was writing before all the nonsense about the union flag (or the cross of St George) being deemed ‘racist’, or Britishness being tantamount to racist.
Friend of mine with money in NR said he felt more confident now the government had nationalised it…
Anecdotal evidence, sorry.
From Darling to Balls? All I can say is, out of the frying pan, into the fire.
76. But are the ‘anti-EU’ factions the same people as ‘the English’, as Mr.Duff seems to be suggesting?
73 Fundamentally this is a betting site and when lifelong conservative voters tell me they aren’t convinced, that affects my view as to where to place a little money in the short term - nothing more than that.
78. I’d rather like a resurgence in british pride on the left, we led the way in democratic socialism. We can be proud of that even if we feel a bit queasy about the empire.
If I were Balls I wouldn’t touch the job with a bargepoll until the second half of next year. Let Darling take the flak now, end his career, then ride to the rescue/position himself as leader after a defeat in ‘10.
82. If you are going to put money on the half-formed views of a handful of people, then you really have lost the plot.
83. Perhaps it could be called “National Socialism” ?
76 - That’s an honourable position, Mike. Would that your party had your integrity.
79. To an extent, with all due caution, anecdotalism isn’t bad. There is still a place for the ‘feeling on the streets’. Indeed as someone who has previously canvassed for the Tories I know it can be a vital guide - it’s not difficult with some political nous to pick up on moods, especially if there is a strong movement.
Of course, the counter to this is when you get mischief-makers on here and elsewhere who are sometimes protecting their betting interests.
So, to be anecdotal I don’t yet sense the sea-change I would expect for a serious Tory prospect at the next GE. At the moment I’d say we’re heading for a hung parliament.
74 1992-1997 isn’t that reliable as a guide. No Conservative is expecting a result along the lines of 419:165 in their favour at the next election.
Surely the prospect of Ed Balls as Chancellor is one very good reason why Darling is safe for now. Balls must be the worst communicator in the Cabinet.
88 My view is that we’re heading for something like Con 320, Lab. 240, Lib Dem 50 at the next election.
76. Evidently your confidence in “winning” an EU referendum is not shared by anyone in the government. Otherwise they would call a vote tomorrow.
80. Oh agree. The Era of the Balls fills me with dread, but knowing Brown, thats undoubtedly what he has in mind. I’ve thought for years that Balls is being lined up first as Chancellor, and then ultimately, when Brown stands down, as PM.
Alistair Darling is almost certainly just a “stop gap” Chancellor, and I don’t believe Brown ever had any intention of actually going into the general election with him as his number two. Hes just put him in there, while Ed Balls spends a bit of token time in another job, but as sure as night follows day, Balls is heading for the Treasury and it’ll probably happen sooner rather than later.
What a wicked web we weave….
Richard 74 - I agree “We are a long long way from the sort of atmosphere which prevailed from 1992-7″.
But then Labour went on to win by a massive landslide taking well over 400 seats. I don’t think anybody is suggesting that the Tories are capable of that. Most likely is a Tory seat total in the 300 - 330 seat range - so just below or just above an overall majority. So I would suggest that you can take little comfort from current conditions.
Labour’s problem, as we have seen in the named leader question from February 206 to May 2007 and in polling from October 2007 onwards is Gordon Brown. Quite simply he is an election loser. He was not even tested when it came to him getting into parliament in the first place and, of course, was given a free ride by the PLP.
I think that Labour would retain a majority if John Denham was leader. He’s an impressive communicator and, of course, resigned his last ministerial post in protest against the Iraq war.
89. Sean I think we have to remember that there is still a huge way for the Tories to go to achieve an outright majority. The swing in the 1997 landslide was 10.3%. I believe I’m right in saying that at the next GE for an outright victory the Tories need to achieve a swing of around 7.5% (assuming the LibDems stay the same). That remains a huge ask. I just cannot see it at the moment. Neither Labour’s economic performance, nor the mood in the country, resonates with that sort of change … yet.
I just read the Tory position paper Harry Flashman posted. Can anyone explain it to me?
It’s not that I think anyone cares what the Tories are saying on this, it’s just that i read the whole thing and it doesn’t appear to make any sense.
So they’d introduce new legislation to allow the BoE to be appointed as administrator of the bank. The Bank of England would run the bank with the purpose of paying back of all creditors (Para 1b “to manage the bank to pay back creditors, including the taxpayer”)- somehow doing this without selling assets “No fire sale of assets”.
Except that this isn’t the objective- the first objective is in Para 1i “the first purpose of administration is to rescue the company as a going concern…” Which presumably would come before repaying creditors, if repaying all creditors would effectively wind up company.
The doc says interests of Shareholders would be suspended- and they’d be able to go to court if the felt that they’d been hard done by (para 1c - “shareholders and creditors would be able to appeal to the courts if they believed they had suffered unfair harm.”) except that they couldn’t (para 2v “shareholders would not be able to take the government to court”)
If the BoE isn’t going to realise the assets but run the bank for a profit, and the Shareholders won’t have a say or be compensated at all, isn’t that more confiscation than nationalisation?
If the bank is going to realise the assets to pay off creditors, and shareholders can sue, isn’t that just what we normally mean by putting a caompany into administration?
The two proposals eem to be contradictory.
Again, I stress, I don’t think anyone cares much what the tories would do, but this does seem pretty shallow.
79.Thanks to the incompetence of this government we have all now got money in Northern Rock!
85 You don’t know me, nor I you - its only the defensive way you respond that makes me question what you say.
88 My feelings exactly.
ok OT but what do people think about the New York Times / CBS Superdelegate poll?
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/superdelegate-poll-unsettled-ground/
95 Partly it depends on the Lib Dem performance. But assuming Uniform National Swing, the Conservatives need a swing of about 5.5% to get an overall majority. It could be a bit less than that, or a bit more, but that’s only half the swing Labour got in 1997.
It’s comparable to the swings the Conservatives got in 1970 and 1979.
92 - I agree with Mr Smithson’s assessment on both fronts. As I have noted before, calling a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty would be smart politics by Gordon Brown, since it would greatly bolster his claims to courage and would wrongfoot the Tories. The Tories would need precisely to spell out what their policy towards the EU is (at present it seems to consist of “we don’t like its general direction”). Given the choice between a coherent if unpalatable policy and no coherent policy at all, my strong hunch is that the public, even in its present surly mood, would back the coherent policy.
It’s not exactly as if Gordon Brown would be risking his Government losing its strong sense of direction by calling a referendum, and it would be better to be seen to be going down fighting than for the Government to disappear slowly as the waters close over it. Even John Major tried to galvanise his party by precipitating a leadership election.
For those still interested in the terrible crisis in our nation’s curry industry, the bleeding hearts at the Indy are on the case:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/news/the-big-heat-crisis-in-the-uk-curry-industry-782022.html
Compare and Contrast
Hashin Thaci: “Kosovo is independent”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7240000/newsid_7249500/7249544.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&asb=1&news=1&bbcws=1
Enver Hoxha: “We are not a state of three million, but a nation of six million”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alDazjHfi3Y
Perhaps there should be a Kosovo thread
Independence recognised by Serbia: 10/1
Independence validated by referendum: 3/1
Civil war and/or ethnic cleansing escalates between Albanians and Serbs: 6/1
Serbia invades: 20/1
Albania invades: 100/1
Juche-based uprising to build a non-sectarian inclusive equal people’s democracy, free from EU/NATO occupation: 1/2
Kosovo wins the Eurovision Sonk Ontest: 1/100
98. I don’t have to know you personally to understand that betting on the views of a handful of people, who may be entirely unrepresentative, makes no sense.
88. Is “on the streets” different from “on the doorstep”?
96. Shareholders are creditors but are at the back of the queue.
The BoE would not run the Bank for a profit - it would restructure to pay back the creditors in a timely manner - ie sell off bits, pull back on new business and allow a zombie style run off of the mortgages.
100. UNS implies the following swings, dependent on LD performance
16% 6.2%
17% 6.4%
18% 6.6%
19% 6.8%
20% 7.0%
21% 7.2%
22% 7.4%
23% 7.6%
based on proabilistic forecasts, and modest LibDem incumbency effects…
101. No offence, but bollox.
The French and the Dutch had votes on the Constitution. Both countries are meant to be europhile, both are founding members of the EU. And both countries had the entire media establishment urging a Yes.
Yet we got two No votes. By big majorities.
Europhiles constantly overestimate the popularity of “the project”, hence their gobsmacked surprise when they keep losing referenda - in Sweden, France, Ireland etc.
If there was a vote in Britain on the Constitution the eurosceptics - supported by the most popular party in the country - the Tories, and by the bulk of the media - would win handsomely.
Indeed I actually wonder if the Lib Dems would even win their in-or-out referendum. What is certain is this: the powers-that-be are sh1t-scared of going to the people, because they share my analysis of popular sentiment. The Lib Dems would never call their in-or-out vote for this reason, which is why they are so despicable.
Brown is likewise too frit to call a referendum. And on this one issue, he is tactically correct.
96, 106 - if I understand Tory policy correctly, the mot juste is not “administration” but “run-off”.
The govt should pay the NR shareholders exactly what a receiver would, and which is also their precise worth. Is the govt incompetent enough to offer them any tax-payer’s money?
Sadly, yes.
Just to flag up a growing controversy between Clinton and Obama being reported on Drudge.
The Clinton campaign is accusing Obama of plagiarising the speeches of Deval Patrick, the Black Governor of Massachusetts.
Obama’s camp is saying that they share ideas and language, and that the Clinton campaign is clutching at straws.
My view leans towards the Obama view, but this is something that may affect the race.
108 - so what is your policy on the EU? What type of constitution would you like? And how do you propose to persuade 26 other countries to agree to it?
110. The benefit of a timely run off would mean that there is quick resolution to what the business is worth and can be returned to shareholders - in this case not a lot.
No coincidence that Northern Rock takes centre stage just as Al Fayed starts mouthing off in a way that makes David Icke look sane is there?
53 - Most people, apart from wonks, hear/see one piece of news, if someone like Osborne or Darling is repeating the same phrase it’s to make sure that the chosen message gets through. People who follow politics in minute detail forget that.
112. How about:
(1) Scrapping the agricultural subsidies that overcharge consumers and damage third world development.
(2) Reforming the fisheries policy to actually reward those that managed their fish stocks.
(3) Make the Commission and the Council directly elected.
(4) Change the electoral system of the parliament so its not the terribly elitish Party List sytem.
(5) Give every national parliament the right to opt out of policy areas.
(6) Add the principle that no sovereignty will be transferred to the EU without the explicit agreement of the people in each nation.
106/9 - But running off would mean not “to rescue
the company as a going concern” would it? It’s rather to repay creditors but over a slightly longer period of time.
Presumably the shareholders would be told they’d get what was left over after the creditors had been repaid from the sale of assets/run off viz- “shareholders would have a claim on any remaining value once the interests of taxpayers and other creditors had been protected”
So is the purpose of the administration to rescue the company or to run it off? If it’s to run it off, presumably the shareholderd could sue if they felt they didn’t get value from the process?
And the market on Darling has just gone offline after dropping to 7-4. Did PBers scare WillHills again or is it just for the evening?
And the market on Darling has just gone offline after dropping to 7-4. Did PBers scare WillHills again or did they just take it off overnight?
107 Using Wells, I get a Conservative overall majority of anything from 18-60, with a uniform swing of 7.6%, the former with the Lib Dems on 23%, the latter with them on 18%. I’ll check out the Rallings and Thrasher figures, but I doubt they’d be markedly different.
112. As for getting the other countries to agree, why not simply refuse to agree to anything else. Thatcher got them to give us unanimous backing for the rebate. Compare to that, this should be a doddle.
111 - Does anyone believe that politicians write their own speeches anymore? Even the least medis savvy person knows that I would have thought.
112 We don’t want a Constitution - glad you agree there is one - and don’t see why there is a need for anything in particular. The EU didn’t shudder to a halt unable to implement what was agreed in previous treaties for absence of a Constitution or a Reform Treaty. Why is it needed? Why do we need a Foreign Minister or a President? Why do the Pillars need replacing?
we don’t need to agree anything with the other 26: we say no, status quo.
If its as unimportant as all those denying a referendum say, then don’t bother with it.
107. Although a more achievable figure for the Conservative could be the point at which, in a Hung Parliament, they are ahead AND Labour and Libdems combined could not achieve an overall majority. There would almost certainly be a Tory minority administration in those circumstances. The swings required for this, depending on LibDem peformance are…
16% 4.3%
17% 4.4%
18% 4.6%
19% 4.7%
20% 4.9%
21% 5.1%
22% 5.2%
23% 5.4%
116. I don’t want to argue over semantics but a “going concern” could mean splitting into parts and selling to other banks. That is different from keeping the current NR trading at the size and in the name it is now.
47/43 Obama/Clinton tracker poll for today - Clinton losing one point. McCain has increased the margin by five points over the last couple of days - McCain 52, Huckabee 27.
The only change in presidential matchups is that Obama has increased his lead by a point, everything else is as you were.
120 - sounds like a quick route to the exit. If that’s what you want, argue for it upfront. If it’s not, what do you do if the rest of the EU faces Britain down?
113- but it’s not timely according to the policy is it? they specifically say no quick sale of assets. How would a run off work in this case?
124. Fair enough. The question (under admin or nationalisation or anything) then would be whether now is the time to be selling the various parts of the banks business. I mean, isn’t that the same as a fire sale of assets - if you do it quickly?
If you don’t do it quickly- isn’t it the same as temporary public ownership?
120. Yup. Just veto the Treaty. Then ask for what we want. If they kick us out, f*** it. How hard is that?
They won’t kick us out anyway. They would need unanimous backing. Wouldn’t happen. They also want our money.
So what do we negotiate? Britain needs a semi-detached status; everyone knows it. Let’s just do it. Cut out the middleman. Much of the rest of Europe wants real Federalism; we don’t. In the end these differences are irreconcilable and the cracks cannot be papered over for ever. So let’s just get to the endpoint: a special status for Britain outwith all the federalist crap.
Then the euronations can advance to their glorious future and we will be happy. Hooray! And Andrew Duff, Lib Dem MEP, can go and live in Liege for good, where he would be happier, rather than living amongst the English who he so obviously hates, and wants to see “defeated”.
Survey USA have been the most accurate large scale pollster so far.
Wisconsin
McCain 49
Clinton 42
Obama 52
McCain 42
This is the message that Obama should be playing again and again.
127. If you specifically set rates not to attract new business then the size of the book will decrease with time.
This will be due to people completing their mortgages, people moving house and not renewing with NR and people coming to the end of periods of special rates who will get a better rate elsewhere.
Additionally you could sell off chunks of mortgage book - eg “buy to let” or whatever if you can.
Google “zombie funds” - they work in the same way.
78
I would have no problem standing for the National Anthem, if it was a real National Anthem, but ‘God Save the Queen’ isn’t. After all they don’t sing the second verse do they!
When I was serving, ‘Queen and Country’ we used to try and sneak out of the camp cinema, before the National Anthem was played. The SWO got wise to this and put the duty NCO at the door to catch us. So we used to slip out of the emergency fire door and so on.
Ah! the joys of service life.
JC. The only relevance your allegedly Conservative voting family may have to your betting would be if they said that their concerns over the Tories response meant they would now switch their allegiance to Labour.Otherwise its floaters you need to be canvassing not confirmed Tory voters.
126 So your argument is we must go with the group because otherwise there might be shouting? They cannot implement changes to EU governance without (currently) unanimous agreement. That’s the rules of the club. The European Commission and other parts of the Eurocracy which have implemented changes in advance might have to re-wind, but if the UK says no is it The End of The EU? No. Does it means Britain’s ejection? No. Will it change things for the worse? No.
Lib Dems claim Europe should do less not more. Reject the Treaty and there’s a chance they might be able to get that objective partially fulfilled.
Cameron policy is piss in the wind and hope no one notices that he is all PR, and has a crap record on helping companies, with advice.
I heard he wasnt well respected in his On Digital days.
FTSE is up at 2.75%
When NR nationalisation was announced, i thought it would be judged as much on the market response as the poll response. The market response has been quite positive. In the short term at least. It could all come crashing down tomorrow.
I still reckon the poll response will be negative (for labour).
129 - they would kick us out, they wouldn’t in practice need unanimous backing (Germany and France united with a claque of supporting nations would in practice be able to force the issue) and they would probably be able to negotiate for more money from Britain, not less, if we wanted access to the common market.
There is much about the EU that I don’t care for. There is even more about the unrealistic posturing of Eurosceptics that I find alienating. If you were to go to the British electorate with a more-or-less explicit platform of seeking years of wrangling with the EU, my guess is that the British public would run a million miles from a No vote.
126. Continue with the present situation. Either the rest of the EU can accept that, or if they want to press ahead to a federal state than give us semi-detached status. There’s no mechanism to kick us out. It seems to me that the Left in this country is very bad at negotiating deals, whether it be with the EU or the Yanks.
135. The detailled pdf would seem to give little factual basis to your post.
134 - my argument is that we need to pick fights we can win, with clear objectives in mind. I regard my approach as being consistent with official British Government policy for at least the last 29 years (with the possible exception of 1992-97).
My complaint about most Eurosceptics is that they have a nihilistic rejection of anything that could be called a compromise. I have some respect for those that believe we would be Better Off Out, though I don’t agree. I have no respect at all for those who argue for reform of the EU in a manner that is utterly unattainable.
132 - What’s wrong with the second verse?
137 So the EU is a teenage gang with Germany & France being the Cool Ones, if poor little Miss Brittannia doesn’t put out then she’ll be kicked out and made to sit with the retards, out of favour and mocked. Sorry, in the words of Mrs Reagan, Just Say No!
140 - the problem is we’ve got to the point where our ‘clear objectives’ are antithetical. The UK (or at least the sceptics) wishes to retain an accountable, democratic form of self government; the EU administration wishes to centralise power in a largely unaccountable bureaucracy. One can only compromise where there is something one can agree on, that benefits both parties, the costs of which are acceptable in relation to said benefits. I don’t see that, right now. So constitutional deadlock is probably preferable.
140 Neither France nor the Netherlands were kicked out when they voted No. Nor did the EU collapse because the Treaty wasn’t passed.
However, if it’s your view that they would break their own rules to kick us out if we didn’t ratify the Treaty, and subsequently carry out on economic embargo against us, then really, I think that’s one club we ought not to be part of.
140. Antifrank the problem is many of the ‘compromises’ and fights you think we have won many others think of as defeats and appeasement. Its all a case of perception.
The fact is as a sovereign nation we should not have to compromise on many of the matters that have become subject to the EU’s control and it is our politicians who have repeatedly allowed that situation to occur without consulting the people directly.
137. No they wouldn’t. Most of the former Eastern bloc is a champion for Britain to counteract what they fear (correctly) as a Franco-German stitch up.
I have no problem with compromise in areas of policy, as long as it is somewhere in the middle of two authentic views. However, I do have a problem with compromising with corruption and oligarchy, and on those issues there should be no compromise, whether its the refusal to bring in double-entry accounting, EU officials not having to document expenses, the refusal to democratise the instution, or huge subsidies to various projects which cause more harm than good and are only there to buy support for the whole project.
I wen ton holiday recently in Europe, i found my EHIC very useful, as i also found my freedom of movement within the EU. When I was abroad i was a bit uncertain about some of the food, but then i remembered that health and safety is enforced EU wide so i felt a bit more confident. The EU contributed to a successful trip.
It makes life a little better, i don’t find it oppressive or that it has a major impact on my life. It’s alright, it’s not great, it’s not bad. I’d like to stay in, but i’d like it to be a bit more open and transparent, a bit more democratic. I want it to change, but i feel eurosceptics aren’t willing to change it because they start foaming at the mouth when they hear the name of the EU and refuse to engage with it, neither do i feel as if europhiles will change it because they are forced to accept everything about it blindly in order to resist eurosceptics. The terms europhile and eurosceptic are odd, it’s like being called a westminsterphile or westministersceptic, i’m a europhile but i’m not in favour of everything to do with the EU, just some of it. The consti-treaty will make no difference to anything material.
129. Just total rubbish. And cowardly rubbish at that. They didn’t kick the French out. Or the Dutch. They couldn’t kick us out. Moreover you ignore the fact that the EU is more than France or Germany - its dozens of countries. They would all need to unite in hating us, hardly likely. Each country would be scared it might one day happen to them.
Tish tish.
No, a semidetached status would be negotiated. It’s coming anyway, under the Tories. We’re already outwith the euro, and we’re not in Schengen, we just need to get out of all the other crap. We can agree to pony up for the single market; in return they have to give us our freedom. We pay hand over fist anyway - it couldn’t get any worse.
Tell you what, just give us a vote on the Constitution. Like you promised, and we’ll let the people decide, eh?
There’s a good boy. It’s called democracy.
134. Yes this europhile idea that we have to agree with what the others say is either spineless or mendacious. Maybe both.
Federasts often like to compare the EU with a golfclub. Well if I was a member of a golf club and they kept changing the rules, quite painfully, I would start to think twice about membership.
For instance if the golfclub said, you have to let all other members sleep with your wife, otherwise you can’t tee off before noon, I might suspend my subscription. No matter what ruckus it caused in the clubhouse.
And if the club then said you have to slice off your testicles, or you are banned from the greens, I might start to wonder if I was that keen on golf in the first place.
The europhile notion is that Europe is “inevitable” and must keep going forward like a bicycle - or it will fall over. I think I have finally realised why this is: because they are scared that if it stops people will look up and say, er, why do we have to do this? What’s the point?
This moment of lucidity will eventually arrive. Britain needs to be in a free trade and defence arrangement uniting Europe with North America. We already have NATO, so all we need is the free trade.
Et voila.
139. You’ve been polite and courteous to me- so don’t take this the wrong way, but describing a 3 page pdf that is internally self contradictory as detailed is nonsensical…
AFAICT and from what you’ve said, what the Tories are proposing is a sort of zombie nationalisation - unless you squint, at which point it’s putting it into administration and selling off the assets PDQ. Either way, doesn’t make much sense because the two are totally diferent objectives.
141
If you google you’ll probably find it, if your a Scot you won’t like it! Don’t forget when it was written
It is not a National Anthem, its about God saving the Monarch, so if like myself you are an atheist and a republican, its not going to mean anything to you. I love my country, (but not all its institutions) I want an anthem about my country! Not that bloody awful dirge!
I could forget I’m an atheist for, ‘Jerusalem’ you’d have to have a heart of stone not to feel a shiver up the spine when that is sung.
The Welsh and the Scots have their own anthems of course.
147. I was in Norway recently- not in the EU. I was really scared that if I got plague I would be hurled into a deathpit, it really made me want to be in Bratislava, where things are so much better thanks to corrupt civil servants with legal immunity based in Luxembourg.
And when I went to a small suburb outside Oslo, the horror! Agh! Practically everyone was dead from scrofula, the water was mainly pus, and the few people left alive in this non-EU hellhole were begging to be saved from their elected politicians so things could be run by an unelected politburo in Brussels.
God bless Peter Mandelson.
It is just amazing how mention of the EU brings out a wild glint in the eyes of some posters. I’m not some wild Europhile, and there is much about the EU that I deplore.
Whether or not the EU could formally kick the UK out, it could make life very difficult for Britain. There is already majority voting in many areas of the EU’s competencies, and the past experience of the fag-end of the Major Government shows that the EU will not hesitate to use and abuse that ability against a nihilistic Government. Remember, the 48 hour maximum working week was brought in under health and safety laws then.
For example, it could choose to regulate intensively in, say, financial services, in such a way that made Britain’s position in the EU difficult to maintain if the City were to retain its current position. It could strengthen rules on the funding of defined benefits pension schemes - a policy that would in practice affect only the UK and Ireland (and possibly the Netherlands). It could alter rules on droit de suite so that London’s art markets had to follow the practices in continental Europe, ceding still further our role in those markets to New York. And so on.
Would it do so? It might, if Britain would neither co-operate in going in a direction that the other 26 countries broadly supported nor get out of the way of the other 26 countries.
I am sure that the self-righteous Eurosceptics would regard such conduct as outrageous, and maybe it would be. But when deciding on a course of action, we must assess not only what we would like but what risks we run and what we can achieve.
150, I’m an atheist, and the god references don’t bother me at all.
If you’re referring to rebellious Scots, it’s fine. If you’re not rebellious then it doesn’t refer to you. If you are rebellious you deserve to be crushed.
141
Tis here, sorry its the last verse, I think you’ll agree the whole thing is pretty unpleasant: PC it ‘aint.
http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/anthem.html#full
147. It’s this naivety which I find so problematic. A “bit more democratic”, a bit? It’s hardly democratic at all. Even the one small part of it that is elected is chosen through an easily manipulated party list system. And there just isn’t any sense of the people’s concerns - they want a federal superstate and are completely willing to ignore the public if they ever have a problem with that. If you want to break up this oligarchy then let’s do it before we hand over power. The idea that we ask nicely for some democracy once they already have the power they crave is unbelievably foolish, especially when they show such utter disdain for democracy.
And I’m not a rabid foaming at the mouth Europhobe. I like Europe. Spain and Hungary are two of my favourite places. I think we need to adopt more of an easy-going Scandinavian mentality on life. We could learn a lot from the French healthcare system. Germany is a great model that can be strong and proud in the world, while also willing to be full and frank about its past wrongs. I think we should co-operate with our European allies (and indeed with all modern democracies) in order to encourage development globally and strengthen democracy amongst our neighbours. I just there are huge structural problems with the whole instutition, and those will come back to haunt us in time. We should not sleepwalk into oligarchy.
Real reform must come first, before we hand over any more power.
151. I take your point, i didn’t think my post was very melodramatic. I just said that the EU made life slightly better. Which it does.
150 - I am Welsh, and we have a glut of wonderful patriotic songs to sing at rugby games etc, but even I well-up at ‘Jerusalem’. The original music by Parry is actually quite bland - it’s Elgar’s orchestration that really makes it what it is. Apparently the Blake poem is meant to be ironic, though…
Elgar’s ‘Land of Hope and Glory’ also has its merits (the time I feel most British