Did Blair get value from the controversial election loans?
November 29th, 2006
-
How much did the bill-boards help Labour to victory?
There is something rather ironic about the fact that a big part of the money Labour borrowed in the run-up to the 2005 General Election was spent on bill-boards like the one above promoting the Government’s successes with the economy and interest rate policy.
This was a key theme in the huge advertising blitz in the run-up to May 5th and on which a large part of the borrowed money was spent.
These are the loans, of course, which are at the heart of Labour’s current financial crisis and, possibly even more seriously, are central to the Scotland Yard’s “honours” inquiry.
-
But were the financial consequences that we are now seeing and having to deal with the police investigation worth it? Will Labour’s reputation for economic competence be affected by the party’s current financial turmoil? Were those posters really worth the price?
Compared with the election land-slides of 1997 and 2001 the 2005 General Election was a close result. Labour lost one in seven of its 2001 votes and ended up with a margin on votes of just 3%. Yet in terms of seats the 36% national vote share produced an overall Commons majority of getting on for 70.
It is hard to say, of course, what finally caused the electorate to vote in the way it did. But one thing seems certain after the party funding row - billboard campaigns like the one featured will not be used on anything like the same scale next time.
-
If strict national spending limits are imposed, as Labour is reported to want, then the big poster campaigns will surely be the first casualty.
The best way to invest precious campaigning cash is probably on things like the centralised direct marketing operation that the Tories established and utilised so well in 2005. They were able to supplement weak local parties in key seats and target spending where it was going to be most effective.
A good measure of the effectiveness of this approach was that the Tories ended up with 15-20 more seats than the seat predictors were suggesting and those who “bought” Tory seats in the final week on the election spread markets made nice profits.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
test
Mike, do you no longer sleep? Posters like the one you’ve illustrated or the pigs will fly posters I don’t think Labour would even try again. By the next GE the memories of black wednesday will be even more vague. They have been in Government so long they will be forced to come up with positive reasons to vote for them (ie child poverty reduction).
Dennis Canavan, former Labour MP (West Stirlingshire, then Falkirk West, Oct 1974-1999), Independent MP (1999-2000), and since 1999 Independent MSP (majority 10,000), could be reaquiring his Labour Party membership card. And Tory leader Annabelle Goldie is parading her Scotch credentials by calling for us to try, again, to host the UEFA European football championships. Now… where did I put that facepaint…
*“St Andrew’s Day could see Canavan u-turn”, The Herald
If scare stories about “seperatism” work “40 times” (according to the Rt Hon Douglas Alexander, Paisley and Renfrewshire South MP, Minister for English Transport - the Scottish Minister for Transport and Telecommunications being Tavish Scott MSP, Lib Dem), are they guaranteed to work 41 times?, or 42 times? or… you get the idea… . “dire warnings about separatism may not work every time”:
*“McConnell seeking firmer ground as party’s base crumbles”, The Herald
The patronage of Jack McConnell, First Minister of Scotland, earns you “the lifestyle of a special adviser, earning between £60,000 and £80,000″. I must start grovelling one day.
The Daily Record, the in-house bogroll of the Scottish Labour Party, has an online survey asking “According to a new poll, 52% of Scots back independence. Do you agree with them?” 60% of the readers of this bastion of the Union say yes!
… and according to The Herald Sir Christopher Evans has made a “formal demand” for repayment of his £1m loan to the Labour Party.
Is there any good news for the British Labour Party in the English press?
What a silly question. Of course the poster campaigns were worth it - Labour won. The parties you need to ask this of are the Tories and Lib Dems who both spent millions and lost. All that anti-immigration stuff that Howard plastered the streets with was a disgrace and I am sure put many voters off. Then there was the ridiculous Lib Dem poster campaign where all the money seemed to be spent in seats that did not matter to them. Labour got this one right. What we have to ensure now is that we cannot be outspent by the Tories who will use any ruse to get back to power.
The answer is more poster TV publicity stunts (with paid rent-a-crowd actors who actually don’t actually like Labour) and less posters around the country.
Here are some New Labour Poster Campaign ideas:
1/ Violent Crime Quadrupled under Labour: Crime pays under Labour
2/ 3000 New Criminal Offences: we take crime seriously, unlike Tories
3/ 2 Million Unemployed: Don’t let the Tories take us back to 3 Million
4/ 650,000 Dead in Iraq: Don’t let the Lib Dems bring Saddam back
5/ Council Tax Doubled: It’s better than the Tory Poll Tax
6/ ID Cards: Don’t let the Tories let the terrorists win by defending your freedom.
7/ Pensions Black Hole: The Robert Maxwell Pension Scheme was our inspiration! (except for MPs)
8/ Privately Owned Hospitals: Don’t let the Tories re-nationise them.
9/ Dodgy Dossiers: We were completely innocent. Hutton said so.
10/ 24 Hour Piss-ups: We couldn’t arrange one in a brewery, but then we don’t give a Four X about Last Orders or drugs or gambling or anything else. Vote for the Party Party. Vote Labour.
3 - One question for you Stuart. How does the SNP’s stance on the destruction of historic Scottish Regiments sit with their commitment to independence? Surely Scotland won’t bother spending any money on a military?
6/ Surely an independent Scotland should get at least one nuclear sub when assets are divided up fairly between Scotland and the rest of the UK. One sub that could destroy London. Isn’t that enough?
Clear signs of poll deprivation here: people trotting out stale propaganda lines at the crack of dawn. Does YouGov realise its responsibility to addicts?
We are a relatively sophisticated political audience so we may be too ready to dismiss the impact of advertising and stunts, but I personally think the Labour posters last year had virtually no impact at all (some were very hard even to make out at a glance) and the Tory posters were positively helpful to Labour: I used them again and again in my local campaigning to illustrate my theme that I was under attack from a virulently right-wing Tory party, and this trumped dissatisfaction over Iraq for many floating Lib/Lab voters. Others may disagree but regardless of their merits, it would be a whole area of campaign spending which could be banned (like TV advertising) with no loss to useful political debate.
It’s harder to assess the effect of direct mail letters. All parties attempt to identify target audiences (e.g. pensioners or families) and address their supposed concerns, and this must in principle be potentially productive and also a useful contribution to politics: why not write to people about what interests them? I wasn’t very impressed by either our standard letters or the Tory ones that I saw, but that’s again a matter of opinion. There is no doubt whatever, though, that the ability to send unlimited direct mail to target seats blows a gaping hole in constituency spending limits. I think the test for the purpose of spending limits should be where the recipient lives, not where it comes from.
What about direct mail in between elections? It’s widely thought that opinions build up over years, so if you write to voters or telephone-canvass in a target seat every few months you may have won the election before the election is called. Peter Bradley has nalysed inter-election spending in his own and other target seats and found the Tories outspent Labour by up to 10-1 in this way, and this presumably helped them win his seat. On the other hand, incumbents have a built-in advantage in making their views known, and the proposed allowance to enable sitting MPs to send a report twice a year to constituents clearly helps incumbency too, even though it will not be allowed to contain partisan material (checked by the Commons authorities, as with current taxpayer-funded material). It’s important that non-incumbents should be able to put their arguments in between elections, but also need to avoid loading the dice to rich parties even more than has historically been the case. Some sort of annual constituency spending limit for all sides seems to make sense, and perhaps there’s a case for specifically limiting spending on postage and commercial delivery, so that parties who want to write to everyone have to find the volunteers to do it - rewarding parties with lots of keen helpers rather than parties who know a few millionaires.
6 Alex
As you know, the Scottish National Party opposed the destruction of the historic Scottish regiments. There is a PDF link to the SNP’s defence policy here:
*http://www.snp.org/policies/international-affairs/copy_of_index_html
Scotland needed regiments before the 1707 Union with England, and we will need them afterwards. An independent Scotland most certainly will have to spend large sums of money on the miltary, including infantry. For an idea of how our military will look, it is probably a good idea to cast a glance at the armed forces of the Nordic countries. Personally, I am pro-NATO, and if-push-comes-to-shove I am certain that I am in the majority of Scots in that question (SNP political correctness aside).
For an outline of public finances in an independent Scotland, please see the links at:
*http://www.snp.org/independence/questions/scotlandpaysherway/
… and this excellent document by brainbox Andrew Wilson:
“Moving Scotland beyond the subsidy myth - Why economic growth is what matters” (note: PDF download!)
7. Mystic Moon
Mmmm… Scotland is not, and will not be, interested in nuclear proliferation. England must take that responsibility onto her own shoulders (bye bye Faslane, Chapelcross, Dounreay etc). Where are you going to put those 4 Vanguard subs by the way? Rochester is roughly the same distance from central London as Faslane is from central Glasgow, so how about the Medway?
Therefore, we will use our share of the UK’s nuclear weapon assets as a negotiation tool for some other assets. How about a larger-than-10% share of the collection of the “British” (sic) Museum? The Elgin Marbles, the Portland Vase, the Rosetta Stone, the Lewis chessmen… c’mon, that lot has got to be worth more than one Vanguard submarine plus armaments?
Please note: it is not SNP policy to destroy London. The Labour Party on the other hand…
4 One major spend by Lib Dems IMO useful were supplements in local freeby sheets. OK not all of them were in the tightest marginals, but I am sure those gave a good counterblast to Labour posters and the Tory poster vans - at least one of which spent a good period in this constituency!
9/ As far as I am concerned we should move to banning the bomb. Labour’s nuclear policy is pathetic. USA has 12000 warheads, plus subs, but they don’t think that is an issue, but I sense from what you say that you would rather have Gordon Brown’s finger on that nuclear button than Alex Salmond’s.
Are you going to let English nuclear subs enter Scottish waters?
You have so much wind, mountains and water, why not go completely green on alternative energy? Run some cables from Iceland and you could have plenty of their geo-thermal electricity as well.
So what will you do with all that North Sea oil?
As for any art in England, as a token of good will, I think we can throw in Tracy Emin’s Unmade Bed! (throw in the North Sea that is!)
Nick, I must disagree. The Labour party is unable to find donors and therefore attempts to change the rules of the game to eliminate a Conservative funding advantadge. I would advise them to be extremely careful here. If such a bill is ramroaded home, there is nothing to stop the Conservatives, once in power, enacting bills that change election rules to our own advantage. Basic fairness is called for instead of saying “we have no cash so we will stop spending”.
You are a reasonable man and will admit, I am sure, that a “communications allowance” is effectively ten grand for each incumbent to spend on campaigning. It doesn’t really matter if it is Labour party branded, as long as MP X in a tight marginal mails out a flyer to everybody saying “MP X - Working for YOU” and spinning his victories, as he will, it is campaign literature. Tory MPs voted against this, Labour for it. So now we see Labour using its majority to a) vote themselves 10k each for their marginal campaigns and declare it exempt from campign fund limits and b) stop their rivals from spending to match or better them.
The public will see that for the wilful gerrymandering it is. Isn’t the vast advantage enjoyed by Labour in the boundaries, an advantage that requires the Tories to have a ten point lead to even nose past the winning post, enough? How much more of a lead does Labour want from the starting gate before it will compete?
Labour should be careful here. I am sure target seats will draw up alternate campaign plans - one for normality, another for if Labour attempts this gerrymandering. It might involve spending a lot of money faster than usual but I am sure that the campaigns will be in place and professionally funded and executed.
Political parties IMO have a duty to raise funds where they can and not from the taxpayer. The Tories are in relatively good shape with the $30m + asset of Smith Sq to set against our liabilities, and that is after we repaid the loans to those lenders who refused to allow us to identify their names. Fine - but here’s your cash back.
Labour teeters on the brink of bankruptcy. The way out is to go to its supporters. In the past Labour has had plenty of millionaires support them. What it looks like to a partisan from the other side of politics is “Now we can’t give them any titles, they won’t pony up”. I think all major political parties should try to avoid burdening the taxpayer. Here’s hoping Labour comes to its senses on funding.
“even though it will not be allowed to contain partisan material (checked by the Commons authorities, as with current taxpayer-funded material)”
so not checked at all then.
I thought Labour got in on the direct mail act long before the Tories.
Indeed, I remember one DM agency in London claiming in 1997, ‘It was us wot won it.’ - although I suppose they would, wouldn’t they?
I have a theory that posters are more useful for making activists feel that something is being done - especially the smaller lamppost plackards. In my experience, it’s worth putting these up good and early if only to avoid the endless distracting stream of activists wandering in and insisting that putting these posters up in their neighbourhood is the top priority for the campaign to the exclusion of all other activities.
BTW the electoral commission has published definitive proof that the loans were not at commercial rates. I’m surprised this has not been a bigger story in the news as Labour are going to have to admit they broke the law.
re 15. It’s the second lead in the Times.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2477253,00.html
11 Mystic Moon
Nope. If Scotland regains her sovereignty then the Rt Hon member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath - Oor Gordon - will not have a seat in the English Parliament, let alone be her Prime Minister.
“Are you going to let English nuclear subs enter Scottish waters?”
I will assume you are using the collective “you”, as I personally will have very, very little say in the matter. If we are a member of NATO (which looks likely) then probably yes, if we are not, then probably no. But I would not count any chickens as far as that is concerned. Of course, what the Scottish government wants, and what the English government actually does in practice may not be the same thing.
The geo-thermal cables from Iceland idea is certainly well worth looking into, and I seem to recall it has been researched. Scottish utility news: Glasgow-based Scottish Power are likely to get bought by Basque giant Iberdrola, of Bilbao. This will leave Centrica (Windsor), British Energy (Livingston), and Scottish & Southern (Perth) as the only remaining UK-based power companies.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/6191282.stm
Personally, I do not go in for much of that “green” energy crap. I am perfectly happy with spewing large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere - someone else can tidy up after me, thank you very much. Trivial detail: I never “recycle” paper, glass or plastic - total waste of time and energy.
“So what will you do with all that North Sea oil?”
Sell it. To you guys, amongst others…
What price would you like to pay for our water by the way? What price are the Welsh offering you? - we can knock off a few Euros if you like. That’s the market economy for you.
I strongly support your Tracey Emin proposal. Can we actually bung her in the North Sea too? And can we throw in Damien Hirst, Marcus Harvey, the Chapman brothers, Sarah Lucas, Fiona Rae and all the other d*ckheads too. Bring back proper, representational, skilful art!
Report in todays Guardian on the BAE (alleged) bribes scandal, naming the Mr fixit as Wafic Said described as a friend of Peter Mandelson and a contributor to Conservative Party funds (£500,000)backing both sides to win!
This Tory Direct Mail thing cannot be underestimated. If the national cap is lowered and caps are applied to constituency expenditure for the year prior to a poll at a level equivalent or bellow the c£10k expenses limit for a four to five week formal campaigning in a constituency this will severely restrict the ability of well funded national parties to boost ‘weak local parties’.
After all even with mailstort is hard to see a direct mail operation getting more than four letters out for each pound spent and that means you can’t write to a target group of 40,000 electors once a month (as the Tories did in some places) in the run up to the calling of a General Election AND do any other campaigning.
No bad thing really, but then I’m a relatively poor Liberal Democrat!
Stuart, a serious question. Do the Scots have enough population to make them a viable nation state? It seems to me that if there is a majority for independence in Scotland it is wafer thin and any move towards it would lead to large numbers of Scots (more than normal) emigrating to England. Can you really run a country with so few people?
I am a fan of self-determination, really, but see the “desire” for independence as a bit chattering classes - there’s no real prospect of it so it’s safe to support. If the Scots were truly faced with an English border I believe there would be a rush to Unionism, but that’s just a feeling I have.
Certainly every Tory must be tempted by a perpetually Conservative England with smaller bills - but I think the Union is worth fighting for, despite that siren song.
20.”Certainly every Tory must be tempted by a perpetually Conservative England ”
In 2005 Labour got a majority of English MPs too (even if they were outpolled by the tories in total votes cast). So I’m not sure it would perpetually Conservative.
Another negative Labour thread. Getting a bit monotonous.
22. To be fair, the loans was the main political news yesterday.
Interesting article Mike as usual. Where can we get hold of the Yougov people to get them to publish their poll? I can see I am not the only one going through cold turkey here.
I don’t think last times posters helped much except as Nick Palmer points out, the Conservative ones seemed to help Labour.
You do have to laugh at the way Labour is moaning about funds though. There was a time when they seemed to be getting more money than us and even outspent us at the last GE (as I understand it).
I think we could do with a return to soap box politics as that is more likely to engage the electorate. It was how our most successful PM (in terms of votes cast) won in 1992.
Mike: “Labour lost one in seven of its 2001 votes and ended up with a margin on votes of just 3%. Yet in terms of seats the 36% national vote share produced an overall Commons majority of getting on for 70.”
More proof, if any were needed, that we do not live in a democracy.
Andrea on normal boundaries (and they will change) we win in England. And will keep winning. But I’m a Unionist all the same.
Stuart Dickinson
The medway is not big enough to take a vangauard sub, the severn, Thames and perhaps the Humber. The Mersey has far to many sand banks. i supose the old vickers factory in Barrow could house them. Doubt you’ll get much love in the Scottish infantry for independence though. You get B*gger all from the Royal Navy.
Thanks Andrea 23. Loans and party funding are the big overnight story. If it’s negative to Labour then that is because of the financial problems that face the party seem to be bigger than with the other parties.
I was trying to take a different angle by looking at what the loans had actually funded. The hope was that this would get a thread going on whether this sort of election campaigning is effective and value for money.
Also Geothermal energy in Scotland would not yield that great a result it’s not near enough to a MAJOR divergent rift and thus the high magma nearer to the surface.
27 Admiral Penketh. Now, now Admiral, the Royal Navy is allowed to bugger in NuLabs Navy ….. just rum and the lash left to tackle ….. although I understand there’s a leather bar in ….. sorry someone at the gates …
The knocking Labour threads are getting a bit predictable here now. Shame.
31. The orchestrated ‘it’s not fair’ moaning from Labour posters is getting even more predictable. This is Mike’s site, not yours.
29 Admiral Penketh. As you appear PBs resident authority on the subject, isn’t there a rift of the plates somewhere off the west coast that caused a large tsumani up the Bristol Channel around 1600 ?
26. Commentator, what doeas “normal boundaries” mean”
On 2005 real boundaries, you would have lost England. It’s a fact.
The tories would have won in 1951, 1955, 1959, 1964, 1974 (1), 1979, 1983, 1987 and 1992
Labour in 1970, 1997, 2001 and 2005
Hugh Parliament in 1950 and 1974 (2)
Stuart - do you know whether the SNP is against nuclear weapons being located within Scotland or just owning them?
The reason I ask is that I assume that if it is the latter, then a fudge would be worked out whereby Scotland makes money by selling nukes to (what remains of) Britain as well as reaping the financial benefits of renting out naval bases to Britain (in which the nukes could still be based) and securing a continued income for local workers and suppliers in the area.
34 - Andrea, in 1970? That was an election in which the Conservatives won an overall majority…so I’d be amazed if they were behind in England then.
PS I think you mean 1966.
36. John, sorry, it should have been 1966
20 - Does Scotland have enough people to be viable as a nation? If Iceland can manage it with a population less than 300,000, and Ireland can comfortably manage it with 4Mn and Norway with 4.5Mn, then Scotlands 5Mn should cope admirably…
28,31 Fair Enough, but it would be nice occasionaly to discuss something other than Labour’s “troubles” or why Labour’s poll lead isn’t real, why Gordon is not liked by women (although liked by men) or why Labour’s debts matter more than the Tories larger debts. etc etc
Of course it’s Mike site, but it might be a good idea to broaden things a bit if he wants to maintain the interest of non-Tories here. If you beleive the betting markets/polss there’s still a good chance that Labour could win/be the largest party next time.
There has been a move away from the Tories in the polls in the past month, anyone would think that it was Labour who were not doing so well.
I am always fascinated by getting to the bottom of what polls actually mean - so the debate about methods yesterday was good. Even if it was in the backdrop of a negative story.
37. yes, I meant it. I didn’t even check the 1970 results.
1970 was a 70+ Con majority in England.
12/13: This misses the point that it’s already permissible to use the Incidental Expenses Allowance to fund a report to constituents, and lots of MPs do it (the proposed allowance simply separates out the expenditure, and as I understand it will mean the IEP can’t be used for this). The scrutiny is quite rigorous - any reference to parties is banned, and individual wording is challenged. It’s not a substitute for political campaigning, though I agree it is useful to MPs to show what they’re doing in a positive way. Whether we actually want to force MPs to communicate less is debatable - perhaps, instead, the reports should include an equally non-partisan contribution from the runner-up in the constituency.
39 - My interesting question for Stuart is what would the SNP plan to do about Currency and Central Banking in the event of independance? Create a (new) currency - the Scottish Poond (sic)? Or have 1:1 convertability to English Sterling but with no influence on BoE Monetary Policy. Or join the Euro?
RE 40 Jonathan, yes there is a good chance that Labour could win the next GE though I would point out there is plenty of time between now and then for them to lose it as well.
The Loans issue is making big news. Mikes angle is a good one. Was it worth spending the money. Clearly not. Although Nick Palmer does contend that there most effective posters were put up by the Conservatives so they did not pay for them.
If you were controlling the election budget would you borrow to put up that poster?
Jack W yes there was a Tsunami back then and also one in Portugal not long afet IIRC created by a earthquake. However a earthquake can be caused by many things other than Volcanic activity which losely we would need in the form of Iceland’s flowing lava out of the (Northern tip of the Atlantic) Rift to make geothermal viable for anything more than a town of say 40,000. The costs would be hugely disproportionate. Perhaps in the distant future with a huge advancement in technology the numbers with which geothermal energy can be viable to in Scotland can be overcome.
RE 35. Dear Stephen that would be a good solution however, my understanding and I’m sure Stuart can correct me if i’m wrong is no nuclear at all in Scotland.
The reason the Tories are in the ascendent on this and other blogs is simple, Labour are in government. When Dave (is he back?) is in government and everything is turning to s**t, you won’t be able to find a Tory for love or money.
Those people in think that with the UK shorn of Scotland the Tories will romp it in England could be making a mis-judgement.
Indpendence for Scotland, will cause political changes in England too. Labour and the LibDems will be forced to do some ‘real talking.’ The re-alingnment of the left much discussed could then become a reality. Liberal Conservatives, certainly the remaining pro-Europeans might like belonging to a party where their views are not an anathema. Once the United Kingdom no longer exists, then the present political structure, will also, no longer exist!
12,42 — it might be better if the Commons committee checked MP’s communications for barely-personalised boilerplate propaganda from party hq.
Surely all this “communication” is what the local paper is for. Give the MP a fortnightly column and rotate the “off” week amongst the opposition parties.
Btw, after the last election I’m tempted to say the best use of campaign funds would be to buy maps for activists delivering leaflets: maps showing clearly where one constituency ends and the next one starts.
Political Betting reflects the state of the nation, Jonathan.
1. Labour does not have a “poll lead”, it is behind in every poll that uses normal weighting adjustments.
2. The decline in the Tory lead this month HAS been reported and led on on PB.
3. The Tories are not in the fiscal trouble Labour are b/c we have 35 mill in outstanding loans but a 30 mil asset, Smith Square, to set against it, and our lenders are not calling their loans. (Labour already sold its HQ) Also the Tory loans unlike Labour’s loans were offered at 1% above the normal rate not below the normal rate.
4. Gordon being behind amongst both women and men is an obvious story (Tories are ahead with men, 2% I think in ICM, just less far ahead than they are with women).
The good news for Lab this month is it reduced the Tory lead over last month and that has been reported.
45 S Penketh. Thanks for that.
Posters are interesting aren’t they?
No-one believes that Joe Bloggs wanders down the street looks at a poster and goes that’s it I’m voting Tory, moves another 100 yards see a LD poster changes his mind and so on.
To my mind posters act like the kind of advertising/sponsorship that Coke do so well. A lavish poster campaign lets people know that a party is serious about the election. The more money that it can appear to spend on it’s advertising the more serious it appears to be in it’s pursuit of your vote. If the other fundamentals are right - it can make a difference I am sure.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter quite as much as you would think what the poster actually say - just how “professional” they look and how many there are. It like webcameron, doesn’t matter what it says - just doing shows he’s down the kids (albeit nerds).
To that end I think Labour were obliged to have posters last time as were the Tories. To have not had posters would have had subtle consequences I think. Labour bankrupt/doing it on the cheap stories would have appeared. I am sure that if you were clever there would be other ways to do it.
Andrea I mean that the last boundary review (not this one, the prior one) massively disadvantaged the Tories and we now need to be ten points clear to win an overall majority.
It will take several boundary reviews for us to correct the imbalance, but it will happen.
Going back to the party funding issue raised on the previous thread, the real risk (as I see it) is that State funding creates and entrenches an oligarchy. Conservatives, Labour, and Lib Dems will always be tempted to push State funding ever higher, because they’ll always be short of money. It’s in the nature of bureaucracies that the more money they’re given, the more money they’ll spend. This would be particularly the case if, as now, we have a pretty unpopular government, whose party membership is deserting them, and unwilling to campaign or provide them with money.
re 40. Jonathan. There is a problem when we discuss polls because for systemic reasons these have overstated Labour for decades. That has now changed with modern pollsters like ICM, Populus and YouGov but not so with Communicate Research.
Polling overstatement does not always help the overstated. Ask Mr. Kinnock. Would he have acted in the same way on the stage at the Sheffield rally in 1992 if we had had past vote weighting and the polls had been showing a truer picture?
John L at 47: Like all apparentloy obvious solutions there are reasons why it’s not been done. How would you make this proposal work? Pass a law requiring local papers to carry a column? And what do you do about constituencies like mine with no local paper reaching more than a small fraction of the electorate?
47
The law of unintended consequences says that this would lead to a plethora of purported ‘opposition parties’ and lots of litigation about who is entitled to what proportion of the ‘off’ week.
And (btw) what about Scotland/Wales/NI?
And what when a local paper covers more than one constituency, (eg Birmingham Evening Mail, Express & Star)? And what amount of penetration in a particular area is required before a newspaper is deemed to be “local” within the meaning of the Act?
And …
51 Boundary reviews alone will not redress the imbalance you are talking of . There have been several studies into the causes of the imbalance and constituency size differential is responsible for only 15-20% of the imbalance . See for example Martin Baxter’s gap analysis on his site and Lewis Baston’s article on the electoral reform site .
54 - Indeed… local paper, what local paper? The nearest I get to reading a local paper is the Evening Standard or Metro. I suspect that I am not alone
52. Very good points Sean. I wonder if the possibility that state funding might ossify the party system - or at least bolster incumbency - is the reason that so many in the political class are in favour of the idea?
OT - I am being taken out by the Bank of England again this evening - Melon, Fillet Mignon, Cheesecake.
They want know
The general outlook for demand cost pressures and pricing in 2007.
and
Will your pay award in 2007 be the same less or more than your award this year?
As I am expecting to be made redundant tomorrow… Oh they perhaps mean the company pay award.
Any ideas?
Thanks, Fred. Even if funding is pro-rata on the basis of votes, it means that existing big parties will get the lion’s share of the funding.
Personally, I think that if a party can’t raise enough money legitimately to cover its running costs, then it probably doesn’t deserve to exist.
49. Always a pleasure Jack W
59 Icarus. “….. Any ideas?”
Avoid the cheesecake !!
Perhaps the state could fund political parties at a going rate of £10/year per member?
57.”Indeed… local paper, what local paper? The nearest I get to reading a local paper is the Evening Standard or Metro”
Why did I get the impression you were leaving in Lambeth?
re b46. Dead right. I often think it would have been wonderful if there had been a PBC on that dark November night in 1990 when Maggie stormed out of the Embassy building in Paris to respond to the first round of the leadership election voting. Just imagine the thread? What would Rik, SeanT and Sean Fear have been saying? Sadly there was no internet in those days.
59 — read snowflake5’s blog and make notes on your cuffs.
If state funding becomes a reality, then a body to adminster the funds would have to be set up. State cash based on votes at a GE (£2.0 per vote?) with each ballot paper asking the question, ‘Do you wish £2.0 to be donated to the party of your choice, tick yes or no’ The money would then be placed into an account held by the Office of Political Regulation. Ofpol would act as a bank, when parties draw from their account, they must justify the withdrawal, and then produce receipts, invoices etc. Companies, individuals, organisations etc who wish to donate, must do so via Ofpol, all donations must be vetted, to ensure they conform to very strict criteria. Anonymous donations would not be allowed, all donaters must be UK citizens, domiciled in the UK. Full accounts would published annually showing all ins and outs.
RE 65 Mike “Sadly there was no internet in those days”
Well, there was, it was however just a small academic/military network. The UK’s academic one (part of the backbone of the web here) was and I think still is called JANET (Joint academic network).
50. John, while I’d agree posters have a ‘look how seriously we are taking this’ plaster them around the place feel they can also have a vote management aspect. This maybe isn’t seen in the FPTP system in England. Certainly here in NI, however, where we’ve had PR with multi-represenative constituencies, parties run vote 1,2,3 party ticket posters and vary who is put in the 1, 2 or 3 position in different geographical areas in order to try to maximise the depth of their vote.
How many people follow the line promoted directly is hard to say but I’m sure it influences those are dedicated to a party ticket.
Martyn Smith @ 47 — where a paper covers more than one constituency, it will make it easier to spot MPs who are just rubber-stamping centrally-provided propaganda.
68 nerd alert!
Back in 1990 we had pubs.
BTW Is the PB.COM party happening? I’ve been offline for a bit (so may have missed it)
68….Just as an aside, it’s now SUPER JANET these days, IV or V I think. Enormous beast.
71. Party? Is there little cocktail sauasage rolls & proper sandwiches? Don’t want none of those tiny little weird continental things….
Nick Palmer @ 54 — not been done? Ask around: I suspect many of your colleagues write for their local rags who are doubtless glad of the free content (like all those reports of under-14s football matches that are written by the clubs themselves).
65 - I remember it well, just switched the TV on in Hotel room in Villefrance-sur-Saone. I have always liked France!
70. Do you think local papers should have to run a column for each MP who cover that area? So Liverpool Echo would have 5 different columns from 5 different Labour MPs.
33 and 45. The Lisbon earthquake of 1755 caused a tsunami that caused substantial damage to some areas of south-west England and Ireland.
63. Why can’t the parties get the said tenner directly off their members? It’s hardly a King’s ransom.
78 I’ve heard that it can be done.
Re 69 I understand the same thing occurs in Eire.
15,
I strongly disagree with your premise.
As previously loans did not have to be declared if they were on `commercial terms` a phrase which the watchdog has never defined.
Therefore there will be plenty of scope for manouvre, in the very high bar to cross, of beyond all reasonable doubt, for the Cps to bring any criminal proceedings against any party.
The reason that Labour and the Conservatives (and to some extent the Lib Dems) are short of money is because they waste it.
What’s the most efficient use of £10m? Blowing it on a national poster campaign, or building up a network of good agents across the UK? Guess which one any of the big three would go for.
And party HQ’s are run like the most inefficient of local authorities, with endless reorganisations, sackings, re-hirings, and staff changes.
69 and 80 - maximising your vote occurs everywhere elections happen; under STV part of that is trying to ensure that one of your candidates isn’t TOO popular to the detriment of the team.
65 Mike. Dateline … Paris/London Dark November Night 1990 Party Telephone Call :
MrsT. “Followers .. I fight on, I fight to win !!”
Rik. “But your regal iconness, what about the Liberal Democrats ?”
MrsT. “Dead parrot talking ??”
Rik. “No majesty it’s Rik Willis speaking.”
MrsT “Rik, go back to your constituency and prepare for second place.”
seanT. “What about my new book ‘Iraqi women I never slept with’ …”
MrsT. “I’m surrounded by vegetables !!”
Sean Fear. “Margaret, my local election roundup clearly shows a dramatic swing to the right in Chile”
MrsT. “I’m rather enjoying this !!”
Rik. “He said Chile not the Chilterns !!”
MrsT. “Dear god …. the vegeatbles have taken over my kitchen cabinet !! ….. John, I keep telling you, your underpants go under your trousers !!
Background Voice. “Now now Margaret …. slip into this nice white jacket, you’re leaving Downing Street for the last time.”
MrsT. “We are a grandmother you know !!”
seanT/Sean/Rik. Pause……”This Major bloke looks great to me …….”
65. ‘Jack W - my insider source says Thatcher will win the second ballot by a landslide’
No, Jack, I’d have been saying “flog the rank and file, and fling the ringleaders from the Tarpeian rock!”
86/87 Di4/Sean.
… “landslide” and “flog” … back to Tsunamis and the lash. Spooky !
O/T but here’s an interesting straw in the wind. How long before “voluntary” comes to mean “regulation by an “independent” statutory body.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6191988.stm
88. my to favorite subjects.
Coincidently The Manchester evening News has a weekly cloumn in which all of Grerater manchesters MP’s take it in turn to right a column on a topical interest with a Manchester Flavour.
88. This ppgh amused me….
Former Downing Street spin doctor Alastair Campbell, who chaired the session organised by the Commission for Racial Equality, said blogs were “perceived as a positive development” but added that “some of the most offensive stuff” comes from them
Pot, kettle, black anyone?
So it seems that the real power in the country at the moment is held by the Labour Party’s bankers.
If no bank will give them the funds to repay the “loans” then goodbye Labour Party.
I would imagine that the pressure on the banks to remain independent is massive - no company or individual would be lent unsecured loans of that level.
Under different circumstances we might have seen some honours in the New Year going to individuals for “Services to the banking industry”
I think its time the bailiffs were called in……
Does anyone know who the 3 main parties bank with?
I think that Nick Palmer has lost it here somewhat.
Ashcroft gave a lot of money, sure - but what was this money spent on? Leaflets, travel & general expenses. Nick I am sure is not happy that government policy has to be run through New Corp - but why should local conservative candidates have to run their campaigns through the Trinty Media local monopoly (which is the only answer if they cannot communicate directly).
Nick claims that there are strict rules governing what can be put in House of Commons funded leaftets. I’ll send him some examples of the leaflets that my ex-MP (Geriant Davies) sent out to me in Croydon. The only difference between them and a labour party leaflet was the former did not say the word Labour on it. Davies had the highest Incidental Expenses spending of any MP in 2005.
Also, Nick fails to recognise the other benefits from being an incumbent. Travel, subsidised housing, access to the House of Commons for extertainment of constituents, staff, postage allowance, access to the media and a job that pays to campaign by doing your job.
If these former MPs were doing such a good job, then why couldn’t raise cash from local businesses/constituents?
81… well we’ll have to disagree but I don’t think you have a leg to stand on. No definition of commercial loan would include a loan which it would be impossible to get commercially… but I look forward to you giving it a shot in court!
Does anyone here with a legal background know what happens and to who when the PPERA is broken. Is it fines for parties or individuals, or are there stronger sanctions?
91 All the local LD accounts I have seen are with Lloyds but no idea if that is universal.
WRT “commercial” loans, if anyone knows of a bank which will make an unsecured loan, to an organisation with net liabilities, at an interest rate below base rate, could they please put me in touch with them?
Has John Prescott got a swollen tongue or something?
64 - “Why did I get the impression you were leaving in Lambeth?” - I guess you mean living not leaving…
And yes I do live in Lambeth, but absolutely never read the South London Press (which is the ‘local’ paper). The point I was making was even in places where there are local papers, people wont/dont read them.
92 yes my Labour opponent sent out stuff using public funds which was unsolicited, contrasted his view on a particular issue with that of his two leading opponents (mentioning the candidates specifically), and was factually wrong anyway. Absolutely blatant smear campaigning which we would never have found out about were it not for the fact that one of these letters was sent to a LD member.
I complained to the Searjeant-at-Arms who did absolutely nothing except for ask the offender if it was all OK to which he replied yes!
That’s why I find Nick’s claim that it is all tightly regulated shameful. It is totally untrue
63 Define “member”. I have never understood why the LDs insist on the payment of a subscription in money as the sole criterion for membership, (subject (to the best of its ability to check) to good conduct, being a Liberal etc).
Why shouldn’t somebody whose short on money but not on time be able to ’subscribe’ through doing lots of delivery or whatever?
I bet there’d be a change of heart if this £10 scheme was adopted, and then there’d be disputes about fiddling, and then there’d be new laws, and yet more PPERA returns to make, and audit, and challenge.
Oh good grief!
95 BCCI might be able to help you out Sean. If you can’t find them in the phone book try Barings.
please - let’s not go there! It’s nearly lunchtime and the thought of John Prescott with a swollen anything is rather off-putting!
82 A cynic might say that a strong network of local organisations would tend to decentralise power from certain young men in sharp suits at headquarters. And those young men in sharp suits decide how to spend the money.
97. Lennon, ops, yes, I meant living (but maybe you also want to leave Lambeth
).
You anticipated me…I was going to say “but you’ve South London Press!”
It’s very strange that NuLab’s latest line of attack is portraying the Tories and Lib Dems as inconsistant and shifting in their viewpoint. Is that going to be taken seriously, given that half of them were Marxists in the 70s and 80s?
89 - The Peeblesshire News has something very similar Stuart. Quite possibly the least interesting part of the newspaper – and that includes the updates on what’s going on at the various branches of the Women’s Institute.
Not sure it’s an idea that should be rolled out across the rest of the nation.
94 ‘Tisn’t
94 ‘Tisn’t
97 - nearly 1 in 3 adults in Lambeth read the South London Press, a minority yes but probably more than most people would guess. (Last year it was responsible for one of the greatest front pages I can ever remember - “Squirrels on Crack” was the headline and it was accompanied by a photo of what a squirrel on crack might look like.) If you include ‘freebies’ then local newspaper readership is probably well over 50% of adults in Lambeth.
Re 95, Sean if you get those details, could you pass them on to me as well
Hague: “How much has the Chancellor robbed from pension funds?”
Prescott: “I’m sure the Honourable Gentleman will tell me in his second question.”
Priceless.
Prescott practically asked Hague to reply to his own question
93,
Thats the point no definition in law.
Re 98 Jon, I don’t suppose that letter/leaflet is available on line some where or could you email me a copy?
My email is benedictmpwhite at gmail daht com.
(Please note that unlike some cheapskates, the MP in my name is in the middle not temporarily tacked on the end like some people
)
Prescott/Hague is more entertaining that the Blair/Cameron PMQs
Aww, Prezza’s getting stressed.
Actually if there were such a bank they would book the loan as an upfront loss which would presumably have to be declared as a donation to Labour under PPERA.
I wonder if anyone will step up to the plate to fill the present funding gap… because if Labour has to secure the funds at a proper commercial rate it will rather destroy any hope they have of claiming these were commercial. I guess the Labour treasurer is mulling that little dilemma as we speak…
The benches are out of control now
RE 110, I have to say that was a remarkanly witty reply by Prescott. Shame he wastes so much money.
Margaret Beckett, clearly not having heard of the Tories’ “Inner To$$er” campaign looked aghast at Prescott’s reference to ‘Mr. To$$er’ on the Tory front bench.
LOLOLOLOL
Hague is demolishing him
oh dear
poor John Prescot! It’s not fair to make him do this in public
Like the fact the Speaker was laughing at Prescott’s “joke” then. Lovely to see the (impartial) presiding officer keeping a sense of decorum.
108 - Really? That’s much higher than I would have guessed. Maybe I ought to start getting a copy now and again.
Benedict… I only have the paper document and no scanner.
119 She sure did and did you see the Labour backbencher making the obscene gesture in full camera view right behind Prescott’s back. Didn’t he remember where he was sitting?
Does Hague have any more questions? I’d pay to watch them go at it for forty minutes
121. Impartiality does not demand losing one’s sense of humour.
120. I don’t think Prescott is going so bad
110&111. Does Gordon Brown ever turn up for PMQ’s when John Prescott is standing in? He might have been able to whisper the correct figure in his ear!
91. I thought the Lib Dems banked with the Co-op
RE 123, Jon, have you (or any friends) got a digital camera? That is what I use. (for example this letter from the letter from the tax credits people on my blog here http://tinyurl.com/y32cmw was done with a digital camera)
Its just that I want to do a series of articles on bad campaigning habits (of all parties) and so far I think I have only realy picked on the Lib Dems.
120, you have to be kidding - can’t speak into the mike, can’t answer a question on pensions - in fact his reply admitted that Labour wiped billions off pensions - didn’t even say “no we didn’t” just asked Hague for the number.
Daily Politics says of Hague/Prescott tussle “I did find ONE positive email for Prescott” they score it for Hague.
124. “Labour backbencher making the obscene gesture in full camera view right behind Prescott’s back.” Who was the gesture aimed at?
Judging by the way that Prescott was behaving at one point I would not be surprised. Very unimpressed at Prescott’s performance.
131. Everything is relevant Commentator…
*relative*
131. I didn’t say he was good, just that he wasn’t so bad.
And I’m not surprised you were impressed by Hague’s performance!
122 - oops, it’s much higher because I did my sums wrong, I dropped a line reading across and divided by the male population in Lambeth rather than the total population. So make that 1 in 6 and maybe 25% in total when you count the freebies.
132. Surely Prescott opening his mouth is itself an obscene gesture?
Barbara Follett comes across very well.
The perception panel seems to indicate that Northerners find Prescott an embarrassment.
139. Hardly surprising - he is almost a caricature Northener, embodying all the popular prejudices which that sturdy breed of Britons face: he is thick, fat, incomprehensible, incredibly ugly, and bad tempered.
Andrea, assume you’re watching Daily Politics, everybody even the Labour voters on the perception panel was impressed by Hague.
Barbara Follet was great in my view but she hardly had a good word to say for Prescott or Labour and she praised the Tories to the skies, their women-friendly policy, their use of technology… I wondered if she was about to defect to us!
Alan Duncan was fantastic. He is such a star.
17 - “Personally, I do not go in for much of that “green” energy crap. I am perfectly happy with spewing large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere - someone else can tidy up after me, thank you very much. Trivial detail: I never “recycle” paper, glass or plastic - total waste of time and energy.”
If you are not being deliberately inflammatory then that is one of the most selfish comments I have ever read. Presumably you do not have children. I do and would quite like there to be a viable planet for them to grow up in. Shame on you. Opinions such as yours have convinced me that unfortunately we are going to have to force people to take climate change seriously through legislation.
142. Yep he was good. Also thought that he did really well on Questiontime a few weeks back in Glasgow!
[63] Unintended Consequences…
“LONDON 29th November 2012- Police are continuing their enquiries concerning false declaration of Party membership records. It is estimated that the Labour and Conservatives over declared their membership by up to 400,000, thus falsely claiming over £4 million from the Party Fund Body OffPart.
The strong reversal in the membership decline of the main parties had been the source of some comment in recent years after the enactment of the Stat Funding of Parties Act 2007, and the enactment of the £10 matching payment.
Deputy Commissioner Gate of the Yard has indicated that his investigation has been making progress in recent weeks, and that he expressed optimism that charges will be preferred in the New Year.-AP”
142. The UK love for Hague is still a bit a mistery for me. He’s generally ok, but I don’t find him witty or funny. It must be because I don’t get British sense of humour.
On the Electoral Commission Web site the Conservative party have a loan from Lloyds TSB for £30,000 at 11.4% on indefinite term.
Sounds like they are borrowing on their creditcards - What were they saying about debt??
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/regulatory-issues/loanstopolparties.cfm
142. Commentator, do you think I pay attention to what Dinky says? I just look at him without listening!
146. Btw, I think he was better than Prescott today (just that Prezza wasn’t so bad..maybe it’s because I usually start watching it forecasting the worst possible scenario for Prescott)
Re Follett. She’s 64…do you think she has had some plastic surgery? or is it libellious to ask?
149 but the perceptions panel showed both Northerners and Labour voters giving Prescott huge negative ratings and Hague positive ones so he really was that bad…
What was wrong about the Trident question from Prentice? I only caught the first bit as I had it on in the background and then the speaker seemed to jump to the next question.
Think the Tories are in real trouble here:
amongst the loans are ones from Juniper Trading Equities Ltd - registered in Britisn Virgin Islands - offices in Geneva for £250,000 at a very uncommercial unsecured base less 0.25%
and £950,000 from the Medlina Foundation (nothing on Google) unsecured at Base +1%
Both of these cannot be considered as being on commercial terms, and they are from foreign donors.
150. I think I’m still entitled on an opinion even if BBC perceptions panel think different! Thanks.
Some of the local Labour recipients of secret loans listed on the EC website are interesting:
Hull East (Rt Hon John Prescott MP, Deputy PM) £10,000
Barrow CLP (Rt Hon John Hutton MP, Cabinet) £48,000
Neath CLP (Rt Hon Peter Hain MP, Cabinet) £35,700
South Shields CLP (Rt Hon David Miliband MP, Cabinet) £5,000
Edinburg South (Nigel Griffths MP, Deputy Leader of HC) £6,750
Wigan CLP (Neil Turner MP, PPS to the bedridden Iain McCartney) - £6,500
Ho ho!
HF @ 151 — it was about the Labour Party rather than the government.
I have solved the mystery of the vanishing Yougov poll! Iain Dale is reporting that the car of Stephen Shakespeare was broken into the other night. Thieves have obviously taken the latest poll and will be holding it ransome.They will only release the poll, when the addicts who use politicalbetting stump up a £100,000 quid; start the collection, or the poll gets it.
Today is Responsible Gambling Awareness Day, btw.
Talking of which, John Greenway MP (who was not selected for a new constituency yesterday so will be standing down — hat-tip to Andrea in yesterday’s thread) chairs the Responsibility in Gambling Trust.
141 “I wondered if she was about to defect to us! ”
I hope not!
156 coldstone. Do we have a Chamberlain to negotiate on behalf of these polls ?? …. send seanT to Munich I say !
153 Andrea. Don’t you dare have an opinion Andrea or “Commentator” will scream and scream and blowj*b your house down !!
Mark - I think the consituency loans are mortgages on properties - they are secured loans.
Though am surprised that you can borrow £48,000 on a property in Barrow in Furness, not sure the whole town is worth that.
Only a friend of Barrow (as I am) is allowed to make that last remark!
159. Jack, all my opinions are rubbish anyway!
Anyway I think Prescott was bad overall, but not as bad as I fear it was. Hence the “not so bad” comment. Naturally Commentator (or the BBC panel) don’t know how bad I fear he could have been, so the “not so bad” comment can seem nonsense to them.
It’s like for people who thought the tories were losing by 100+ seats in 2005 thinking that losing by 66 wasn’t so bad. If someone else was thinking about just a 30 majority, the “not so bad result” wouldn’t make sense.
Not sure if it’s clear
158. Sean Fear, she can’t be worse than Polly, can she?
Benedict… yes I can do that.
“Yet again the November YouGov poll is not featured in the Daily Telegraph. If, indeed, it has been held over then it is likely to be a little old when we get it.”
I know that they did one about 2 weeks ago which does not appear to have been published anywhere? Is it quite common to have political polls commissioned by groups other than newspaper’s which don’t become public?
Btw, I suppose a question about pensions should have been forecasted by those who prepared Prescott for PMQs (considering that the pension bill has been published today). Why no-one prepared a reply to such a question?
Re 163 Jon, many thanks.
I have also just changed my blog layout to a 3 column layout, and wondered if any one could say if they think it is an improvement or not.
165. normally when they know prescott is going to do PMQs his team prepares him for a full week pretty much from what i have heard. He just trotted out the usual lines this week but it wasn’t as electric as the classic “punch and judy” session with Hague last time.
165. Andrea, I thought that Prescott’s attempt to accuse the tories of not supporting their pension bill before they even had time to read it was even worse than asking Hague to answer his own question.
It really was embarrassing by that point.
161 Andrea. Wonderfully clear !! …. you’re becoming almost British with that self depricating humour !!
169. Jack, it’s too demanding. Then I would spend too much time wondering if people think my opinions are rubbish, if they’re incosistent or being terrified that Commentator will challenge them! I’ve decided just to stick in my “give stats” job!
161 I get it! You see in English the phrase “not so bad” means “quite good”
IE “He’s not so bad” or “He isn’t bad” is a moderate term of approval. You mean he’s bad but not as bad as I thought. “Not AS bad” is what you mean I think… if I figured it out right!
And I would never challenge you. You are the Boca della verita, the Oracle at Delphi…
169. JackW there is a bottle of whisky for sale that might be older than you.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6194442.stm
143. Obviously a selfish fool. Just read the crap he spouts.
171. Yes, Commentator, I meant he’s not as bad as I thought he could have been, not that he was good! Sorry!
Something that hasn’t been discussed in the moves at ITV.
Murdoch switched sides following that infamous meeting on his secret Island. The Tories had previously blocked access to terrestrial tv.
Watch what is happening at ITV. Murdoch gaining 20% bridgehead… Extra money for head hunting…
Is this the fruition of the deal carved out in 1997? If so, it could see Murdoch dumping the Blair albatross around his neck.
174. Andrea, is Silvio Berlusconi going to retire from politics?
176. Chris D, there were some suggestions about it last week. Then he fainted.
Benedict, I went to your blog and was immediately offered an opportunity to re-finance my loans
[145]
172 ChrisD. Bloody cheek !!
The oldest in my collection is a bottle of The Macallan bottled in 1936. I call it my “Three Kings Over the Water” !
RE 178. Hmm… Something on there is not as free as it should be then. I don’t get that problem here though.
Have you noticed that anywhere else?
178 - Clearly Benedict is hoping the upper echelons of the Tory Party read his website
178/180. Yes the t0sser gets everywhere these days…
164
The famous non-published poll, was in Autumn 1978, NOP for the Daily Mail (which I think owned NOP) it showed an 8% Labour lead, the Mail did not publish. The Mirror found out about it, contacted NOP who sold it to the Mirror. This what at the time that Callaghan was expected to call a GE, which he posponed till spring 1979, the rest as they say is history.
179. Wow, my dad has got a Macallan which was bottled around 1964 (can’t remember exact year). It is his favourite whisky.
Benedict the left hand column is a waste of space, who cares about the tags on a small blog? Other than that I like it.
New thread
184 ChrisD. The Macallan is a very fine whisky, with a strength of flavour and richness that both the connoisseur and novice may appreciate. It is one of the finest Speyside malts and much to be recommended.
Re 181, Lennon, is that a reference to the refinancing?
Re 185 Comentator, did you get an irritating popup as well?
BTW I added 3 columns in part to stick those labels where people could see them. I will look at the site traffic to see if anyone uses them.
You could open an account with forex broker oanda. Say with £1000. You can trade micro lots and adjust your leverage with them, short GBP/USD and make/lose 10p per pip. Also, go long USD/CHF, and you’ll have an interest positive set-up, which means you’ll earn while you sit in the trade and wait for the dollar to strengthen. It’s an idea i have been demoing for a few months, made just over 19% on £1000 starting balance. Low risk in my opinion, as it would take a drop in the dollar that is way beyond what has happened historically to put your money in danger
147. Icarus, I see that The Tories have a £2,600,000 loan recorded from ‘Big Ben’. Presumably this will bring about a ‘big bill’ for the little weed?
Mike, it is a piece of cake to point out that half the money spent on advertising is wasted. It is far more difficult to establish which half, unless one has the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.
The fact that despite Iraq, the election was won [or bought] illustrates that the advertising did work, even if they couldn’t actually afford to pay for it.
But that is a different problem to losing the election, and one which can far more easily be fixed…
189…. which is what ought to happen. Sterling should break 2 easily and since everyone is going short into it we will probably see 2.30, and usdchf should break parity too.
re 20. With Scotland’s population of about 5m odd they wouldn’t even be in the bottom 50% of population sizes so I think that they just might manage it.
btw, I think it was John Curtice who showed that the reason the Tories won more seats in 2005 was because the marginals were not uniformly distributed by percentile. The link is some where on the Anthony Wells site….