Will turnout in Glasgow really be that low?
July 15th, 2008
Why my money’s on 45-50%?
Ladbrokes have just put up a new Glasgow East betting market on the level of turnout that we can expect. This is timely because much of the comment about the seat has suggested that the proportion voting could be very low indeed.
It was just 48.2% at the general election and there have been predictions of it dropping to the low 20s - particularly because election day takes place during the main Glasgow holiday period. This meant that much of the early campaign activity focussed on the getting postal votes signed up. These are the prices:-
0-19.99 % 40/1
20-24.99% 16/1
25-29.99% 5/1
30-34.99% 7/2
35-39.99% 9/4
40-44.99% 4/1
45-49.99% 6/1
50-54.99% 20/1
55%+ 33/1
There’s a widespread view that the smaller the turnout the better this will be for the SNP because the assumption is that that those who will be least likely to vote will be Labour.
I’m not so sure. Because this is such a critical by election and there is so much media coverage my guess is that we will see quite a high figure. Remember the last really tight by-election, in Crewe and Nantwich, where the figure was only a couple of points down on the general election.
Glasgow East is a seat which has always been a cert for Labour and this, surely, has been the reason why voting numbers have been low. It could be that come a week on Thursday we might see the percentage rise to near or even large than general election levels.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Turnout at the (very keenly-contested) Scottish general election in the 2 constituencies that make up Glasgow East:
Glasgow Bailieston (entire constituency is in Glasgow East): Electorate 44,367 - Turnout 17,272 (38.9%)
Labour majority 3,934 (% change since 2003 -11.0%)
Glasgow Shettleston (4 wards are in Glasgow East): Electorate 44,278 - Turnout 14,801 (33.4%)
Labour Co-op majority 2,881 (% change since 2003 -18.9%)
http://www.alba.org.uk/scot07results/gr02.html
Do you really, really think that turnout will be higher than the 39% achieved in Baillieston in May 2007? That was a very high profile, tight Lab/SNP contest (+ council elections at the same time) with blanket media coverage, and not in the middle of the Glasgow Fair either!
Too high by a long way if the evidence of bloggers here is anything to go by.
Summer holidays, disillusioned Labour voters in a constituency which couldn’t be bothered to show any enthusiasm in a general election, strong focus on the voters which they have not experienced before, recent and developing news.
I know nothing personally about this place but I would think 30-35% might be tops on that basis?
Surely comparisons with CandN are misleading. Different circumstance, different political territory, different parties slugging it out, different local issues, different reasons for the election.
I cannot see a turnout market on the Ladbrokes web site.
Wiki gives these stats for CandN. How do they compare to Glasgow East.
Employed: 62.2% (60.6%)
Unemployed: 2.8% (3.4%)
Economically active full-time student: 2.6% (2.6%)
Retired: 15.0% (13.6%)
Economically inactive student: 3.6% (4.7%)
Looking after home/family: 6.1% (6.5%)
Permanently sick or disabled: 5.1% (5.5%)
Other economically inactive: 2.6% (3.1%).
Crime levels (per 1000 population)
Violence against the person: 5.7 (England and Wales: 11.4).
Sexual offences: 0.2 (0.7).
Robbery: 0.4 (1.8).
Burglary from a dwelling: 7.2 (7.6).
Theft of a motor vehicle: 2.4 (6.4).
Theft from a motor vehicle: 7.8 (11.9).
And in CandN general election turnout was 60%.
3. John L
Me neither. Where is it? Anyone got a direct link? Or better still, can Mike or Shadsy not link to the market through PB’s “bestbetting” pages?
Re 3. I gather there is a technical issue.
On the general issue remember what people were predicting ahead of Crewe & Nantwich election. Nobody was suggesting that it would get to 58%.
You get low turnouts where the result does not matter. When it does people are more inclined to vote.
4 missing last line is ” And the by election turnout was 58%.”
Stuart ratehr makes my point from a few days ago by comparing Westminster with Holyrood turnouts. For whatever reason Scots still think Westminster is more important and turnout in higher numbers for it.
In an entirely uncompetitive race turnout was 10% highe rin 2005 than a more (but still not very) competitive race in 2007.
The SNP need the turnout to be as high as possible if they are to win. They need to mobilise a coalition of everyone who is anti Labour - and that means getting people to the polls. It’s not sufficinet for them for Labour people to abstain - a low turnout is indicative of a sullen acceptance of Labour and most probably a narrow Labour win.
If the SNP start moving up in the voting intention polls (if there are any) then turnout should also move up.
re 5. Linking through the Bestbetting pages provides the site with a small income stream which is vital to our survival.
Mike S yes but it still went down in CandN.
The lack of engagement demonstrated by the turnout in GEast will ensure that it declines there too, and to make that only a small decline, there will have to be a lack of apathy that does not seem evident.
Even Nick Palmer seemed resigned to a lack of enthusiasm and by his record of optimism, that suggest Labour have a problem with their turnout, and as the majority of previous voters were Labour, that has to lead to a reduced turnout overall.
A contrarian suggestion.
All and sundry opine that a high turnout is good for Labour. In normal times that a surety. But right now? When there is no enthusiastic support for Labour and their hopes apparently rest on voters casting their votes by habit more than by conviction?
What better incentive for normally apathetic voters to trudge to the polling stations than a desire for change?
Admittedly Glasgow East isn’t the likeliest place for this to happen, but elsewhere it’s the feeling you get when chatting in the queue in the Post Office, the supermarket or in the pub. Just maybe Glasgow will decide to be a trendsetter.
Sorry to go O/T so early but the BBC websites headline on the inflation story is a disgrace. They state inflation is highest in 11 years at 3.8%. Last time the annual rate was 3.8% was June 1992. I think everyone except the BBC can subtract 1992 from 2008 and not get 11.
12 - 1992 … who was advising Norman Lamont?
Mike I think you’ve called this one wrong. I’d be very surprised if the turnout is over 40% The most likely figure I’d go for would be around 36% and thats where I’ll be putting my money.
The turnout in whats perceived to be Labour safe seats is never strong at the best of times and away from general elections is even weaker. Taken together with the time of year that its been called at makes +40% unrealistic.
13 - I would point out that CPI inflation in 1992 was 3.8% and falling. CPI inflation in 2008 is 3.8% and rising!
When is Glasgow fortnight, if such a thing exists any more?? Anyone know?
12 But didn’t you get the memo - 1997 is Year Zero? Before that there was only a Major void…
170, Last thread, Witan - I Agree!
17 - Indeed, but it is utterly disingenuous.
Leeds, summer 1999 - safe Labour seat - turnout sub-20%. Any other similarities?
Did we have CPI in 1992?
Would we not expect a greater engagement with the political process in Cheshire than East Glasgow?
19. most journalists are utterly incompetent with even the most basic of figures.
having said that, i suppose it is interesting in itself that inflation is currently at its highest since the day when the MPC took over, and CPI became the target measure.
before that, too often inflation was a political football.
21 - No but if we look at RPI the posistion is the same. 4.8% now and last time it was as high was June 1992. I think the only way you can get 11 years is to compare CPI now with RPI in 1997 which is farcical.
To answer my own question the ONS says:
The Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HICP) has been developed as a comparable measure of inflation for Member States of the European Union. It was used to monitor performance against the convergence criterion for price stability in the Maastricht Treaty. From January 1999, it will be used by the European Central Bank as the target measure of inflation for the European Monetary Union area.
The UK HICP was first published in February 1997: the index started in January 1996 and the first 12-month inflation figures were for January 1997…..
The ONS has now constructed estimates of the UK HICP back to 1988 and indicative figures for 1975-1987. ….. . A comparison is also presented of the historical HICP series against RPI excluding mortgage interest payments (RPIX), which starts in 1975. RPIX is preferred to RPI for this comparison because the inclusion of mortgage interest payment in the latter can obscure the picture.
And the details are at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/economic_trends/HICP_Historical_Estimates.pdf
Glasgow East’s past experience is relevant, but so is recent experience in other elections:
Crewe & Nantwich - turn-out 58%
Henley - turn-out 50%
London Mayoral election - turn-out 45%
Haltemprice & Howden - turn-out 34%
Of these, the Glasgow East by-election seems most similar to the London Mayoral election. Potentially close, covering some areas which historically have had low turn-out, potentially very important (while I take Stuart Dickson’s point about the relative importance of Scottish and Westminster elections to the Caledonian posse, the possibility of ousting Gordon Brown has to rank as potentially very important).
Glasgow East has fewer well-heeled area than London, so I would expect turn-out to be lower than in the London Mayoral election. Rather boringly, Ladbrokes’ odds for the favourite outcome are pretty much mine. 35-40% turn-out, I’d expect. If not, I expect it to be lower rather than higher, influenced by the comments made about the potential impact of Glasgow fortnight.
Mike, you were mentioned in despatches:
http://adamsmithwasasocialist.blogspot.com/2008/07/flattery.html
24, farcical? Controversially polite way to describe BBC journalism.
Any idea where the BBC is getting its 11-year figure from?
The BBC calling inflation just an “11 year high” is so very wrong. The BBC’s bias is reaching ridiculous heights, even an 11 year high!
Where is the BBC’s leftie Economist Stephanie Flanders to talk about RPI comparisons?
Reality is that we already have the worst inflation for 16 years and it is going to get worse.
21 - Yes, the ONS publish CPI data going back as far as January 1988:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/tsdataset.asp?vlnk=7174&More=N&All=Y
June’s figure of 3.8% is the highest since June 1992, when it was also 3.8%. Whether wilfuly or ignorantly, the BBC are plain wrong on this one.
O/T
Trinity Mirror now down 16% on the day - could Gordo lose one of his last 2 remaining friends ??
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/fds/hi/business/market_data/shares/3/23377/default.stm
At the risk of repeating myself the majority people I have spoken to on the doors are Labour voters who are undecided on whether or not they are going to vote. If turnout is in excess of 35% then they have decided to vote and they are only going to vote for Labour. That’s why I’ve said the bigger the turnout the more likely result is a comfortable Labour hold.
If it is in the 25% bracket then the majority of them have decided to stay at home and that makes the result closer.
31. as explained above, up to 1997 the figures are only retrospective estimates
Repoted from previous thread….
“NickP’s reports would suggest the value lies in either 40/45% at 4/1, or 45/50% at 6/1.
“I had £25 on the former, but basically I think Shadsy has called it pretty accurately.
“Incidentally, there has been a move away from Labour on Betfair in the last hour or so.”
34. Is ‘Ed’ actually Ed Balls?
‘Glasgow East by-election: Fuel bills and the Old Bill as Taggart actor campaigns for Labour’
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Glasgow-East-byelection-Fuel-bills.4289303.jp
35 I don’t think there has been a move away from Labour on Betfair , there has been a big lay on Labout at 1.67 combined with a big wager ask on the SNP at 2.5 presumably the same better ( is it Mike S ? ) , not much interest in either being taken .
Meanwhile, the FTSE 100 is down 142 points…..
O/T The Dow and FTSE are off a cliff today. FTSE down 3.4% @ 5111.
RBS -10% (!)
Re Glasgow East turnout. Not betting yet on this aspect so here are my views.
Do we really think that an area with 50% unemployment are going to flock out to vote? Many of the people in work apparently will be on holiday and I would that they will have had thousands of proxy votes set up before leaving. The local Labour party are (we are told) not used to running a GOTV operation.
35% to 40% seems about right. 40% to 45% looks like reasonable value.
62 from previous thread: Socrates, I totally agree with your Democratic VP analysis except for the vetting issue. If Obama believes his candidacy is very weak (based on some disastrous events occurring between now and the convention), I think the vetting business could go out the window and Hillary could have the leverage to win herself a VP spot. You’re right that she will refuse to hand over her dirty laundry to Obama, so she could only grab the spot from a position of strength relative to an Obama position of weakness. This is a very, very unlikely scenario, but is the only scenario where it seems she could somehow land the VP spot.
34 - Ah yes, but they’re probably fairly reliable aren’t they? And in any case, you have to go back to 1992 to even get close to 3.8%. So even allowing a reasonable margin of error, the beeb are totally wrong.
38.Mark - I have unloaded about £2000 earlier today either laying Labour or betting with the bookies on SNP at 2/1 and 15/8. I am less certain of a Labour victory now but I will be buying them again if they move back to somewhere near evens.
43. yes the BBC are totally wrong, but basing the headline on the made-up figures is also spurious, in my opinion.
43 - Within a little yes, but for comparison the RPI at 4.8% last month, and was last at this level in Jun 92. The only possible way the BBC can get an 11 year figure is to compare CPI now with RPI 11 years ago which is illiterate and farcical.
45, in any case, if it can’t compare CPI with CPI it could compare RPI with RPI.
45 - Yes but the two comparable are RPI. So compare them.
45 - I think it’s a bit harshdescribing them as “made-up” - inflation figures are only ever an estimate anyway, and if the ONS has chosen to publish retrospective figures, then I think it’s entirely reasonable to use them. Besides, if it was the lowest in 16 years based on the estimated figures you can bet the government would be trumpeting it…
46 - That’s not actually quite true - RPI hit 4.6% in Feb 07 and 4.8% in March 07.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/tsdataset.asp?vlnk=229&More=N&All=Y
Individual monthly figures for inflation can, of course, be misleading. To get a real feel for the way things are going we should take a much wider sample - let’s say 5 years.
The last five years of Major’s government had RPI inflation in June as follows:
1993 - 1.2%; 94 - 2.6%; 95 - 3.5%; 96 - 2.1%; 97 - 2.9%. Cumulative 12.9%
The last five years of this government has RPI inflation in June as follows:
2004 - 3.0%; 05 - 2.9%; 06 - 3.3%; 07 - 4.4%; 08 - 4.6%. Cumulative 19.6%
So inflation under a Labour goverment has, over the last five years, been half as much again as it was in the last full term of a Tory government.
Fiddle or spin as ye may, the real figures do NOT lie.
49. you are right on most points, I maintain they are pretty well made up. the CPI basket is adjusted every year, you can fiddle it to come up with the answer you first thought of. RPI[X] doubly so, and more volatile.
If the BBC had a point at all, I guess it was that inflation has never been higher under the MPC system, which started 11 years ago.
51. that is pure spin, cherry-picking the data.
This point that the iCM poll may have skewed the weighting because people gave answers about their 2007 vote instead of 2005 is interesting.
Looking at the figures the SNP “2005?” vote seems closer to their 2007 performance than 2007 and could suggest ICM may have boobed on this.
Mike, have you contacted ICM or the Telegraph to ask if they are taking account of this for any other polls?
53. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
I can imagine that RPI is even worse.
55. appropriate data would be for equivalent points in the economic cycle, which can probably only be ascertained in hindsight. not in an (as yet imaginary) electoral cycle ending this year.
mirthios is trying to make a partisan point that probably is not there to be made. clumsy use of statistics is the worst way to make that point. see output of G. Brown for evidence of this.
Labour have cancelled next year’s Spring Conference:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/politics/
Clearing the decks for a general election, leadership election or a mass suicide, or simply running out of money?
57 - Correction, Labour never intended to have a Spring conference, it was just ministers’ words being taken out of context by journalists…
57 - Most likely running out of cash.
56 - it is an interesting suggestion that inflation will be affected by an electoral cycle, imaginary or otherwise. Is this a view you hold uniquely?
56. Would that be the ever changing economic cycle as defined by one G. Brown?
For some reason, the media are making quite a big deal of an endorsement of Labour’s campaign in Glasgow East from some relatively minor ’star’ of Taggart called John Michie. Not being exactly an avid fan of the programme, I wasn’t quite sure who he is, but judging from his photo in the Scotsman, I now realise he’s the one who went on Andrew Neil’s show ‘This Week’ a few months ago to profess his passionate support for Scottish independence!
Surely Labour must have known about this rather embarrassing fact? I’m a bit young to remember clearly but didn’t they run into trouble in the 1980s for accepting an endorsement from Robbie Coltrane in similar circumstances?
63.Will anybody get Rab C Nesbitt’s endorsement? Is he still alive?
62. Celebrity endorsements are getting harder and harder to find as the luvvies turn away from Labour. So even z-listers with embarassing views are being drafted.
As long as no-one gets David Tennant’s endorsement because we woudln’t want accusations of Tardis ballot boxes that are somehow bigger on the inside!
63. Well, the actress who played his wife (I think it was wife - I didn’t watch that programme either!) is an SNP supporter and was touted in the media as a potential candidate for them in Glasgow East, but she ruled herself out because whe had too many work commitments.
63.Rab C Nesbitt - select “Ballot Box” from this menu:
http://www.pagan.clara.net/rab.htm
67.Rabbie - Or even By Election!
“Taggart” is that dreadful show where the participants speak with scots’ accents?
As for Labour Manchester Conference…
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1058193_65m_to_keep_labour_safe
The article says security costs have jumped from £3.9m in 2006 to 6.5m this year.
“Police sources said the bills reflected inflation and the growing size of the conference, not security concerns.”
What does that make the inflation rate? This year’s conference is unlikely to have as many participants or sponsors as in 2006, but even if we accept it stays the same size, that suggests inflation of 33% over two years.
56. You can say what you like but Labour took the credit when we had ecconomic growth, but are saying the problems at the momen are because of global factors. It doesn’t wash and the soundbites about no more boom and bust will come back to haunt Brown and deservedly so
60. I am saying that is not the case - which is why your analysis was so invalid.
61. well it is ever changing until crystallised by the benefit of hindsight - in 20 years we will see the economic cycle of the present pretty clearly in the charts.
Barack speech now on sky
71. meanwhile the opposition parties either blamed global conditions for economic success, or denied it was happening, and are now blaming the govt. for problems.
that is politics.
re 54. I know that most of the pollsters read the site and I am sure that they are aware of the point.
I think this is the first poll in a Scottish Westminster by-election since the Scottish Parliament was created.
72 So the “Golden rule” would be pretty meaningless then until assessed 20+ years later?
76 - The Golden Rule is pretty much meaningless.
76. I would say so - apart from as rhetoric. I don’t even know how it is supposed to make any sense, apart from sounding soothing.
Time to get the “LABOUR ISN’T WORKING” posters out again!
75. “I think this is the first poll in a Scottish Westminster by-election since the Scottish Parliament was created.”
That’s probably true, but if this problem does exist, it would presumably also apply to the Scottish sample in every UK-wide poll that is conducted. That would be a much smaller issue, admittedly, but it’s something they really need to look at.
I still think Gordon created this by election, by negotiating the MP out.
The MP had been claiming high expenses employing his wife and daughter in his house, and resigned because of highly financed ‘depression’, no doubt caused by his being ‘found out’.
Gordon needs a by election win to move Crewe & Nantwich, and Henley 4th place into history. He probably offered the MP a resign and keep the loot deal, thinking he could bag a quick by election in his Scottish heartlands.
Re: BBC reporting of inflation figures:
I submitted a complaint about the ‘11 year high’ figure a little earlier this afternoon. If they don’t just ignore me, which they probably will, I’ll post their response here.
Subject to last minute adjustment, FTSE100 closes at 5171.9
Interesting to note that on the evening of Monday, 8th December 1997 (more than eleven and a half years ago) it closed at 5187.4
79 - Actually, I think the posters to get out are the ones from 2001. Not the “30 days to save the pound” ones, the “You paid the tax - so where are the policemen / nurses / various other improvements in public services” ones, and the one with the picture of a big dustbin with the millenium dome as the lid with the slogan “what will labour waste your money on next?” I thought those were quite good. In 2001 the public were in no mood to listen to anything the Conservative Party said and the wealth of the nation seemed to be increasing; now, I think it would resonate. It might be rebuffed by Godon and harriet quoting numbers of policemen and nurses and other things at us, but no-one believes them any more and people turn off when they come out wit stats.
81- Lets hope it backfires then! Of course if they win by 1 vote, Labour will spin this as a fantastic victory and the begining of Brown Fightback/relaunch number 12.
83 “things can only get better…..”
Re 83 - sorry, my maths are wrong - that’s ten a half years ago!
Sounds uncharacteristically risky for Gord.
anything as long as they don’t get Michael Howard’s racist ones out again
81. Sounds uncharacteristically risky for Gord.
81. “Gordon needs a by election win to move Crewe & Nantwich, and Henley 4th place into history.”
I think Labour actually finished 5th in Henley (behind Tories, Lib Dems, Green and BNP). And even assuming Labour are going to hold Glasgow East with a small majority (still a very big assumption) not even Gordon would have been mad enough to wish this by-election on himself…would he?
interesting conspiracy theory. I doubt it is actually true, but it is convenient.
I guess even if Lab lose, they are still the “big hitters” in Glasgow politics, and Cameron is out of the headlines for a couple of weeks.
89. What the anti-semitic Labour ones ?
93. http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2005/01/28/will-the-pig-poster-cost-jewish-votes/
don’t remember them, but same view.
Most people don’t pay much attention to the official inflation figures anyway. Most people go by what they are paying at the supermarket for the weekly food. What they are shelling out on bills and what they are spending everytime they drive.
I think most people understand that by using clothing and electrical items, i.e. non essentials, the government can keep the “official” rate artifically low. So, it really doesn’t matter what spin the government/BBC put on it, when people buy their essentials, if *FEELS* like inflation is up in double digits. Thats what will damage the government over the next few months. That, and of course rising unemployment.
89 - or alternatively:
anything, as long as they don’t get Michael Howard’s rubbish ones out again.
To be fair, the Tories did better than expected in that campaign, and Michael Howard was an unexpected beacon of competence and energy in comparison with the previous few years. But I maintain (with absolutely no evidence, mind) that any success was despite rather than because of the poster campaign.
92 - I don’t buy that, I think the Conservatives could do surprisingly well here considering. Plus it allows them to road test a few ideas in relative safety.
ed you must be desperate to get the racism card out again.
It won’t wash any more.
98. are you serious? what do you define as “quite well”?
Lab seem to be guaranteed lots of airtime, and can always frame it as the serious political juggernaut up against the plucky minority SNP that might get a few protest votes.
Con and LD will surely be marginalised?
+ any impact the Davis campaign could have had in “silly season” was obliterated by “serious” byelection buildup.
99. not at all I just despise the sort of campaigning (and politics in general in fact) that can be summarised as “I’m not a racist, but…”
94, not that rubbish again. I bet the people who drew it didn’t even know Howard and Letwin were Jewish - I certainly didn’t. In any case, the ONLY time the Labour Party ever ran it was a splash on the the website. It didn’t make even a single bilboard and if it hadn’t been for the shrieks of feigned outrage, nobody would have noticed at all. Not a very good way to whip up anti-semitism.
102 - A lot of publicity material is released in a very small way in order to get the benefit of free press coverage, posters especially which are hardly ever seen or noticed.
100 - Quite well as in holding vote share fairly steady.
102. I don’t remember it, and judging from that article it may not have been intentional, but it certainly looks crass and insensitive.
102 - Not sure I believe that nobody involved in that poster knew that Howard is Jewish. Not that that means they were being deliberately anti-semitic of course – I don’t think they were.
81. The only thing wrong with the theory is that it would have needed GB to be decisive. Otherwise very plausible, and working in that nobody has talked about the scam in public. It also enables London Labour to get a grip on SLAB post-Wendy. Margaret Curran may be playing for the Scottish labour leadership (having leaked on Wendy).
92. This is Scottish politics, and Cameron doesn’t figure.
98; very successful trials of ideas by the Conservatives so far.
104. surely that won’t mean anything? retaining a tiny vote share whilst riding high in national polls?
I think they would have preferred one they had a chance of beating/scaring Lab in.
I think this must be the first Scottish Westminster by-election where one of the candidates is the ‘incumbent’ MSP (for most of the constituency) - that must surely work in Labour’s favour?
Though having an ‘incumbent’ MEP as their candidate didn’t work out too well in Dunfermline.
109. has she said she will stand down? or will it be two-jobs?
108 - Well yes but this is the by-election that is happening. I really don’t think that Cameron et al will be worrying about only holding vote share in Glasgow.
102 Perhaps you should look up what Lord Janner — a former Labour MP — said about the disgraceful matter.
102 re Fagin/pigs — a dog whistle to Muslim voters deserting Labour over Iraq.
100 A net gain of 33 seats, and significantly reducing Labour leads in most marginal seats was doing quite well.
111. no I’m sure they won’t be worried. the point is that it is not a convenient one for them, and this supports the conspiracy theory idea.
it would probably not have been so clear-cut back when things were actually decided though.
might have been a combination of factors - maybe Lab felt they needed to flush out one or two “snouts in the trough” to show that something is being done, and maybe they picked the politically most convenient such possible example.
110. She has said it will be two-jobs.
113 - would many Muslim voters have considered switching from Labour to Tory over Iraq?
116. I don’t understand how anyone gets away with this.
at the same time that politicos are telling us they need to be paid more to make up for the massive salaries they think they could be getting elsewhere (no-one agrees).
100, 114. If the aim was to show Labour as the serious dominant party, it has massively backfired. Now everyone knows that even a very safe seat isn’t safe any more. This seat is safer than Gordon’s own.
110. She’s been extremely opaque on when she will stand down, saying she will take ’soundings’. On a couple of occasions, interviewers have tried to pin her down on whether that might mean carrying on with the two jobs until the next Holyrood elections in a full three years’ time, and she conspicuously failed to rule that out (she just ignored the question). If she does step down earlier and cause a by-election, I’m wondering if Labour are planning to time it to coincide with the next UK general election, thinking that might minimise the damage.
109. It’s worth remembering that the SNP candidate John Mason also represents a significant chunk of the constituency, and received (I believe) the highest personal vote under the new STV system in Glasgow at last year’s local council elections.
112.
“Lord Janner — a former Labour MP — said about the disgraceful matter.”
was he talking about himself?
116. Aren’t at least two jobs mandatory for Labour politicians?
Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury
Secretary of State for Scotland and Defence
Leader of the House and Lord Privy Seal and Minister for Women and Head of the Equalities Office and Deputy Leader and Party Chairman
Has it got anything to do with salaries and expenses?
117.
“would many Muslim voters have considered switching from Labour to Tory over Iraq?”
Only mad ones. Tories would have been further into George Bush’s snug than even Tony Blair was if we had the misfortune to have them in government at the time.
123 - as somebody said, IDS was Bush’s poodle’s poodle.
There has been an awful lot of talk on here about how the contest will be close and this may be turn out to be right. So far though, based on the detail of the ICM poll, Labour are in front and even if the intention to vote figures were a bit wrong hold a lead in that.
I am still hovvering over the idea of betting SNP with the expectation of an odds shift closer to election day and then laying off or hedging by backing Labour. What is putting me off is that I think the chances of SNP vitctory are somewhat being overplayed at this moment and its difficult to filter it out.
Not saying they cant do it but so far the evidence doesnt support the much of the talk yet.
123 - you can’t be MORE at war
The median point of those betting odds on turnout is at about 37%. I was predicting c.31% but I’m thinking it may be higher. I’ve never thought it would be 25%.
I predict a Labour majority of more than 3,000 OR an SNP majority of more than 2,000 but not in between.
122. If you count all her titles, Harriet Harman has got at least seven jobs - Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, Chair of the Labour Party, Member of Parliament for Peckham, Leader of the House of Commons, Minister for Women, Minister for Equality and Lord Privy Seal. If you wanted to be clever (why not) you could chuck in Privy Councillor, Queen’s Counsel and member of the Labour NEC to get it up to ten. In fact, there are probably others I don’t know about.
127 - I predict something in between.
126. we were arguably the “moderating influence” in that particular coalition, we could have chosen to be the hawks.
125. it must be quite close, or Paddy Power would have paid out by now
(from prev thread0
“wasn’t Cameron going on about ‘personal responsibility’ just last week?
Why is someone’s weight their own responsibility, but their debt not?”
Because no one in a civilised law-abiding society can stop you or me from stuffing our mouths with refined carboydrates if that is our want. They can, however (if you haven’t got a Tory government) regulate the greedy Tory lending institutions to prevent them from allowing people who cannot afford it to put themselves so deep into debt that they themselves will never pay for it (and rarely do the institutions pay for it either) while the rest of us do.
128. I think it is reasonable to let ministers off with also being MPs, don’t you? we could even, at a stretch, allow them some honorary titles on top, and maybe a party job that doesn’t involve much work.
but MP + MSP is outrageous. as was mayor of London + MP.
and scotland + defence sounds like a big job.
126.
“you can’t be MORE at war”
Thankfully we’ve never had Liam Fox as Minister for War. The difference would be between a feigned victim of seduction and that famous lady in the cafe in the film who screams: “yes….Yes…YES!!!!!!!”
131. So if all this regulation to stop lenders lending to the irresponsible is so desirable, how come your lot have not done so in the last 11 years?
133 - is that meant to be an answer to something?
131 - are Northern Rock still offering mortgages?
135 - please don’t encourage him.
132. “I think it is reasonable to let ministers off with also being MPs, don’t you?”
Actually, the only reason I started thinking along those lines is that Labour had the cheek a few days ago of trying to deflect from Margaret Curran’s discomfort by accusing Alex Salmond of having four jobs - ie. First Minster of Scotland, MP, MSP and SNP leader. Although how he was supposed to become First Minister without holding at least three of those jobs is beyond me.
So, by Labour’s own definition, MP for Peckham must count towards Harman’s impressive haul of jobs.
131 - They can regulate the manufacturers of complex carbohydrates as well - ask anyone who has worked in the confectionary or alcohol business.
There is absolutely no difference in terms of forming a policy from the perspective of autonomy, and both can be equally difficult situations to escape.
However, I’ve been fat and I’ve been in debt, and there is no doubt that the latter is far, far worse.
138 - I remember the Labour candidate in my constituency at the last GE getting worked up over the fact that the sitting MP was also President of the Lib Dems and hence not totally dedicated to being a local MP. I dont know if anyone asked her whether she would rule out ever accepting a ministerial role in the name of consistency.
Apparently there’s a minor furore over the government’s plans to save every thought and dream, sorry, save every email and phone call for twelve months:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/jul/15/privacy.internet
What gets me is the ignorance of everyone about this - even, it seems, the information commissioner. He Just Doesn’t Get It. This email-saving plan is part of an EU Directive already nodded through. We therefore have no choice - we have to apply it in the UK, and the database must be available to our European friends. The deal is already done.
The idea was concocted years ago in Brussels, but met opposition. However when 7/7 happened, europhile Charles Clarke saw his opportunity to quickly enforce something he couldn’t possibly hope to pass in the UK parliament. He proposed the law be revived. Brussels eagerly agreed - more power for Europe! more Europewide agencies! - and thus the Directive was born.
Now they complain in London. But it’s too late. This is how Europe works. Our laws aren’t discussed or voted on any more. They just “appear” from Belgium. And we have to submit.
Europe is not a democracy. It’s more like Tsarist Russia. Ukases emerge from St Petersburg, and the commissars get to work across the steppes.
The raw stats of the ICM poll are quite interesting:
Labour - 131 - 43.2%
SNP - 124 - 40.9%
Tory - 28 - 9.2%
Lib - 10 - 3.3%
Oth - 10 - 3.3%
Considering the questions about the application of the previous voting intentions I ran a programme on how it would look on weighted and unweighted figures.
On unweighted Labour is ahead on weighting fully to the 2005 intentions and taking an average of the 2005 & 2007 results. The SNP only ahead on applying 2007 results.
On weighted results the SNP goes ahead when taking an average of the 2005 & 2007 results.
This could get interesting.
141 - I bet the rest of the EU are take a more measured approach to adopting the directive.
141 - Have you picked up that the Polish president has u-u-turned and now stated that “Poland will not be an obstacle to the [Lisbon] treaty’s ratification”?
141 well said. The EU is corrupting every facet of UK law
144. Yes. He’s been sat on. I suspect the Czechs will also succumb.
The only hope for European democracy will be you brave noble Irish!
Interestingly, I read an article yesterday (think it was the Guardian, too knacked after a day of Tom Knox in-the-field research to check) that said Cowan will stall in October, hoping to put off having a referendum altogether. The idea is he simply won’t call a vote unless he is guaranteed a win, because another No would probably end his career, and probably consign Ireland to some future European slowlane. Fracturing the EU.
So the thinking is that he will argue, in Brussels, that the pro-European cause is best served by NOT calling a revote in Ireland which could possibly be lost.
Who knows? Who cares?? Brussels rolls on whatever. The real showdown will come when we elect a genuinely eurosceptic Tory government in the UK. The first truly eurosceptic government in a major country that Europe will have seen.
The Economist thinks this will lead to the break-up of the EU. I doubt that. But I think it will change things. At last.
I’ve gone for 40%-45% at 4-1 for value, but in terms of likelihood, I would opt for for 35%-40% at 9-4.
Mike seems somewhat friendless on this occasion with his pick of 45%-50%
124.
“IDS was Bush’s poodle’s poodle.”
obviously stood too close to the clippers!
Jim M - I refer you to Forfar loon yesterday and the discussion this morning!
135.
“is that meant to be an answer to something?”
As an answer, it is seriously superior to your questions, but that doesn’t say much.
146 - sit on a pole: Sounds uncomfortable.
It’s easy to blame the EU for all in the directives, but it is the fault of the British government for gold-plating them.
A case in point is that two EU directives (Insurance Mediation and Distance Marketing) had the aim of creating a single market. They totalled a mere SEVENTEEN pages.
Whilst most countries did not need to gold-plate them, it led in the UK to the Insurance Code of Business, which runs to A HUNDRED AND NINETY FOUR pages.
143. Not true. All countries must enforce the Directive by the end of this year (making our promised parliamentary discussions a laughable charade); many have done so already, some are going further than the UK.
But the point is: the EU “law” is already in force. And now we are having a “debate”??
Apologies for the wodge of text, but here’s the wiki chapter on the EU directive, just to make things clear:
“On 15 March 2006 the European Union formally adopted Directive 2006/24/EC, on “the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC” [1][2]
The Directive requires Member States to ensure that communications providers must retain, for a period of between 6 months and 2 years, necessary data as specified in the Directive
* to trace and identify the source of a communication;
* to trace and identify the destination of a communication;
* to identify the date, time and duration of a communication;
* to identify the type of communication;
* to identify the communication device;
* to identify the location of mobile communication equipment.
The data is required to be available to competent national authorities in specific cases, “for the purpose of the investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crime, as defined by each Member State in its national law”.
The Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) committee of the European Parliament had recommended that data be retained for a maximum of only 12 months; that it be made available only with a judicial warrant, and only in connection with crimes serious enough to qualify for a European arrest warrant; and that communications providers be compensated for the cost of the data storage. [3] But these recommendations were put aside after private representations were made, over the heads of the MEPs who had been specialising on the dossier, by the German government to the German leaders of the dominant Socialist and Christian Democrat blocs in the Parliament. .
The Directive as adopted covers fixed telephony, mobile telephony, Internet access, Internet email and Internet telephony. Member States are required to transpose it into national law within 18 months - ie no later than September 2007. However, they may if they wish postpone the application of the Directive to Internet access, Internet email and Internet telephony for a further 18 months after this date. A majority of Member States have indicated that they will indeed exercise this option.
Member States retain the flexibility to go substantially further than the Directive mandates. Subject to notification to the Commission, they may require data to be held longer than the two year maximum set by the Directive. They retain the freedom under Article 15(1) of the earlier Directive 2002/58/EC to legislate official access to the retained data for purposes beyond those set out in the Data Retention Directive. (Germany, for example, has indicated that it seeks to make retained data admissible in certain civil copyright cases [4]). And they maintain the freedom to require retention of additional data, beyond that specified by the Directive. (For example, the draft of the Danish executive order to implement the Directive [5] seeks to require ISPs to log the source, time and destination of every single internet data packet, rather than just the details of logins and logouts to the ISP that the Directive actually seems to require).
As of January 2007 there are still several months to go before the deadline for national laws to be adopted to implement the Directive. But at the time the Directive was passed there were three countries in the EU with legal data retention actually in force. Italy retains data for four years and Ireland for three years. The UK has an extensive system of data retention, under a voluntary agreement made with the industry, but it had not yet been placed on a statutory basis. Belgium had re-introduced the possibility of data retention on 13 June 2005 with a new telecommunication law, but the royal decree stipulating what kind of data should be stored, by which market parties and for what period of time was never issued.”
ConHome has two speeches today - video of Cameron full of blame and no solutions and transcript of Osborne full of kiddy-boy rhetoric and no beef.
153. Well both clearly superior to you who, as always, is just full of sh*t.
Loathe to go against Mike but can’t see the Glasgow east voters getting more than 40% out.
Inflation up - again!
Last summer there were cuts in energy prices. Can anybody remember when? Is the rise due to these cuts dropping out of the calcs, or can we “look forward” to them dropping out of the calcs next month, thereby pushing inflation up again.
Has there ever been a by-election with turnout that has exceeded the previous GE?
153 - You should only ever say one thing in a speech. There’s a very entertaining film of Harold Macmillan relaying advice that he was given after his maiden speech to that effect by Lloyd George.
Just in case you can’t work it out, David Cameron is saying: “Gordon Brown’s economic record isn’t what it’s cracked up to be” and George Osborne is saying: “the economy has got worse so we might have to put up taxes on taking office”. These seem like perfectly normal messages for Opposition politicians to wish to put forward, and the vitriol that you spew out appears to have splashed in your eyes if you can’t see that.
Evening all, on BBC SCotland they have just shown a copy of a letter from the Labour candidate addressed to the SNP candidate by name asking him for his support!!
Folks you are all getting carried away comparing Glasgow East with English seats. It may as well be on another planet.
Most people in Glasgow East couldn’t care less about who their MP is and even if John Mason wins, in 6 months time if you stop most people on the street they will probably tell you they still have a Labour MP. I understand that there are 4,000 postal votes if I correctly read a posting on here a few days ago. That amounts to only 6% of the electorate. In the absense of an effective CLP before David Marshall’s resignation, I doubt many of them will be Labour campaign inspired.
I just cannot see the turnout exceeding 35%. Last year’s Holyrood election and council elections in the Eastend were fairly exciting as the substantial fall in Margaret Curran’s majority, from 6178 to 3934 and more so in Shettleston where Frank McAveety’s majority fell from 6347 to 2881. That means in 4 years from 2003 to 2007 the Labour majority over the SNP fell from 12,525 to 6,815. That was before the SNP became the Government in Scotland.
I believe there will be hugely different turnouts across the various polling stations and this together with the contents of the 4,000 postal votes will determine this election. Places like Garrowhill and Mount Vernon will probably see 50%+ turnouts but equally places like Barlanark will probably see <20% turnouts.
There will be little or no tactical voting. As I have said since day 1, it will be Lab v SNP and then completely separately LibDem v Tory. Tories and LibDems will either turnout for their own candidate or not bother at all to vote. Both Ian Robertson for the LibDems and Davena Rankin for the Tories are proving to be able candidates and fighting hard campaigns. Both deserve to keep their deposits and from what I have seen and heard so far, they should do. For both parties that would be a great result. Anything over 5% will be a bonus.
Margaret Curran needs to get the traditional Labour vote out. The SNP need to get the more than 5,000 SNP voters from last year who voted in this constituency for John Mason and his 2 colleagues who all got elected to Glasgow Council out to vote. Don’t underestimate the fact John Mason last year achieved the highest personal vote of ANY councillor of any political colour in Glasgow.
Beyond that the SNP will be seeking to get the potential switchers and Labour will just be wanting a big turnout. The lower the poll the more likely John Mason wins. I still say it will be John Mason by under 1,000 after 1 or 2 recounts.
153 - Wage Slave - So you hate the tories, you can’t stand labour and you ridicule lib dems, do you actually support any party or are you just waiting for a violent uprising?
Just a quick OT, oil falls most in about 3 years.
Its perfectly possible that it will fall further. Punters (like myself) who take an occasional interest in betting markets such may still want to look at the market as its possible the overall trend (barring a big shoot out in the Gulf) will be down a little more though the falls have been heavy.
It didnt quite reach the $150 that I suggested a sell at but there may be profit there for the brave and quick of thought as the furtures speculators have bought too high.
152. What policy area is this headed under? i.e. What “opt-out” do we need Cameron to negotiate to get rid of this travesty?
154. Now now. Whilst I agree that Wage Slave’s contributions are generally, how can I put it kindly, lacking in quality and insight I think it’s a trifle unkind to describe them as s**t. Would it not be more positive to encourage him to improve himself?
42. I imagine if there was some disastrous event for Obama, he would have to have a VP pick that dealt with the “problem area”. It would look weak enough if it looked like Clinton had wangled her way onto the ticket now, but if he did it when he was already looking weak it would be disastrous for him. Just can’t see it happening.
Incidentally, someone mentioned Dodd on the previous thread. Lay his odds too - not a chance in hell. Rendell is also highly unlikely in my book, and you should put the house on Pelosi not getting it.
Warner, Bloomberg look like good odds and it might be worth putting a few quid on Brese