Does the ICM data suggest backing Boris again?
April 4th, 2008
Would he have had a bigger lead with a different turnout approach?
With the publication of two polls showing very different pictures of the UK’s biggest political betting event for years there’s going to be even more scrutiny of how the figures are produced. There are matters in relation to the YouGov approach that I have written to Peter Kellner about that I hope to discuss in the next few days
In the meantime we now have the detailed data from ICM which on Wednesday night reported top-line figures of a Johnson margin of just one per cent.
As I discussed at the time the survey caused me to close down a large part of my betting position on the Tory. Now, after looking at the detail from ICM, I am back backing Boris again.
The challenge for pollsters in this election is dealing with lowish turnouts. For how can pollsters be sure that those who say they will vote in a particular way actually do so? There’s not a very good history here for in the 2000 and 2004 elections turnouts were in the mid-30s which led to some skewed figures from the phone pollsters with big over-statements of Ken’s position.
Like in all ICM voting intention polls those Londoners interviewed for the Mayoral race were asked to rate on a scale of 1 to 10 how certain it is that they would vote. Reproduced above is the relevant section of data and as can be seen Boris supporters 59% rated themselves as “certain” compared with 49% for Ken. So if the poll was just restricted to just them then Boris has 43% to Ken’s 36%. Taking the 9/10s into account as well the split becomes Boris 41% to Ken’s 35%.
Some pollsters weight responses so an 8/10 answer is only worth four-fifths of the value of a 10/10. ICM don’t do this - everybody rating themselves as 7/10 or more is included and given the same value.
Now this approach might be right for general election voting intentions but will it work in a much lower turnout election like the one on May 1st? If I was a Ken backer I would be worried by the lower certainty ratings. We’ll know when the results are declared but the ICM data has given me the confidence to put four figures bets on Boris again.
Latest mayoral betting is here.
New format betting section. The betting odds search engine, Bestbetting.com, has revised our betting odds pages and added new facilities such as an historical odds feature. The firm pays a commission share which helps keep the site going. Please use these links for all your betting needs - not just politics.
MessageSpace Advertising
When the polls come out shouldn’t we get big blobs of multiple Boris at the top of the thread?
Where is this alleged New Labour blue swastika? The link in the previous thread wasn’t working properly and wouldn’t let me log on properly to see it.
Considering how much of a loser Ken has looked recently, this poll must be fairly encouraging for him. You’d have expected his numbers to fall through the floor. Personally I’d prefer him to win but I must say I’d rather lost hope. A glimmer has been restored.
1. The Labour swastika thing is one of the most laughable attempts ever to embarrass a political party. Google it if you’re that interested, and you’ll see it.
3. Google what? Where? I tried googling it. I can’t find it. What? Where? Give me a link. I googled “Labour swastika” and it sent me straight back here. I news-googled “New Labour blue swastika” and various other things and didn’t find anything useful. If someone has seen it, just show me the link! Grrrr, bah humbug…
3. Would it be so hard to provide a link? Maybe I’m just being thick, but I’ve Googled every combination of ‘New Labour’ and ’swastika’ I can think of, and haven’t found this story. Could you perhaps suggest where those of us not in the know could find out about it?
4. Heh, snap.
6. Snap? I’ll snap someone’s head off in a minute if someone doesn’t show us a bliddy frothing link… Grrrrr….
Found it (via Guido and ConservativeHome).
Original post: http://www.order-order.com/2008/04/bad-start-for-new-no-10-digital-media.html
Updates:
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/04/promoting-natio.html
http://www.order-order.com/2008/04/do-you-think-this-is-herr-brauns.html
As ConHome reports, the site has now been password-protected, and my guess is that if it is re-opened to the public the offending image will be gone, with no evidence that it ever existed. But the story’s not hugely implausible - after the screw-up that was the logo for the London 2012 Olympics, I can believe that some idiot actually thought this would be a good idea for a logo.
4,5. It’s been removed, every last trace, which takes a lot of technical know-how and effort. You won’t find it again.
Expect the Downing Street site to come back shortly with a subliminal Star of David somewhere…
Luckily Guido captured it earlier…
http://www.order-order.com/
Anyone in the PC brigade object to the three-legged swastika?
http://www.isle-of-man.ws/images/isle-of-man_governorsflag.gif
Thank god they’re autonomous..
It wouldn’t be the first time the Hakenkreuz was worn by a Brit…
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWameryJ3.JPG
http://www.bills-bunker.de/mediac/400_0/media/DIR_9816/colourposter.jpg
http://www.daswolf.co.uk/brit_fee.jpg
http://www.diggerhistory.info/images/asstd2/bfc03.jpg
A distant relative of mine… say no more..
I did say that when the innards of the poll came out they would show Boris was fine. Roll on May 1st
11 Eh?
I agree with Mike that differential turnout may be the key and his comment on pollsters dealing with lowish turnouts very relevant . Should we not therefore treat the Yougov poll results with even greater suspicion as their results are based on a turnout rate of 80% plus amongst their panel sample .
Further to Mark’s point can I ask Mike to enquire about the objection on the Sky blog that YG oversampled voters 55 plus?
O/T looks like Jimmy Carter is supporting Obama.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/04/wuspols104.xml
re 14 & 15. I have written Peter Kellner to ask for comment about the point in Adam Boulton’s blog about YouGov over-weighting the over 55s. My own researches suggest that this is the case but I need to wait another day for the YouGov response.
I have to say that I am much happier with the ICM approach subject to my comments above on differential turnout certainty. I wrote to ICM’s Nick Sparrow on Wednesday on this very point and am waiting for his response.
Ken has an unfair advantage. His children alone give him a big head start.
Rumour reaches us that the News of the World is to run an eight-page exclusive pull-out giving a blow-by-blow account of Brian Paddick’s sex life to date. The working title is “Helmets I Have Known and Loved”, although the editorial team are polishing it at the moment.
14. An 80% turnout among members of their panel would not be implausible, though it does strike me as a touch on the high side. The sort of people who sign up for YouGov will by their nature be the sort to like ‘doing’ things, and I can well imagine voting falling into that category. Given the high profile of political opinion polls as against others that the firm runs, I can also see a disproportionately large number of politically active people signing up, both because they’re interested and because they’d quite like to help their side (whether it does or not is a different matter - I suppose it depends on how truthful they are in their profile).
17 then if both approaches are weighted correctly, they give BoJo about a 6% lead? still more than enough to win comfortably.
PS I think turnout will be high in this election, at least relatively.
19.
Going back to the ICM poll, this has 2/3rds of respondents saying they are certain to vote. That won’t happen. I’m not convinced the filter filters.
If I’m a newspaper commissioning a poll, it won’t worry me. I’m buying a story, that’s all. But if I were running a contender’s campaign, I’d feel I had poor value for money. Do the private polls have an additional filter?
One noticable thing to me about the figures above is the second preference stats. Livingstone has a 16% lead at the 10/10 level, but this drops to 1% for all those in the 7/10-10/10 range. Paddick’s certainty level is even higher.
This looks like another reason to back Boris. The strength of the support for the non-Tory/Labour candidates in the second preference vote matters hugely to whoever is behind. These are essentially wasted votes, as the odds on the top two not being Boris and Ken are surely pretty long (any suggestions? 20/1?). If most who intend to use their vote in this way are fairly certain that they’ll do so, then the winning line starts to fall some way below 50% of all votes cast, so the task becomes much bigger for whoever is behind after the first ballot.
No fewer than two-thirds of Paddick’s second preferences are 10/10s, rising to almost five-sixths for the 7/10-10/10. Others have more than two-fifths at 10/10, rising to the same five-sixths for the 7/10-10/10 range.
It is true that many of these second preferences may not be counted anyway - a lot will be second preference to Boris or Ken - and but some will not and they will matter.
The press coverage of the, ‘Livingstone Revelations’ is either muted or even sympathetic, wonder if it could actually boost Ken?
The Telegraph even printing this charming picture!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/03/nlivingstone103.xml
Brings a lump to the throat!
Morning All,
1. Don’t write off Hillary yet. there is a clear pattern of Obama pulling up/ahead in the big states and then her clinching it in the end. No reason why this has to happen this time but none why it won’t either. As ultimately its an expectations game her lead narrowing for several weeks before the vote is actually helpful to her. If shes 20% ahead all the way then its less of a story.
2. Not sure I believe the MORI. the LD/COns figures look well in line with recent stuff but they seem to be adding 4 or 5 points to labour that are going “Others” in other polls. NO wonder they can’t sell it to anyone and publish it weeks late.
3. Ken. well some of the posts on previous threads diminish the site. If you are appalled by Kens sex life you hardly going to vote for Paddick or Johnstone in protest !
26
p.s.
I thought vegetables were OK?
O/T Another PA poll showing Obama/Clinton very close:
http://www.411mania.com/politics/columns/72402
Ladbrokes still offering 4/9 Obama on its 12% PA primary handicap which is looking more and more attractive.
Taking the polls we know of at face value there were two neck and neck then two weeks later one showing Boris had bounded into a 12% lead then a week later it was 10% and a week after that back to 1%. The 12% and 10% followed some pretty nasty expose’s on TV and in the press. The 1% came after the expose’s were digested and found to be unimportant. ICM’s might be the more reliable underlying reading.
To any realistic chance of Ken winning he has to start as underdog. It’s the only way he’ll motivate his own supporters and get the ’stop Boris brigade’ off their backsides.
Straw PB poll. Does anybody here think Ken will win re-election?
I’m a no.
31. Given its record you have to take yougov seriously and they are saying “No” so at time of writing so would I. However this is a new kind of race in Britain and the American examples suggest that these sort of leads can be turned round particualy as we have 26 days which is an eternity in political terms.
31
Now there’s a surpise!
I’m a perhaps, but hopes not, as I’m itching to see what Boris will do when elected, its going to be great fun.
27 Mori face to face polls do overstate Labour and understate Others compsred to telephone polls but the difference is around 2% not the 5% you mention . Comres by contrast always overstate Others thjough the reason is less clear .
31 - Can’t see it. It will probably end up being tight. Just looking at the state of the parties they represent would point at a Livingstone loss. Now Livingstone is likely to somewhat outperform Labour’s ratings. The issue is that Boris is one of the few Conservative candidates that can outperform the current Conservative position.
31 I’m a no - and by a surprisingly large margin too, I reckon. (15%+)
#9 Rod, impressive work by Downing Street covering their tracks and a little chilling. It’s as if it never existed - not an easy thing to do, as you say.
31. Ken is brilliant at playing the underdog and the anti establishment candidate. The press hostility which I understand is being redoubled this week-end with the serialization of a Livingstone biograpphy might just see him over the line. He will definately try to tap into the ‘he’s a bastard but he’s our bastard’ sentiment that Boris being so extravagently supported by the Mail group will engender.
11. Rod - are you are trying to wind everybody up by periodically implying you are some kind of closet Nazi?
39 I’d love to think it was a wind-up!
Maybe this was covered last night, but I missed it - what does Ken have against vegetable fetishers? “As long as you don’t involve children, animals or vegetables…”
38
The one thing working in Ken’s favour is, ‘Kinnock Syndrome’ everyone is going to vote for the challenger, right up to the ballot box, then, its, ‘Well I don’t know, Boris is a bit of a risk, can I really chance it: perhaps next time’
We have with the Ken Leavingsoon election a real test of the reliability of each of the pollsters. The question is what is the best way of forecasting the Ken Leavingstoned’s vote
A huge sample from the computer literate = Yougov
Polling without weighting = Mori
Polling with weighting Comres etc etc
This should be the real point of interest for pb com, not Ken Livinginsin’s bedroom habits.
41
No vegetables! Saturday night is not going to be the same: there goes the Covent Garden Vote!!
This ken kid thing won’t affect him much, but I see some supporters as being turned off. Not that many, but some. Boris and Paddick have both refused to say anything about it which is the right tactic.
For the record, I think Livingstone is going to lose, and lose badly.
38. Kiss of death to Ken! “Wodger” has backed him as a sure winner!
With Wodgers reputation for tipping on this site, they’ll be cracking open bottles of champagne in the Boris campaign office this morning!!
Back Boris fast!
reposted from the last thread as Mark obviously missed it.
Mr Senior - you’re on for a tenner on 120 tory gains in the local elections (net gains natch). Just so I can be holier than thou I’ll get you to send my winnings to charridy. I’ll email PtP tomorrow.
if you’d rather not bet mark just say so.
46 - I can’t wait to see his concession speech. I reckon that about 20 seconds in he will blame the Evening Standard or Andrew Gilligan!
48 - I’ll be amazed if the Tories make any sort of number of gains on May 1, given the areas where the elections are being held I’d expect them to paint +50 as a good night, especially if Boris wins as well
49. Yeah, it Ken lose’s no doubt he and Labour will blame it all on a right wing conspiracy from the Standard, rather than addressing the real issues, which are the awful negative campaign they have been running so far and that miserable Scottish socialist we have in Downing St, who will surely turn out to be one of the biggest vote losers in British political history!
49. Yes, a hysterical and sour rant of the highest order looks on the cards, a fine blend of Dave Spart/ColinW/Mark Senior/Tyson/Roger.
As well as Gilligan and the ES, we can perhaps expect some kind of reference to zionist groups, ‘fascists’,'racists’,'the establishment’ and many other traditional Spartist targets.
Perhaps we can have a betting market on which of these groups or characters gets mentioned first?
49. Yes, a hysterical and sour rant of the highest order looks on the cards, a fine blend of Dave Spart/ColinW/Mark Senior/Tyson/Roger..
As well as Gilligan and the ES, we can perhaps expect some kind of reference to zionist groups, ‘fascists’,'racists’,'the establishment’ and many other traditional Spartist targets.
Perhaps we can have a betting market on which of these groups or characters gets mentioned first?
50.
(a) A Boris victory will overshadow everything else
(b) I remember very similar things being said last year. Even the best of us (Sean Fear etc? Predicted only ~+550 gains) - the average prediction was around + 300.
And the Torys made over 900 gains.
53. The really interesting question is how many losses the Lib Dems will make…
48 A deal but to be fair you should note that the new shadow unitaries are new seats so cannot be counted as gains or losses for any party although it will be possible to compute theoretical notional gains for these seats .
43
I respect polls, but we shouldn’t forget, they are, ‘NOT’ predictors of the future, they are snapshots of opinion. They cannot guard against, sudden events which change opinion, (ERM etc) or and the most difficult of all, ‘cold feet.’
Extrapolation of information, is a very, ‘dodgy’ business, take for instance, gas lighting, if you were to graph the growth of gas lighting from 1850, you could say with absolute certainty that the entire country would have gas lighting by 1950, of course up pops electricity, result no one has gas lighting by 1950.
Remember the marble in the saucer game? put a marble on the edge of a saucer, and point it inwards, ask someone what will happen if you let the marble go, they reply, ‘It will roll into the saucer, jiggle about and settle down, you say, ‘Why?’. They reply, ‘Its your Newton’s laws innit’ You bet them that if they do it, within 10 goes it won’t, they take you on, on the fifth or thereabouts, you hit the saucer of the table, sending the marble and the saucer flying across the room. They complain and say, ‘You didn’t tell me you were going to do that’ You reply, ‘I didn’t say I wouldn’t, welcome to the real world, there are no rules here’
Politics! is a bit like that!
51 Livingstone can’t win this election on the back of a core vote strategy. He has to keep those boroughs that normally vote Conservative but which backed him in 2004. His campaign has done nothing but alienate people in those places.
52/54 Creatures of the night are usually back in their coffins at this time of the day .
Sifference is Kinnock was seen as annoying but the only alternative, Boris is seen as being rather likeable if a bit daft. The Ken and Labour campaign has tried to make him out to be a nasty right winger, and a bumbler at the same time. These two conflicting messages plus the voters intense dislike of labour have given Boris a serious chance of victory.
57. I’m suprised Labour haven’t come up with the obvious solution to this problem - repatriating parts of outer London to their original counties. Losing Bromley, Romford, Barnet, Kingston etc. plus mass immigration would keep their hold on London pretty firm wouldn’t it?
I’m sure the Newt would feel much more comfortable not having to trawl for votes among the suburban capitalist running dogs who inhabit these areas. On the other hand, losing the opportunity to lord it over them would be a blow..
53 - was this part of this year’s predictions competition? Anyone know what the average prediction was?
42 clutching at straws…
For anyone still confused by the Swastika references at 11, here’s a link to the Britisches Freikorps, a sad but insignificant and brif episode in history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Free_Corps
Hope Ken has a book deal in the pipeline - without his fat mayors salary he’ll be stuggling to meet his support payments.
62
refer to 33
[57] Indeed. I had a look at Boris’s website and certainly I can see nothing in his transport or housing promises that ought to cause a single Labour borough Council leader the slightest problem. (Or, come to that, enthuse a Conservative one…)
As a friend said to me yesterday, if all they can argue about is the shape of the buses in London, why should the outcome make a blind bit of difference?
31: perhaps, hope so.
49: I was invited to a TV debate this week (on civil liberties) by a foreign news channel, to be chaired by Andrew Gilligan. I said “Hell, no, not if he’s supposed to be a neutral chair”, and the TV bod said despondently, “That’s what people keep saying.” You have to be an awfully dim ES reader not to work out that Gilligan has a very definite set of views. Nothing wrong with that as long as they’re clearly editorial opinion rather than supposedly unbiased reporting.
66
You get the feeling, that somwhere along the line, they’ll be comparing willies.
67. For goodness sake Nick - if all politicians took your view then no Conservative would ever appear on “Brown lickspittle” Andrew Marr’s show or Dianne Abbot (or other leftie) wouldn’t work with Andrew Neil.
Pathetic !
63 being a longstanding, regular poster, RodCrosby was allowed to get away with denying the gas chambers on this site. Even Labour Mp Nick Palmer defended him. Now he posts appproving pictures of Britons in Nazi costume, proudly claiming a family connection. He also called objections to he swastika “the pc brigade”.
I was accused the other day of asking for Emily to be banned. For the avoidance of doubt, I dont want Rod banned, but I do thinkn Mike should make it clear that Holocaust denial and multiple links to the British Freikorps are not what this site is all about.
67. Oh come on Nick, since when were journalists ever ‘unbiased’? Every one has their own angle and you and your mates have never batted an eyelid when left-leaning journalists at the BBC and elsewhere have put heavily pro-Labour slants on stories, or run stories largely or even solely with the intention of trying to damage the Tories. Your whining about the media is pathetic and just shows how worried you are about losing.
ps Nick as you are around, can you condemn post eleven since to my eyes you gave a free pass on the “gas chamber myth” earlier
69: Well, why *should* I go on a foreign TV debate if I don’t like the chair and expect him to be biased? For the money? To influence Iranian voters? (It’s Press TV, an Iranian broadcaster, though they get shown in other Middle Eastern countries.)
O/T: TB on religion, engaging as ever (IMO - and
I’m an atheist):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/04/nblair104.xml
63. Interesting that there were so few British recruits to the charmingly named ‘Freikorps’ - even from among POWs.
What a contrast with the many thousands of Frenchmen who volunteered to fight in Germany colours - on some estimates a rather greater number than fought with De Gaulle’s Free French.
73. I can only assume you are chicken or lazy.
Frank Field seems to be advising Gordon Brown to bribe low-paid working families with “lump sum payments” before the May 1st elections. Why can’t the odious Brown just cancel this months grossly unfair abolition of the 10% tax rate and keep his grubby hands off the money in the first place?
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/frank_field/2008/04/clunking_fist_indeed.html
72. Oh why don’t you take your Witchfinder General attitudes somewhere else? You really are the most incredible bore.
72: I agree with your post at 70, test. My previous comment was basically that we shouldn’t be drawn into a debate on the holocaust (I think that anyone with any sense is clear that it happened precisely as generally understood, and it’s a waste of time and space on this forum to debate with those who disagree). But Rod does seem to be making a habit of dragging things like this before us in a “look what the cat brought in” way, even though they’ve got nothing to do with political trends or betting, and I’d like to ask him to desist.
77. Because he’s an idiot. Brown has the strategic planning ability of the French army in the franco-prussian war. He’s still fighting the last election, not the next one, and thinks he can win by bashing the tories and using tractor figures. Removing the 10% will give him some much needed cash to make himself look better to the middle classes. I can’t really see any other reason for making the poorest even poorer.
As this is meant to be a betting site…
The LibDem seats price on SpreadFair has fallen sharply for the first time in over a year. It held in a dull 48-50 range through all of last year’s troubles and yet in the past week or so has dropped to 44-45. Anyone got any thoughts as to why?
N.B. I have no money on this as I don’t think it’s liquid enough to be worthwhile and I think it’s too far from the GE to assess how many ‘none of the above’ voters there will be. If I were betting, though, I would see them at the 40 mark on current trends.
The problem with reintroducing the 10% tax rate is that all tax payers would benefit, Unless the higer rate band was increased. Unfortunately Labour feel they are commited by their manifesto -not to increase the higher rate.
I think manifestos should have use by date, perhaps 2 years from publication. Things change, the MPs have it half right - reintroduce the 10% band but also put a couple of percent on the top rate to pay for it (or better a new top rate at £100k plus)
Mike, I’ve just tried your link to the best odds section and come up with this on the banner:
“The GOP nomination seems to have narrowed into a two horse race, after Guiuliani’s high risk strategy failed to come off in Florida. McCain’s victorys in Florida and New Hampshire gives the advantage to a man who was written off only a few weeks ago. Compare odds here.
Bet on USA: Republican Candidate now!”
In need of an update, possibly?
Off topic.
Interesting article on Real Clear Politics outlining how Mrs Clinton might win the popular vote in the Democratic primary election.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/no_really_hillary_has_a_decent.html
Mike - I’m not certain ICM have done their normal 7+/10 filter. The blurb before the tables says they have, but if you actually add up the number of Conservatives at 7+/10 the number of Labour at 7+/10 etc, it doesn’t total to the figures on the next table.
On the other hand, if you total them up taking 10/10s as 1 person, 9/10s as 0.9, 8/10s as 0.8 and so on down the line (ICM’s old approach) the figures stack up.
I don’t think it makes a significant difference actually, but there goes.
With some MPs expenses being published today and all by October, what are the odds on one or more MPs having to resign?
59. Good morning to you too Mark!
Kiss kiss kiss! xxxxxxxx
56
48 A deal but to be fair you should note that the new shadow unitaries are new seats so cannot be counted as gains or losses for any party although it will be possible to compute theoretical notional gains for these seats .
Mark, as there are elections being held there I think it is fairest to use the notional gains in those areas (three is it?). I expect the tories to gain well over 50 seats but 120 is pushing it so I’ve been very generous - unlike you with your comments
I will email PtP
85. So Anthony… you don’t think that this ICM poll is too generous to Livingstone then? Do you think its fair and doesn’t matter much either way how they filter/weight votes?
Do you think that turnout is adequately dealt with, or do you think it assumes it will be too high?
64,000 dollar question – do you think Boris’ “real” lead is higher than what this poll suggests when you factor in the above?!
89. ICM for the Guardian - no sums required.
re 77 just for the record, here is a government quote at the time of the Frank Field debate mentioned
Chief Secretary to the Treasury It is a very striking attribute of the Budget that the biggest proportionate gains go to the households on the lowest incomes.
And these were the Labour members who voted with Frank Field against the abolition of the 10p band
Corbyn, Jeremy
Field, rh Mr. Frank
Hoey, Kate
Hopkins, Kelvin
Jones, Lynne
McDonnell, John
Simpson, Alan
I don’t notice the name of the honourable member for Broxotowe - who he know to have doubts about this policy - on this list. Well Nick it’s a bit late now to be worrying about your majority, you had your chance last June.
I’m still hoping that Mike gives us a picture of Gordon dressed up as the Sheriff of Nottingham - he robbed from the poor to give to the rich - tomorrow.
72- Channel 4 News is still the king of Pro-Labour (Or at least very anti-tory) bias.
79 thanks Nick.
87 Good morning casino , my post did not refer to yours seems the post renumbering had it’s sometimes weird effect . The posts I referred to are now 53/55 .
But yet there are Conservatives (including DC) on it week after week. Perhaps they are less touchy than others.
61. i know this was tongue in cheek but some of the outer london boroughs do actually want out - after all they have lower crime and few tube stations so precious little of the GLA tax is spent on them.
Lennon 41.Vegetables can also be mistreated. I recall from many years ago, a lady was known throughout the office as “Fruit and veg”. I won’t elaborate.
92. Jon Snow is the most punchable man on the telly imho
96- Croydon will only become part of Surrey over my dead body!
91 Thank you, Chris A, for this list. Only seven honourable MPs in the Parliamentary Labour Party (but some of my favourites are there).
The Parrot of Broxtowe has explained that, for him, being a Labour MP precludes independent thought. For the good of the cause. My party right or wrong. Squawk.
So, it’s no so surprise to find he’s not there.
75- Gollop
“What a contrast with the many thousands of Frenchmen who volunteered to fight in Germany colours - on some estimates a rather greater number than fought with De Gaulle’s Free French.”
This is revisionism at its best. I don’t understand why some posters here still indulge in French bashing when there is a debate about British past…
For your information:
- The Légion des volontaires français (or LVF) had 5800 men. This is the smallest ratio of any occupied country in Europe. To give a simple comparison, the Belgian volunteers were more than 20 000.
- The Free french were more than 50 000 at end 1941,
more than 70 000 at end 1942,
more than 500.000 after the liberation of Northern Africa (1943)and the new French army was a million strong after the liberation of the mainland.
(obviuosly i don’t mention here the tens of thousands that joined interior resistance and the maquis. The Vercors Maquis only had more fighters than the LVF…)
Most of these were volunteers often very young, that had been hiding to escape forced work in Germany (and were desperate ti fight against nazism. My grandfather was one. Aged 19, he fought during 1 year and commanded a small unit formed in the South of France that went all the way to Austria, fighting.
For the memories of such men, your imbecile untruth about the relative size of pro-nazi volunteers and De Gaulle-supporting ones should be retracted. thanks in advance.
96. Indeed. Bromley seems an obvious choice for ‘UDI’.
i thought abolishing the 10% tax rate was a great idea and much needed simplification.
the only undesirable side effect was the new band of relative low earners that do slightly worse under the new rules.
i would have thought the obvious solution would be
* raise the 20% threshold appropriately to offset this (when the country can afford this tax cut).
* consider lowering the 40% threshold to offset this, in turn
rather than
* reintroducing the unnecessary complication of the 10% band.
100. Perhaps Andrew Gilligan was in the press box intimidating him ?
102. The best idea would have been to raise the threshold to eliminated the 10% band - no losers then.
yep although no losers in the tax system = country goes bankrupt!
102. oddly enough the people doing slightly worse off are those that havent got much to begin with.
99. as some of the crank posters this morning might say
“croydon is a part of surrey already”
105. No losers in the tax system = the government goes bankrupt, not the country.
Beating up Nick Palmer about the abolition of the 10% band is a bit harsh. I regret its abolition and personally would have liked to have seen its expansion, but it affects most people who were in the 10% band marginally (thanks to other measures) and while a few people are affected more substantially, this is a fairly minor matter. A few backbench MPs can parade their conscience, but I fail to see why Mr Palmer should give up his perch at the bottom of the Government ladder on such a small issue. Far better to fight from the inside. Resignations should be kept for big points of principle.
Current India-SA score:
India 76
South Africa 450/6 (132 ov)
*OUCH*!
106. yes and that’s the undesirable thing. they did do some compensating to limit this effect, they probably gambled that they had done “just enough” to prevent any negative reaction to this (while picking up positive reaction from the 22%->20% cut). in fact the press took a different line.
but i think that removing the band long term is a very good thing.
* simplification of this system = good, in my view
* having any tax (even only 10% of some of it) on the lowest wage-earners = no motivation to get off benefits into work. i think the 0% tax allowance should be as large as possible for this reason.
can always make up the difference with lower thresholds for the other bands
101. If you add in the Vichy forces, including the colonial troops, then the balance is massively pro-Axis for 1940-1943 at least. It’s telling that you choose to ignore this detail, mon cher. Of course, you could argue that these men were ‘only obeying orders’
111. a collegue of mine works part time in order to look after his kinds, mainly because his wife is a nurse and works daft hours. He has been hit by the tax increase, but isn’t get any more tax credits. As you can imagine, he is less than thrilled.
re 102 Ed so you think it’s a moral and just policy to make those earning £8,000 per year pay £212 more income tax until the country “can afford” to cut their tax.
The obvious policy was not to rob them to pay the better off in the first place. I’ve never been a government supporter but this whole policy makes me extremely angry. It’s completely immoral. I’m not unhappy that the government wants to shoot itself in the foot, and balls and head for good measure, but it doesn’t make it right.
kinds=kids, my spelling today.
113. I bet he’s glad inflation is only 2%, interest rates are at a historic low and the country is in good shape to ride out any economic storms ?
112. Indeed. There was no logical reason for colonial French troops to remain loyal to Vichy. They were hardly directly threatened by the Axis.
They even chose to FIGHT THE AMERICANS during Operation Torch, when it was 100% clear the Allies would prevail and resistance was pointless. Anti-semitism and facism was a much stronger force in France than the UK - by a country mile.
It is also worth noting that the French Navy refused to surrender its ships to the Royal Navy in 1940, when it was quite clear that if they did not do so, the Nazis would have got their hands on them.
Chris - I intend no offence btw - there were many brave and noble Frenchment but, sadly, they weren’t in the majority.
re 109 antifrank I bet you don’t earn £8000 a year. And if you did I can’t see you voluntarily giving away nearly 3% of your income so the government can bribe the middle classes.
“Marginal” indeed! What a bloody insult.
re 111 “simplification” of the tax system? This is a joke surely? Gordon Brown’s meddling led to the most ridiculous complicated and arcane tax system practically anywhere in the world.
[75] - According to the wiki, there was a list of over 1000 POWs who were interested, but it seems the unit was undermined since the only people with any calibre involved were trying to sabotage it. A lot then down to happenstance and the bravery of individuals - not sure you can draw comparisons to other countries as a result.
116. Fortunately he paid for the house a few years back, wasnt an expensive one when they bought it (now its worth a shedload) so he can afford to keep working. Although he says if things get worse he can get a better amount on benefits.
68: ‘You have to be an awfully dim ES reader not to work out that Gilligan has a very definite set of views.’
Gilligan can’t be all that bad: in the past he’s cited PB.com when rebutting dodgy opinion-poll interpretations in the media.
119 - No, it’s really not a joke, the combined changes reduced the number of bands of income tax and aligned income tax and national insurance thresholds. From the tone of your post you seem opposed to complexity in the system so I presume you welcome this simplification?
[111] - Different rates for tax bands is far from being a complex aspect of the tax system. If they really wanted to simplify the system they could give up the pretence and merge NICs with income tax, and even that would touch many of the really complicated bits and pieces.
114. Interesting that the first pay-cheques which will reflect this tax cut will be at the end of this month - the last week of April. This is barely days before the local elections and - probably - far too late to affect the result.
I’d imagine those earning between £17-£31K will be around £10-£30 better off a month as a result??
Even if there are, which I am, £20 better off this is easily wiped out by my higher fuel, energy, council tax and food bills which are (at least) £20, £30, £10 and £20 more a month respectively than they were 12 months ago.
And I’m a frugal spender..
Personally I find the London contest pretty dispiriting- and the LAST thing it is about is issues. It is game show politics of the first water.
So now we have a contest between two of the biggest gargoyles in British politics. In the red corner, the shifty and slightly seedy figure of the current incumbent, who, in addition to rumours about his drinking, is revealed as a rather irresponsible philanderer. Meanwhile the ethical questions about his relationship with Hugo Chavez remain unanswered and allegations of corruption involving large sums of money and unqualified individuals like Lee Jasper continue to swirl around him.
Then there is BoJo who also seems to have a long history of playing away too, since he seems to have cheated on each of his wives on a pretty regular basis. The questionable nature of his relationship with Darius Guppy where he is recorded as agreeing to take part in an assault on the journalist Stuart Collier was a pretty spectacular lapse of judgement.
So… er… none of the above anyone?
118 - how many people on £8,000 a year are losing nearly 3% of their income as a result of last year’s budget? It’s disingenuous to present one change without considering others made at the same time. There are some losers, but it is indeed marginal.
118 - how many people on £8,000 a year are losing nearly 3% of their income as a result of last year’s budget? It’s disingenuous to present one change without considering others made at the same time. There are some losers, but it is indeed marginal.
124 - Merging tax and NICs is something they want to do but it is not as simple as you might think and is particularly difficult to do without consequent negative impacts on disdvantaged groups. The complexity has arisen historically and the easy simplifications have been doen, anyone who knows how to finish the job in a pain-free way would get a very warm welcome over in the Treasury.
117-
To make myself clear: I only contest the patent untruth that Frenchmen that “volunteered to fight in Germany colours” outnumnbered the Free french as Gollop pretended at 75-
More details:
“It is also worth noting that the French Navy refused to surrender its ships to the Royal Navy in 1940, when it was quite clear that if they did not do so, the Nazis would have got their hands on them.”
Wrong. the proof is that when the Nazis tried to snatch it, the French Navy sank its ships in Toulon in 1942. Not a single French boat was used by the Axis during the whole war.
As for your other arguments: did the Vichy army hold any battle for/alongside the germans? No. Did they accompany them in any expedition in Russia or Africa? No.
They remained loyal to Vichy France and some even (for 3 days) did fight an invasion of French territory unoccupied by the Axis (North Africa). I don’t say that it was the right thing to do but it’s not what gollop was talking about: “volunteering to fight in Germany colours”.
Indeed few Frenchmen were brave enough to volunteer for the Free French forces, at least before 1943. But they outnumber those that “volunteered to fight in Germany colours” by a factor of at least 15 (not including the maquis, which were thousands of men strong even in 1942)
And this is the opposite of what gollop said.
[128] - But the losers are concentrated amongst those that are the poorest already. How on earth could a Labour government have made that happen?
And all, lest we forget, for the purpose of pulling a rabbit out of the hat to wrongfoot Cameron. That was worthwhile now wasn’t it?
127
The whole point is that the the losers, however small, are the ones with very little to begin with. And it’s not just working people, it’s pensioners with small (thanks to this government) occupational pensions.
131 - I don’t think the change is a good idea either - I thought I’d already said that. The purpose of my original post was to defend Nick Palmer from the unfair suggestion that he should have given up his career over it.
Ladbrokes’ website, never the friendliest and always the ugliest, appears to be inpenetrable this morning so far as the political betting pages are concened. Try turning on the switch Shadsy!
131
Fine, but none of the other Labour MP’s who stood against it have lost their jobs have they? I find it incredible to believe that there were so few Labour MP’s on that list. It is appalling.
” Frank Field seems to be advising Gordon Brown to bribe low-paid working families with “lump sum payments” before the May 1st elections. ”
The last paragraph is a hoot:-
” They might also, hopefully, abate the anger that will be inflicted on innocent Labour councillors standing in this year’s local elections. ”
Yeah, right - just like they’d not turn against the Tories if they had scrapped the 10p rate. Isn’t this all just a balance sheet move though, most low paid working families people will now recieve even more family credit. It’s the single low paid person who will suffer the most. It would be better for them to be the on the dole probably.
I notice the Tories held both their by-election results yesterday down in the South-West, with increased margins in both seats.
130- True, but then those French ships would have been very useful during the Battle of the Atlantic.
131- Yes, it made Labour MPs feel very smug, for about half an hour.
Would the French navy really have been a help? Haven’t you read Hornblower?
Zim is turning very ugly. After the overnight raids, the riot police are everywhere and it looks as though Zanu-PF will declare a state of emergency and nullify the parliamentary election and then ram through a Mugabe victory in a spurious second round. MDC people are going into hiding.
135 - those MPs are all backbenchers. I absolutely disagree with your point about the number of Labour MPs on the list. Rebellions should be saved for major matters.
134. I can’t find anything wrong Peter. What are you seeing?
75. As a matter of fact they were not called the Freikorps, but the “British Free Corps.”
120. They may have been few in number, but I have a distant connection with two of them. One, Francis George MacLardy, was an old-boy of my school, and another (Irishman) was a distant relative of mine.
to clarify, i don’t think (and never said) that the detail was particularly well thought out (or if it was, they gambled on this not making the headlines and lost).
what i meant was that the broad ideas of reducing the number of bands (and aligning NI and tax) are very good ones. much better and more interesting than gimmicky arguments over e.g. non-doms which both main parties have seemed to get drawn into.
137. really? I thought the lib dems always did well in by-elections
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7330083.stm
More bad figures on personal debt. Its the economy stupid.
PA reports:Tories cruised to easy victories in this week’s only two council by-elections.
They boosted their majority over Liberal Democrats at Dunkeswell, East Devon District and comfortably won at Parson Drove and Wisbech St Mary, Fenland District, Cambridgeshire where they had been unopposed last time.
RESULTS:
East Devon District - Dunkeswell: C 349, Lib Dem 162. (May 2007 - C 411, Lib Dem 240). C hold. Swing 5.2% Lib Dem to C.
Fenland District - Parson Drove and Wisbech St Mary: C 646, Lab 191, Ind 119, Ukip 55, Lib Dem 35. (May 2007 - C unopposed). C hold.
[133] - Yes, the baiting of Nick Palmer is a bit mischievous, but I think you are playing down how bad this change is. The movement is, historically, in the opposite direction to the principles the Labour Party has stood for.
As you say, you oppose it, but this isn’t a change the government had to make. It wasn’t a regrettable decision forced on them by circumstances. It wasn’t the lesser of two evils. It isn’t simply a matter of falling short of what you would hope to achieve, but forming a basis for further progress. It’s actively making the situation worse.
A ‘genuine’ Labour government would have been more likely to introduce a higher rate of tax (say 50% for >£100k pa) in order to finance an expansion of the personal allowance, the 10% tax band, or both.
Instead they took money from the poor to give it to middle income earners who they hope will sway marginal constituencies.
Whilst it doesn’t measure up to something like Iraq, it does beg the question of what point of principle would see Nick Palmer, or the rest of the herd, break ranks. What would it take?
India 76
South Africa 494/7 (141.2 ov)
(AB de Villiers: 217*)
(Match delayed by rain)
India are 418 runs behind with a mere 3 days to go. I’m guessing a bet on South Africa probably isn’t going to get any value!
145. Check this thread;
http://www.vote-2007.co.uk/index.php?topic=1958.0
Two excellent results for the Conservatives. I guess Mark Senior doesn’t want to talk about it.
130. You are just dealing in semantics now. Vichy France was a Nazi puppet state, with its leaders ‘hoping for the victory of Germany’ (Laval), and anyone who remained loyal to it was a Nazi puppet by extension. The commanders of the Vichy forces at home and abroad, and their men, were willing collaborationists.
137. Strange that those results didn’t get an airing on here from Mark Senior earlier today…
142 Well 10/10 for your response time Shadsy! I can’t get beyond your home page, when I then click on one of your down betting menu, I get about 5 out of the 10 processing bars, then it stops. I’ll try the other computer and see if I experience the same problem.
149. damn work firewall!
[136] - Have they increased the rate of tax credit faster than inflation then?
Under the old working families tax credit people would indeed have gotten money back, since that was calculated on post-tax income, so if that went down due to income tax changes, they would automatically get more WFTC. However, the tax credits system now is calculated on pre-tax income, so unless the rates have been changed (by more than inflation), people on tax credits won’t get any back to compensate.
153. Local Council Byelections 03/04/2008
« on: March 07, 2008, 10:18:15 AM »
——————————————————————————–
Appears to be 2 this week :-
East Devon DC Dunkeswell Conservative seat and a straight fight between Con and LibDem
2007 result Con 411 LibDem 240
2003 result Con unopposed
Fenland DC Parsons Drove/Wisbech St Marys Conservative seat candidates not yet known
2007 result Con unopposed
2003 result Con 683/630 Lab 264
..though the massive 35 votes the Lib Dems got in Fenland and the 5% swing against them in Devon might conceivably explain it.
150- God bless the English Channel
152 PfP
I’m getting Ladbrokes fine, but I am using Firefox (my much preferred browser).
Perhaps it’s time you upgraded that steam-driven puter of yours.