Can Martin survive without Harman’s support?
December 4th, 2008
Could the Speaker’s job now be on the line?
Harriet Harman is in a very different category from every other member of the cabinet. For she owes her position of Deputy Leader to her successful campaign in last year’s election. Brown could sack her from his cabinet but he can’t fire her as his deputy.
This has given an independence of action which she seems ready, when necessary, to use.
As leader of the house she is in a position to play a key role in the follow-up to the Damien Green arrest and, particularly, the sorry saga that caused his Westminster’s office in Parliament to be searched without a search warrant.
If Michael Martin was watching Newsnight last night he cannot have felt comfortable by the apparent reluctance of Harman to give him her support in a hard-hitting interview with Jeremy Paxman. (Click on the picture above to watch - it’s about ten minutes into the programme). If that’s what she’s saying in public heaven knows what her private views are.
The press isn’t particularly kind to Martin this morning and I wonder if Harriet has decided that he should go.
And if that happened there’d have to be another by election in Martin’s Glasgow seat. If this had taken place before Glenrothes there would have been a strong argument against holding an unnecessary by election. Now Labour would feel confident about beating off an SNP challenge to retain the seat.
Another benefit from Martin going now would be that Labour would be in a much better position at Westminster to determine the successor. Waiting until the general election could take away that option.
A lot to play for in the coming few days.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
No
Smith completely skewered by John Hemming asking her how many of the leaked documents the civil servant would have had a duty to reveal if asked under the Freedom of Information Act!
No, it makes him look dreadful. Smith is also not being helped by John Reid making clear she’s got it wrong at the moment.
Who injected Kaufmann - and with what?
Mike’s right. Labour can more influence the critical choice of new speaker now, if Martin goes. A less Labour-friendly Speaker would be a real disadvantage to the party in a new parliament, especially if hung or with a smallish majority.
IMHO Martin’s dreadful, and should go now!
Good question by David Davis.
Smith just comes across as totally useless and dishonest
Lol, Smith claiming there’s a long history of civil servants and MPs being arrested under “Misconduct in a Public Office” (although they’ve never actually been charged…)
From previous thread.
Richard N @ 311.Yesterday afternoon I received a ‘phone call from a Forum friend who works in the City.
“Have you contacted Spreadfair ? ”
“No.” I had decided to let my positions run to closure for two reasons.
1.They were bombproof.Had sold the three major Parties at 636.1.
2.I didn’t think Spreadfair would share my high opinion of them.
“Well you should ! I just closed my Tory Sell with a Buy at 337.0 and have transferred the Sell to Sporting Index at 342.0 (now 340.0).”
This was hard news and I thought maybe to Buy out my entire position at 620.0,commission free.
Sadly Spreadfair played hardball and were only prepared to offer 626.0 which was a joke.
So in answer to your question,RN,I haven’t closed.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On topic !
I thought that yesterday,Marin looked like Dead Man Speaking.I think he is a goner with or without Harman’s support.
O/T Brwon to be on R5 at 1pm - taking calls apparently..
Indy on plans to swap personal data around Whitehall
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-big-brother-state-ndash-by-stealth-1050576.html
Something for Nick Clegg to think about opposing.
Is there a market on next Speaker (or Speaker on a set date in the future)?
Hewitt - “FoI Act means no need for leaks from civil service”!
Er, yes, but you’ve got to know what questions to ask!
Bank Rate down to 2%, 100bp off
Re 8, Alaex “Lol, Smith claiming there’s a long history of civil servants and MPs being arrested under “Misconduct in a Public Office” (although they’ve never actually been charged…)”
is there? Who says and where is the proof?
13. Who was the last MP to be arrested under that law?
Is HH thinking about actually doing her job?
Seems like an untypical accusation to level at a Lab minister, but it was pointed out in the exTorygraph this am that ‘Leader of the House’ is just that - she’s supposed to ensure that minority parties get a fair, or at least a fairish, shake - something which hasn’t been noticeable over the past few years what with timetabling and guillotines. Martin is not unbiased, but he’ll get the support on most Lab MPs whilst the rest would gladly see him turfed out, which puts her in a cleft stick. One one hand a NuLab ministerial numpty, on the other a non-partisan umpire.
Care to hazard which one will eventually come out on top?
I think the public will be more interested in the interest rate cut than this stuff about Green today.
Off topic, and in view of base rate coming down to 2% no doubt the Chancellor and PM will be imparting pressure on the mortgage lenders to pass on the rate cut in full to help hard working families.
However, not so long ago they were trumpeting the role of long term fixed rate mortgages and putting pressure on the lenders to provide more of these products.Might it be fortunate that the lender’s and their customers largely ignored such sage advice.
Nick Palmer on his feet!
Incidentally, as a Labour loyalist, I thought the Speaker’s statement was very poor.Not that he said anything that was untrue,but the way he set out to blame his staff, in part, for the mix up.I would not like him as a boss.
I was also uncomfortable with the way he criticized the police.
He could have handled his statement much better.
Nick Palmer just said Gordon should be ashamed of himself in the house
16 - I agree
17 - My youngest brother and his partner are in just that position, and very p*ssed off they are too.
16. Quite possibly - especially with this headline
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/
20 - Did the Civil Service Code exist pre Labour? Might escape on a technicality?
20. You jest, sir.
20. he’s going to be eating both of his own feet this evening i suspect
From Robert Fisks article on the Lebanon in the Indy,
” But someone needs to explain to me how this little Middle Eastern cabbage patch is bouncing along so happily amid the cyclones ripping through the world’s economy.”
Thats easy. They have been trading for over 4,000 years. After a while you get good at it.
Even during the Israeli invasion of 1982 they had the strongest economy in the middle east (including Saudi and Israel) and really don’t want to fidn they have oil as well.
16. I think the public will. What the public’s interested in and what’s of critical importance to the long-term health of the democracy can be two different things. A decent chunk of the public’s probably more interested in I’m a Celebrity than either of these two.
On topic, who exactly does support Martin? He’s only staying in place because of inertia.
Re 14, Frank “13. Who was the last MP to be arrested under that law?”
Yes quite. I would have asked her to name one.
Sorry, Mike, am I missing something? Why a byelection if Michael Martin ceases to be Speaker? Surely he is still an elected MP? Or has he said somewhere he would go?? Or is this your assumption?
23. 24. 25
he said encouragement of civil servant to break civil service code (leak) is shameful. Surely Gordon Brown is covered by this statement?
Re 16, Valley Boy “I think the public will be more interested in the interest rate cut than this stuff about Green today.”
Why? it won’t make a jots bit of difference. No one has got money to lend in pounds at anything like that rate.
re 16. Dead right - for millions of savers who have provided the funding for people to benefit from the housing market are being totally screwed.
What’s the point of saving for your retirement if you are going to get next to sod all from your investment?
This has taken away a very big part of my income.
30. hahaha what a pathetic creature Palmer is.
Strong intervention by Nick Palmer, supported on the Labour benches.
The gist, systematic leaking is shameful.
HS agrees.
29 - The convention is that when the Speaker steps down he also resigns his seat. Why we should think Labour would feel bound by this particular convention when they have merrily jumped up and down on all manner of other conventions over the last 11 years is another story.
32. Mike - why didn’t you invest in fixed-rate products?
Why doesn’t someone stand up and quote Brown from his interview with Frank Bough in 1985, and ask if that was encouraging a breach of civil service impartiality?
34. Is Gordon Brown shameful then gabble
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QIrweIqqsOc
Palmer is such a lackey. Grow a backbone man.
38. Leaking is not shameful but if you have a partisan civil servant leaking for party political reasons, that is shameful.
If there were upto 20 leaks in the ‘publice interest’, why haven’t we seen them?
Re 34 Gabble, “The gist, systematic leaking is shameful.”
So Gordon Brown’s mole was shameful?
What about Winston Churchills?
40 ‘Publice interest’?
There are creams you can get for that Gabble.
40. There were claims of up to twenty leaks from ’sources inside whitehall’ however this has not been bourne out.
34. Obviously not when Labour benefits from the leaking, then.
41. No. They were principled leaks, as were the leaks to Damian Green concerning immigration. That’s not what this is about.
40 - Perhaps because the “20 leaks story” has been made up by the Government?
Martin must go. Alan Hazelhurst, if willing to run for 7 years or would be ideal. He is old though.
45. Bullsh*t - put up or shut up.
36. classic. “you didn’t want to do that”
ooh dear.
The various responses to my post at 16 proves a point that I made last night on another thread, that people’s voting intentions are largely guided by self interest.
I include myself in that.
It will be interesting to see which way the polls are moved by these cuts. If at all.
48. runnymede: “…put up or shut up”
Precisely what the investigation is for. I’m happy to wait.
a leak is a leak. just depends who is in Government eh?
Lol - turns out Green wasn’t arrested for “counselling or procuring misconduct…”
Re 45, Gabble “41. No. They were principled leaks, as were the leaks to Damian Green concerning immigration. That’s not what this is about.”
I see. So Gordon Brown and Damian Green are principled.
What is it all about then?
54, what for then?
Being suspiciously Conservative? Wearing a loud shirt in a built up area?
52. However the accusations of up to twenty leaks are coming from inside whitehall, we cannot take these as the truth either.
54. Huh?
Re 54, Alex “Lol - turns out Green wasn’t arrested for “counselling or procuring misconduct…””
So what was he reported for?
55. Principled and shameful it seems?
50. that doesn’t sound good.
29 - Tim13
Upon general election day the speaker of the house is automatically returned to parliament without voting. If he thus stands down he is technically an unelected member of parliament and has to re-stand for his seat.
Hope this explains your question Tim.
58 - aiding and abetting only.
51. If I remember correctly there was a slight movement to the goverment after the last cut. These headline moments have proved beneficial for Labour so far but it is anything beyond the immediate that they seem struggle with. Hence the PBR. They are very easily blown off course after a couple of days.
Gabble, good NuLab sheeple-citizen that you are, have you volunteered your DNA before the terrorist-loving European Court of Human Rights forces Judge Jacqui to delete her collection?
51. for many people that is true. whether they will blame or praise the govt. for a BOE rate cut forced by recession conditions is another matter.
55. A potentially dishonest civil servant with access to sensitive information which, if leaked, could have had an affect on national security.
66. Utter b*llocks, and you know it.
“For what then? Being suspiciously Conservative? Wearing a loud shirt in a built up area?”
Looking at Jacqui Smith in a funny way?
66 - …potentially…. if…. could….
66. The same is true over many leaks over the years, yet previous MP’s, such as Brown, were not arrested or searched.
62. That’s even more vague.
66 - So what’s that got to do with the arrest of Damian Green?
The Govt keep on going on about how the Conservatives are apparently giving notice that they will be perfectly happy for civil servants to leak when they are in Govt. Their primary concern is the arrest of one of their MPs for doing his job.
69. Fleet of Worlds: “…potentially…. if…. could….”
Exactly - hence the investigation.
68. She should do a few more buttons up then if that is suddenly an offence.
You might as well argue that anything exposing Labour’s mistakes is “damaging to national security”!
65. I think the next polls will be v interesting. Very hard to tell if Greengate has been tough on Government or on Tories as well as the post PBR and mortgage stuff.
fascinating times
72 - Right… so it’s entirely a fishing expedition then.
70 - presumably “aiding and abetting” just means “receiving and putting into public domain”.
“Counselling and procuring” means instructing, encouraging, paying etc
68, he’s been arrested again, for using a public convenience.
71. Has Damian Green released everything he received into the public domain?
66. Then that’s covereed by the OSA. The current situation is nothing to do with national security, despite several Labour ministers trying to claim so (the current line has evolved to “classified and sensitive information”).
72. You can’t just arrest people on that basis!
81- my point exactly.
72. Then why wasn’t Brown or Cook given the same treatment in the past? Your assuming that while this leak was made by a nasty tory out for self interest, the previous leaks were made by brave civil servants fighting against the evil tory government.
I heard some of Harman’s interview from last night with Paxman, on the radio this morning. I also heard Harman interviewed on PM yesterday afternoon. On both occasions she was faced with hard questions but did not impress me. She waffled and prevaricated.
She should have done better to come right out and say that she was not going to comment or respond to particular questions for a), b) or c) reasons. Instead she tried to avoid answering the questions and when pressed, ultimately stated, in effect, that she would not answer the questions that were put to her.
I’m not suggesting it is easy to avoid answering a question when politically this is the wiser path but it is a necessary political skill which some politicians manage better than others. As Mike pointed out yesterday, Brown is particularly poor at this and he will even avoid answering those questions where a straight answer is clearly the best approach.
A PM needs to be able to respond deftly to difficult questioning. Brown is very bad at this. I don’t think Harman is very good either and in my book she looks less of a potential future Labour leader as a result. Of the current bunch of aspirants for that position, none are stellar but I still find David Miliband the best of the bunch.
81/82 - As someone said yesterday - it’s thoughtcrime, Minority Report stuff.
70. claiming that past indiscretions have gone unpunished isn’t a very good defence, is it?
every time we shine a light into the parliamentary underworld, i think most people are shocked by how grubby it actually is. the fact it used to be even worse isn’t an excuse in its own right (c.f. john lewis list)
72. It’s not ‘Minority Report’ Gabble.
Well If Labour go on like this and the Conservatives win the elction and Labour MPs are arrested, the Conservatives will have fun quoting their own words back to them.
I hope it never happens.
But this is all an affroont to democracy.
Time for a written constitution or some Government WILL lock up its opponents - probably for not having ID cards and some other sillly reason.
79. Your using a lot of if’s gabble, if so and so did this, if he did it for this reason. No solid evidence at all, apart from a string of assumptions and guesswork.
81, 82, comrades, you are stuck in OldThought. NewThought shows that citizens are either Guilty, or Not Yet Guilty. Indeed, by seeking to embarrass the Government Comrade Green has shown himself to seek the very destruction of the British State.
66. Whereas Labour leakers in the 90s WEREN’T potentially dishonest? And DIDN’t have access to sensitive info? And they COULDN’T have had an efffect on national security?
Yawn. Grow up.
83: Labour = political wing of the British people. Leaking against Labour is therefore analagous to treason.
81. Apparently you can, in the twisted mindset of the Labour party. Valerie Veness’s famous remark has now become the orthodoxy. Opposing the Labour government is itself an arrestable offence.
Gabble doesn’t seem to understand the distinction:
Govt investigate potential threat to National Security - NO PROBLEM AT ALL. They would be being negligent if they did not.
Arresting someone as a consequence of that investigation, even if not seen as not having breached national security, not acceptable.
I’m lead to understand that it’s customary to investigate criminal offences once they’ve been committed, not beforehand.
Though it appears that Gabble may have just founded an entirely new school of jurisprudence.
We’ll call it the Retard School.
Stuff like ‘24′ and ‘Minority Report’ is hard p0rn to NuLab authoritarians.
St john - I agree, D.Miliband is being written off too soon. He handles interviews pretty well even if his speeches aren’t inspiring.
86. But in the past they weren’t seen as indescretions, it’s taken this government suddenly deciding it’s bad to change it, for purely it’s own reasons. If the reasons they give for persuing this are valid, how come no other government before has tried it?
Just because the Police investigation started out as an investigation into potential breach of national security, it doesn’t follow that such a breach has taken place.
The police seem to operate on the basis that once a complaint has been made, it is recorded as a crime, so therefore it has to be cleared up and someone arrested.
Martin Coxall.Your spelling alone entitles you to be a Head Prefect at the Retard School.
Well done !
How did the questions go to Smith?
The fact of the complaint indicates that a crime has been committed, the facts of the case don’t matter.
Smith’s statement today appeared to say that none of leaks to date had National Security implications, but that Sir David Normington had decided to ask the police in because future leaks might involve security issues.
Sounds as if the police were (in part) being asked to identify and prosecute folk who might leak in the future!
As has been argued by a number of contributors here, the existing leaks were appropriate for internal staff procedures, but not the involvement of the police. And certainly not for the investigation of an MP by the police.
All this appears to be a move to blame Normington for the fiasco. Also explains why no-one has been arrested under the Official Secrets Act (or a modern equivalent).
Smith’s statement also leads one to raise the question of why the police agreed to take on the case in the first place.
If it turns out that Galley and Green were colluding to systematically leak Home Office information for little more than party political reasons, the public will be revulsed.
I think all you tories know that and I detect a some desperation in you posts.
If it was all principled, then all the information received by Green or other tories will be in the public domain. We will see.
Gabble is potentially a bit daft. Better arrest him.
99
“The police seem to operate on the basis that once a complaint has been made, it is recorded as a crime, so therefore it has to be cleared up and someone arrested.”
You wish. Police do not investigate burglary and crime clear up rates are less than 40%.
But then I am talking about trivial offences like muggings, GBH, theft etc.
You are talking SERIOUS crime like…Opposing the Government.
No wonder I do not trust the police as a body.
103, could it be because they’re political animals and/or had an eye on the Met job and wanted to impress Jackboots?
The police wouldn’t get into such a mess if they stuck to the thought that they are not investigating “a crime”, but they are investigating an “alleged crime” (although it seems not even that in this case).
103. Smith’s statement also leads one to raise the question of why the police agreed to take on the case in the first place.
Indeed - it suggests they were either a) misled and didn’t check up or b) don’t understand the law. In either case they are guilty of misconduct.
104. Gabble can you accept that there will be a Tory Government (probably soon) and it would not be a good thing for them to take this type of approach to leakers/whistleblowers. And are you really saying that leaking information embarrassing to the government ISN’T in the public interest?
104. If you think the public at large are going to be critical that stories about the government’s inability to manage immigration, which they attempted to cover up, were made public then you are clearly on another planet.
John Hemmings asked if the information leaked could have been obtained under freedom of Info act. He didn’t get an answer. But if it could, and it sounds as if it should be available potential leakers only have to point opposition MPs in the right direction to obtain the info legitimately.
104. Gabble, I’d call you a maggot but that would be an insult to juvenile members of the species Calliphora.
What the F does “colluding to systematically leak mean”, and, whatever it means, why the F wouldn’t it apply to your gloating little toad of a leader in the 1990s?
Labour = liars.
Gabble’s current line seems to be that the Tories may have colluded with Galley to obtain all sort of politically embarrassing material and then, er, didn’t release any of it!
111. I’ve already posted upthread that the immigration stuff was principled.
114. Does the Home Office have some embarassing info about members of the Cabinet, concerning their past holiday exploits, perhaps?
104. ‘If’ it turns out he’s done something wrong then yes it will be bad. But so far nothing has come out but accusations and assumptions, your basing your entire theory on the fact that Green has done something wrong, but that it was has annoyed everyone. There is no evidence Green HAS done something wrong apart from people inside the home office claiming he ‘might’ have. Arresting and searching someone because you think they could have done something but you have no evidence at all apart from someone accusing him is daft.
114. Do we now know what the tories got? Have they published a full list?
117. “Arresting and searching someone because you think they could have done something but you have no evidence at all apart from someone accusing him is daft.”
Not just daft but sinister.
110
Its absolutely in the public interest when the Govt are deliberately concealing bad news that the electorate should know. Personally I would laugh like a drain if when in Power the Conservatives called in the police to every leak of whatever nature and had Labour MP’s shouting and screaming about public interest defence. That’s whats so Stalinist and unpleasant about this whole business…. OR perhaps Labour MP’s would just acquiesce?
119. And very possibly, illegal.
i thought the speaker had to stand for election to parliament its just that the main parties choose not tostand aginst him ? I thought he did have a couple of mickey mouse candidates against him last time around but i may be wrong
Re 66 Gabble “55. A potentially dishonest civil servant with access to sensitive information which, if leaked, could have had an affect on national security.”
I see. Have you any support for that defamitory remark?
117. Cuddles: “…your basing your entire theory on the fact that Green has done something wrong,…”
I’m happy to wait for the outcome of the investigation. It is the tories who have pre-judging that Green has done nothing wrong, from a position of complete ignorance.
SNP stood against him so presumably have an organisation in his constituency - I wonder how good the Labour Party canvass returns are - Nick?
118. No, we don’t, but again you are assuming they have stuff they shouldn’t have. So far the evidence used to arrest Green seems to be based on the assumption he’s guilty.
122 - the SNP stood against him (they don’t care about the “convention” of not opposing the Speaker), so whether they are a “mickey mouse” party is a matter of personal, partisan, preference
108 Alex
You have also to take account of what an incompetent and badly managed organisation the Police Force is. Anybody following the current de Menenez Inquest cannot fail to be struck by its appalling failures and blatant dishonesty.
124. the tories are presuming he’s innocent, as does the law. So far there hasn’t been any proof of his guilt, even the police leaks are saying that.
I think if we’re going to ban “potentially dishonest” people from access to sensitive Govt information then we’d better abolish the concept of Government by politicians!
122 - The SNP stood against him last time.
118. Do we know what Brown got from his mole in the 90s? Did he get stuff he didn’t publish? Has Brown given us a list? Has Brown described what “inducements” he may have offered his mole? Did this mole go on to work for Labour? Who is he? Was he a Labour member?
Etc etc etbloodycetera
Until we get answers to these questions every single statement you make, Gabble, is pure and utter hypocrisy.
No surprise there then. Labour = liars.
“The police seem to operate on the basis that once a complaint has been made, it is recorded as a crime, so therefore it has to be cleared up and someone arrested.”
Well just seen my local on-duty plod pop home for his lunch in uniform and squad car, that was an hour ago and still “on break”. Clear up rate and arrests don’t seem to be the priority of this particular officer of the law, unless it is clearing up is luncheon plate and arresting any indigestion from eating too much too quickly.
124. No, from the position that the police are leaking that there is no evidence and that they are looking at a way out that doesnt make them look bad.
You keep posting that you detect “desperation”, what is that based on?
61 - “Upon general election day the speaker of the house is automatically returned to parliament without voting. If he thus stands down he is technically an unelected member of parliament and has to re-stand for his seat.”
Nonsense. It is merely a convention that no major party stands against him and indeed not one the SNP observes. Martin was elected by a comfortable margin but was certainly elected in 2005.
I think the point is that it would be odd to go back to party politics having served as speaker and, like Betty Boothroyd, the likelihood is that he would stand down and take a peerage. He would not be required to do so, though.
Gordon Brown taking calls on Simon Mayo Show from 1pm. Wonder if a Dave from London will be tempted to phone in and ask him some questions that have so far remained unanswered?
As an aside: this wasn’t Sergeant Plod off the street, this was our first line of defence against suicide bombers and the like, supposedly our finest anti-terror officers. Yet they blunder around like complete halfwits, take on a ridiculous case, make an illegal search of Parliament, lie about consultations with the CPS, leakleakleak/spin/leak to defend themselves in the press, etcetc. It would all seem beyond ridiculule, not at all credible, if this wasn’t the same organisation behind the DeMenezes execution.
What chance does the UK have of preventing future terrorist attacks with this bunch protecting us?
ECB cuts rates to 2.5%
124. Gabble given your socialist leanings you probably do not understand it but in our judicial system there is an ‘assumption of innocence.
We are just giving Damian Green and Mr Galley their legal rights. Unlike large numbers of Labour supporters who seem to have convicted them already. So much for the independence of the police and ensuring they are free from prejudice.
ecb cuts by 75 bp
131: “Has Brown described what “inducements” he may have offered his mole? Did this mole go on to work for Labour? Who is he? Was he a Labour member?”
No, yes, she not he, and yes.
135. Brown coming out of hiding. i’m surprise by this. Last time I remember a ‘leader’s session’ on 5 live, Cameron came on for the Tories, Clegg for the Lib Dems and Jack Straw for Labour.
Re 124, Gabble, “I’m happy to wait for the outcome of the investigation. It is the tories who have pre-judging that Green has done nothing wrong, from a position of complete ignorance.”
Well no, I know that Chris galley and Damian Green are not guilty of the offences they are accused of because I have read up on the offence. There is no crime, and you don’t need to know a lot about that to work it out, see here;
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2008/12/greengate-jill-pays-speaker-martin-and.html
131
the person who was suspected of leaking material to Brown is at this time in the whip’s office.
141. Hmmm, how many questions will he ignore?
Good Bye Every Body! I have cut my posting down recently and will now stop altogether. There are lots of reasons for that which aren’t interesting enought to post.
However I would just like to commpliment the extrodinary quality of the site. If you cut out all the personal abuse and hackery there is a core of amazing political judgement, exprience and wisdom. The leading articles are always good often superb and i wish Morus and Mike smithson were running the Lib Dems. You can often just use the live thread and posted links as a better analysis of what has gone on that day than main stream media.
Before I go I would make three observations about the three big parties which may or may not illuminate the current political scene.
Firstly conservative posters should try and understand labour members and voters more. However absurd it looks objectively many are energised by the current phase of the recession. For some acivists its a chance to atone for the crime of Iraq for others its a counter point to the perceived heartlesness of the last tory recesion. however dep i the psycology of such people is that by handing out cash and using big government they can renew or at least have an honourable defeat.
there is a signifigant sector of the population that needs this largess and will willingly hold onto nurse for fear of something worse. If you add to that reinforcd core of voters swing eople influenced by the price of fuel and rapidly falling tracker mortgages you could well see some surprising poll results in the new few months until the utter coming horror of the lagging indicators kicks in. lets not forget Major won in a recession and was cruxified long after growth had resummed.
To the Conservatives I say play it long and move Osbourne. the death of tory england was always silly. This is a deeply conservative country and Western Europes most successful political party was always going to recover when it found its new disraeli who would decontaminate its brand. cameron is dismissed as a shallow ad man. perhaps he is. However an ad man was what was needed and there is nothing shallow about the polls, local election results, boris winning and crewe and nantwich.
the pattern of this crisis is for the economy to get steadily worse than ay one has so far predicted. I fear this is going to be trully awful and no one will thank the incumbents. Osborne is clearly very talented but for some reason just doesn’t quite look the picture as shadow chancellor. It will probably be alright because the economy isn’t going to be. but he could be the tiny crack i the heat shield that will cause the whole shuttle to burn up in the reentry of a GE campaign.
To my own party…
We have blown a once in two generations oppertunity to seriously challenge Labour as the party of the liberal left. The need to defend existing real estate in the south of england, an ahistorical belief in tory collapse and the ex SDP genetic belief that labour are just misguided rather than wrong has led us towards the ice berg and away from the open goal.
Bitain is post industrial, largely service driven and mas univeristy education is liberalising attitudes. The half centuary crime of Iraq opened up deep labour teritory which could have been rclaimed for progresive, non state progresive forces.
Instead we have failed decapitaion of the Tories, actual decapitation of two leaders and too greater focus on another opposition party rather than a disintergrating government.
Nick Clegg for all his talents is just not the right person to run a counter establishment political insurgency that relies heavily on protest voters and the low wage rural independents that keep us in so many of our seats.
In conclusion I fear Labour will do and spend anything to win empowered by the secular misionary zeal that only the state can help people.
I’m am not a conservative and can not find cheer in another tory hegonomy however this government need to be replaced and large numbers of people will reach for the only credible weapon in hand.
And the dominoes are still falling for my own party from the cover up from kennedy’s alcoholism. the Chaotic removal of a leader followed by the panic striken installation of an establishment canidate who was useless. Who was then chaotically removed and replaced by the panic striken installation of an establishment candidate who was useless….
I wish everyone well, the country better more liberal times and let the debate continue…
141 - Maybe he has been assured nothing too bad will come his way, and he has to push the PBR and mortgage aid to the max.
140, 143.
WTF?? Is this true??? Then why aren’t the Tories singing it from the top of Telecom Tower? It blows every single pathetic Labour argument (such as they are) right out of the water. No??
144, I wonder how many callers will end up being arrested for trying to gold the government to account.
147. the tories are trying to build a more cross party consensus, that way it won’t look to the public like more westminster squabbling. The media will probably push more into that though, it’s a potentially explosive angle.
129 The difference between the Police and a ordinary citizen is that the Police can arrest on suspicion of a crime been committed.
A citizen would have to see a crime for example theft to arrest.
Therefore as many cases in the world outside your insular world people are arrested on allegations, that don`t turn out to be correct.
Nevertheless the Police have a duty once a complaint has been made to look into the circumstances.
Thats why ordinary joe might think, some of these conservatives bleating normally don`t give one, and never previously critize the Police, but only when it effects their small little cosy club, do we hear from them.
148.
See here..
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23597038-details/High-flying+minister+was+implicated+over+Tory+leak/article.do
Corrupt to the core.
She’s a reserve. In the off chance that Damien Green was charged, Dave could make a complaint to the Met, and she and Gordon would have to be arrested on the same grounds.
Labour know this, which is why they’ll ensure the Met get the message to drop the case.
148. “trying to gold the government to account.”
If only the government did have some more gold on account we might be better placed.
Also meant to say that Simon Mayo isn’t exactly a harsh critic of the government, his political leaning are definitely left, although I have the feeling no where near as left as in his student days.
Saying all that, I have to say that I do enjoy the Mayo program, especially the book and film reviews.
143. If someone were to complain to the police about this person’s past potential ‘endangering of national security’, do you think they would be duty bound to investigate and ‘follow the evidence, wherever it leads’?
Also in the Standard..
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23597055-details/Beckett+doubt+on+how+many+homeowners+will+be+helped/article.do
Fresh doubts were raised today over how many homeowners will be saved from repossession by Labour’s new mortgage scheme.
Housing minister Margaret Beckett refused to put a figure on how many households would benefit.
She reportedly suggested yesterday that just 9,000 people would avoid having to give back the keys to their homes because of the initiative unveiled by Gordon Brown.
But today she told BBC Radio 4 banks would have to decide on a case-by-case basis who would be entitled to the bailout. She also suggested the fall in house prices may soon be over.
“There are some indications, small ones, that we are getting towards the bottom,” she said. And she appeared to admit the Government had encouraged irresponsible lending
Simon Mayo “How are you”
Brown “OK, but I’m just thinking about … difficult times … ” etc
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23597038-details/High-flying+minister+was+implicated+over+Tory+leak/article.do
That is incredible. The pure, glistening hypocrisy of Labour encapsulated in 300 words. UGH. UGH UGH UGH.
Labour are the adhering fecal matter on the U-bend of politics. Gabble, Palmer, Brown, Harman, all of them. Ugh.
Courtesy flush, please.
Right, nobody say or post anything interesting or controversial for the next few hours. I need to focus on my company accounts.
156. “There are some indications, small ones, that we are getting towards the bottom,”
That looks like a ‘green shoots’ remark, does it not - especially goiven today’s Halifax numbers,,,oh dear….
155, hahahaha.
No.
Not unless Jackboots gave the green light.
160. Mistake, we are nowhere near the bottom.
“But today she told BBC Radio 4 banks would have to decide on a case-by-case basis who would be entitled to the bailout.”
That is an interesting statement to make. So by the sounds of it, it isn’t even a government / bank scheme with set criteria. Rather, if the banks see fit (or not as the case may be) they will let you in on the scheme, where the government provides insurance.
127. Yes, the SNP choose not to follow that convention, as is their right.
The reason why there would almost certainly have to be by-election if Martin stood down is that he cannot go back to the Labour benches for the same reason that ex-speakers sit on the crossbenches in the Lords - it would look as if they were just on secondment from their parties if they returned to their former colleagues on leaving the chair. Were that to be allowed, there’d be nothing stopping them being appointed to office by their party and for their party afterwards - and so there’d be an incentive to behave in a partisan manner as Speaker. In effect, it would become a government job. Only by giving up all partisanship while serving as Speaker and afterwards can that be avoided (although it does also require the Speaker to act competently as well).
There is the option of sitting as an independent until the election but even then, it would be difficult for him to take up any cause that might be seen as controversial i.e. pretty much anything. The easiest option to avoid embarrassment all round is to give him a peerage and bump him upstairs, out of sight.
145. Sorry, to hear you are leaving, Yellow Submarine. We need more Liberal voices on here! I agree with much of your analysis and whilst it doesn’t look too good for the Lib Dems at the moment, we just have to stick with Clegg. If Labour want to carry on down their authoritarian path there is plenty of room for the Liberals and I think in people like Cable, Huhne and Laws the party has real talent. The best hope for the Lib Dems is after the next election, not in defending southern seats against the Tories. Frank Luntz’s focus group in Manchester was very positive.
165. The lib dems have done well during the Greengate thing, looking liberal but not partisan.
157
***** hell!
That was a bit tough. Still, now the hard questions are out of the way…
154
I loathe Mayo doing politics.
I detest the regular panel he has reviewing books - ‘pseud’s corner’
Multi-culti, namby-pamby,….mutter, mutter…
145 Yellow Submarine - Thanks for that interesting post. Some good stuff in there for all of us. I’m sorry that you won’t be posting again.
Also congratulations on your entry for the Best Mixed Metaphor awards for “towards the ice berg and away from the open goal.”
163. Falling apart bit by bit, as policies made up on the hoof are prone to do…
OT betting on snowfall on Christmas Day.
Long-range forecasters and global warming sceptics weatheraction.com reckon it will be a White Christmas. Corals are generally best priced at 5/1 against most locations.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/61049/Brace-yourself-for-a-white-Christmas/
135 ‘What chance does the UK have of preventing future terrorist attacks with this bunch protecting us?’
No more or less than before. I think it’s down to luck and chance.
145. Sorry to hear that you’ll be leaving the site, Yellow Sub. A fine last post, so to speak - I agree pretty much entirely with what you’ve written. Good luck in the future to you.
171. Pretty much, like those terrorists that failed in london because they were parked illegally.
2.5% cut over two months. A lot of people are going to have a lot more disposable income. The BoE may be (nominally) independent, but a lot of such folk are going to thank Brown and Darling for the extra cash in their pockets. Couple this with yesterdays announcement re repossessions, and a lot of homeowners are going to have a warm feeling towards the government. Let’s see if this is borne out in the next opinion polls.
I must confess a vested interest - I have a lifetime tracker mortgage!
174. Hmm - I’m going to overpay my mortgage with the extra so I can still afford to pay it when we have to pay back Brown’s 1 trillion of borrowing in massive tax rises.
The mortgage scheme will help any mortgage holders, from the participating banks, that get into difficulties due to a change in their financial circumstances. Of course the criteria has to be applied on a case-by-case basis.
I don’t quite understand people’s disappointment that this may ‘only’ affect 9000 people. Surely the lower the better!
158 - Sean, did you miss the bit about her being cleared?
176. 75,000 repo’s next year Gabrielle - can the other 66,000 go whistle ?
174
Agree.
Unortunately a lot of people are going to lose their jobs in the next +2 years and for those in employment increases in take home pay are going to be few and far between.
(see new casr sales for an example of what will happen to car making employment)
Re 174, Sandy, “I must confess a vested interest - I have a lifetime tracker mortgage!”
Though there will be a collar on your mortgage rate.
Out of interest, why would there have to be a by-election when Martin quits as Speaker? I know he was elected as Speaker and benefitted from a free-ride at the GE, but surely there is no formal legal requirement for him to put himself up for re-election any more than an MP crossing the floor would?
145 - Sad to see you go, Y.S. Is it because the site rebranding meant you found your sea of green?
Not that it really matters, but since it has came up (sort of) the SNP are obliged by their constitution to stand a candidate in every seat in Scotland!
It would be a bit silly to “shout from the rooftops” about her if she just sued them and won. Which presumably she would.
181
the collar may be illegal if not properly declared in the T&C.
177. Politically, isn’t it better for the government to help no-one, rather than only one in eight? Do nothing and there’s a general resentment to the government but a much more direct one to the banks / former employers etc. Help one in eight and the other seven will blame the government for discriminating against them while the one might not be bought off anyway. If the government is going to launch this kind of scheme, it has to be much more wideranging to have a positive impact economically or politically.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/programmes/mayo.shtml
Mayo: Shouldn’t you have seen this coming? Vince Cable warned you in 2003. He was right. You were wrong.
Brown: Well, I was right for the next four years.
145 - I’m sorry you’ll be leaving us Yellow Submarine - I hope whatever is pulling you away is resolved as well as is possible.
Your advice to the three parties, particularly to your own, is spot on. They would do well to heed it.
Hope to see you back here in the not too distant future.
182. Bob - see my post at [165].
re 186, Madasafish “the collar may be illegal if not properly declared in the T&C.”
I understand that they are in the terms and conditions.
182 - Just Convention, and not wanting to stay to watch another Speaker doing *his* job. Not legal requirement though, you’re right.
184 - Incredibly Incanescant Chap - that’s interesting, I always wondered why they ignored the convention, and assumed it was just that they were rebellious.
The Evening Standard article is actually a bit naughty. It reads at first sight as if Goodman has said that she was “cleared (to leak) by her bosses”, when the reality is that she says that she was “cleared (by an internal investigation) of actually being the leaker”.
182 - There is no law about a retiring Speaker remaining as an MP mid Parliament, but the practice for at least 100 years is they immediately leave the Commons and are elevated to the Lords where they sit as an independent.
187, but those who aren’t in risk may feel better disposed towards government, ie it gives them a kinder visage. Which is perhaps ruined by authoritarianism.
Re 181 & 186: I checked the small print last month and didn’t see any reference to a collar - suggest evryone in a similar position does likewise. Co-op Bank is the lender, btw, so I also get a dividend.
188 The truth and Gordon Brown can never be heard in the same sentence. That statement is just apalling.
191 Its got to be in the big writing not the tiny font used for detail - Halifax told by FSA that they can’t enforce theirs because they had moved reference to the collar from the easy to read guide to T&Cs into the detailed bit.
190, 192 - thanks - not sure how I missed your explanation just 20 posts upthread, having carefully skim-read through to see if someone had posted an answer!
Perfectly reasonable analysis, but I suspect with this lot, conventions are there to be ignored and ridden roughshod over…
197
Man falling from skyscraper joke:
He is heard to say, as he passes successive floors,
“so far, so good”
O/T: What are the betting implications of the political turmoil in Canada? Yet another general election would be fun!
197. Exactly. Brown just doesn’t get it. Plenty of people warned him, the IMF repeatedly warned the UK government. What action was taken? Bugger all.
202.
Brown not getting it ?
All
Unfortunately
Told
Im
Stupid
Man
177 – Gabble, home repositions for 2009 are likely to be in the region of 75,000.
The mortgage scheme as presented by Gordon Brown yesterday was dishonest; a cynical distraction to hide an embarrassment and already it is falling apart.
The reason you do not “understand people’s disappointment” is because you do not understand what has happened or its consequences, period.
Instead of continuously shilling for your party, take some time to read the comments from some very knowledgeable contributors here and learn something.
154
I loathe Mayo doing politics.
I detest the regular panel he has reviewing books - ‘pseud’s corner’
The book panel changes each week, genius.
201, got a Canadian friend. The only person who can call an election is the Governor (Governor General?) who is cutting short their tour of Hungary and the surrounding region to head back and sort out the crisis.
199
I disagree with your comments.
Conventions are just conventions. If politicians do not bother to make them laws, then they can be broken at any time.
Labour are perfectly entitled to breal ALL conventions as are the Conservatives.
Whether is is wise or fair is of course a different issue.
181 etc.
no collar on mine!
Can somebody who is not quite as drunk and distracted by Internet pr0n as me answer a technical question. Does Gordon’s mortgage wheeze change the value of those mortgages as assets to the banks? Surely a loan where you might not get any interest for two years is worth less than before Gordon’s sphincter dilated and this policy emerged. Does anyone know?
205. Though there are quite a few regulars on it, or at least there used to be.
202. It just sums up Brown’s complete inability to think long term. He was just keeping his fingers crossed that the whole thing would hold together lon enough for him to get into No.10.
209 - I thought the idea was that the Govt makes the (interest) payments on your behalf?
209 - It’s worth more than a loan that’s been defaulted on though…
212. Does it? Then why did the banks need to “agree” to it?
214 - Because they don’t get the capital payments.
213. Not always because you can repossess the house, throw the spendthrift shell suit clad residents and their 60″ TV out into the snow and sell the property.
216 - I think you can repossess the TV as well
206. Surely she has the same power as the Queen would have here, or is the constitution of Canada quite different?
9 URW - I found Spreadfair were willing to negotiate on price as one or two others on PB have also reported.
Maybe you should try again, whilst they’re offering commision free deals.
214. So the loan must be worth less than a normal one not subject to a two year hiatus while the borrower sits around smoking and laughing at the yield on 10 year gilts. I’m not this has fully been thought through and may in fact have been scribbled in the margin of a copy of the New Statesman while Gordon emptying his back yesterday morning.
Gordon was onviously worried the Queen’s Speech would be knocked off the front pages by Greengate, so he quickly cobbled this mortgage guarantee together. As usual with Labour it is government by headline.
211. He seems to think that because the economy didn’t immediately blow up when he was warned that the warnings were wrong and he was right.
Banks nationalised, enormous bail outs, the projected doubling of the national debt, interest rates slashed, housing market crashing, and the PM seems to think that all those warnings were wrong and that his time as Chancellor was just tickety-boo.
What is wrong with him?
There is an issue here about how this might affect banks’ capital requirements with regard to mortgage loans. One of the many details that strangely enough wasn’t worked out in advance.
On the subject of Harriet.
My party game of name your three most stupid Politicians has been ruined by the existence of Sarah Palin as she appears in everyone top three.
The rules are that you have to name your three most stupid politicians and get everyone to agree that your selections were more stupid than their’s
Harriet was always in my top three (my exocet unanswerable WMD selection being the magnificently thick John Moore, from 1980s Thatcher Cabinet fame)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/programmes/mayo.shtml
Mayo: Does Obama have a negative view of UK?
Brown: I’ve met him, you know. Twice actually. In person. And we’ve spoken on the telephone. He shares our policies.
Mayo: He’s not too bad for a novice.
Brown: He’s got great strengths [neck started to turn] … for really serious times.
205 - They do have regulars though, like Mark Webster.
great last post by Yellow submarine with much food for thought. I hope that you grace the site again at some point on the future with further such lucid arguments.
225. Hmm, ignoring all the questions then getting in his soundbite, what a surprise.
209/212 The issue here is that your mortgage payments are suspended for two years, but the interest accrues anyway. On a 100k mortgage that would mean adding about 9k onto your mortgage balance, which because of compounding will require an additional 5 years to pay back. In other words have two years of your mortgage now, pay for another 5 years later. L0an sharking in all but name.
“No more boom and bust”
205
not a listener then?
218, think it’s similar to ours, but my friend gave the impression that she (the Governor, not my friend:p) could call a snap election if Harper’s plan to axe subsidies for parties was something he tried to force through to crush the other parties.
224, Harman, Lansley (on QT tonight… Cameron should’ve followed my advice and have him sedated in a basement) and… er… Palin.
Can someone wake me up when this pathetic Westminster Village spat over Green is over, and our silly childish politicians start talking about something Joe Public actually cares about i.e. the recession.
The amount of people involved or intervening in this ’story’ seems to grow in direct, and inverse, proportion to the public’s interest.
Sort it out you bunch of red and blue muppets. Nobody cares.
222. This article offers a possible explanation
http://cityunslicker.blogspot.com/2008/12/madness-of-king-gordon-lets-get.html
224.
1. Sarah Palin.
2. Sarah Palin.
3. Sarah Palin.
Do I win a prize?
Brown: I’ve met him, you know. Twice actually. In person. And we’ve spoken on the telephone. He shares our policies.
Sounds like a little child talking about having met their footballing icon. I met David, yes David Beckham, twice, well once I was on a coaching course with 250 other kids, but he shook my hand. I support his team you know.
232. You were very interested yesterday, right up until your theory that it was unravelling for the tories was proved wrong.
231. Yes Lansley vs Johnson is look like as unbalanced a match up as the horror show for Labour that was Ozzie vs Alexander last week.
Can Dougie come to your basement too?
233 From the same blog - a review of the mortgage announcement …
The buyer of a Northern Wreck ‘Together’ 125% whopper can see some nice chinks of light here. Already badly in negative equity, he now gets 2 years to live in his house. At the end he owes even more and the value of the house is lower, perhaps under 50% equity by then. So the bank forecloses and he is turfed out to bankruptcy; but he has had 2 more years of living beyond his means and the government has further subsidised the banks lost and to some extent and allowed the books to be cooked further for longer. Finally, the market cannot adjust to lower prices as the market is being artificially supported.
glw @ 222 “He seems to think that because the economy didn’t immediately blow up when he was warned that the warnings were wrong and he was right.”
Maybe he thinks there is an international dimension to the current crisis, and that it originated in the United States.
But you and other posters may have a point that Brown is unduly optimistic owing to the previous decade of outperforming experts’ doom-laden forecasts.
As regards the realpolitik, the Conservative attacks on Brown for this crisis do not resonate with the public and so the party and its followers here should drop them. A more promising line of attack might be PFI commitments that represent wasted investments, and heavy future liabilities.
Many people have decided a long time ago that he should no longer be the Speaker, but were too scared to speak openly, and he just wouldn’t take the hint, and wanted to keep hoovering up the benefits.
But that is the past - it is now out in the open, and many, many MPs have now decided that they will never get a better chance than this to boot him out - if they delay and tarry they may miss the boat, and he will cling on by his fingernails for another 2 or 3 years.
After shafting the previous Serjeant-at-arms for being too competent and now having the audacity to blame the new SAA for being incompetent he just looks ungallant and incompetent.
The Telegraph has a great cartoon of him today with a sign which says ‘THE BUCK STOPS elsewHERE..’ It sums it all up, and he has overstayed his welcome by a long, long time…
232
You can talk about the recession as much as you like.
It will NOT solve anything.
A 15 year old credit bubble and monstrous debt burden cannot be solved by talking, government measures or anything but interest rate cuts and time.
If we start talking about the recession and how to fix it, we will all be a tad bored in 2010 when it is still ongoing.
237. Yes, last week was interesting, Osborne was clapped and well liked, Alexander was heckled by a hostile crowd.
232. No I wasn’t. I said all along that it was a Westminster Village story but that the Tories had a chance to make real political capital out of it and failed.
That remains my view. Show me any political capital they have made? The story is buried on page 7 and nobody gives a fig about it – outside Westminster Village.
I like debating you but don’t use Straw Man arguments against me. You can go back and check my posts – I have always said it is a Westminster Village event.
209. It depends on the detail we don’t have yet.
If the interest is just deferred, then assuming that the loan is repaid then there won’t be any balance sheet loss. There will, however, be a cash-flow loss as the money is not being repaid upfront (anyone remember the spark that got us into this? Oh yes - it was banks suffering short-term cashflow problems).
It’s not clear whether it’s these payments that the government is underwriting / paying, or any losses incurred as a result of the scheme.
There may well be real losses resulting as well. The interest deferment is for two years. If house prices have not increased in that time to cover the interest on the loan unpaid in the deferment period, then the value recouped by the later repossesion will be lower relative to the outstanding loan than would have been the case. Whether that has a positive or negative effect on the balance sheets of banks depends on how many mortgages that would have ended in repossession are saved, set against losses made due to increased outstanding debt and lower repossession sales recoveries.
241. So you are of the view that we can do nothing to mitigate its impact? In which case, I will have to respectfully disagree sir.
re 62 I’m afaird that’s just plain wrong. When parliament is dissolved the speaker loses his seat just like all the other MPs and has to fight it again in the subsequent general election if he wishes to remain an MP.
A more promising line of attack might be PFI commitments that represent wasted investments, and heavy future liabilities.
Problem is people don’t understand PFI, and even then they say well “its just like my mortgage in’ it!”. All the talk about debt is lots and lots of people are in shed loads of it, and debt is more acceptable than ever. Hence why until the last PBR people didn’t see anything wrong with large government borrowing / debt, because it was used for “investment”.
232, arresting an Opposition MP and ransacking Parliament is a serious business.
237, quite. Alexander and Lansley in the basement would be like a freakish experiment where scientists observe delinquent chimpanzees.
242, yeah. Osborne was aided by the fact that Alexander’s a cretin, but he also put in a solid performance himself.
243. Yes you did, but you were also of the firm conviction that the story was unravelling for the tories and that they’d overplayed their hand. In fact the opposite has happened, the tories have reigned themselves in and kept relatively quiet, while the speaker is depserately trying to hold onto his job by blaming everyone, Harman refused to back him up, and Jacqui Smith keeps looking a twit. Also, most papers still have this story prominantly.
242. Alexander is utterly woeful. I shudder when I see him. I can’t abide his horrific “sending out a message” methodistic politics. The guy is a tragedy. The fact that he can be utterly destroyed by a lightweight like Ozzie shows just how awful he is.
244.
Also not clear is whether the bank can refuse the holiday.
Also not clear whether the bank can insist on a penal interest rate during this holiday.
245. I don’t believe he said that, just we can’t talk about the recession every minute of every day.
237. when dougie got heckled by that slightly nutty chap last week i did actually begin to feel a bit sorry for him
244 - O/T David, I see there’s a by-election in the safe Tory Bingley seat in Bradford. One contributor on Vote 2007 comments,
“The Conservative candidate will be John Pennington - which for connoisoirs of Bradford politics will be interesting!!”
What can he mean? )
Interesting contest in Waltham Forest with two by-elections in the same ward which the LibDems won narrowly over the Tories in 2006.
232. Care to explain how anything can “grow in direct, and inverse, proportion” to anything else?
250, Osborne isn’t a stellar media performer, but he is above average. Alexander is not as bad as his sister, to be fair.
248. It is serious Morris but it was a police venture and a police blunder. I still fail to see what it has to with politics other than give our elected members an excuse to swing their dicks at each other in a insular, pathetic and unedifying way. Oh and now we are saying we should sack a decent and fair minded man in Michael Martin. What a tawdry farce.
253. You are a better man than me. I enjoyed it.
145 Yellow Submarine
Like many others, I’m sorry to see you go and hope you will return. If you do not, you at least have the consolation of a much-praised last post. I liked it very much and think all three Parties would do well to take note of your words.
Good luck in whatever you do next.
256. “Alexander is not as bad as his sister”
Damned with faint praise…
241
How to reverse a Recession
is the title for an econo,mics tome yet to be written.
I have already given the answer : time and interest rate cuts.
Interest rate cust because it makes borrowing cheaper.
time because cuts take time to work.
We have an additional dimension: HUGE Bank losses and more to come mean Lending is going to halve.
And no Government can stop that…
re 104 well that’s consistent from the Home Office at least as they want to collect our DNA in case we might offend in the future.
257, decent and fair minded? Hahahaha. His wife spent £4,000 of our cash on taxis.
I concur it was a police blunder (warrant part at least) but it’s incredible that the Home Secretary didn’t know Green was about to be arrested over nothing unless she asked not to be told.
257. Michael Martin decent and fair minded? Your having a laugh! Over MP’s expenses he basically supressed any dissent to cover up for his own misdemenours, he downgraded the serjeant at arms office because the previous incumbent dissagreed with him and is now blaming the new one for this fiasco.
257. Haha very good. The faux outrage and world weariness is coming along nicely. Next week - how to appear truthful.
191. It depends on the lender. I have a base tracker with no collar. Nationwide has a collar at 2.75% etc etc
263. Which is pretty much what John Reid said.
255. ? A goes up while B goes down.
Punters,
I think it may be time to review the election-date market:
- Interest rates lowest since 1951;
- Temporary VAT cut;
- Headline-grabbing (but probably small-scale) action on repossessions;
- Short Queen’s Speech, with some controversial bills removed from the draft;
- Economy getting steadily worse, but most people haven’t yet been hit.
As far I can see, the only counter-argument is that the Labour MPs would want to keep their jobs as long as possible. It is of course a strong argument, but is it decisive?
257
Blame H Harman
She killed Martin last night on TV.
267. Oh yes, he stabbed her good, her catty reply didn’t help much either.
Gabble, no the government do not know what else the Tories have. And it is driving them nuts. Delicious, isn’t it?
re 175 me too with the tracker. I have no warm feeling whatsoever towards this shower though. But you could be right and perhaps the politically illiterate will feel grateful.
257 “Oh and now we are saying we should sack a decent and fair minded man in Michael Martin. ”
That’s a good one. Best joke of the day, so far.
269
Agree
Inevitable in my view.
Ensure police apologise, a few more sweeteners, arrest a Conservative MP in bed with an illgal immigrant whore who has bribed him to get a fake passport and an entry to the House of Commons .
and Labour WILL win.
265. It’s funny how my appearance always smokes you out, oh Runny Honey. How are you feeling today?
269. It might be, however the times are very volatile. The polls are all over the place, the economy is getting worse at quite a rapid rate and Greengate has mired them in a controversy that no matter how hard they squirm and strain, they can’t seem to get out of.
257. Are you serious? IMHO Martin is a shocking Speaker. Would love to get rid. However, I do agree that this seems a police blunder.
269. Richard also factor in
* Brown’s fear of elections
* Opinion polls in the main showing no Labour majority
* Prospect of recession ending in 2010 (certainly more than 2009)
* “Why go early to lose by less”
* Something may come up - either pro Brown/anti Cameron
I see no real prospect of Labour calling a 2009 election.
re 221 fortunate that the Queen’s speech was not today because Karen Matthews is going to be all over tomorrow’s front pages.
269 Richard
Shadsy has just put up a new market on the Month of the next GE. You should look at it. If you think it will be in 2009 (I don’t) there are some juicy odds available.
Favorite is May 2010 at 5/2, which I think is about right.
274. That may not be a fashionable view. But it remains my view. Some Tories even see it – witness Alex on here last night. Good job some of us go against the orthodoxy on here, otherwise we’d be subjected to linear back-slapping and Runnymede’s daily intemperate grumbles about something or other.
279. I agree, Brown would have to make a decision. He doesn`t like that.
254. Expect a rubbishy low turnout: the weather’s foul here today.
JP is a top guy who has been involved in a number of successful business ventures around the district and is well-known, both because of that and because he’s also been a high-profile campaigner to save the former Odeon cinema building in Bradford centre.
It’s this latter point which gives the potential for interest. Bradford Council is currently run as a minority Tory administration with general Lib Dem backing, as it has been since 2000. The Council are keen to demolish the former cinema, which was built in the 1930s and has some architectural merit despite being refused listed status seven times. JP would like to see it kept and earlier this year put together a plan that would have saved it, though whether funding was in place to realise the plan I don’t know.
The public mood is mainly on the side of BORG, who are campaigning for its regeneration, and against the council. To add to the confusion, Yorkshire Forward (the regional development agency) now own the building and have their own plans to demolish it and replace it with a modern and uninspired design.
The council is narrowly balanced between Tory and Labour to such an extent that one councillor’s vote can be critical. How the result of the by-election will affect matters is unknown - but it’s unlikely to quieten that particular issue.
269.
I think it may be time to review the election-date market
I don’t. Brown has tried lots of “clever” announcements before and it hasn’t helped him. Unless he sees the polls (notice plural, not one) going his way he will hang on Micawber-style.
239. The whole point of the forecasted warnings is to promote action to avoid the doom. So yes warnings don’t generally come true, which is why you warn. Sadly Brown seemed to believe that, ‘no more boom and bust’, he wasn’t just lucky but had changed the game.
279. Also
* Chance of disposing of bank shares by 2010
* House prices may have stopped falling by 2010
* Growth should be back to flat or small +ve
etc - Brown - “due to our policies we’ve weathered the recession”..
269
“Headline-grabbing (but probably small-scale) action on repossessions;”
Add ‘firewalled’ to small-scale (smart move - the banks can be blamed if they don’t cough up)
The police have just contradicted the Speaker
http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/498f66f50058de12038339bdb1066ca3/Commons+raid+police+backed.aspx
280
I am behind the curve on this one. Who is Karen Mathews svp
289, didn’t Grieve say that the police and Speaker’s statements were ‘incompatible’?
282. Ooh, you freedom fighter you.
In case anyone is remotely interested, and I don’t think you will be, Margaret Curran, the defeated candidate in the Glasgow East By-Election will try for (and almost definately succeed in getting)the Labour nomination for the constituency for the next GE.
Twas to be expected, but I thought I’d put it out there anyway
290. The Yorkshire Chav-napper
aaah yup i was thinking politics ..silly me….
268. Surely directly proportional: y=kx
Inversely proportional: y=k(1/x)
The two are mutually exclusive.
289. Oh dear…the blame game continues. Who is going to be caught lying first?
291. And how, the speaker will probably be gone after this. And remember bob it’s not the tories getting rid of martin, it’s a mixture of his own stupidity and labour’s continued avoidance in backing him up.
279
The polls have swung once - they may swing again…
But people become inured to fear and with time it merely becomes enervating.
289.
More - including source from Met
http://machiavellitheprince.blogspot.com/2008/12/mr-speaker-misled-house-yesterday.html
244. Good explanation, thanks. This combined with the IR cut is awesome short term politics by Gordon. He gets and seems to be able to pander to the ineffable stupidity of the British electorate in a very capable manner.
“I detest the regular panel he has reviewing books - ‘pseud’s corner’
The book panel changes each week, genius.”
If he had said ‘the panel of regulars’ you would have been correct, as this would refer to regular panellists. He did, however, refer to ‘regular panel’ which is about a panel that regularly appears, no mention of who makes up that panel.
No surprise how people regularly fall for spin lines, they are often truthful but designed to confuse the issues.
266/191 Halifax have just announced that they are not imposing their collar on base tracker mortgages.
291. WOW. That’s surely it. Either the Speaker and the Sarjeant must go - or the police are called to the Commons and swear under oath.
Eventually we had to reach this point. No one wants to take the rap. That situation can’t be sustained for ever.
But what an extraordinary position we have now reached: the Speaker of the House of Commons, and the most senior officers of Scotland Yard: accusing each other of lying.
Unbelievable. And all under Labour’s watch.
Heh.
If the Speaker resigned he would just go back to being an (independent) backbench MP. No need for an election.
Tim - Harman isn’t stupid, calculating, yes, but never stupid. Palin is of course the most stupid (and I’d add any politician who supported her) but stupidity, in an intellectual sense, must bring in Jacqui Smith (as compared to the level she has been overpromoted to) and any number of backbenchers for whom Bumbling Bob Ainsworth would make a good representative. The very act of thinking on his feet seems to be beyond him.
PfP AT 219.I was reluctantly willing to be a Buyer at 620.0 but they couldn’t see beyond 626.something which was downright ridiculous.Obviously the fact that they are currently willing to waive commission is a factor but in truth I live in hopes of a make/up closer to 610.0 for the three major Parties combined and 620.0 is almost a worse case scenario so I doubt I can do business.
Richard Nabavi.I replied to you twice but you didn’t reply once !
On your topic of Election Date,I am trying to drum up interest in Betfair’s new market which combines the above with ‘Most Seats’.
304. I am curious now whether the civil servant (if we believe it was not a minister) who made the decision to call in the police will get a bonus this year?
I’ve got a tracker,as have friends (we are hard-working,ESSENTIAL public sector workers)-in the words of one,’Darling is a Darling’
Here is the letter
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7765081.stm
309. Not very bright your mate is he ?
Sorry for the wodge of text, but here are the crucial paragraphs of the police letter sent by Bob Quick to the Home Secretary. It explains why Harman does not have “full confidence” in the Speaker.
Labour must have seen this letter and realised the Speaker was lying.
Here are the paras:
“On Wednesday 26th November 2008 police officer led by the Senior Investigating Officer attended the Palace of Westminster to speak to the Serjeant at Arms. The officers briefed her to the effect that they were seeking permission to search the Parliamentary office of an MP. The Serjeant at Arms was informed that the police had applied for and been granted by a magistrate, three warrants in relation to three other premises related to the MP. The officers informed the Serjeant at Arms that the provisions of Section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act required that they first seek consent of the person who occupies or controls the premises where they believe evidence may be found.”
“The officers explained the nature of the investigation and the purpose of the search and were satisfied that the Serjeant at Arms understood that police had no power to search in the absence of a warrant and therefore could only do so with her written consent or that of the Speaker. Prior to giving written consent the Serjeant at Arms told the officers that she would seek legal advice. Further discussion between the officers and Serjeant at Arms is detailed in the officer’s statements.”
“The Serjeant at Arms indicated that she would give her consent at the appropriate time and that she would take responsibility for informing the Speaker. It was further indicated the officer would seek consent the following day on Thursday 27th November 2008 and the MP concerned would be identified to her.
“On the 27th November 2008 officers attended the Palace of Westminster where they again saw the Serjeant at Arms and written consent to search was provided in two forms; namely a signature on a standard police search form 101 and in a letter provided by the Serjeant at Arms. It is understood that the Serjeant at Arms had obtained legal advice in the interim. The legality or otherwise of police actions in criminal investigations are often subject to challenge and are settled through the judicial process.”
Link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7765081.stm
304. The game isn’t over, either. It still has the potential to reach back to the Home Office, the Home Secretary, and beyond.
And last night I started wondering if the tradional second-Wednesday in March Budget speech may be brought forward a week or two,to accomodate a pre-Easter (April 12th 2009) GE,were circumstances-not to mention polls,propitious?
312. Martin is toast. Of the blackened, smoking variety.
311 The mate is a ’she’ and she is an intelligent lady
305 Not true. Parliamentary convention means that he would need to be re-elected to his seat.
313. Maybe. But for that, the Tories need proof that a Labour minister knew of the impending arrest prior to the event, no? That might be hard to find… without a mole….
Either way, what a scrumptious scandal. Gets better by the day.
315 Even as a Labour voter,the very thought turns my stomach
316. Well she’s no accountant or economist. Or able to understand the implications of the PBR. She might be good at crosswords I guess.
If Martin goes I doubt he’ll go quietly, he’s been stabbed in the back by the government. The tories haven’t even been damaged by having a go.
281 Re: Ladbrokes’ monthly GE odds - Favorite is May 2010 at 5/2, which I think is about right.
PtP - that’s a great spot. If it’s to be 2010, May appears the overwheming favourite and the 5/2 available looks better value than the 4/7 for H1 2010 as a whole.
I’ve taken this bet, plus some 5/1 for June 2009 (to coicide with the Euro elections) as a saver.
314. Having already moved one election next year, can Gordon announce another one on a different date without looking really stupid? Oh, wait…
Off politics… Alan Curbishley availible at 10/1 on Coral, his betfair odds are 7/1
The amazing thing is, not only did the Sarjeant at Arms give consent, she went away and took legal advice first, and then came back some time later - and gave two forms of WRITTEN consent.
This is so contradictory of the Speaker’s version of events it is laughable. Unless the police are all lying, the Speaker must resign.
And I find it very hard to believe no Labour politician was aware of these events during the “seeking of legal advice”.
318. I think that’s where we will be going next.
311. Who is in the public sector?
318. The assumption seems to be that there is/was only one mole in the Home office. Whilst I don’t know any different I do think it is presumptious to assume this. Mr Galley is not the first Home Office employee accused of leaking imigration information in this Government and I am sure he won’t be the last. The Home Office is not fit for purpose and as such I would consider it as a leaky sieve which no matter how they try will never stop leaking.
If I was the Home Secretary I suspect I would be as paranoid as she seems to be because with a department as dysfunctional as hers, she is going to lose her job. The only question is when.
326
Didnt Mike have a bet that The home secretary wouldnt last to the election. Mike is very astute when it comes to political bets…
329. I hope she does survive. ‘The Home Secretary is going down in Redditch’ is something I want to hear come election night.
307 URW - Sorry for not replying; I was trying to keep down the volume of posts. But you are right not to close if they won’t listen to your argument about the total number of seats. Maybe they can’t add up.
279, 281, 285 etc - What I’m really saying is that it looks very much as though Labour are doing a number of things which can be interpreted as laying the groundwork for a possible H1 2009 election. Obviously Brown won’t make a decision until nearer the time, and would probably go for it only if the polls were favourable in Feb/Mar. However, as punters, we need to anticipate that possibility in advance, and I’m not sure that 2009 is quite as unlikely as the odds suggest. One of the reasons is that I am almost certain that the economy will feel a lot worse in May 2010 than in May 2009.
Speaker won’t resign. Jill Pay will.
296. OK – you got my drift though I’m sure.
Smith will surely follow Martin in due course. There are also major inconsistencies between her claims and those of other parties…
330 Would you like to rephrase that, Chris?
320 True-she has no qualifications in those two fields.On the other hand I do have ‘A’ level economics and a Level 2 Open University qualification in Accounting and Bookkeeping.My candid view-a calcualted gamble,that should work reasonably in the medium term-ie growth back to 2%/annum by 2nd half of 2010.(A lighting,back-of-a fag packet calcualtion I do confess!)
34 - after seeing him in action for a while now thats probably the kindest thing i would say about him
330. Your bizarre cross-partisan fantasies are not suitable for a family website!
@330:
Does the sound of clumping jackboots give you the RFH?
Yellow Submarine. Excellent post.
3329 jacquiboots?
I wish I had taken the £20 offered for Martin to go last night. His position continues to weaken. It can’t weaken much further.
As for Harman. I’m starting to think she’ll make a decent leader of the opposition.
I’m not saying I would ever vote for her (I’d probably go to the Lib Dems before Labour) but I’ve developed a grudging respect over the past few months.
**washes mouth out**
342. I said much the same last night. And I backed her at 16/1
342. Did you see her performance on Newsnight last night? It was rhapsodically embarrassing. Admittedly, she was defending the indefensible, but sometimes you have to do that.
And, to put it kindly, she wasn’t very good at it.
@342:
No, I know what you mean. Whilst I disagree with her politics, she seems to demonstrate a certain sincerity that has been somewhat absent from Labour since the mid-nineties.
This police letter is nowhere on the media radar - it’s being ignored.
Nobody paying any attention to the discrepancy between the speaker and officer Quick.
It’s like it never happened…
317. Are you sure that is right Lefty? What precedent is there for this? Most speakers retire at GEs and become peers. Betty Boothroyd retired in 2000 and resigned as an MP as did Speaker King in 1970.
I think that in practice Michael Martin would have to resign but I am not sure that there is a clear rule stating he must.
henry Addington (speaker 1795-1801) stood down as speaker in 1801 and became PM after William Pitt reignsed over Catholic Emancipation. In those days, however, Ministers had to resign their seats and contest a by-election upon taking office.
342 Go on then David, just for you, £20 even money, you say Martin ceases to be Speaker on or before 31 Jan 2009, I say he remains in place on that date. You have 30 minutes to confirm yes/no before I have to go out.
It would be useful if people claiming to have a “tracker” mortgage were to identify the lender.
344 - Sometimes Newsnight interviews are impossible if you are in a hole. I give you exhibit A - MichaeL Howard (another decent leader of the opposition).
346. Monday’s debate should be fun.
348 - I’m in on that, Peter. I’ll be disappointed if I lose - more for the state of Parliament than my £20!
349. Abbey - taken out April 2008, 40% deposit.
346. Give it time. The letter only appeared about an hour ago.
Not everyone is as quick on the uptake as the political bloodhounds of pb.com.
336. My view too. Actually think it’s a crafty policy that has also won a news cycle thumpingly. However people on here would rather talk about the game of executive toy snooker ensuing over Greengate.
It looked to me like Hattie’s mind, rather than allowing her to say something Mandelsonian and outright barbarous, intervened just in time so that what came out was literal gibberish.
As the interview went on, she became less and less coherent. It’s an interesting defense mechanism.
349 - I’ve a tracker mortgage with C&G, any reason why you ask?
Interesting developments today
- Green states that when he was arrested he was not charged with conspiracy but aiding and abetting. Police statement after arrest said differently. Labour’s assault has been based on the assumption it was conspiracy. Green should know, why the discrepancy?
- Speaker & Jill Pays say one thing, police say another regarding whether she was informed of her rights. Did the SAA get legal advice? did she understand the seriousness or in absence of guidance from the Speaker or the mysterious missing Clerk of the House (phone switched off? not to be disturbed?) did she fail to get the advice? Who is telling the truth?
- Smith poor in House despite helpful interventions from most of her side (Reid not so helpful)
Michael Martin has shown that he was promoted above his level of incompetency. He does not have the natural or learned abilities required by a Speaker.
A speaker needs a presence to command the respect of the House, a good sense of humour, be an excellent communicator, be able to demonstrate even-handedness, a willingness to listen and above all absolute honesty and transparency.
His predecessor’s expereince on the stage and her upbringing enabled her to have many of these qualities.
Regarding George Osborne, I would agree with previous posts in that he does not have the ability to easily communicate to all at their level. He does not appear to be at ease with himself and so in not being able to relax in public, does appear to exhibit a superior manner - not an ideal quality for a top politician - he would appear best to be suited for a supporting role but not as a leader.
354 - It is on the BBC website and linked to from here:
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7764857.stm
Links is ‘Full text: Police letter on MP warrant’ on right
355. Well, that’s because we are refusing to be taken in my Brown’s blatant manipulation of the media. Derrr.
What do you think we should do - always argue about whatever the Mail or the Express think is important, on any given day?
Berk.
@355:
Do you think that ‘winning the news cycle’ is the only thing left of any importance in politics?
352 Done deal David - I’ll email PtP with our respective posts 348 & 352 above to record this bet. In all probability, the outcome is likely to be determined over the next few days.
OT: Canada. My friend’s just said Harper’s asked the Governor General to suspend Parliament to avoid a no-confidence motion.
According to Bob Quick’s letter, “On Wednesday 26th November 2008 police officer led by the Senior Investigating Officer attended the Palace of Westminster to speak to the Serjeant at Arms…”
…followed by all the stuff about seeking written consent etcetera. Then, “It was further indicated the officer would seek consent the following day on Thursday 27th November 2008 and the MP concerned would be identified to her.
On the 27th November 2008 officers attended the Palace of Westminster where they again saw the Serjeant at Arms and written consent to search was provided in two forms…”
So a day elapsed between the two visits and the Serjeant never had the gumption to inform her boss of this ground-breaking event? I find that unbelievable.
359. As a known non-fan, I thought Osborne was really pretty good on the recent Question Time (and that’s probably the severest test for a British politician, barring a Paxman hatchet job).
He was affable, witty, clever, deft - still a tiny bit callow - but certainly not a charmless twat like so many other senior politicians - on both front benches.
358 Ted - Yes, the discrepancy between the police letter and what Green was actually arrested for is significant (see last few sentences of link at 360). It may seem a minor nit-picking point, but it’s actually important because Labour have been trying to smear Green with talk of ‘inciting’ or ‘inducing’ leaks. (Gabble is the leading authority on this).
Re 349 - As stated earlier, Co-op Bank lifetime tracker. 0.49% above base rate. Got the deal in June 2007.
364, a quote from my friend: “After parliament has only sat 15 times, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is currently in talks with Governor General Michaelle Jean to try and persuade her to prorogue (that is, suspend) parliament in order to avoid a no-confidence vote on Monday.”
369, meeting appears to be 30 mins in, apparently nobody knows what the outcome will be.
355. Well the Green story is still bubbling away so the Government attempts to kill it appear to have failed. The Mortgage story got front page headlines which was good for the Government but the Green story got plenty of space and still has legs.
The good side of the Mortgage story is the splash headline (and they certainly looked good), any potential downside still yet to play out if the scehem is not as all encompassing as the headline suggested (as, it seems, it is not).
If Jill Pay had 24 hours to seek legal advice, it is almost inconceivable that someone in the Government would not have been made aware of the situation.
Even if Jil Pay doesn’t have the common sense to know that this had the potential to be political dynamite, the person or persons giving her the legal advice WOULD have.
347. Pretty sure I`m right. However, I think that it is also a constitutional convention that another party will not put up an opposition candidate against a Speaker seeking re-election. So a formality perhaps, but Martin would still have to resign and seek re-election, though probably unopposed. Please someone correct me if I have this wrong.
Also worth mentioning that Nulab have a track record of ignoring conventions anyway, so who knows?
361. Thank you for your kind words Sean. Do I sense that you have now changed your view that this is merely a Westminstian gripping yarn for the nerdish fans of Michael Dobbs thrillers?
365. It is also unbelievable that no Cabinet Ministes got wind of this, during the several days it was taking place.
@374:
Oi! What’s wrong with being a political nerd?
“Now Labour would feel confident about beating off an SNP challenge to retain the seat.”
I imagine there will be cooler heads among the Labour strategists than that - but if they are foolish enough to be that confident, then to coin a phrase, bring it on.
Glenrothes was to a large extent down to local factors - a controversy over home care charges in the local SNP/Lib Dem-run council, and the fact that Brown had sympathy as a local man. If you need further proof of that, look at the pro-SNP swings in the Forth and Baillieston by-elections held on the same day.
In addition, a Springburn by-election would be more of a Glasgow East than a Glenrothes scenario - it’s much harder to defend a seat made vacant by a pointless resignation than by a tragic death.
371. You see I just don’t buy this “it’s unravelling” line. Why? How?
The only line of attack seems to be “oh well, not many people will actually end up using it.” OK, so the Government has launched a very reassuring policy for cheaps. It’s a hard life.
376. Nowt. I am one. But you take the point….
On the issue of election timing, it seems to be accepted that the UK is about 6 months behind the US in the development of the credit crunch/recession. The news coming from the States at the moment continues to be dire, and this is likely to be the situation here in late May/early June. Doesn’t seem a suitable time for Brown to go to the country.
The earliest he would choose to go is when the first ‘green shoots of recovery’ emerge, which puts the election into 2010.
372. Yes. And who was it gave her this legal advice? Surely the obvious person would be a lawyer high up in the government? The Attorney General maybe.
372 I wonder who she got legal advice from? Surely any remotely competent lawyer, with the vaguest knowledge of parliament, would have seen this as a whopper of an issue?
Unless of course the police spun the ‘national security’ line a bit too enthusiastically? Just a thought…
377. Aye aye. We have Sean T and Red Meteor on here simultaneously. Do I sense a long and hilarious Blackaddian insult-fest on the topic of Scottish nationalism?
@378:
My primary concern with the policy is that it doesn’t go nearly far enough. Eight banks only? Opt-in? Only 9,000 out of 75,000 expect repossessions covered?
Viewed in those terms, it looks a lot like a gimmick than a completely thought-out policy.
My personal feeling is that the Tory policy should be to extend the scheme to everyone, not the lucky few Gordon wants to help.
Am I being dumb or is there a huge inconsistency in Bob Quick’s letter to the HS. At the beginning he says the following:
“1. Was a warrant needed to search the Parliamentary office?
No.”
BUT later on he says this:
“The officers explained the nature of the investigation and the purpose of the search and were satisfied that the Serjeant at Arms understood that police had no power to search in the absence of a warrant and therefore could only do so with her written consent or that of the Speaker. ”
At one point he says there is no need for a warrant to search a Parliamentary Office but later on says that his officer told jill Pay that as there was no warrant she could refuse permission.
384. “My personal feeling is that the Tory policy should be to extend the scheme to everyone, not the lucky few Gordon wants to help.”
Yes - that’s a clever, much more intelligent counter than the crappo line we’ve seen thus far. Fair play -you should call Central Office!
379 - Because the casual observer now thinks they are going to get their mortgage paid for if they lose their job.
385. What he means is they don’t need a warrant IF they have explicit consent to search.
380 John - A lot depends of that last assumption. I’m not convinced that the famous ‘green shoots’ will emerge that quickly. Even if they do, the public perception tends to lag behind the strict economic data.
378. The other lines of attack are:
* It discriminates for feckless borrowers over prudent renters.
* It prevents (or may not) banks flushing out bad loans
* It lands the borrower with penal interest rates and may constitute bad financial advice
* It is more borrowed taxpayer money thrown after bad.
* It encourages people facing bankruptcy to choose 2 years of free rent at the taxpayers expense.
* It reduces further the number of properties entering the market at the “correct” price
* It prolongs the housing downturn
* It discourages the banks to lend. In particular to people with small deposits.
351: you reckon, runnymede? Today’s statement exchanges were pretty low-key and none of the benches were full. I think the Tories have (wisely IMO) decided they’re not going to gain from ramping it up any further.
Sorry to see Yellow Submarine go, and thanks for the thoughtful envoi - hope to see you back when your circumstances allow. Your analysis echoes a Tory poster (GeoffH, I think) who said a couple of days ago that we might be heading for a 1950-style election, with both large parties increasing their votes as the electorate saw the election as a stark choice. It’s worth remembering that 2005 was very unusual in having both big parties under 37%.
But is Britain actually instinctively a conservative country? It obviously begs the question of what that is, but I don’t think so in the political sense. It seems to me that there’s now an absolute majority for vaguely social democratic ideas - welfare state, mildly redistributive taxes, strong NHS, attention given to equality and environmental issues, even up to a point political correctness (that’s why people hasten to assure you they’re not racists). It doesn’t mean the Conservatives can’t win, but they can only win by agreeing to respect the general gist of that way of thinking. Cameron saw that immediately but the jury’s still out on how far he and his colleagues have internalised it.
378. That’s fair enough but Gordon’s problem is over-puffing announcements. The press this morning suggested a big scheme but it now seems to be a reality small cheap scheme. It may not be a problem but it has the potential to be one for the PM and it comes down again to his hubris and determination to outmaneourve the Tories.
380. I don’t know if you have a Betfair account Martin, but the election date/winning Party market shows that according to the odds, Labour are about 4 times less likely to win a 2010 election than the Conservatives.
Compare that with the two 2009 options, which show Labour with only slightly less chance of winning than the Conservatives if an election was held in 2009.
Liquidity is pretty low and it is a relatively new market which will take time to settle down, but I think the odds there do reflect that Labour are far more likely to lose a 2010 election than a 2009 election.
I think Harriet Harman comes out of this very well indeed. She is a woman of principle, which is why she struggled when challenged to betray her principles. She had the courage to stand for Deputy Leader (when Gordon couldn’t even find the bottle to allow a contest for leader, although he was bound to win) and won it against all the odds. She is clever, bold, and ambitious. She knows that lots of people dislike or underestimate her and she can be self deprecating, as when she said that all the men in the country would run if she made it to leader.
I thought her performance on Newsnight was brilliant. She passed up the political bromides, which would have made her look more polished in the interview, in favour of not doing the wrong thing (backing Speaker Martin) which would make her look bad later.
349 Barclays .19%over base and I don’t think there is a collar.
Harriet may be been terrible last night on Newsnight, but her position allows her to take a defining stance that will stand her in good stead come a leadership election.
Did the HS know? It’s a house of cards. The SAA’s a gonner. Is Martin going to survive? He’s a loyal Labour man but he is also loyal to himself. Would dropping someone else in it [other than the SAA] serves his interests or be counter productive?
I believe his statement yesterday was silent as to who if anyone he spoke to but I can’t remember.
388. Ah, gotcha! Was being dumb then!
@391:
Britain is an instinctively small-c conservative country. Whether or not that translates into big-C depends on a lot of factors.
398. “Britain is an instinctively small-c conservative country.”
[citation needed]
393. Sorry, John. I misread John Marston as Martin.
281. PtP. Thanks for pointing this market out. I agree with PfP that 5/2 May 2010 election looks like a bit of value so I have had on.
391. No, but the speaker is still in big trouble, as is Jacqui Smith. John Reid’s nice little interjection hasn’t helped her cause, and the line of ‘operational independance of the police’ is further undermined if even former labour home secretaries think she’s wrong.
358 - “Regarding George Osborne, I would agree with previous posts in that he does not have the ability to easily communicate to all at their level…” Well, I have said so.
Dominic Grieve is clearly not for the top table. We hear rumours Hague would like to write biographies (mentioned on this site). Cameron, what do you do?
396 Sally C - The Serjeant At Arms may not be a goner if the legal advice she received was unambiguous and from an authoritative source.
Can a third party give consent to the police to search a person’s property / possessions / office ? (I know two policeman sitting in their car can give each other permission to park on double yellow lines.)
@386:
Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures, of course. A scheme like this would be reckless during ordinary times, but if we’re facing a situation in which large numbers of people are about to lose their homes through no fault of their own, I feel that we are honour-bound to assist.
Which is why it’s a shame that the scheme looks like something of a gimmick to me.
391. People agree with “mum makes nice apple pies” shocker.
Is Britain a conservative country? Of course it is. Most countries are conservative - the vast majority, in fact. We are no different.
Many if not most Britons would like to see…. the death penalty reinstated. A very large minority want to leave the EU altogether. Most are enraged by petty political correctness. Perhaps a majority want to see ZERO immigration. Not just less immigration - ZERO.
And so on and so forth.
As always with a piffling middlebrow lefty like yourself, you confuse what people are prepared to tolerate, as long as the government delivers the economic goods, with what they actually WANT.
The people have tolerated a lot of your government’s idiocies and wankiness cause the economy has been strong. Don’t confuse that with support.
For instance I doubt more than 10% of the people give a flying f*** about most environmental issues; and I am sure a large minority are actively irritated by them
Strictly: as others have stated, Snowdon’s at 13/1, which seems far too hgih given there are 4 left and she was top of the leaderboard last time. She’s evens to be evicted next, so you could put a £10 on her to go and a similar amount on her to win as her odds should fall if she stays.
Not advocating this as a betting tip, but I think Tom might go next. Why? He’s got the rumba, which is always very hard, particularly for blokes. Low score would make him much likelier to be in the dance off, and neither chap has been there so far. Nerves might get to him whereas Stevens and Snowdon have both been through it.
405 fr - Yes, that is an interesting question. Is it the MP’s office, or parliamentary premises, for this purpose? Again something for the lawyers.
@405:
That’s surely the whole point, isn’t it? Grieve’s parliamentary office doesn’t belong to him, it belongs to Parliament. And Parliament’s appointed representative in such matters is the Serjeant-at-Arms.
Thus why it was her consent that was needed, not Grieve’s.
405 - Yes, in the same way a landlord can allow a property he owns to be searched, if his tenant is the suspect.
399 - yes, conservative - but a liberal country too. With strong socialist tendencies - look at our attachment the NHS.
410, didn’t the Speaker downgrade the SAA role so she was only responsible for the Commons? Does the office count as Commons or the rest of Parliament?
On shadsy’s date of the next general election market- Why is May 2009 at 33/1?
I know the Euro and Council elections are due in June 2009. Isn’t there an argument that it would be inapproppriate to have all three elections on the same date and wouldn’t it require special legislation?
I’m probably missing the point but I’ve availed myself of some 33/1.
312. Sorry if I’m overanalysing, but I’m not sure if that letter proves Martin was lying. The “required that they first seek consent of the person who occupies or controls the premises where they believe evidence may be found” bit implies but does not state that they made it clear to her that she was allowed to refuse to give consent, they could have made it sound like it was a formality and she was not allowed to refuse. Indeed the “satisfied that the Serjeant at Arms understood that police had no power to search in the absence of a warrant” bit seems to back this up - if they had explicitly told her they would surely have said so, they wouldn’t have “understood”, they’d have known. This sounds like “we didn’t tell her because we didn’t think we needed to” sort of language (which granted would probably have been the case with a more experienced/competent SOA). The letter looks more like a bit of CYA on the part of the police than proof Martin was lying.
Not sure this proves anything much more than the police overreached themselves and need their wings clipping (yes, it helps to prove that Pay and Martin are not fit for purpose, but we knew that already).
404 True. But did she seek ‘legal’ advice or just advice.
It helps the police to infere the former.
@412:
The two are not necessarily incompatible: Small-c conservative: opposed to change for its own sake, sticklers for tradition, immensely proud and defensive of our heritage and history.
It’s Britons’ innate conservatism that has prevented us from replacing the NHS with something that works for half a century.
It may be an absurd Stalinist monstrosity, but it’s *our* absurd Stalinist monstrosity, dammit, and if you try to change it we’ll phone up Talk Radio and call you scum.
Penny4them at 393.That is almost exclusively my market and is thus a bit quixotic.
I DO make mistakes but am willing to have a go.My main trading ideas reflect exactly what you point out.
1.By its very nature a 2010 GE implies that Labour are on the ropes and the Tories have it in the bag.
2.WHENEVER the election takes place I will always believe that the Tories are slight favourite.This second view is much more contentious and the way to contend is via the ‘GE Date and Most Seats’ market on Betfair.
If Harriet Harman’s non-committal comments about Speaker Martin, speed his demise in the office, then, for perhaps the first time in her political career, she will have done something useful.
In her civil liberties days, she would have been aghast at something like this happening, and can you imagine the outcry if this happened to a Labour MP. If you think there is a furore now, it would have been even greater in those circumstances.
Anyone who has ever watched any police programmes on the telly knows to ask for a search warrant; even if the Serjeant-at-Arms didn’t, the Speaker should have.
The man is a joke figure, and even his friends know that he has limited ability. He should never have been appointed in the first place.
If he doesn’t go now, he should go at the next General Election, or an incoming Tory administration will surely force the issue.
417 - sums it up nicely. Never saw a contradiction.
408. I have the same feeling myself. With less competitors, if you win it is not easy to end up in the dance off. I’d say Rachel v Tom in this weeks dance off. 13s is a great trading bet on Snowden. You can hedge/arb by backing her with same stake to be evicted.
Does a search warrant signed by a Justice of the Peace allow the Police to search Parliament (which among other things is the highest court in the land)?
417. I couldn`t agree more. Loose talk confuses conservatism with right-wing. I`m surprised at you Nick (391). Vaguely socially democratic, yes - but strongly conservative too I suggest.
@419:
To be honest, isn’t it preferable that Martin stay until after the next general election?
391. Don’t spoil old Grumblewede’s fantasies Nick!
407: mmm, but most of the examples you give are of large minorities (as can be shown by various polls). I’d readily concede that there is a large minority of the sort of people you describe, and that they used to be a majority. But I think you’re out of touch with current majority opinion - and that Cameron knows it.
Are the police lying or is the Serjeant at arms and the Speaker incompetent?
Possibly all of the above. Either way someone is going to resign.
Meanwhile we have someone as Home Secy who the civil service regard as so singularly unimpressive they do not bother to keep informed and someone that always appears in public with Jack Straw as her handler.
What a shower.
415. No, you’re overanalysing.
Here’s the paragraph again:
“The officers explained the nature of the investigation and the purpose of the search and were satisfied that the Serjeant at Arms understood that police had no power to search in the absence of a warrant and therefore could only do so with her written consent or that of the Speaker. Prior to giving written consent the Serjeant at Arms told the officers that she would seek legal advice. Further discussion between the officers and Serjeant at Arms is detailed in the officer’s statements.”
How else would the police be satisfied she understood her powers, if they hadn’t explained them to her. The alternative is that they are saying she is a retard.
Furthermore, why did the Sarjeant at Arms go and get legal advice, if she didn’t realise she could refuse consent? She obviously saw this was a delicate issue, which required legal advice.
Furthermore twice over, if she got legal advice, and took a day about it, presumably she was advised that she was allowed to refuse consent? Unless she went and asked some wino at the corner of Queen Anne Street, rather than a QC.
To believe the Speaker’s version of events, you have to believe
1. That the police were misleading
2. That the Sarjeant, despite seeking legal advice, still had no idea that refusing was an option
and
3. That the legal advice failed to tell her that refusing was an option
This is literally incredible. Basically the Speaker and the SAA decided to consent to the search, even though they knew they could refuse. Basically they are lying. As are Labour.
I think the point is that “being conservative” (small-c) and “Conservatism” (The family of political philosophies) only have a glancing familiarity with each other.
As has already been demonstrated, this country is just as conservative in its defence of its established Liberal and Socialist ideals as it is of its Conservative ones.
421 - that might be hedging, but it’s not arbing. You are hoping for a price to materialise at a later stage that will enable you to make a profit; not guaranteeing yourself one now.
I know little about SCD, but you should identify what you see as the value and just back that rather than trying to overcomplicate things. Of course it is possible that both an eviction price of evens and a win price of 13/1 are both value, but I doubt it.
Anyone else worried like me that we hase as our counter terrorism police the bunch of plods who cannot ensure that searches are conducted within a 100% certain compliance of the law?
It ought to be the creme de la creme.
@426:
Great, just what we need. An Old Commie and a Cornish Sex Memoirist arguing about who’s most in touch with the average Brit.
seanT “The alternative is that they are saying she is a retard.”
A strong possibility if Mick the muckup was looking for someone his intellectual inferior.
418 URW, BF put that market up as a result of my requests for them to do so. I am grateful to you for putting the prices up that you have and hope it becomes a profitable market for you.
I would basically agree with the way you have priced it up, the only area I would disagree with slightly is that I would have Labour as slight favourites to win most seats in an early 2009 election, because there wil no doubt be lots more eye-catching (if misleading) goodies unveiled in the March budget, which could give them a short term advantage.
@433:
Zing!
428. Or just maybe the advice the SaA received was “Wait until you find out who the MP is, and if it’s a Tory say yes, if it’s one of ours tell them to p1ss off.”
436. I wonder if that advice was in writing, and could be obtained under an FOI request?
391 Palmer wrote: “our analysis echoes a Tory poster (GeoffH, I think) who said a couple of days ago that we might be heading for a 1950-style election,”
Yes, ’twas I, but I notice you ignored the main point that what was striking about ‘50 and ‘51 was just how many voters were prepared to see us slide in a Soviet-style state by voting Labour against all the evidence of their incompetence of the post-war period. The Labour Manifestos of the time were full of policies that would have guaranteed such a fate; more nationalisation, controls etc.
Of course, you’d have probably approved being an ex-Commie.
However, the point is that ’twas only by the skin of our teeth that we avoided that dreadful fate (Thank you Liberals for being broke at the time and only able to fight a mere handful of seats). Next time, we might not be so lucky.
And next time we have to factor in not only Labour’s incompetence but also its malevolence.
417/423: well, we’re struggling with definitions here, but in Yellow Submarine’s post he was talking about it in a political context. Naturally there are lots of people who are conservative in the sense that they don’t like change. But YS was (I think) implying (and seanT too) that most people in Britain agree with the general mindset that drives Conservatives, so it’s defying gravity when non-Conservative governments are elected.
I do think that used to be true, but is no longer the case. It’s the reason why even now the Conservatives are having difficulty maintaining a convincing lead, at a time when oppositions in most countries are flourishing.
426. Latest opinion poll on the death penalty I can find is this.
MORI/Associated Press (sampled 9-18 February 2007), poll on death penalty for murderers: 50% in favour compared with 45% opposed.
As for immigration, this is from The Times in 2006:
“According to the poll, just 14% of people strongly agree that immigration is “generally good” for Britain — with double that number taking the opposite view. A total of 63% say immigration laws should be “much tougher” — up from 58% 18 months ago — while a further 11% say there should be no more immigration.”
I could be reading it wrong, but that seems to indicate 74% think there should be NO MORE immigration - at all.
I don’t deny that Britain is a more liberal country than it used to be - and that’s good. But to believe there are million of people out there swooning at your social democratic ideals, like “environmentalism”, is nonsense.
The bulk of Britons are small c conservative, but have a sensibly relaxed and very British attitude of “each to his own” - as long as you don’t do any harm.
The one socialist institution the Brits do love, bless them, is the NHS - for all its faults. But the Brits also love the monarchy.
430 You are right as usual, Aaron. Lisa is almost certainly the value at 12/1. The four remaining competitors are very closely matched in terms of ability, so backing the outsider makes sense. The downside is that at this stage (and possibly at any stage) it’s a popularity more than a dance contest. For some reason, women tend to vote more heavily than men and for some other reason, they tend to vote for men rather than women. The two remaining females are therefore, rightly, the two outsiders and Rachel is slightly the better dancer and slightly the more popular personality.
Boringly then, it looks like it’s between the two men but for fun I would take the value bet at 12s and hope she makes it through to the next round.
434. Interesting that you think the March Budget will be full of more goodies. Don;t you think that with the fiscal stimulus the Government has fired its economic volley and has no serious ammunition left. If it seeks to extend borrowing even further in March won’t there be a real danger of a collpase in the Government’s international credit worthiness?
416 If SAA sought advice, legal advice or just a bloke in a pub, then it still means she was aware she could choose not to sign - which doesn’t fit the Speaker’s statement, which he did after all have four days to prepare.
Morris Dancer’s point at 410 still hasn’t been answered (I raised it yesterday). The Parliament web site says responsibility is for ceremonial security, so was she actually empowered top grant access or should it have been the Clerk (presumably its not just anyone with a passcard who can give consent?)
There are so many questions over process, whether there was privileged information on any of Mr Green’s PCs (reference by Speaker to that yesterday) plus the whole issue of whether in common law a crime could have been committed as case law indicates it probably wasn’t, that it is unlikely there will be any charges.
As for the “National Security” issue - wasn’t Duncan Sandy’s case (let alone Winston Churchill’s) about National Security? and in that case the Committee on Privileges said the OSA didn’t apply to him.
Labour is complaining its too leaked against basically and wants to plug the leaks. Maybe be more honest and make less mistakes?
439. It’s the reason why even now the Conservatives are having difficulty maintaining a convincing lead, at a time when oppositions in most countries are flourishing.
Such as where? Looking across Europe I think most oppositions would love to swap positions with the Conservatives.
She added: “He is the person who upholds our democracy and yesterday I was literally awash with disappointment”.”
Will someone inform Nadine Dorries about how to respect the English language or are we to ship her out to Palinsville?
428
Isn’t it simpler to posit that none of them knew what they were doing, or what they were supposed to do?
They dismissed the framework of conventions which define conduct in the HoC,
instead they carried out the actions which would bring about the result they desired.
438: Of course I approved of the 1945-51 Government, and every Labour Party member I know thinks it was superb. But more relevant is that the legacy of that period (notably the NHS but also the wider welfare issues, though not the nationalisation) has mostly been accepted by the Conservative Party, has it not?
@445:
I remember my English teacher had some very salient advice on the use of the word “literally”: don’t.
447: Nick, nice to see your strong criticism of Brown in the HoC today. Have you seen the light?
447. Read Corelli Barnett’s ‘The Lost Victory’ - that’ll put you straight.
428. you don’t have to believe Martin to think that the police were misleading. As I tried to explain, the police letter itself strongly gives that impression. 2 & 3 are good points though. One possibility though concerns the question she asked when (if) she sought legal advice. I can certainly imagine an exchange along the lines of -
SOA: “The police are going to arrest some tory and they’ve got a bunch of search warrants with them. They say they’ve got to ask my permission to let them into Green’s HoC office, what do I tell them?”
Lawyer: “They’ve got warrants? You’ve got to let them in.”
GIGO. If she asked the wrong question she would get the wrong answer.
“The alternative is that they are saying she is a retard.” Indeed. She was appointed by Speaker Martin as somebody he would be comfortable with after all.
“440 . A total of 63% say immigration laws should be “much tougher” — up from 58% 18 months ago — while a further 11% say there should be no more immigration.”
I could be reading it wrong, but that seems to indicate 74% think there should be NO MORE immigration - at all.”
Heres a clue to how you’re reading it wrong.
11% say there should be NO MORE immigration at all.
439. Are oppopsitions in most countries flourishing? The French Socialists seem to be in a state of near collpase and institutional navel gazing. The Canadian government maintained its position in the GE there last month. America is something of a special case with the “Bush factor” and also one ought to rememebr that the Dems strengthened their position in both Houses of Congress even though they were already in control.
What is the situation in Germany, Italy, Spain, Ireland? Do people on here know? I think it would be interesting to compare the Tories performance with that of other oppositions in Europe and North America.
365. ‘So a day elapsed between the two visits and the Serjeant never had the gumption to inform her boss of this ground-breaking event? I find that unbelievable.’
Exactly-as I said yesterday, there is a crucial period of time here which is unaccounted for.
The post at 372. is spot on too - was everyone in government really blissfully ignorant for this missing 24 hours about what was going on?
What was the SAA doing during this period? twiddling her thumbs? Or frantically contacting higher authorities who all happened to be ‘unavailable’.
The whole thing stinks.
317 - “Parliamentary convention means that he would need to be re-elected to his seat.”
What convention? I am not sure there is even a recent case of a Speaker remaining in the Commons after resignation. Since the war, Boothroyd and Lloyd left mid-term to be elevated to the peerage. Weatherill, Thomas, Morrison and Clifton-Brown timed their departures to coincide with a General Election. Hylton-Foster died in office. Martin could easily simply continue as an MP but in practice would follow Betty and Selwyn.
“I do think that used to be true, but is no longer the case. It’s the reason why even now the Conservatives are having difficulty maintaining a convincing lead, at a time when oppositions in most countries are flourishing”
This is actually deluded. The reason the Tories are “struggling”, with only some opinion pollsters reporting them with a record lead, is that Brown is practically a Tory on so many issues, as was Blair. In fact Brown and Blair have been arguably to the right of Cameron - in terms of supporting America etc.
And who was it said: “British jobs for British workers”? Oh yes.
439. The Conservatives are having difficulty maintaining a convincing lead because they still haven`t fully recovered (though they are getting there) from a decade of Blair propaganda. Blair managed to get many conservative (small c and large C) voters to vote Labour. Blair was always terrified because he instinctively felt that the British are still conservative by nature. The Tories are back in the game 1) because Blair`s gone and Brown is no replacement (in the electorate`s view), and 2) the Tories are vaguely electable again.
440. Interesting one this.
I always used to think “Labour doesn’t win elections, Conservatives lose them”. Not sure it applies so much in these more liberal times.
@440:
It’s also worth remembering that, one way or another, most of British history has been dominated by two rather centrist politcal broad-brush philosophies: Whiggism and One-Nation Conservatism. Socialism is a relatively modern intrusion into our political makeup, and its longevity is dependent on its adherents being able to maintain polarisation along class lines indefinitely.
As the neoliberal consensus comes to an end, and class lines erode, we’re likely to see a long-term return to the political axes that existed before the birth of the Labour movement.
[440] - “A total of 63% say immigration laws should be “much tougher” — up from 58% 18 months ago — while a further 11% say there should be no more immigration.”
I could be reading it wrong, but that seems to indicate 74% think there should be NO MORE immigration - at all.”
I’m almost certain you’ve read that wrong. 11% say there should be no more immigration. I think they’ve just used their language very badly. I don’t see why there would be 74% who wanted no more immigration but only 63% who wanted tougher laws about it. That doesn’t make any sense.
442. Of course further borrowing would increase the danger of a collapse.
However, Brown has not shown any reticence about gambling with the future economy of this country in order to gain short term popularity and it would be unwise to think that he would not continue to do so, if he thinks it might win him an election a monh or two after the budget.
You may recall Morus’ excellent analogy with Brown being a P*ker player a week or two ago. I think he will go “all in” in March.
459. Martin - out of interest, what do you think Whiggism stood for?
Don’t forget how parts of the Tory party have moved.
Last I heard their payments to married couples would apply to gay couples in civil partnerships.
Is that still true?
447.
Again I see you dodge the point.
I never doubted for one moment that you would have approved of the ‘45-’51 government.
I would have hoped that however, the easy slide to a Soviet-style state that Labour promised at the ‘51 election might have aroused just a smidgen of doubt.
But, no. Once a commie, always a commie.
As to the the legacy. The things you continue to be proud of are more of a mill-stone than a legacy.
If only we had got the national health service that was promised by the 1943 White Paper (Conservative Minister) and not the nationalised monstrosity that Bevan insisted on creating instead, then there’d have been no need for the permanent search for reform, without moving away from universal provision, that has bedevilled every administration (Conservative and Labour) since.
439. Calling Nick Palmer - Nick, can you put us straight on this topic, see thread 317/373/455 and others? Or Mike?
450. Yes, Correlli Barnet was spot on.
Use the Marshall Aid to give every one who needs ‘em false teeth instead of modernising the industrial base. Good Labour politics, that.
453. “What is the situation in Germany, Italy, Spain, Ireland?”
I’m sure I read not long ago that both the Social Democrats in Germany and the potential alternative Fine Gael/Labour coalition in Ireland had both gained substantially from the crisis. Germany is a special case, of course, because the Social Democrats are already 50% of the government, but will still present themselves as the alternative to Merkel at the next election.
@462:
In the very broadest terms, the notions of Romantic-era Liberty: enlightened self-interest, the mercatoria, a slightly more fractious relationship with the crown.
461. Hmmm. I think that depends on how the Budget plays out. The PBR still hasn’t fully played out yet thanks to the ComRes poll which threw us all. I’m not sure that an irresponsibile Budget would get a fair wind in the press outside the Mirror. Also would the sweeteners have time to take effect before an April/May election?
Would Mr Brown be brave enough to go “all in” with the possibility of his Budget unravelling during the course of an election campaing. The budget would be subject to fierce media scrutiny and, crucially, public scruitny of a higher level than normal. We all know that the PM’s sleight-of-hands tend to fall apart on second or third glance so this would be a huge risk for him. I’m not sure he has the balls to go for it.
I wonder if the SAA’s consent letter would shed some light on what was understood by whom?
468. Hmmm yes - and so what might the modern equivalents be…?
459. ‘Before the birth of the labour movement’
You mean when most peole didn’t have the vote? I think this country has a long history of liberty and that effects economic policies to this day (83% tax!!!). There’s definitely a certain resistance to change when it comes to our institutions but that is probably because we feel we have a fortunate inheritance. We haven’t needed revolutios all the time (we have satire instead).
But I’m not convinced we are a conservative country overall, either with the big C or little c. Just look at how race relations have developed, our political correctness and I believe the first western country to have an elected female leader.
460. Indeed, I think you are right, which is why I was cautious in my statement - the article is badly phrased.
Nonetheless my point is good. The vast majority of the British public either want very sharply reduced immigration, or no immigration at all. Which isn’t quite the Social Democrat Disneyland Doctor Palmer is suggesting.
And MigrationWatch claims they have a poll which shows a majority want “balanced migration” - i.e. zero net immigration. However I have yet to see the poll itself, so I shall again be cautious before citing it as proof.
And now I have to feed my daughter her cream cheese soldiers. Ciao.
461 Interesting with Brown on being a P*k*r player is how he reacts to playing a bad hand.
In the weeks after being hailed “Saviour of the World” - he was available to all and sundry, on the BBC, ITV, in newspapers “writing” articles or being “at home with”. It gave him the confidence to do a big play at PBR.
The PBR was a washout and he disappeared from view.
Yesterday he flourished his Mortgage play, note he did this in a way that had it failed to grab attention wouldn’t have mattered much, it wasn’t in a Budget/PBR or in the Speech but in his reply to the Leader of the Opposition. In the event he got good headlines and he’s back. Expect that will give him confidence to play another big hand rather than fold as he did last week.
471. Nulab without the enlightenment.
467. Interesting. I do seem to remember the CDU or their allies getting spanked in a regional election fairly recently (though before the economic crisis took hold). I have to say I’d be more reassured by Mrs Merkel than Mr Brown but that is largely because I loathe Mr Brown and don;t know a great deal about Mrs Merkel!
470. Isn’t the real issue now the mystery of the missing 24 hours in which the SAA supposedly informed no-one at all of what was going on, and neither did the staatsgeheimpolizei (whose ability to keep things to themselves has been amply demonstrated these past few days)?
460. Indeed, I think you are right, which is why I was cautious in my statement - the article is badly phrased.
Nonetheless my point is good. The vast majority of the British public either want very sharply reduced immigration, or no immigration at all. Which isn’t quite the Social Democrat D1sneyland Doctor Palmer is suggesting.
And Migration Watch claims they have a poll which shows a majority want “balanced migration” - i.e. zero net immigration. However I have yet to see the poll itself, so I shall again be cautious before citing it as proof.
And now I have to feed my daughter her cream cheese soldiers. Ciao.
@471:
There are no exact modern equivalents, though Whiggish ideals underpin some of the Neoliberal Consensus, whose adherents included Thatcher, Major and Blair.
A couple of points…
Isnt the problem with leaving the EU that, well, we would still be under their influence anyway. I mean its like with America, we aint part of the United States but we arent completly independent from them. If we left the EU the same thing would happen, wouldnt it?
Views of immigration is a tough thing to measure in this country because until recently, saying something like “I think the immigration level should be slightly lower than what the Labour party thinks it should be” was treated as if you were saying “I HATE BLACK PEOPLE”
[464] - From wikipedia, I found a link to this White Paper [dated 1944]
http://www.sochealth.co.uk/history/1944whitepaper.htm
It includes such gems as:
“A full dental service for the whole population, for instance, including regular conservative treatment, is unquestionably a proper aim in any whole health service, and must be so regarded. But there are not at present, and will not be for some years, enough dentists in the country to provide it.”
I doubt they would have expected us to be still facing such problems with dentistry today as we are.
I haven’t read enough of it to understand the distinction between “publicly organised” and “publicly provided” in practice.
476. That too. But for now it may be easier to get sight of the search paperwork, of which the SAA’s letter forms part.
I assume the letter at least laid down conditions to the scope of the consent or there would be little point in writing it.
It may be the House authorities felt more in control of such a search than if they had faced a warrant.
481. I’m not sure what additional information a sight of that paperwork would give us. But I think it would be very interesting indeed to see what the ‘legal advice’ the SAA took looked like…
…perhaps the next round of the blame game will be the SAA blaming duff legal advice?
482
Would the SAA be able to take Legal Advice without the Speaker’s PRIOR Aprroval?
I doubt it.
476. So who exactly would the SAA have gone to for her legal advice?
It’s not like she would have looked in the Yellow Pages and got a free 30 minute session with a local solicitor is it?
Presumably the legal advice would be from a legal department which has been set up by the Government inside the Westminster set up.
405ff
So councils can give police consent to search all their council houses ? And the Duchy of Cornwall and the Duke of Westminster ?
482
does the SaA have a ‘voice’?
484. Yes…and of course no-one in that dept would have said anything at all to anyone in government, oh no….
482. One can only take this so far. Is there any reason to think a magistrate would not have issued a warrant to search Green’s Parliamentary office given that warrants were issued for the other premises?
We do not yet really know why this fourth warrant was not obtained along with the other three.
487. Of course not.. it’s the sort of thing that happens every day.. no need to inform anyone that MP’s offices are going to be ransacked by the terrorist squad.
480 The National Health Service that never was - this White Paper was the basis of the Conservative NHS proposals in the 1945 GE. Much more decentralised, responsible in main to the Local or Regional Health Authorities, retention of an independent voluntary sector among other things.
Aloha, PB-peeps,
I see Yellow Sub and Antifrank have quit - in the same topic. What have you guys been doing to drive them away?? Anyway, travel safe, both.
Seems to still be a lively time for politics back in Blighty. Have an Abbey Tracker at 0.5% over base since 1997, so the 1% fall in the interest rates should just about allow me to buy a dry crust here in the US - dollars are becoming soaraway expensive.
On Greengate - seems the SaA asked for legal advice. From whom? Was that advice shared with the Speaker? Or the Government - and when? Murky waters.
As well as “Toenails” Robinson, I think we can add Jacqui “Fingernails” Smith. Still hanging on, but….she better not do a Gordon and start chewing them!
Of course, this being Britain, “immigrants” arrive in the country, but only “ex-pats” go and live abroad.
When do you ever see the media refer to a British immigrant living in Spain? Only foreigners can be immigrants in small-c conservative Britain.
488. perhaps because the magistrate in question thought that a search warrant for the HoC was above his pay grade and turned down the request, but the police decided to go ahead anyway and see if they could strongarm the SoA?
488. Indeed we do not. But it is abundantly clear that some of the main actors (possibly all of them) in this tale are lying and trying to cover something up. What is it?
Did the SAA sign the consent forms when they arrived to search or were they given to her ahead of time?
The fact the SAA spoke to someone [ie got 'advice'] doesn’t mean she understood she could refuse entry. It’s the police who say she went for legal advice about consenting to entry. Let’s assume she is hopeless. Her approach to Martin could have been no more than than an obvious panicked reaction, ‘What do I do, who do I tell?’ the police want to search an office.
Martin may have washed his [their] hands of it and didn’t ask the correct questions. Someone giving good advice might have directed her to collect certain information such as, if they had a warrant or if the DDP had agreed to it [he hadn't].
I don’t have a problem with imagining circumstances in which she might not understand a thing about was going on. I have a problem with the idea that her contact with others didn’t spark off a reaction. Anyone out of their depth would go up a level.
They didn’t know the identity, but they MUST have known it was in opposition - likely a Tory - benefiting from the leak.
Did Martin really not speak to anyone and get advice?
At the bottom of this is a washing of hands because he was an opposition politician. It is just a case of how many sets of hands were washed.
I can imagine her just signing the forms when faced with the terror squad if they were produced in the moment and she’s been given no support.
If she was given the consent forms before, it beyond belief she didn’t and others didn’t know they could refuse or get advice on it in.
Interesting that Martin doesn’t seem unable to contact lawyer when his reputation is on the line.
493. Who knows?
484 The Mysterious Missing Clerk of the House - the SAAs boss and the key person responsible in all this has within his organisation a Legal Services Office to provide such advice.
Unfortunately it seems The Clerk had gone AWOL as his name is missing from any of the narrations.
Open and transparent Government anyone?
495 Sally C, presumably attorney-client privelege would over-ride a Freedom of Information request to see the advice that was given? But what of the advice sought?
In the forthcoming debate on the Greengate affair, can the SAA be called upon by MP’s to answer questions?
The missing clerk who switches of his phone when parliament is not in session, but but would have been in session when the request was made as it was made 24 hour before? Wasn’t it?
492- Spain is in the EU. A Brit moving to Spain is like someone moving from one part of the country to the other. Are Scottish people who live in England immigrants? (Actually dont answer that!)
Greengate is still going on Thursday, a week after it started. We have the Home Secretary’s statement and the police letter as genuine new news items today, and it’s maintaining 3rd or 4th place on the TV news. It has been buffeted by other stories (Bombay, Queen’s Speech, mortgage bail-out, Shannon Matthews) but still keeps going. There will still be stories in the press tomorrow. Moreover there will be a debate in the HoC on Monday and this is exactly the sort of thing the Sundays like to get their teeth into.
So for those saying that this was a Westminster Village-only story with no interest for the voter and which the press would quickly downgrade… well it appears to have legs.
305 is true, 317 is untrue. If Martin resigned and wasn’t offered the immediate peerage that would just go to show he had been crap after all.
499 But wouldn’t she be getting advice on behalf of Parliament, not personally. Parliamentary authorities would be the client.
494. 495. The main questions seem to be who really kicked the ‘investigation’ off, and what liaison there has been between them and the police along the way?
The other question is how the House authorities and police dealt with each other.
Any or all of them could be covering up.
As to the SAA, if she had 24 hours to think about it, she was hardly put on the spot.
I think there might possibly be another little unexploded bomblet in the Met’s letter:
“The effect of the condition in subsection 3 (c) is that a Justice of the Peace may not issue a search warrant under section 8 if he/she believes entry to the premises will be granted without a warrant (ie by consent). As there was no basis for submitting to a JP that it was believed that consent would be refused, it was considered that it was not open to a constable to make an application.”
In other words, the Met are saying that they COULD NOT apply for a warrant, because they HAD NO BASIS TO BELIEVE CONSENT WOULD BE REFUSED.
Or, to put in plain English, they thought they would get consent. Which is, prima facie, very odd.
It would not be odd if they knew in advance that they would get consent.
501 One would have thought so - he does have HoC accomodation but might have left the vicinity for a break a bit early?
Ben Brogan reports that its Labour MPs most upset at Speaker Martin following his very poor defence of his actions and dropping the Serjeant in the centre of the mess.
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/12/is-the-threat-t.html
503- On Channel 4 News (Why do I still watch it) they said something about Labour focus groups that show the public dont really care about Greengate, and are far more concerned about the economy.
There’s an intriguingly long delay in the announcement of the Canadian Governor-General’s decision about whether to get Stephen Harper off the hook. There’s also some talk that she might speak to the opposition leaders before making a decision. To me that sounds like she’s going to agree to Harper’s request but wants to make it look scrupulously fair. After all, if she spoke to the opposition leader and then effectively sacked the Prime Minister, it wouldn’t look good.
I wonder if all this will set a precedent for any similar crisis in Britain?
re 330 the image that conjures up is almost as bad as Matthew Norman in today’s Indy “While we count the moments until she re-enacts that scene from Basic Instinct, albeit, please God, wearing knickers….”
508 But Gordon still expresses support for the Speaker in public - will he be mad eto look a prat if the Speaker does indeed step down?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7765160.stm
501. And the clerk of the house is….
re 349 firstdirect 2003, 40% deposit, base rate +1.5%
507. You may have something there.
502 - But quite a lot of people refer to Polish immigrants when they are people in the EU who intend to return home (and indeed have in quite large numbers). Sandy at 492 has a point that there are some interesting differences in popular terminology (although I am not sure ex-pats or migrant workers in either direction are really “immigrants” in that they have no intention of seeking citizenship).
Quentin Letts lays into the Speaker as a dud and has this to say about the SAA.
“Serjeant Pay - a souped-up Tilly the Typist with purple hair and Stanley Baxter gait - was wearing her sword. Had she been Japanese we could have had a nasty scene on our hands.
To be honest she did not look too upset. She is either very calm or very dim. Possibly both.”
http://tinyurl.com/6onmzq
510. Ah, now that I’ve said that, the Governor-General has approved Harper’s request and he’s now off the hook until January.
re 414 stjohn no legislation required to have 3 elections on the one day, but legislation will be required to move the council elections from May to June
I take it all back - Harriet for Home Sec!
507 - I’m not sure you’re right there. It is quite common when dealing with allegations of white collar crime not to get a warrant, not because you have been agreed it with the subject of the search but because you are dealing with professionals who arguably have a strong incentive to consent and are unlikely to seek to dispose of evidence. It’s different if you’re dealing with an alleged drug dealer. It happens quite frequently in my professional experience (as a lawyer rather than a white collar criminal I have to say!)
The real story:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/no%11one-entirely-sure-what-speaker-said-200812041437/
517 Anne Tremain’s piece in the Times had a bit that made me smile regarding Gabble McShane
“Denis MacShane, whose quest for publicity is legend and who can actually smell out TV cameras, said that, on the contrary, it was leaks that threatened democracy. He knew this because he was “a former minister”. As Mr MacShane said this wondrous phrase, he looked very close to bliss.”
521 James - But that would apply to the other three premises, for which they did get warrants, would it not?
517 - there’s a minor classic in the comments, too:
“I imagine the Brown household on a Saturday morning.
Sarah: “Do you think it will rain today Gordon”
Gordon: “That is a matter for the weather forecasters, we have put in place a process for telling us the weather and it would be wrong for me to prejudice that process or influence their decision”
Son Brown: “Will Celtic win today dad?”
Brown: “Look these things are decided on the field of play, it is not for me to pre-empt the outcome of that contest. Indeed should the matter not be settled on the day we have further instigated additional process by way of the pools panel. It would be utterly wrong for me to anticipate their decision in any way.”
512 It has been obvious to almost everyone that Speaker Martin was not up to the job (in the same way that Norman Lamont was not up to the job). Everyone has been telling Labour this for a very long time.
When will political parties learn that appointing a substandard, mediocre party hack to a position of prominence almost always backfires.
Sooner or later, they do a lot of damage which ultimately costs the party. The Tories paid very, very heavily for appointing the mediocrity Lamont.
523- Ahhh yes, Dennis McShane, one of the anti-english brigade of Labour MPs.
@519:
As I understand it, that’s not true. The date of the council elections can be moved by up to three months requiring nothing more than an executive order.
O/T General Motor’s shares on the dive again after S&P downgrade them to “CC” rating.
394 - That is obvious. If there was an election in 2009 it would be because Gordon Brown thinks he can win. Total no-brainer of a book.
526. But Gwynfa the problem is that all of the Labour Parliamentary Party pretty much (and certainly all those trusted by the Government) are substandard mediocre party hacks. We suffered Prescott as deputy PM for years doesn’t that tell you something?
529
How many levels of junk are there?!
I cannot conceive of a way GM can survive in anything other than a greatly reduced form. Been toast for years really
A very intersting post has just appeared on Coffee House
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3065591/did-a-minister-have-advance-knowledge-of-the-green-arrest.thtml
IF this proves to be true, its dynamite.
I don’t think Martin can survive. As I posted last night, I reakon Speaker Martins position is untennable. I also think Jackie Smith will have to resign when the full nature her failings come out.
533. Game on…..!!!
535 The original post is on three line whip/.
519. Chris A. Thanks. So at present we have Council elections scheduled for May 2009 and Euro elections scheduled for June 2009. To move the Council elections to June 2009 would require legislation.
If Brown wants to keep his options open for a 2009 General Election then presumably he could quite reasonably call it to coincide with either the May Council elections or the June Euro elections. Does this make sense and if so is May 2009 at 33/1 value or not?
General Motors should go bust because they produce stunningly average cars.
It is many many years since they stood for anything other than mediocrity.
who knew?
Vernon Coaker - Minister of State responsible for policing, crime and security.
or maybe
Phil Woolas is Minister of State for borders and immigration.
I have been perusing the Beeb and have noted the BBC’s pecking order of Top 5 stories.
This includes
-.Fake Lapland closes down.
- Ancient supernova curse solved
While I’m sure that Sean T will be delighted to see that one of his thriller storylines appears on the Top 5, he will be less happy to hear that Greengate is nowhere to be seen. What a fizzler.
524 - Presumably they had previously been refused consent for the other premises (which were controlled by Green rather than the Serjeant at Arms). The Assistant Commissioner says he asked the Serjeant at Arms the previous day and presumably did the same to the MP.
535. Hardly, when a journalist asks a question in the headline, it usually means the answer is no.
re 509. That’s the sort of information that is just total spin.
Vernon Coaker is he the one?
534. Leaving aside my earlier observation on Labour’s calculations about whether they could hold Martin’s seat in a by-election, my view is that Martin wouldn’t fall on his sword even if they wanted him to. Even if they offered him a strong incentive to do so. He’s as stubborn and self-important as they come.
Come to think of it, his stubbornness and self-importance is fittingly reminiscent of a certain Edward Heath on the day Martin was elected!
531 Too sweeping. I don’t like Prescott.
But, I don’t think he is stupid. In fact, I think he is both intellectually curious and intelligent.
His public persona, I would guess, is carefully crafted to make his enemies underestimate him. But, he held one of the great offices of state for a long time, having been born into a very humble background. That tells you he is not stupid.
546. Not stupid - but ignorant, boorish and inarticulate certainly.
546 - can’t stand the brute, but I vaguely recall at least one senior Civil servant stating that Prescott was the most impressive Minister he had worked with.
Nice piece of spin Bobajob. It is inconceivable that noone in Govt knew about this, the arrest of an MP and noone said anything to anyone?. Its not possible, and I really hope events will prove that someone has been telling porkies.For The Home Secretary to deny it, is also inconceivable, but then again she is so useless, its just possible.
I’m not really sure how Green-gate will play. Personally, I have a lot of sympathy with Green and agree with the points made by Cameron, Clegg etc. But if you step back and try to look at it from the perspective of somebody without a close interest in politics, does it not look (wrongly) like MPs claiming to be above the law? Just a thought.
541 James - That would imply 24 hours notice to Damian Green of his arrest and the search. Possible, but if so a new twist in the story, and I would have thought unlikely. I mean, they don’t normally give people advance warning of a raid.
540 What political betting markets are open on New Forest Christmas Wonerlands closing down or likelihood of finding a solution to ancient curses?
might be sme money on the Speaker, next Government, party seats or when the election is though. Lively one (in event terms) now looks the Speaker.
548. That was early spin in 1997! He had not shafted the civil service at that stage!
Party sausage anyone?
549. MTF Given the nature of the leaks one of these two chachters must have known!
Vernon Coaker - Minister of State responsible for policing, crime and security.
or maybe
Phil Woolas is Minister of State for borders and immigration.
I think it is Vernon Coaker! What do you think?
554. Wasnt Woolas on the radio quite early denying all knowledge?
553 I knew he shafted his secretary, but Martin are you saying he shafted … the whole civil service.
550. It could look that way if the trail isn’t followed to the end - which is what Labour are hoping for. If it is followed to the end, it has the potential to look like the Watergate scandal - an unprecedented attack on the democratic system by the government.
557. “unprecedented attack on the democratic system by the government”
Oh give over.
Wonder if the Met is leaking that a minister was kept advised?
551 - It’s not that unusual to give somebody advance notice of a search, and also pretty common to give advance notice of an arrest (indeed, you can be asked to present yourself at the cop shop at a particular time to be arrested). They may or may not have done in this case - clearly the Serjeant at Arms was very unlikely to seek to destroy evidence whereas with Green it would have been a judgement call.
552. None (AFAIK) – but then many people ramping Damp Squib Gate on here have never made a bet in their lives.
554
I am to far removed from it. All I know is that someone is definitely telling porkies. I have as much confidence in Jacqui Smith as I have in Gordon Brown as an economic genius, and before anyone say otherwise it means ZERO.
Earlier on today, Lefty at 465 asked Nick Palmer to put him straight. Did he not see the conflict in that request ;).
@558:
It’s certainly an unprecedented attack. There’s no firm evidence yet that the Govt. was involved, but it sounds as if it’s only a matter of time now.
Just noticed the last bit on Iain Martin’s piece “or keep uncharacteristically quiet” - sounds like a reference to a minister who has been less than quiet recently. Think Mr Martin has in idea who it is.
555. So it must be Mr Coaker! I think he is one of Mr Palmer’s neighbouring MP’s?
No wonder Nick has gone so quite! He knows!
556. Not literally! But he has hardly done the departments reputations that he has been head of any good! Prsecotts mega department was broken up and subject to ridicule. Maybe Prescott had a small part and the media magnified his impact and penetration on the office of deputy PM?
Dates of the last seven General elections. 5th May 2005; 7th June 2001; 1st May 1997; 9th April 2002; 11th June 1987; 9th June 1983; 3rd May 1987. So that’s one in April, three in May and three in June.
561 Does making a bet give ones opinion superior authority? I think not.
@561:
If they’ve never made a bet in their lives, chances are they won’t be ramping. Silly boy.
561 it all informs the market.
548 - That’s probably overstating it, but I was involved in a couple of projects with what was the Office of the Deputy PM and became the Department for Communities, Local Government and the Regions. They spoke pretty highly of Prezza, which they didn’t of other ministers and which surprised me a bit.
@567:
In some respects, yes. If you’re prepared to stake hard specie on your opinions, it forces you to think much more rigorously about them.
I hope Martin doesn’t survive. I haven’t seen anything quite as ungallant from a Labour member before. Blaming the ‘oik’ is something Tories have been doing through the ages but despite the costume Speaker Martin should have known better.
I didn’t realize until today that the ‘mole’ was in charge of the Home Secretary’s diary! Surely some of you must have flinched when you heard that?
569 like it did in the latest by election you mean…
Jack Straw has been keeping his head down. As has McNulty.
So the latest gossip is that A Minister Knew. Well, of course they did. They all did! Do you really think this lot could keep a secret - about a Tory being arrested for leaking documents he had received? I bet the phones were hot the moment it was suggested. Their joy would have been unconfined.
Someone senior is going to have to go to keep Gordon in post. That skull-piercing sound rising above the pain threshold you can hear? The descent of Jacqui Smith’s fingernails as they scratch the Blackboard of Doom….
572. Bloodyhell! How on earth could she not know?
It is sheer bollocks! Smith and Mr Martin must go!
568. Ramping does not have to mean changing markets – I can simply mean over-egging in political terms.
575. It’s beyond question that the government encouraged, perhaps even instigated Green’s arrest and no doubt they were thrilled when they heard the news. Perhaps less thrilled now.
@572:
Surely be her principal private secretary that does that?
516 - James, you beat me to it with the Polish analogy.
So, a Polish immigrant to Britain only intends to stay here to work for a couple of years. A British ex-pat in Spain has gone their to retire and never intends to return to the UK.
No contradictions there then.
145. I am really sorry to hear you are leaving, Yellow Submarine. But hope like others, you discover you can’t keep away for too long, especially if a big political story breaks.
I have always found your posts a must read on this site.
563. Is it an unprecedented attack *on democracy by the Government*? No, it’s not.
I could raise a number of attacks by the Thatcher/Major Govt that were far worse and affected thousands more people.
1. Banning flying pickets (Police restricting movement of people with different views to Thatch)
2. Banning repetitive beats through the CJA (Police arresting those with different tastes in music from the Tories)
I could go on.
Funny how short some people’s memories are.
578. Evidence? No. You don’t have any do you?
580 - Sandy - it depends on perspective, surely? An immigrant is someone who comes here. An ex-pat is someone from here who’s currently living abroad. I’m sure other countries have the same linguistic distinctions.
578 - Just because you say it’s “beyond question” doesn’t mean it’s so. I think the government ought to have come out against the arrest and I am annoyed they didn’t. My personal view is that they didn’t encourage it before the event though - that may be wrong but it isn’t “beyond question”.
573 For some it indeed did so - SeanT for example as result of links and comments posted here took a firm view Labour would win, as did a few others, some (I include myself) felt it was less of a done deal than expected but didn’t give the same weight as perhaps they should have due to personal bias and hopes (I posted that Gordon making public appearances meant Labour had high hopes but still erred in thinking the SNP had too many resources employed for Labour to win).
Any polls out tonight post Queens speech ?
578 Its like the firework that you buy, Great idea initially, you light it and it starts to spark and then it goess fzzz.. and goes out or does it. When you go up to it to see if its still alight it goes BANG in ur face. This story has the propensity to do just that.
584 - It would be interesting to hear from somebody with experience in, say, Spain how British ex-pats are referred to there.
554 - Phil Woolas explicitly denied prior knowledge of ANY minister on the Today programme the following morning.
My money would be on either be McNulty, Coaker, or Byrne.
581 I’d agree with that.
If the Lib Dems were run by people like Yellow Submarine, then they would be in an excellent position to benefit from Labour’s malaise.
Unhappily, the LibDems are run by people like Mark Senior.
582. But did Labour repeal those two items you mention?
The flying picket thing was about organised intimidation.
The repeatitive beats was probably about the dickheads you use to see in areas like Kings Cross sitting in the roads and frequently used to see around parliament. Particularly student demos.
Funny you never see those anymore! Oh that’s right Labour passed legislation about protests in the vacinity of westminister!
587 I though they had all gone home
584 - I would define an ex-pat as someone who is living in another country on a temporary basis, normally because their job takes them there. Someone who goes to live in another country permanently has emigrated from their home country, and therefore is an immigrant in their new country.
Unless of course they are British.
583. Evidence? No. You don’t have any do you?
Bit like the police situation with Green as they have not pressed charges!
582. Have to say the stuff about banning raves all seemed a bit draconian, tho having spoken to some people around at the time, they were getting dodgy as F*ck. Raves in Farm warehouses with Live wires dangling from ceilings and real dodgy people running the show. Basically many were disasters waiting to happen before you through a healthy dose of MDMA and speed in to the mix.
However, I still think this government’s approach to the civil liberties and the role of the state in relation to the citizen is worse than Michael Howard at his worst
Lord Mandelson has failed to quell claims the government has yet to reach a deal with the banks over its mortgage interest relief plan.
The business secretary told BBC News the government was “working
together” with the banks on the plan.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7764125.stm
590 Taking the clue at the end of Iain Martin’s piece “stay uncharacteristically quiet” tends to point IMHO more towards McNulty of those three.
537 Interesting point stjohn. Did the Queen’s Speech yesterday provide for legislation to change the voting date for the local elections? If not then maybe these will still be held in May, leaving Brown with this alternative for a GE. I think I’ll follow you in with a few quids’ worth at 33-1 on May 2009, if it’s still available, plus a very small bet on Sept 2009 at 20-1, which also looks like value to me.
589 - There! James, you just did it - referred to British ex-pats in Spain, rather than immigrants.
New thread: “Did a minister have advance knowledge?”
597. The fact that bank shares held up today shows that this plan is unenforceable and will only apply to very few people.
596. I remember going to cafes in Stoke-on-trent where people openly smoked dope & were off their heads on E’s, Whizz, coke etc. Indeed one person i knew took an off duty police officer into one from out of the area and they did acid!
594 Ex-pats are I agree those who are temporarily resident in another country, never intending to stay on till they die. Immigrants/Emigrants are those who have made the decision to change residence permanently.
As regards those British in Spain its a mix - many intend to spend their retirements in the sun but haven’t broken emotional ties with their home country and if illness or disaster strikes look either to return or to the UK Government to help, more ex-pat than resident.
A few Indian and Pakistani “immigrants” also actually look to retire back home, building houses and keeping contacts. Most US residents in London don’t intend to stay, just to work.
Re: Green arrest. Since David Cameron knew exactly what was going on (apparently), the thought must have crossed his mind to ring up the PM / Speaker / Home Secretary and protest to them at the treatment that one of his Front Bench was receiving.
OK - I am too dim to think why he didn’t do this. Can anyone suggest possible explanations?