Has Cameron gone too far on the Clarke speculation?
January 6th, 2009
Would not appointing him now seem like a defeat?
As the Daily Mail is reporting this morning David Cameron “..did not rule out an audacious move to appoint Mr Clarke to the Shadow Cabinet when asked about the possibility for the first time yesterday.”
Certainly the speculation about a return of the 68 year old ex-Chancellor has been allowed to continue for more than a week and if it doesn’t happen then it could appear as though the leader has given in to shadow cabinet members and others who are reported to be strongly opposed. The Telegraph is talking about a “Shadow cabinet revolt”.
This, of course, comes on top of the fight before Christmas when the Tory leader had to withdraw plans to stop his top team having outside interests - something that might prove problematical in the run-up to the general election.
The main problem with Clarke, of course, goes back to his pro-EU views which almost certainly cost him the leadership in the past. The appointment now could open up some of those splits once again. Clarke is also one of the few leading Tories who was opposed to the Iraq war - an element that has added to the mistrust.
The main benefit is that Clarke is a “big beast” who comes over effectively on TV and in the media. He would add much needed fire-power to a front-bench team that is not very well known. He could play a key role in getting the party message out on the economy - something that Osborne sometimes appears to be struggling with - which in itself could create a problem. This would no doubt be spun as a defeat for the shadow chancellor.
Clarke would also seem to be the ideal person to go up against Labour’s “come-back kid”, Peter Mandelson, and a return would really spice up politics in the run-up to the general election. One issue that hasn’t been raised is whether Clarke would have to go to the House of Lords.
Cameron might be quite pleased at the way the Mail is reporting it - which is in sharp contrast to the Telegraph report which is full of negatives. Certainly you can see the latter, which threw everything it could against Clarke in the 2001 leadership contest, being none too happy.
MessageSpace Advertising
First?
The main problem with Clarke, of course, goes back to his pro-EU views which almost certainly cost him the leadership in the past.
How can that be a problem? No-one cares about Europe.
Clarke seems genuinely popular with the public so a plus if he’s appointed. If he’s not, then this story is one for the Westminster Village only. So either way I doubt Cameron would be damaged by any decision he took, at leasst in the short term.
I missed this at the time, but this is very much us.
http://www.xkcd.com/500/
1 & 2 - Very good points, I was going to make both
As for whether anyone will care about Europe it could depend on how it’s handled. What’s he being appointed to and will it crossover with anything EU related? If they can keep the two separate then it’s not such a big deal.
As a minister, Clarke’s specialism was upsetting naturally conservative professional groups: the police, doctors, even teachers. In this way he worked for a Labour victory. Of course, for the under-40s this is ancient history.
Clarke was also pretty careless of backbench opinion. The problem was not his pro-Europe views but EU right-or-wrong: rather than seek to reassure Maastricht sceptics, he proudly announced he had not read the treaty but knew it must be passed.
But the main strike against Clarke is that his main cheerleader has been Lord Mandelson.
The Telegraph article says Clarke is a “passionate advocate of the single currency” but I very much doubt that that that is true. As far as I know, he takes a pragmatic line as far as the Euro is concerned; that is to say, he would favour entry if the economic conditions were right.
The way in which possible embarrassment for the Conservative party would manifest itself would be that, within minutes of being appointed, he would be asked something like “would you rule out Euro membership under any circumstances” and being an honest man, he would answer “no”.
This would presumably cause mayhem within the party, which appears to have moved from a pragmatic stance on the Euro to one of ideological opposition.
Cameron must know this and if he were to appoint Clark he would certainly go up in my estimation - he will prove that he is a man not a mouse and prepared to do what he always said, that is to say, take on his own party.
I remain unconvinced that he will actually do it. I think he could eventually overcome opposition in the party but he would still have a substantial section of the media against him, and it’s the media which constantly feeds the anti-European propaganda. The rather hysterical tone of the Telegraph piece, exaggerating Clarke’s view in order to demonise him, illustrates this very well.
Today’s front pages
Well, if anyone wants a punt on this, Ladbrokes have Clarke at 28/1 to be chancellor by the end of the year. I think Clarke is the most likely successor to Osborne, and that Cameron will have a reshuffle this year, although I remain convinced we won’t see an election until 2010. Cameron has only just twigged that the next election’s goiing to be all about the economy. He’s going to need a vince-like heavyweight.
As I argued here Cameron should not bring Clarke back into the Shadow Cabinet - http://richardwillisuk.wordpress.com/2008/12/29/clarke-in-or-out
9. Interesting blog entry, Rik. But it sounds as if you’re going for “safety first” rather than a winner, for instance you want to promote Chris Grayling - but how many people outside the world of politics have heard of him? I assume you agree that the euro issue is the real stumbling block.
OT. It’s the London bus story again. You wait months for a decent film and then three arrive at once (The Reader Che and Frost-Nixon).
British politics seems rather inconsequential when compared to the tragedy that is happening in Gaza. All civilized people can do is count the days till Bush and his cronies disappear and hope that Obama turns US foreign policy of the last 8 years into nothing more than an ugly memory.
“Clarke is also one of the few leading Tories who was opposed to the Iraq war - an element that has added to the mistrust”
Clarke was right, the rest were wrong - sounds like a plus point for Ken in my book, showing a greater insight than most in his party, and being prepared to stand by his convictions.
I once encountered Ken Clarke when he was birdwatching at Rutland Water - Mrs Clarke was slightly less interested in the wildlife - she nodded off in the corner of the hide.
O/T Serra beat Ferrero 7/6 6/3
re 11. Agreed on Gaza. It’s difficult to see where a UK political site fits here and the discussions we have had have been highly polarised and bad tempered.
Any thoughts on how we could frame a discussion would be most welcome.
I met my wife, Jacky, in Gaza City and now, nearly 40 years on we have very different views of the current crisis and the right of Israel to exist.
The big news for you is that you didn’t come last in the 2008 prediction competition and you ended with a positive score. Maybe your status as the contra-indicator is on the wane?
1 - “How can that be a problem? No-one cares about Europe.”
No, the public don’t care about Europe as a rule. But Tory MPs and activists are a self selecting sample and do care about Europe as a rule (though rather less than a few years ago).
13. Sorry that should have been 6/3 7/6. A winner either way.
14 - Mike, Just out of interest, is it you who questions “the right of Israel to exist”?
I don’t think BERR would be the right place for Clarke, as it would mean moving Alan Duncan, who’s one of the few positions outside the Big Four that can get television access.
Much better would be to put him in health or dwp, replacing either the unimpressive andrew lansley or the invisible chris grayling
*people not positions
re 17. Jacky
20 - Thanks. Back to the thread…
18 - I can’t see Clarke wanting to take one of the “lesser” cabinet posts. Been there, done that, etc. Would shadow Foreign Sec. interest him? Hague could then replace Osborne, and Osborne gets a party role for which his perceived talents are best suited.
11 On the contrary, I think I’m a fairly civilised person but surely there is sometimes a case for force to be used to settle disputes. Now that Israel has gone in, I think they might as well continue and see if they can defeat Hamas in detail.
On topic: the discussion around KC was, to me, a worrying lack of plurality in modern politics, or at least a worrying lack of people apparently in favour of plurality. When Thatcher was in power, we knew that her government was a coalition of neo-liberals, one-nation Tories and traditional conservatives. It was arguably the better for that, unless possibly if you were a partisan of one faction or another. It certain injected some creative tension into the government: you could say that it diluted the implementation of the Prime Minister’s vision (although others might say it tempered it somewhat); for the majority of government activity, which is to respond to events, it means that different options could be considered and kicked around before arriving at a solution.
From the voter’s point of view, in our system, if a Government has a working majority, of course the most potent opposition to really cr@p policies generally comes from within.
Blair’s NuLab project, of course, required expunging the public consciousness of any idea that there might be some socialists in the Labour party.
I understand that in the past the Conservatives have had a problem with Europe and Cameron has done a lot to close that down. However, why should we not accept that all the members of a Shadow Cabinet are likely to have different views about things? The Tories seem to have got to a position where the outright Europhobes and -philes are both in a minority, with moderate Euroscepticicm being in the ascendancy. To be honest, I think that is probably the right position for the Tories to be in. But why can’t we accept that some people think differently?
On KC: I think he would need to go into a heavy-hitting economic role. However I don’t think it’s a good idea to replace Osborne, not because I think he’s been brilliant at the job, but because, after all the pressure he’s been under, it would look like weakness. However, if KC were to go to Business, it would give him the opportunity to pronounce on economic matters, and he is heavyweight enough to counter Mandelson. And putting him in the Lords would give Cameron an excuse not to give him a major departmental role after the election, as he could revert to the recent convention of not having major departmental heads in the Lords. The only downside is that labour could claim that the only person the Tories have capable of standing up against Mandy is a 68-year-old has-been, but I don’t know if that would stick.
BTW I find the idea that Osborne has to stay as SCotE because he has a load of good policy ideas is a load of bollocks, in fact I’d be worried if the Tories were relying on one man to come up with their economic policy programme. Surely they have a load of policy wonks, tame economists, etc beavering away behind the scenes developing economic policy? I can’t see Osborne’s role being much more than presentation (which IMO he’s not that great at) and probably coordination.
House prices - fell 15.9% in 2008:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7812108.stm
Last six month’s sales down 7% at Next, 3.3% at Debenhams:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7812954.stm
Next shares up 7% - so the market feared they could be worse. I said several weeks ago that I expected Xmas retail sales not to be too bad - but for Q1 2009 to be dire. Are people really going to resume paying full price for goods after a lengthy period of drastic sales?
House prices - fell 15.9% in 2008:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7812108.stm
Last six month’s sales down 7% at Next, 3.3% at Debenhams:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7812954.stm
Next shares up 7% - so the market feared they could be worse. I said several weeks ago that I expected Xmas retail sales not to be too bad - but for Q1 2009 to be dire. Are people really going to resume paying full price for goods after a lengthy period of drastic sales?
Sorry for the double post. Dunno how it happens….
25 I was interested to see this on the news, as most of the recent house price stories have just been “the last 12 months” which only tells part of the story.
I believe that, according to Nationwide, the peak was Oct 07 and prices have fallen something like 18.6% since. Although that’s not in the article on the Web.
By the way, does anyone know of a useful resource that tells you when economic indicators are published? I believe interest rates are the first Wednesday of the month, but what about inflation, mortgage lending, retail sales, jobs etc?
Ilm just reposting this from late last night, as I think it relevant. BTW, good morning all.
Osborn was looked and sounded like an absolute political beginner in front of Paxo on Newsnight this evening.
The lighting made him look like a clown, and he didn’t act any better. The Tories wont get elected if they cant do better thn this.
by weathercock January 5th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
Surprised no-one has picked up on the poll of London marginals for Greenpeace in UKPR (even if only to dismiss it).I suppose a bit out-of-date by now (14 Dec) but do they not give some guide re the London battleground?
3.LS, so true, and it made me laugh on this freezing cold morning.
Surely it is equally important to find a role for Malcolm Rifkind - he is another affable “big beast” of the Major days. I agree that Clarke could be a risk but this is the kind of thing that Cameron must learn to manage as leader. The answer is NOT to keep key heavyweights on the back-benches. Let’s see if he is up to it.
I think if you ask most senior Labour people they do fear Ken Clarke. He’s more likeable than Osborne and probably better known by middle-aged and older voters.
There is no doubt bringing him back would be a risk for Cameron - Brown would play mischief over Europe to stoke tensions on the opposition benches.
The question boils down to how much do the Tories want to win? Brown was bold enough to bring back Peter Mandelson because he was a class act. Will Cameron be as brave? I think he should, but won’t.
14. Mike - There is no way to have a polite discussion about Israel/Palestine,sadly.
There won’t be until th situation is solved. Mind you I have perfect solution - crazy sounding, expensive but doable….
5. The point about Labour encouraging the return of Clarke is amply demonstrated by the transparent spin of post 6. Note that the EU is very keen to have its men in senior positions in both the main parties, too. They are halfway there already.
31 - Affable, indeed charming, certainly, but what’s he done to warrant the proud ‘big beast’ label? He was utterly lamentable as Foreign Secretary in the Balkans crisis. And had no measurable impact on the domestic political scene.
14. Mike. I didn’t come last…. Well that’s an excellent start to the New Year! Does that suggest I was close to the last?
It’s impossible to have a rational discussion of Israel/Palestine for reasons that if expressed would cause a row on their own. Though support for the Palestinians is pretty overwhelming worldwide I’ve always thought their best chance of progress would be to spend millions with the finest PR agency on 5th Avenue and try to get their story across over there.
(35 - Sorry Ms. Nuala - I have this strange feeling you may still be a pbc lurker)
36-Though support for the Palestinians is pretty overwhelming worldwide…
Maybe in your circles. On the other hand, birds of a feather…
11.”All civilized people can do is count the days till Bush and his cronies disappear and hope that Obama turns US foreign policy of the last 8 years into nothing more than an ugly memory.”
Roger, what are you expecting Obama to do that will be so different from previous administrations?
Listening to Kevin Maguire last night doing the Sky news paper review, I was struck by the way he seemed convinced that it would be Obama and Brown working as a team in future, as opposed to Cameron and whoever.
Labour are really banking on Obama’s star qualities wowing us Brits, and that he will be a natural supporter of this government while keeping his distance from the Tories. Really odd IMHO, considering how closely Labour ended up working with Bush and his team, who really did put the Tories into exile during that period.
I don’t think that Obama is going to be that enamoured, or even that bothered about keeping such close ties with the UK. He doesn’t come across as someone who feels that strongly about the old Atlantic alliance, and might do what Bush intended to before 9/11, and that is concentrate more on domestic affairs within the US rather than Foreign policy out with it.
I am not convinced that Labour’s much hoped for close alliance with Obama will end up materialising.
On TV this morning I couldn’t help noticing the remarkable similarity between the new slimline Ann Widdicombe and Tony Benn with a grey mop on his head. Not just the features but the blinking mannerisms, the tilted head. And of course the total bilateral loopiness!
Has anyone recently seen them in the same space-time interval?
36 Roger - all is not lost, you came in with the lowest positive score overall, beaten to final place by three who had negative scores
22.
“Osborne gets a party role for which his perceived talents are best suited.”
Peddling the Party line has always been where GideO’s talents and experience are best-suited.
29. I mentioned at the time that we were phoned to take part in this poll (my partner took the call). They asked if she was more or less likely to vote Labour if the 3rd runway got the go-ahead. What they did not ask was who she might vote for instead. Therefore, the claim that there would be a swing from Labour to Tory if the runway is given the green light must be at least partly based on conjecture. In my partner’s case the swing would be from Labour to Green, but this was not picked up by the pollster.
39. Obama will look across the Atlantic at a fag end unelected prime minister with 15-17 months left on the clock who’s party were bedfellows in an illegal war with George W, who is miles behind in the polls and is slagging off America as the cause of all thoe woe.
I cannot see why Obama will want to step in the brown stuff when he has 8 years ahead.
39 Christina, agree, I think the refusal of Brown to up the UK troop numbers in Afghanistan will play badly with Obama and he is already sidelined on economy as the main player in US minds is Sarkozy. US (as it did 8 years ago until faced with Old Europe’s refusal to support Iraq) will be looking to deal with Europe rather than UK and Brown isn’t seen as someone particularly well placed to speak for Europe.
The Obama doesn’t come from a particularly Anglophile background, father’s family involved in Kenyan independence struggle, mothers side involved with third world and he was bought up in Hawaii - very different from the WASP Bushes, Oxford scholar Clinton.
44. Yes - it’s hard to understand why Labour believe Obama will want to associate himself with a tired loser like Brown.
re John Loony previously. It should be today at 1pm EST. I presume that someone will televise it.
If Cameron does bring KC back, it will clearly be to Business, not Shadow Chancellor. I wonder if Hague’s statement that the Tories would *never* enter the single currency is a preemptive strike? The Telegraph story doesn’t identify the dubious shadow cabinet members, but it would fit naturally with that and with Hague’s campaign on the issue in 2001. I’m sure KC can be persuaded to say 2not right now” about the Euro, but he certainly can’t be persuaded to agree that the Tory line is or should be ‘never’. His response would be a throaty chuckle and “Well, in my time in politics, you know, I’ve always regretted the times I said never, but it’s not on the agenda at the moment.” It’s the best he could do, but it will still contradict Hague.
BTW, the Indie shows again today what an eccentric newspaper they are. What might they lead on today? Gaza again? The argument over Cameron’s proposals? The high street trading reports (not as bad as predicted)? Nope. It’s a backbench MP criticising Tesco’s pricing of a couple of bottles of wine. And then they compound it by having a whole editorial sarcastically dissecting her comments.
I appreciate I am in a huge minority but seeing Brown hobnobbing with Obama would make me even less likely to vote for GB. I am not alone among my friends, but appreciate that it is a self selected group! ps Roger, and they are overwhelmingly not in support of the Palestinians.
Happily, 39/44/45 should mean Obama is kept somewhat off my TV screens!
re 13 HenryG, many thanks!
48. I don’t much care for the Indie, but revealing what rent-a-quote muppets many of our MPs are seems to me an important public service.
13 Off thread, thank you very much, Henry.
Nice to wake up to a winner.
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota (CNN) — Democrat Al Franken declared victory in the hotly contested Minnesota Senate race Monday, saying the win is “incredibly humbling.”
Another Senate Seat for the Democrats
“A Minnesota board says Al Franken won his U.S. Senate race against Norm Coleman by 225 votes.
The Minnesota State Canvassing Board on Monday certified the results of the recount of Republican Sen. Norm Coleman’s fight to retain his seat against Franken. The results showed Franken with a 225-vote lead”.
Probably be an appeal
Phil C see this site:
http://www.forexfactory.com/calendar.php
38. Peter. Most outside of the States see the Palestinians as an oppressed minority facing overwhelming odds….the Americans see the reverse. ‘A plucky little Israel outnumbered……’ A sort of Middle Eastern ‘Custers Last Stand’. This has been largely thanks to the excellent PR of the Israel lobby over there.
41. Ted. ‘You beat three with negative scores’. It’s a start!
52,13.
Henry got my vote for tipster of the year - why he didn’t win is beyond me quite frankly - he’s a god
44 – An excellent summation Harry F, Labour’s hope of reflected glory is woefully optimistic, why associate yourself with an unpopular loser who blames America for his mistakes?
45. I don’t think that Obama is, or will be especially Anglophile in the way that Bill Clinton is. But Gordon Brown expects that his economic policy will be closely aligned with what he is doing in the UK and this will be politically significant. BTW Ted what do you think about Clarke’s european views - are they are a stumbling block to his coming back into the shadow cabinet?
re 28 weathercock would that be Gene Osborn or Joe Osborn, perhaps? Both of them are political novices as far as I know.
If , howver, you mean George Osbornee, then we know you think he’s a clown, so even the first time you posted this was superfluous.
54 Thanx Witan, although I’m slightly confused as it says base rate will be out at 7am Thursday, when I thought it was usually 12noon?
60 OK, I have now re-set the timezone, it is due 12noon.
45.Absolutely Ted, it should worry Brown that the American military are becoming much more openly critical of the Brown government/MOD top brass with regard their behaviour in Iraq and Afghanistan. And I took that as a clear sign that all might not be well with Obama’s administration and this Labour government on this issue.
48.”Nope. It’s a backbench MP criticising Tesco’s pricing of a couple of bottles of wine. And then they compound it by having a whole editorial sarcastically dissecting her comments.”
Not to worry NickP, I am a fan of Which magazine, and they have been on the case for a while. She has a very valid point by the way.
Weathercock you are on your hobby horse again. Martin Coxall will no doubt join in later to accompany the Labour riff that will follow your lead.
In fact Osborne did well even getting Paxo to admit with a smirk that his line of questioning was silly, and even in the following link after the interview Paxo was trying to spin his way out of it, and failed.
The lighting was not the problem but the haircut was. Too long for his face. I see Cameron is going longer too.
The silliest interview with GO was on Sky where the interviewing clown asked GO, and I paraphrase, how he could possibly know how people on their uppers felt because he was a rich boy. You know, the Tory Toffs line which Boulton now supports.
Well, GO did well saying that he was from a manufacturing family and understood business recessions and the need to keep people in their jobs and the consequences of unemployment.
He should have asked, “and what about you, you lazy interviewer, have you any idea what is really going on out there?” But sadly he did not.
phil C set the time zone under the time at the top of the column. Just click the clock symbol there.
And Phil C set the filter to what you want to see.
MPC odds on betfair
1.25% or less : 1.49
1.5 % : 2.14
1.75% : 21
2% : 14
All others 200
Is 2% maybe worth a punt ? (ie no change)
“The answer is NOT to keep key heavyweights (Rifkind) on the back-benches. Let’s see if he is up to it”
Or…..’Come on Cammo lets see if you’re ‘ard enough!’
This might be appropriate if you were talking about Howard or Widdicombe …but Rifkind! Even I find him inoffensive!
63. “Well, GO did well saying that he was from a manufacturing family and understood business recessions and the need to keep people in their jobs and the consequences of unemployment.”
A bit like Prince Charles saying he was from a family of sailors so he understood fishing quotas.
58.
“I don’t think that Obama is, or will be especially Anglophile….”
I would refer you to the flag of his state of birth:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=hawaii%20flag&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
PS if he’s Anglophile he still may not like the dour Scotsman!
On topic, I doubt that Cameron will be anything other than pleased that a possible of Clark to some Shadow front bench role, all good publicity which reminds the public of the wealth of experience the Tories have on the economy in difficult times. I think that we have to stop seeing any return of people like Clark as a negative for Osborne, its not, its a major plus for the Conservatives.
And both Clark and Lawson appear to be very much back in the fold, advising the present Shadow Cabinet team. And I have noticed that they, and people like Redwood are appearing more and more to be singing off the same script as Osborne&Co. That is not a coincidence.
Osborne is still coming out on top of Darling, who is looking increasingly weak and ineffective at the wrong time. I will be very surprised that either he or Brown are still in post by the end of the year even if Labour hang onto 2010. Osborne will always struggle to gain the gravitas expected of a Chancellor, that only comes when you are successful in the actual post.
69.
Apols, wrong link.
http://www.50states.com/flag/hiflag.htm
I don’t understand why Cameron doesn’t appoint some experienced MPs in ‘advisory’ roles for economic policy and other areas.
That way, no-one has to be pushed out but key individuals within the party can still have their say and add value.
http://www.lettersfromatory.com
Radio 5 live have a discussion on for the last hour “Who is right : Brown says spend, Cameron says save”
Majority of callers say save. Cable on now - interviewing for the Lib-Lab coalition CoE job :(.
70.that a possible *return* of Clarke.
56 “Why he [HenryG] didn’t win is beyond me quite frankly…”
It was because me and Jack cheated, Ghost.
70 “reminds the public of the wealth of experience the Tories have on the economy in difficult times” You said it!
Had a look at the marginals poll that Sandy mentions at 43 (http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1781) - thanks for the heads-up. Main point of interest seems to be that the swing there (before the debatable questions on Heathrow) is virtually identical to the national picture, but with a squeeze on the LibDems. This is what you might expect in Lab/Con marginals, but there’s been speculation that marginals behave differently - the big summer poll showed Labour doing slightly better than nationally in them, whereas the NOTW polls (albeit not weighted for local demographics) have shown the Tories doing better.
I suspect the marginals are pretty politicised at the moment where a year ago I had the impression that most people were quite detached. The 250 people we got to the Beeston Labour meeting last night, albeit on a local issue (anti-Tesco), was the largest crowd I’ve *ever* had for any meeting that I helped organise, and afterwards I talked to numerous people who wanted to discuss wider issues, what were the chances of stopping the Tories, etc.
It’s a heavily middle-class area - I’m not sure that those of you who live in safe or Tory seats realise just how much appetite there is in Guardianista circles to ‘fight off the barbarians again’, as one put it with only a hint of irony. This isn’t a huge swathe of the electorate, but it’s crucial in terms of ground war helpers, and disproportionately large in Middle England marginals like mine.
63. No hobby-horse, Witan. If you thought that Osborne (Gids), got the better of Paxman last night, both your eyes and ears need testing, sorry to say.
I am a committed member of the R. Wing half of humanity and will vote Tory, (nothing else to vote for), come what may, but the Shadow Chancellor was abismal last night. A class act he was not!
Re, The Dr Who ‘ in the know ‘ betting story about late betting on Matt Smith.
On the day I posted on PB about the favourite to take over and others pointed out very valid reasons why he wasn’t able to take the role without quitting another high profile and successful one.
It was never going to be a women as Tennent had said ‘the new chap’ on several occasions leading to the annoucement.
BBC news ‘tipped’ two people in the morning, one of them was Matt Smith. They ran a story about the possibles and he featured as already working with Billie Piper and being a respected actor for his age.
I thought about him but decided he looked too young and the price was huge at something like 33/1, but in all reality - the BBC story was the big tip from the horses mouth and in hindsight was worth a wager based on that alone.
A quick look at a few fan postings on the net didn’t mention Smith either.
Once a ‘young’ doctor was officially mentioned in the afternoon Smith was an odds-on shoe in - but betting was probably suspended by that point.
Totally under the radar apart from the last day tip of the hat on the BBC News… anyone posting more than a tenner on him at 33/1 must have known something that we didn’t I’d have thought.
Just goes to show really that political betting is far more predictable most of the time!
65 I have now worked that out - it’s an excellent site, thanks. At first I thought it only worked a week ahead but you can click on the calendar and look up single days in the future. So if you set the filter to GBP you can follow all those UK economic indicators…
Tomorrow we get the British Retail Consortium Shop Price Index which will be a first look at what’s happened to inflation and give us an idea of how much people needed to discount by to get those apparent slightly-better-than-expected Christmas sales figures. Thurs is of course interest rates, and Fri is manufacturing output…
It is ALWAYS a sign that things are going badly with Labour when the spinners start going on about Tory toffs!
77. Guardian readers still not voting Conservative shock !
Nick Robinson has started writing comment NOT blog - replies not allowed. Oh dear.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7812454.stm
72 But he doesn’t need to appoint people to advisory roles he can, er, just listen to their advice.
As much as I hope that John Redwood is in on Tory economic policy development, i realise that giving him a publicly acknowledged position would mainly serve to frighten the horses somewhat.
Clarke would make a great chancellor, just the right person to take the UK into the Euro.
Merkel eats s**t!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5454738.ece
53-So Franken stole the election with the help of the Dem SodS? Was repeated ad nauseum in Florida in 2000…Or this time it’s different. Franken is a Dem.
55-Agree with you as regards the US, but don’t live there. Thank God, would be bored sh!tless
But I think the Palestinians play well among Muslims and the “intellectual” European left. Most others are indifferent.
M&S to lay off 1000 staff (BBC)
86. Quite a few people are actively hostile, remembering the Munich massacre and other outrages.
83, does he normally do that?
There is a very similar recent blog post too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2009/01/return_to_the_fray.html#commentsanchor
Amusing first reply too:
“Last night I watched George Osborne with despair. ‘Flashman’ became a stuttering, nervous fourth-former under the bullying of Jeremy Paxman. If he cannot stand up to the rigours of Newsnight, what hope has he if DC becomes Prime Minister, and Osborne becomes Chancellor? More urgently, what hope have we, the long-suffering citizens?”
I wonder if the writer has ever seen Brown have a Paxman interview?
89. Has Brown ever had a Paxman interview ?
Some unanswered questions I keep posting and nobody can answer.
When was Brown last interviewed live on Newsnight ?
When was Brown last on BBC1 Question Time ?
83 I doubt it is because people slag him off - more to do with the fact that they persistently show up his inconsistencies.
On Obama and the British - I think I read somewhere his grandfather was vehemently anti British having been tortured by us in the fifties.
Ah, yes I did.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article5276010.ece
90, quite.
I can’t recall ever seeing him on either programme. Admittedly, I’ve stopped watching Newsnight regularly because it’s little more than propaganda now.
16 Congrats Henry and many thanks for a great start to the year, fully justifying my picking you as PB’s Best Betting Tipster of the Year.
I’m sure Hagues comments were a preemptive strike.
Clarke claims the last two manifestos have been “far right wing nationalist documents”
Hague makes the point about the Euro,at the same time as dissing Dave over the outside interests.
On Gaza, Mike says.
“Any thoughts on how we could frame a discussion would be most welcome.
I met my wife, Jacky, in Gaza City and now, nearly 40 years on we have very different views of the current crisis and the right of Israel to exist. ”
So we are straight into Israels right to exist if we’re not careful.
A discussion that usually only applies to conflicts involvolving Israel.
I’d frame the discussion around what a settlement in the short medium and long term would look like.
92. It was far worse in the mid-1990s.
73.I caught a bit of the discussion, the government want people to carry on spending in this recession despite the levels of public and personal debt. But it sounds like the public are in the hangover stage, and reaching for some form/period of detox from borrowing and spending, rather than going for the hair of dog spending splurge continuing the pay later mentality.
Again, the Westminster bubble seems to be behind the curve on this, the Tory attacks on the sheer level of debt, and the fact that it will be paid for by even higher taxes later is beginning to filter through even more. That relatively small package for savers announced by Cameron yesterday was clever, and feeds into this.
I keep saying it, but still people keep underestimating Osborne and his team. They are not in charge, and unable to immediately implement a policy right now this minute. They are concentrating much more on the future, and positioning themselves over the longer term for the economic period when we might have a GE. Over the last few months the government have had an advantage in the media, they are able to actual control the levers in the shorter term on the economy, but in the longer term the wrong decisions will come back to bite them much harder.
They had the chance to be bold and honest by taking the right decisions, they fluffed it by allowing the very fact that they are only about 18 months from a GE to get in the way. What the public might have appreciated from a tired and increasingly distrusted long term government, was a real change of behaviour where political decisions took second place to sound economics. This really was last chance saloon for them, and they have resorted to type yet again under Brown.
Was it only a couple of months ago that Brown and Darling were down playing the severity of this recession and how precarious a position we were in to weather it? Now I see that instead of a recovery towards the end of 2009, Brown is now yet again moving the goalposts and talking of the recovery not appearing to possible 2010/11, after the next GE.
77-I read the Guardian!
77 Indeed the Guardianista’s are more motivated than before. The same old, cold-hearted, laissez-faire Tory meme has definitely gained traction down my neck of the woods.
70. speculation about Clarke replacing Osborne not a negative for Osborne???!
cloud cuckoo land.
77. seems to contain fundamental misunderstandings about the demographic make-up of “marginal” seats.
what makes you think there are more guardianistas there than anywhere else?
48 - To be fair to the Indy’s taking the mickey, she did sound a bit thick being interviewed on Five Live earlier.
99 Don’t worry, if Camerosborne loses the next election it will be painted here as part of some kind of clever long-term strategy.
69. The flag of Hawaii incorporates the union jack - well, I never knew that - brilliant! (you must be good at pub quizzes?)
I don’t know what Saint Barack thinks of the dour Scot but it’s said that he found Dave a bit of a drip.
98. Where the Tory majority is weighed rather than counted….big deal.
99.Where did I say that Clarke would replace Osborne??!!
Hadn’t seen this when I posted@39.
Peter Hoskin at the Coffee House Blog. A relationship on the wane?
This is quite worrying.
104-I remember reading years and years ago that the safer the Tory seat the more off th scale was the local Labour Party. Thsi still the case?
Christina.
Quite.
Osborne is thinking ahead. Years ahead.
As Mike says, its not always about policies but positioning. The massive levels of debt will have to be paid for and Cameron and co need to be on the right side of the argument when it explodes. It could affect voting for many years.
Brown can get away with it with it with some, for now, while things are in a state of fearful flux and when the bill hasn’t been presented, but Cameron can’t afford to sacrifice long term advantage for short term polling.
People will be angry at someone - and its unlikely to be themselves.
There is obviously some truth in the theory that the bigger the majority the longer you stay in power. That keeps people focused on short term polling when an election could be weeks away.
However if Cameron is elected or even falls just short of it in very short term - the belief the big bill is Labour’s fault will be much more valuable, long term.
104. They are probably grumbling in a time warp over their glass of Rioja after smuggling a box of Kleenex in to an advance showing of “Che” at the local “Arts Cinema” (no pleb filled multiplex for them) : “We must kick the Tories out of power this time - Cameron has been a terrible PM - I saw him on Newsnight last night you know…”
Interesting article on the American recession, could be coming here!
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article5453671.ece
Note to PB’rs there are an awful lot of new acronyms to learn: learn ‘em it’ll impress ‘em down the the pub.
102.Don’t be silly, there have been several discussions on here in the past about what would constitute a defeat for Cameron at a GE in light of the electoral mountain we have to climb. I also note that the goal posts for this government clinging to power are a hell of a lot smaller.
77 Nick P I’m not sure that those of you who live in safe or Tory seats realise just how much appetite there is in Guardianista circles to ‘fight off the barbarians again’, as one put it with only a hint of irony.
Maybe, Nick, although you’d have to be pretty loony to be worried about a Cameron government. On the other hand, it works both ways. The strength of feeling amongst many people that “we MUST get rid of this appalling government” is stronger than anything seen in the UK for many years. As a result, I tend to agree with those who think the LibDems will be heavily squeezed.
On topic: I’ve said many times that Cameron will never appoint Ken Clarke to be Chancellor. It would be too divisive. What you have to understand is the depth of dislike of Clarke within a substantial section of the Conservative Party. It’s not simply his pro-EU stance; it’s more that he is seen (unfairly in my view) as some kind of traitor. That is why the party made the bizarre decision to select IDS as leader rather than Clarke.
Having said that, I wouldn’t rule out Cameron bringing him back in a lesser role - if he would accept it.
104 et al. Ah the sweet sound of Tory complacency. Labour Marginal less than 5miles away, Three more within 20 miles.
103 The Big Gahuna wanted to be part of the British Empire, so he added unilaterally.
Gordon Brown and Tony Blair want to be part of the European Empire, so they added Britain unilaterally
105. Nice quote in there -
‘I am told that a report circulating at the highest level in the Ministry of Defence concludes that there are now serious doubts in Washington about the effectiveness of the British Armed Forces. Senior military figures are said to have been surprised, and shocked, by feedback that arrived in Whitehall last month’
Looks like Labour has achieved its goal of trashing yet another great British institution. Police, civil service, magistracy, now the armed forces…
76 Johnathen, ask not what the Conservatives can do for people on benefits, ask what Labour can do for taxpayers!
111. Oh yes, Crawley is full of Guardian readers, isn’t it? haha
111. I don’t think CCHQ will need reminding where Labour margins are but thanks for the attempt at a heads up.
98 Jonathan - Do you have any evidence you can point us to on this?
113 yes but Labour dont really like defence do they . It is better to not be a threat to enemies, then they leave you alone!
110. coming out in a cold sweat yet? he might blow it.
117 He appears to be at odds with Mr Palmer who was on here only hours ago claiming the Guardian was not a Labour paper.
118. it is a long time since “defence” actually came into it. “offence” to third world countries we don’t like the look of, maybe.
113.They did that a long time ago, hence the now long running British Legion campaign to restore the Military Covenant.
120. the guardian is usually quite anti-tory, from what i can make out, so both statements could in fact agree
I would describe the Guardian as pro-Labour, anti Brown quite frankly.
115 You’d be surprised the range of people who live in Crawley. You should visit. E.g. plenty of civil servants commute from Three Bridges.
Anyway, I seem to have scratched a raw nerve. Sorry about that. Off now, will pop back later.
123 But aren’t.
Internet access in the sixth form common room working well this morning I see.
105. I think I could point you to a similar article “OMG the special relationship iz dead” written around the inauguration of every American President for the last 40 years, (with the possible exception of Reagan).
For a good example of how the tensions of different PMs and Presidents of all parties get resolved, it’s useful to see the example of how carter and Thatcher, no soul mates, established their working relationship.
http://www.margaretthatcher.org/archive/us-carter.asp
113 Of course there are lots of benefits of Labour’s defence policy.
The promotion of homosxuality in the military has been an enormous success. Gay soldiers get paid leave to attend pride parades. This is very important to ensure diversity and is a great recruitment tool.
But there have been other successes too. Women are now in the front line. When the navy sailors were captured by Iranians, the boat driver was a woman. She showed great skill and courage driving her boat during the capture.
But Labour is also making great efforts to save money. Inspite of having 2 wars, there are still ways to make cutbacks. The cuts are so effective that the Iraqis and americans dont even ask britain to help police basra anymore - saving even more money. The Iraqis even said British troops arent needed and can go home if they want to.
Thanks to however gave the Serra Ferroro tennis tip! Its offset last nights casinos loss, I feel a bit better now!
128-I do remember the obvious delight in the BBC/C4 when Bush I paid his first overseas trip to Germany, not the UK and what it all meant. Roll forward to August 1990…
128. Ibn fact, I could even write retrospective articles on “How the New president will create difficulties for Britain” myself! How’s this?
Kennedy -Macmillan - Age, Diferent parties/philosphies, different conception of world, Britain in decline, Military commitments, colonialism, different styles.
Nixon -Wilson: Different parties and philosphies, lack of support for Vietnam, Briain on wane
Carter - Callaghan - New broom versus old stager, British decline, emergence of stronger realtionship with Germany, election and change vs more of same.
Reagan-Thatcher - I think it’s hard to argue that this one wasn’t seen as good news for Mrs T.
Bush - Thatcher: Kinder gentler America vs keepin up pressure on free market refroms. Attitude to Europe/ending of Cold war, sense that Thatcher saw herself as “senior”. Tensions over Bush being “soft”.
Clinton - Major: Different parties/philosophies, Major allegedly helped Bush campaign, Different personal styles, Balkans policy tension (this might have been later),
Bush - Blair: Different parties/philosophies, Cheney etc contemptuous of “Europe”, Blairs close relationship with Clinton/Gore,
re 103 well it’s hardly surprising - it was where Captain Cook was eaten after all.
What Alan Walters said about KC.
Walters described himself as not so much a right-winger as “an unreconstructed Manchester liberal with a notably small ‘l’, believing in light government and unilateral free trade”. He could be extremely blunt, especially in areas of core belief, and about those who didn’t see the world similarly. One bête noire, Kenneth Clarke, had barely become Chancellor of the Exchequer before Walters described him as lacking “spine, knowledge and drive” in economic policy.
Not true? surely!
130, HenryG. I hope he has some tips for Qatar
Also, Andrew sometimes gives tennis tips, which generally turn out well.
113 nobody should be surprised…here are some articles
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/4092439/Our-Army-failed-its-test-in-Iraq.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-499877/RAF-chief-warns-dont-pilots-fly-planes.html
But Gordon Brown did say the Defence Forces are “next in line to be taken down a peg after the monarchy”. Hang on…is he on our side?!
134. I’d agree - Clarke is the Vince Cable of the Conservative party - more heat that light.
100: Marginal seats vary, obviously, but there are a good many who have a larger-than-usual middle-class segment, who are not hardcore Labour or Tory voters ‘because my father would turn in his grave if I didn’t’. This separates into people who vote primarily on economic prospects (an important element of the 1997 coalition - the ‘who is best for the economy? question is a good pointer for these) and people who vote primarily on ideals (who tend to waver between Lab, LibDem and Green in national sympathy and who in general were increasingly anti-Blair, cf Roger).
The latter (who I call Guardianistas as shorthand) are a very significant part of Labour’s majority in marginals like mine, and they were quite demoralised in 2005 becuase of Iraq and other issues: we dragged most of them out in the end, but activism was well down on 97/01. By and large they’re now back, and it’s proving very useful in organisational terms.
After watching George Osborne’s dreadful performance on Newsnight last night, it seems pretty clear that Ken Clarke would be a lot more persuasive as shadow Chancellor.
On the Obama and Brown tangent, I think it’s missing the point whether he likes Brown, Britain or whatever. Obama’s a professional politician, and he’s bound to be symbolically friendly. What could give Brown a boost is if Obama was seen to sign up plans that are seen to be Brown’s for joint global action to prevent a depression. Obama is likely to want Europe to do the kind of thing Brown is advocating (spend a load of money on a big stimulus) and it’s not unthinkable that he’d cooperate in making it look to British people like Brown taking a lead. (All it takes is a few sentences that the UK press will be all over and the US press will ignore…)
Meanwhile in other Special Relationship news, war criminal to honour war criminal for services to war crimes (*):
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5455004.ece
* I’m paraphrasing a bit.
I just can’t see Cameron shafting Osborne by appointing Clarke to any economic portfolio.
How could a guy who is a) more experienced b) more popular, c) better on TV d) more widely respected on economics not be seen as a backseat driver in that position? Any internal party debates on economic policy would be seen (rightly or wrongly) as power struggles between the two, which Cameron would have to ajudicate.
It’s a terrible, terrible idea. Also he can’t make Clarke For Sec, ’cause of Europe. Home office/Justice are possibilities for Cameron, but I can’t see Clarke being interested.
That said, not ending the speculation is silly by Cameron. It just means it drones on, and he looks like he’s considering stabbing his friend in the back. Soon osbornes “friends” will have to start reminding people about Clarke’s weaknesses in response and the party will start to look divided.
140-Clinton bestowing some bit of tin on Blair? A bit late for Fat Bill, and a bit early for Hilary surely?
138. it is hard to see why they should be any more prevalent on the edge of nottingham than anywhere else.
133 Was Captain Cook eaten?
“Was his body eaten by the Hawaiians who killed him, or was his flesh carefully removed and discarded, while his bones, believed to have magic powers, were carefully stashed–and if so, where? No one seems to know. And could Cook had saved himself that day, had he known how to swim?”
http://www.phy6.org/outreach/books/Cook.htm
FWIW, the Hawaiians I met were keen to relay to me that he wasn’t eaten - he was actually buried at sea.
I went to Kealakekua Bay in December. It’s a nice spot. It has Spinner Dolphins. There are worse places to die (although perhaps better ways!)
134. That seems a pretty good assessment of Clarke by Alan Walters. Probably not how the public view him, though.
re 138 Just had a look at the marginals poll and the Labour position seemed to be driven by the 18-24 cohort who went L67% to C23%. ICM seemed have found it hard get a reasonable sample of the age group and they had to be weighted up by more than half.
A survey of voter registration levels across the whole London by NOP last year had more than a quarter in this group not on the register.
Surely one of the most liberating things about the Obama presidency could be the end of our special relationship with the US. It would lead to a re-evaluation of the UK’s role in the world and will make it much less likely that we ever send our troops into battle to provide cover for an American administration.
A lot of silly dreaming going on by lefties about Osborne.
This is particularly wet one:
‘Soon osbornes “friends” will have to start reminding people about Clarke’s weaknesses in response and the party will start to look divided.’
BTW, I hope we’ve noticed that Merkel is announcing new 50 billion Euro “Stimulus package” for Germany today to include higher public spending and tax breaks.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUKTRE5042ND20090105
Hold on, Didn’t I read something from a German guy a bit ago about how that multi billion dollar stimulus package was a really bad bad idea?
Brown 1, Germany 0?
@141:
That’s obviously not a problem if you move Osborne away from SCOTE. Then there’s no question that Ken will have the last say on any economic issues.
re Hawaii. Hows this for a fascinating story?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Young_(Hawaii)
138: Nick - By your estimation, what proportion of your constituents would you describe as “Tory haters”? This may well include a proportion of the Guardianistas, but will also include a tranche of non muesli eaters too.
@147:
I very much doubt there’s anything Obama could do to end the special relationship. It’s something more fibrous, interwoven and socioculturally non-specific rather than just whether the POTUS and the PM are bum chums or not.
149. Are they proposing any silly VAT cuts ? Thought not.
146. Good spot Mike - hard to see how this notoriously low turnout group will be enthused to turn out for such a deeply unattractive character like Brown at the GE, as well.
148 - My guess is that most “lefties” would be very happy for Osborne to stay exactly where he is, but to get more exposure than Cameron is currently allowing him. By talking up Clarke - who is an impossible appointment as someone above notes - Labour is actually making it harder for the Tories to hide Osborne. He may have some good ideas and perform well in the Commons, but on TV - as Paxman showed last night - he comes across dreadfully. He also has some very attractive Bullingdon baggage.
150 Hopi Sen - Hold on, Didn’t I read something from a German guy a bit ago about how that multi billion dollar stimulus package was a really bad bad idea?
No, Hopi, you’ve got this wrong. (Since you’re a smart guy, this must be deliberate!) Everyone agrees that, where affordable, a stimulus package is a good idea. The problem is that Gordon Brown has made such a hash of his decade as Chancellor that Britain can’t afford much of a stimulus without incurring excessive borrowing. It is countries whose finances are in a bad shape - most notably the UK - for which a very large stimulus package is a bad idea.
I don’t think any serious commentators disagree with that; clearly, there has to be some limit to the amount of extra borrowing - if not, why not borrow twice as much?
153 - Culturally we will always be closer to the Americans than most other countries, but economically and politically that does not have to be the case, especially as the post-war generation hands over to those born and brought up in the 60s and 70s. I do a lot of business with the Americans and they are a fairly unsentimental lot that now tend to think of Europe as a whole rather than of the UK or France or Germany.
Bringing Kenneth Clarke back as shadow Business Secretary would be a bit of a misstep. Peter Mandelson was brought back for a specific purpose: to bolster Gordon Brown where he was weakest, on strategy and spin. Kenneth Clarke would not achieve this purpose, since David Cameron is amply stocked with strategicians and spinmeisters.
If Kenneth Clarke were to be brought back because he’s a big beast and popular, that’s all well and good so far as presentation is concerned. However, is it really likely that he would want to submit himself to the rigours of Cabinet office in his 70s? He would presumably only serve briefly if at all in a hypothetical Cameron government from 2010. So his return to the shadow Cabinet would be lipgloss.
Add to that the risk of an avoidable row over his views on the EU, and it just doesn’t seem worth it to me. Far better to give him a grand title outside the shadow Cabinet and allow him to perform the role of shadow minister to the Today programme.
148. YOu’re right. It’s not about to happen. it’s already happening.
“A number of shadow cabinet ministers have told the Daily Telegraph that they are implacably opposed to a comeback by Mr Clarke the so called big beast of the Tory Party”
I know you’ll say it’s an unsourced story, but generally journalists don’t lie outright about this sort of thing. So it’s at least two members of the Shadow cabinet. It could be Fox briefing to destabilise Osborne, but that seems overly complex to me.
150, Indeed, but I’ve got to say I agree with SallyC on this aspect of it. Osborne is far to close to Cameron for him to do that. It would look like a horrible betrayal, especially after osborne rescued cameron last year.
I find it hard to understand why Cameron is even prepared to undermine Osborne by leting this Clarke story spin on, eith consciously or by inaction.
148 So he has one does he, is that an imaginary one or his great leader.
149 I seem to recall that one Mori London Mayoral poll showed some people saying they were 100% certain to vote at the start of the questioning and then saying they were not registered to vote in the same poll at the end - the deadline for registration having passed.
Hard to credit.
I asked a question at the end of the the graveyard shift last night.
Can anyone confirm whether I am right in saying that if there was an election this year and GO was appointed Chancellor, he would be the youngest Chancellor since the 1800’s?
151 - A more direct link,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Young_(Hawaii)
157: Yup. Before the economy collapsed, our budget deficit was the worst in the EU15. So much for prudence……
149 see 85
whoops
150 see 85
160 Daily Telegraph?
I don’t believe everything I reading the Telegraph. In fact like many Tories I have given up reading it altogether because of its inaccuracies.
But I am surprised you do believe it - it thinks your guy is a loony.
161 Hopi “I find it hard to understand why Cameron is even prepared to undermine Osborne by leting this Clarke story spin on, eith consciously or by inaction.”
My guess would be that the reason is that Cameron is negotiating some role (but not Shadow Chancellor) for Clarke. If so, it will be as part of wider reshuffle. Osborne and Hague are unlikely to be moved, however.
157. spin u-turn
132 - That’s an excellent post, Hopi - you should flesh it out into a few 200 word articles, as it would make a good magazine piece.
163 - I would be astnished if Rod Crosby couldn’t confirm or deny that within 15 minutes.
141. Obama has very similar economic plans to Brown as far as I can tell - borrow to spend despite large deficit. he is unlikely to let Brown take all the credit for the idea, especially as he will get more flak if it goes wrong.
170 Now you are just trying to talk sense. There’s no place for going off at such a tangent on here today.
When Obsorne is the topic - frothing is the order of the day.
166 or anyone else for that matter: what is the difference between a budget deficit and national debt?
It is hard to reconcile the stat you give about our deficit with the fact that in ters of overall debt the UK is nowhere near the worst performer and even withthe stimulus package announced by Brown and Darling we will not be close to Japan, Italy, France etc in terms of overall debt.
How does this work?
158. No, I think the German government has actually moved in policy terms. In that newsweek interview, The German Finance minister criticised Britain for “tossing around billions” on tax cuts on proposals that were developed too fast and untested and said:
” we are not about to collapse. We are just about to ratify our €31 billion stimulus in Parliament. As long as we haven’t even given that a chance to work, I am not going to participate in this bidding war over who can do the most. I try to exude a little steadiness and continuity instead”
A month later, the German stimulus packaage is being increased by 20 billion and will be including tax cuts he has opposed till now (although there is a CDU-SPD debate on what sort of cuts and targetted at who).
Sounds like tossing aound billions in fastly developed proposals to me!
Ken Clarke would certainly be an elderly Cabinet Minister.
Even older than the illustrious Mr Prescott, who stood down from Senior Office aged 69.
170 - but presumably Grieve is…
175. You might have considered finding out such basic details before pontificating on the matter, don’t you think?
176 - Is it not also the case that the VAT cut is only one aspect of the UK’s stimulus package?
170. Sounds reasonable, but what role could Clarke be appointed to that would not be seen to undermine Osborne but still be of interest to him?
As I said, the only thing I can think of is Home/Justice, but would clarke really want to give up everything for that?
Con home says “don’t bring back KFC”
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2009/01/six-hopes-for-a.html
176 Hopi - Perhaps. But the central point remains. The German public finances are in good shape, and the markets recognise that in the credit default swap rates. Britain is seen by the markets as more risky. I wonder why?
179 - I never have. I would like to though.
Can you help?
164. Lord Randolph Churchill was appointed Chancellor at the age of 37, in 1886…
Osborne can’t beat that record, but he will beat Austen Chamberlain (39 in 1903)
183 The Euro.
181 Hopi what role could Clarke be appointed to that would not be seen to undermine Osborne but still be of interest to him?
Dunno. (There’s a straight answer for you!)
Perhaps to shadow Lord Mandelson, as various people have suggested, but as you correctly pointed out that would give rise to speculation about splits between Clarke and Osborne. Perhaps some new role which is not a portfolio as such? We shall see…
185. Thanks Rod.
169. Sally. I don’t think the Telegraph is the font of all wisdom, but I also don’t think their reporters are in the habit of lying about their sources. Neither do I think this of the Spectator, the Mail or the Sunday Times. Even though they disagree with meI might be dubious of the absolute veracity of reports in the Star.
Exaggerate the story for effect, perhaps, have a clear perspective on what the story “means”, definitely. pass on a favoured sources perspective uncritically? Sadly, all the time, but most pol corrs don’t outright lie.
So the story stated that multiple Shadow cabinet members said this to them. To me, that means they have spoken to a minimum of two shodow cabinet members.
169 especially when socialists like Rosa Prince write as political correspondents. bound to get an accurate , unbiased view.
@182:
Hey, if that Idiot Savant Montgomerie thinks it’s a bad idea, I say “go for it, Dave!”…
186. So why are the Greeks and the Italian swap rates so high ?
176. No one here will really care what’s going on abroad when it becomes clear that the UK financial Stimulus has not worked and has been money down the drain in the most part.
192 They’d be even higher outside the Euro.
O/T - the Nationwide consumer confidence index, part of which Anthony Wells used in his interesting recent article, had its December release today.
The net balance of optimism/pessimism about the UK economy in 6 months (which Anthony used in his analysis) deteriorated to -28 from -23 in November and -11 in October. If Anthony’s analysis is right, this could mean bigger Tory leads in the next set of polls.
Other interesting details -
Overall index at a new record low
Big deterioration in employment prospects
Small majority expecting lower income in six months - first time this subindex has been negative
191. He also says that Villiers should be kept. Speaking as a Labour partisan I pray for her return to a frontline economic brief.
193. Apologies for missing out my commas btw
194. You don’t really know what you are talking about do you ?
@196:
Dave has many far more talented women he needs to be using, but I have to admit, I do find Villiers’s one-woman vendetta against BAA to be very entertaining.
196. Agree with you there, she’s hopeless.
196. For once Hopi Sen is talking sense - Villiers is a complete nonentity.
183. talking about swap rates to compare national economies is nearly as ridiculous as the endlessly tedious forex discussions that some Con supporters on here managed to sustain for several weeks when the pound was falling.
179 - Panic not, I have worked it out now
199. yep, but who are these women that he needs to be using? at the moment Con party women are invisible, hence they are doomed to remain nonentities
The VAT cut has been a major help, possibly a life saver to companies who pay VAT. How else do you get funds quickly to companies?
153: We don’t do ‘hate’ much in Broxtowe - national controversies come through with a dampening, mild echo. I wouldn’t say that more than 20% are passionately anti-Tory, and in the same way no more than 20% are passionately anti-Labour. That’s why it’s a marginal…
202.
oh dear oh dear.
BBC : 1 in 10 shops will close in 2009.
13 Henry G Manson, just to say thanks v much for the tennis tip.
208, the fruits of Brown’s economic genius.
66. i expect a cut but don’t understand why 1.75% is 20/1?
208 - what the figure for a typical year? 1 in 10 does not shock me - shops shut all the time.
206 - Nick, Interesting that your local Labour party is organizing a protest against a Tesco’s application which will be considered by a Planning Committee on which you famed Lab-LibDem coalition will have a clear majority. But of course planning issues transcend party politics, don’t they?!
212. usually about 7pm
Planning issues are decided centrally. If local councillors want to vote against Tesco they will be threatened with an appeal which would cost the council money that it hasn’t got.
Worst case, Tesco could claim that the councillors were acting unfairly and they might be personally liable OK, OK, a small chance but would your wife/husband allow you to risk the family home?
205. For most companies the VAT cut makes no difference at all. VAT registered companies receive VAT on their sales, pay it on purchases, then pay the difference over to HMRC. There is a small benefit to non-registered businesses, or registered businesses who decided not to pass the VAT cut on by continuing to sell at the same VAT inclusive price.
Some companies will have a small cashflow advantage, but on the whole it is only consumers who will see any advantage.
SO @175: It was just about the yearly deficit, not the total owed. We’ve been running 3% to 3.5% since 2002/2003, which is ridiculous in a boom. The EU were publically warning Brown about it for years, eg here in January 2006….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2006/jan/07/politics.europeanunion
Brown dismissed this, convinced of his own genius. In reality, all he was doing was buying votes with a structural deficit, taxing tomorrow’s voters rather than today’s.
Mr Jones, your coat.
re 182. What a truly amazing comment by Tim Montgomerie on CONtinuityIDS on Ken Clarke. He writes “.. Since last month my opinion on this has hardened as I was reminded of the ways in which Ken Clarke held the Major government to ransom”.
What complete rubbish. It was the the Euro-loons who caused the problems and held Major to ransom.
Tim, of course, used to work for IDS - one of Major’s famous “bast*rds”.
206: Thanks Nick. Turning all of the anti-Tory 20% into a “Pro-Nick” vote will be the trick then.
I suppose some Lib Dems and others would fit into both 20% anti- groups though.
Mike but VAT is charged on the value added by a transaction. Assuming the firm is breaking even the costs of making and packaging and distributing the product, that are not bought in - which are mainly wages are now charged at 15% instead of 17.5% - a major reduction.
219 Crazy Stuff. Ken Clarke virtually personifies the Tory majority. If the Tories can’t embrace people like Ken they will deserve to remain an IDS inspired rump.
@222:
Do not make the mistake that Tim frequently does of believing that he speaks for anybody but himself.
BTW, for admirers and supporters of George Osborne in these troubled times, I have helpfully pointed out on my Blog a very good policy reason why David Cameron should not want Ken Clarke anywhere near his front bench on economic issues.
Just trying to be helpful in ensuring someone from a manufacturing background keeps his job. *cough*
202 ed “talking about swap rates to compare national economies is nearly as ridiculous as the endlessly tedious forex discussions that some Con supporters on here managed to sustain for several weeks when the pound was falling.”
Thanks for the economics lesson, ed. Now can we move on to Lesson 2. “Why governments can’t borrow unlimited amounts”.
As I posted above: if there’s no problem with exchange rates of swap rates, why does Brown not borrow twice as much? (Admittedly, he probably will..)
215 - Your second paragraph is not correct, at least as far as the planning process is concerned. The company might indeed argue that a refusal by Councillors, particularly if the application had been supported by Officers, was so unjust that it would ask an Inspector to award its own appeal costs to the Council. For a major public inquiry, this could amount to many thousands of pounds, but would be borne by the Council not individual members.
They could only be held personally liable if a Court ruled that the breach of process was so egregious that members would become personally liable.
225 ..exchange rates OR swap rates..
219, 222 - Must surely be the ONLY issue on which Martin Coxall, Mike Smithson, “Smiley” Jonathan, and sweet little me are all at one. Yuk, how I loathe ConLoon.
225. i think he probably will borrow quite a bit more, as will other countries.
there are plenty of arguments against (and for) doing so, but comparing the rates of german, italian, and british gilts is not one of them
229 ed - So the limits are what, exactly?
@228:
I’ve met Tim Montgomerie several times, and he seems a genuinely lovely guy.
However, I can’t abide his ConHome empire building, and the way he insists on portraying his rather fringe Christianist GOP-esque politics as something adhered to by most Tories.
Maybe Isaby will be a moderating influence.
Runnymede @ 195. Good spot - I heard that on the Today programme this morning, meant to do a post about it but then forgot all about it!
re 152/165 I’m all intrigued by John Young now, but can’t find anything fascinating on that page.
Mentioning the euro, there’s been a big rebound in sterling’s rate against it over the last couple of days and is now trading at close to £1 = €1.10. Parity scare over (unless the ECB doesn’t cut rates as now expected)?
On topic, no, Cameron hasn’t gone too far as hardly anyone’s noticed what’s been said. I don’t honestly see that the gains that such a move would bring could outweigh the disadvantages, so I don’t expect it to happen. But then again, I said the same about Obama appointing Hillary as SoS.
Clarke is better off where he is: a big beast on the backbenches, able to weigh into the debate as and when appropriate, with all the extra authority that comes with the independence of not being in the shadow cabinet. It avoids another clash over outside interests, it avoids clahes over the Euro (and I agree with the comment earlier that Hague’s comments may well have been provoked by this speculation), and with the best will in the world, Clarke’s no spring chicken these days.
If the Conservative front bench wants to make better use of him (and it should), they should be pushing him to appear on TV and radio as much as possible. Apart from anything else, it’s much easier for a backbencher to refuse to answer what a Tory government would do as he can credibly say that he’s out of that loop and not his decision.
224 Thanks for the helpful comments, Hopi. In return, may I remind you that there’s a very good policy reason why Gordon Brown shouldn’t have any say in the government’s economic policy, as he is so very heavily identified with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule_(fiscal_policy)
Remember that?
231 - I’ve not had the pleasure but will take your word for it. Yes, it’s the over-weening presumption of messianic proportions that truly grates with me too.
230. as with all finances, borrow within your means, buy stuff you can afford.
229. From whom?
231 Just underlines what an odd coalition the modern Tory party has become.
The conHome crowd are almost the antithesis of the classic post war pragmatic Tory that Clarke represents. They don’t sit very well with the free market ultras or the new young grandee/NottingHill tribe.
237. Come on Ed, you can do better than that. If you are going to pretend genuine understanding of this topic you had better be prepared to debate the detail, not retreat into meaningless platitudes.
I’ve not met him in person, but he writes a gentlemanly email, and that is no mean skill!
If I were a Tory, I probably wouldn’t be on the IDS wing, but you’ve got to admire ConHome for what it is. It’s a good activist resource, the branding is good, and it’s muscled its way into a stronger and more influential position than almost any other right-wing blog. Getting Isaby was a coup as well.
I don’t spend a lot of time there (unless PtP convicts me of offences against grammar and syntax) but for PB.com’s prison camp, it’s a very good site.
(FWIW - I didn’t realise that CONtinuityIDS wasn’t its real name for about a year…)
237 ed - Ah! Now we’re getting somewhere. And given that the public finances are deteriorating very rapidly on a number of fronts (VAT receipts, corporation tax, property taxes, etc, on the revenue side, and social security payments on the other side) ‘borrowing within your means’ implies keeping public expenditure under reasonable control - exactly as the Conservatives have been saying. This is especially true because of the structure of the UK economy, with its heavy dependency on financial services and its high levels of personal debt.
236. A slightly different perspective- I completely agree about the oddness of Conhome political positioning, but Montgomerie has at least gone out and built something new that works. The attempts to set up moderate tory versions have been pretty poor (what happened to that platform10 or whatever it was called?)
For the same reason, although I often disagree with Liberal Conspiracy, I try to quiet myself because Sunny and co have done something I couldn’t do in finding and maintaining an audience.
I console myself with the thought that it is far easier to find an audience when one speaks in opposition, even to ones own party (not that LibCon is a “labour” blog).
ARGH!
Two posts just disappeared. Here’s the bare minimum with no link:
The Evenign Standard reports Iceland is to sue us for using anti-terror legislation to freeze their assets.
#176 Bit embarassing though, the German stimulus looks to be about 2% of GDP, the US stimulus around 7% of GDP, and the UK stimulus around 1%.
239 Jonathan “what an odd coalition the modern Tory party has become”.
Not really. No odder than a coalition which contains Lord Mandelson, Frank Field and Dennis Skinner, to name just three. All major parties (and most minor ones) are ‘odd coalitions’.
And in defence of ConHome, it does give space for other points of view within the party.
235. I think the two things are very different. I’d argue that as circumstances change, so should policy responses, which means it’s obviously fair enough to debate the justifications/attack the reasons behind policy moves “so why did you shange your mind, eh?”, but that’s very different to a complete difference in opinion on current policy between two principals.
So if potential Shadow Business Sec Clarke says a VAT cut was the best way to stimulate the economy and Cameron thinks it’s a “criminal waste of money”, one of them will need to give way.
221
Wow!any company that relies on those crumbs to stay afloat is already on death row and it’s a matter of when not if.
I think that Clarke’s comments on VAT are the biggest barrier to him returning at the moment. That circle needs to be squared.
139. NickP I like and respect you and therefore caution against reading too much into the return to the fold of Guardianista types.
I’ve been there. Being a Tory activist in 1997 was far easier than it had been in 1994/5/6. It is almost universally forgotten that in May 97 we regained many of the County Councils that we had lost in the nadir 4 years before. Our committe rooms were far better staffed in 97 than they had been for years and the threat of letting Labour back in motivated our version of the Guardinistas to come out and vote/help. The net result was still a landslide defeat.
I’m glad Left inclined people are attending your meetings and offering you help. You deserve it. I just don’t think it makes much difference to the result once the electoral wind has changed.
247, 249, I watched a repeat of the last big debate on economics (PBR, I think) recently and I think Clarke stated he said that VAT could only be cut if the public finances were in a fit state. And they aren’t.
245. I wonder what the response on here would be if we had a deficit like the US’s and announced a 7% GDP stimulus….
.. though of course the fact that T-Bills went negative last month means the US government won’t have too much trouble raising the money..
..and besides, it’s great news that the US will bei doing all it can to stimulate demand, Should be good news for British companies and the parents of British companies. We get a big share ofthe benefit without having to pay for it.
247 But Hopi, the whole point about the Golden Rule was to ensure that public finances were in a good state, by reducing borrowing during the good times to allow more flexibility during the bad times. That was in fact was Labour did in its first term, as the economy improved under the policy inherited from Ken Clarke. Sometime during the second term Brown throw it all away and public expenditure went out of control. We are now paying the price.
Of course, it’s a fair point that the current economic climate is worse than just a normal ‘Boom and Bust’, and that therefore you would have to allow borrowing to increase more now than in normal circumstances. The problem is that we are starting out badly-placed to do this, thanks to one Gordon Brown.
246 “Not Really”. Well we’ll see if and when Cameron tries to lead them in office. The IDS wing should be easy to handle though for now since the GOP has been so discredit. My chagrin is that the human Clarke tendency to date has been too far from the levers of power.
Labour is has always been and will always be a diverse mixture of people, groups and minorities. It’s almost the raison d’etre of the party. Without doubt there are Labour MPs who rationally speaking should be in the same party to put it very mildly. Makes it all the more entertaining.
251. Which would then put the Tories back in the “Do nothing” box they’re fighting so hard to get out of. If Clarke says the most effective way of stimulus is VAT, but we can’t afford it, well you can’t easily propose something else “less” effective for more money can you?
252. I’d be sh*tting myself even more. The USA is heading towards an even bigger ostrich scenario than Broon.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/4125947/Willem-Buiter-warns-of-massive-dollar-collapse.html
242. i don’t think any of the main parties agree with you, actually, the Cons have dramatically moved away from the “blame Brown and advocate spending cuts” approach in recent weeks, probably for fear of being fenced into a “tory cuts” corner ahead of an early election.
they have now joined Lab and the LDs by coming up with a new arguably impractical tax cut/economic stimulus each week.
221. Icarus, it doesn’t matter what rate VAT is to a VAT registered business. It does not affect profit a single penny.
VAT registered businesses simple act as tax collector for the government, handing over VAT that they have charged their customers after deducting the VAT they have been charged by their suppliers. It is only the end consumer (or non-registered VAT business) that ever pays VAT that is not recoverable. Hence only they will see any saving.
255, uh no.
The false dichotomy you present of “Cutting VAT by 2.5% whilst stores are already slashing prices by 60% or not doing this cut” is, as cunningly inferred by my brilliant use of the word ‘false’, not true.
The VAT cut (if carried on for the proposed period of time, to use a Brownism) will cost circa £12bn. The Tory proposals announced yesterday cost about £4bn. They will also do something for savers and encourage saving, which will assist banks in their recapitalisation which may help ease borrowing.
250 You know I really applaud posters like you, Concanvasser. You are not only fair-minded but you clearly have first hand experience of the hard work and daily grind of active Party support. This contrasts dramatically with the empty noise of our resident tubthumpers who have probably never knocked on a door or filled out a canvass return in their lives.
Please keep posting, more often if possible.
254 Jonathan - No, I think you are reading this wrongly. Cameron is very much of the ‘human Clarke tendency’ but without the EU baggage and (IMO) with more grit. So, in a future Cameron government, the levers of power will be firmly in the hands of the centre.
But I did enjoy your point that diversity is OK in the Labour Party but not in the Conservative Party!
257. Two points on Tory tax cut proposal:
1. Funded by unspecified spending cuts - looks like their high speed rail link to the north may be out the window then.
2. Aimed at encouraging people NOT to go down to the High Street and spend their money. Good news for small business then.
Hm, excessive use of “then” as last word in a sentence. Have to try and stop doing that then.
@260:
Oi, it’s possible to be a tubthumper and a ground pounder, I’ll have you know, PtP!
261. Clarke = Bloke, Cameron = Chap. There lies the difference, which is why I don’t think you can equate the two.
261 The problem with Cameron is that no-one really knows what he believes in. You’re just pouring your own hopes into him. You may well be disappointed. He was perfectly happy to write a right wing manifesto for Howard.
258 Imagine an item that was sold to the consumer for £10 in November, was also sold for £10 in December. If the govt receives less VAT on the sale in December, who pockets the difference?
I really wonder whether Tory comments describing the 2.5% VAT cut as meaningless is just cover for them to raise VAT by a meaningless amount (20%)
We already know that all Tory govt raise VAT.
262. We have lived beyond our means these past 10 years. Way, way beyond. And Brown’s solution is to go even further than that. I appreciate the rationale but if we want to make sure a bust of this nature doesn’t happen again we have to wean ourselves off this huge level of debt. And I think encouraging savings is a smart thing to do.
Sod it, I don’t want a government who promises me the earth when the public purse can’t afford it.
More savings = more money for the banks to lend. Not rocket science.
256. I think Willem’s personal prejudices are intruding just a little there, though, don’t you?
‘The past eight years of imperial overstretch, hubris and domestic and international abuse of power on the part of the Bush administration has left the US materially weakened financially, economically, politically and morally,’
259. the only way these can reasonably be compared is (a) size (b) general skew towards any section of the population.
the VAT cut is obviously bigger but still relative small fry, and is biased towards people that are spending money.
the savings cut is aimed at modest savers.
debate should be about (a) how much stimulus is appropriate (mixed messages on this from both parties)
(b) whether there should be any skew and if so, who should benefit? should it be spenders or savers or borrowers
263 Martin
If you’ve pounded the ground, you’ve earned the right to thump the tub!
Seriously, my point is that the party grafters tend to respect their opponents and it shows.
266. there is a certain amount of friction in the system though, so encouraging a certain level of savings will probably not translate into banks lending out to small businesses in time to save those businesses. it may well improve the situation of many peoples personal balance sheets.
267. But wouldn’t a small business prefer to have cash coming in through the tills rather than via a loan from their bank?
268-He obviously forgot to mention one or all of Kyoto, global warming, climate change, drowning polar bears or some such mumbo jumbo. So, obviously impartial.
246. The difference is that all those Labour MPs you mention share a desire to improve the lives of the most disadvantaged in society and a belief in equality. This is the raison d’etre of the Labour Party. What’s the Tories central purpose?
I think you’d get very different views if you asked Iain Dale, Guido Fawkes and Tim Montgomerie.
274 “What’s the Tories central purpose?”
To govern, G. That has always been it’s central purpose. Always will be. Sometimes it forgets, but then it remembers again.
We should be grateful for that, even those of us who rarely vote Conservative.
270 PtP - Are you still a long-term Labour seller/Conservative buyer on the spreads? I closed my position (having done a little short-term trading last month), since I don’t see obvious value at the current levels with the current opinion poll data. This is because, although I expect a steady shift away from Labour as the job losses mount, the spreads are already factoring this in.
246. Mandelson a believer in equality and helping the poor?…haha
260 & 270. Thanks for that Peter, you cheered me up!
Re respecting your political opponents, it helps if you are married to one of them! Two of the greatest influences on my life (my late grandmother and my wife) were/are stuanch Labour party ladies.
262: ‘Aimed at encouraging people NOT to go down to the High Street and spend their money.’
Ah, I remember the 1980s when the Tories were vilified as the party of reckless consumerism. Who said Thatcherism’s dead? It’s alive and well today in the pronouncements of leftist ‘Keynesians’.
275 Grateful? Yours is surely the most damning description of the Conservatives ever written on pb.com. Government for it’s own sake.
#252 The point is that Paul Krugman implies that the stimulus needs to be around 1.4% of GDP [he's arguing for a bigger US stimulus], to mitigate 1% of unemployment, ergo our 1% stimulus will have little effect; it’s a squib.
it’s = its
220 - yes, Sandy, that sums it up well!
250 - concavassser - yes, it makes life nicer and helpes campaigning if you have a motivated segment of the electorate (2005 people were generally friendly enough, but few were positively keen), but I agree one shouldn’t get carried away with it. What makes Broxtowe so interesting is that it’s got chunks of almost every voting group - apart from those mentioned, there is a former mining area, a commuter belt, some extremely wealthy streets (one is the 10th wealthiest in Britain), several villages, and an area which is essentially an outer bit of Nottingham. Apart from ethnic minoorities (4%) and farmers (virtually none) we’ve got some of everything, and winning here represents an interesting job of coalition-building.
A by-election due Feb 26 will be in a C1/C2 commuter area - safe Tory last time and one of the largest wards in Broxtowe, but with a significant BNP presence.
I hope the pound rebounds some more. Just booked a ski trip to Italy next month.
280. Sanctimony alert…
Richard Nabavi- Strong words from me.I think that the Spreads are the very worst way of getting with the Tories or opposing Labour.
I did a little ‘fun’ exercise with mythical Options and this exercise convinced me that I am right to stick with my positions; namely a Sell of the Tories at 334.0 and a Back of them everywhere else in every odds market I can find.
All this is medium term.Eventually I will switch to all-out Tory Backing mode.
News from israel that a the proposal for an Egyptian/Jordanian buffer force in Gaza is being pushed.
278 Well that’s a very strange alliance, Concanvasser, but I don’t suppose it’s illegal.
Good luck and best wishes.
276 Still a long-term seller, Richard. Others may have different strategies which may work better but I remain confident in mine.
HNY btw.
Can’t see Cameron bringing Ken Clarke back unless it is just to fight a forthcoming 2009 General Election. I would have voted for Clarke for leadership in 2005 and I think that Labour would have been out of office by now if the party had gone the same way.
233. try
http://tinyurl.com/8gmka4
On the VAT “cut” - I am a self employued VAT registered contractor. My costs are mainly non-VATable, whereas my output is VATable. I am therefore on a flat rate scheme. Before the tax cut, I charged VAT at 17.5% and paid it over to the government at 12.5%. So for every £1000 of income, I made a profit of £50 on VAT (which is supposed to cover the VAT I pay on purchases but do not claim back). Now I charge VAT at 15% and pay it over to the government at 11%. So for every £1000 of income, I make a profit of £40 on VAT.
I am £10 per £1000 earned worse off under the new VAT rules. Can someone explain to me how this is a tax cut? It is another of Browns tax rises disguised as a giveaway. This tax cut will probably cost me about £800 this year.
287 Oh dear - just re-read and it does make it sound a bit like I’m Caligula! I hasten to add two very seperate females.
288 PtP.Maybe I should change my name by deed-poll to U.R.Others !
Disagree vehemently with your strategy.
286, 288 URW & PtP - Many thanks. It’s an interesting judgement. The polls towards the end of Jan/early Feb may provide a bit more of an indication of which way the wind is blowing.
Happy New Year!
292 What u get up 2 in the privacy of your own home…
Anthony Wells reakons with the publics confidence for the economy falling again, Labours poll rating may well drop in the first 2009 polls;
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1783#comments
HNY-Richard.I voted for you as Most Promising Newcomer….which you were ! I also have a lot of time for Penny4Them because she single-handedly created a new market on Betfair.Also I have a lot of respect for P.Magnan.
Forget the polls ! The polls obviously will change the perception,but what I have discovered is that a Spread Bet for CONS/v LAB is the very worst way to go if you are of that opinion.
It doesn’t matter(to me) what your opinion is; what matters is the chosen instrument for expressing that opinion.
re 51 Well the Indy does have some redeeming features with more on how new Labour and police abuse have now made photographing public buildings a terrorist act. The worrying thing is that the police are so flagrantly abusing these laws with seemingly complete impunity. Who knows what they’d do once they’ve run your ID card through the scanner?
Still I suppose if we’ve done nothing wrong (like Mr Powell)….
293 It really depends on where you are starting from, URW (UROthers?). I have good Labour sells but also many other hedge-like positions including a very strong NOM position on Betfair. It can be a bit misleading then to say what my main startegy is. Nevertheless I think it is a good idea to have a strategy, although it’s equally important not to stick too inflexibly to it and definitely NOT ignore the wind shifts.
Good luck this year. Looks a bit barren on the Political front which is why I am concentrating more on the horses for the time being.
afternoon all, frnkly I dont think the electorate is the slightest bit interested in who David Cameron brings on to the front bench or not. Ken Clarke has been on our TV screens arguing the Tories case and demolishing Brown Central’s arguments and so called “rscue package” for weeks so I bet most voters think he is already part of Dave’s team!!
I doubt the 30,000 Woolworths staff or 1000 M and S staff joining the dole queues frankly care.
the role of famous companies which durvived the Great Depression and 2 world wars but have failed to survive Gordon Brown’s total mismanagement of the British economy continues to grow. Wedgewood was making china when Wellington was licking the French at Waterloo but in Brown’s Britain too many people don’t know what a plate, knife and fork are for. But then given the tasteless trash running the country, is it hardly surprising.
Murray annihilating his poor opponent in Qatar
Odds for the Aussie Open are now quite telling:
Federer 3.7
Murray 4.5
Nadal 5.24
Djokovic 7.0
Tsonga 20.0
Others 50ish (Davydenko, Del Potro, Gulbis, Simon, Fat Dave)
In other words, we go into a slam with a British player only a fraction off joint favourite. Who would have believed that a few years back?
It’s entirely realistic too imo - Djokovic looks overrated, despite TMC he looks off form and just got bounced out of Brisbane by Gulbis. Nadal shows no signs of knowing how to win a hard court slam. My money went on Murray a few months back (550ish at 6.0), but that price is long gone.
Of the above, best value now would be with Tsonga imo - I’d favour him to beat Nadal again, probably Djokovic on current form, and he’s a challenging style of opponent for Murray. If he can maintain consistency, it only takes one of his good serving days in the final and he can win (especially if someone else takes out Federer first). Best price is 21/1, should be a lot lower imo. Still a long shot of course, but a tasty one.
HNYPtP !
It seems to me that almost every way you can get with the Tories is a good way.I say this purely with my betting hat on.I don’t have a doctrinaire hat suitable for this weather.
Like you,I am massively weighted towards NOM and have quietly been dumping bits of it in favour of a Tory Overall.
Did you notice that Sporting Index have been lowering Tory Seats ?
“Who knows what they’d do once they’ve run your ID card through the scanner?”
All the more reason to 1) Not vote Labour, and 2) RENEW YOUR PASSPORT ASAP.
301, I checked the market earlier. Murray’s odds have actually drifted, he was about 3.55 or something. Nadal’s were tighter too.
Cheers for the tip
304, bleh, I misread it for the Qatar Open. My mistake.
303 No, I didn’t notice, URW, but then hving set my positions for the long haul, I’m ignoring minor shifts like that.
Thanks for pointing it out anyway.
142. Cameron needs to decide whether he wants to be PM or be Osbourne’s pal. Clarke should have been back by now , at worst shadowing Mandelson. These clowns look like they are going to let labour off the hook just so they can keep all their pals in the Shadow Cabinet. They have been terrible since October , Brown has ran rings round them which says a lot. They need to get their act together or they are out of the running , sitting back hoping things get worse and people blame Labour is not going to be a successful plan. Osbourne has to be moved , he is dire and sounds like a silly wee boy , he will never make a COE.
Cameron needs to get serious and make some real decisions.
308, thoroughly wrong.
The Tories haven’t been great recently, but it’s unfair to lay the entire blame at Osborne’s door. Events conspired to rob the Tories of most of their conference coverage, whilst the media has transformed from savage wolves to obedient lapdogs for Brown, never questioning his dodgy stats and claims.
Osborne’s council tax freeze and the IHT stance of 2007 were both excellent measures. He does need to polish his media performance, and he absolutely should remain in post.
142. I have to agree. Th economic circumstances are such that it is no time to put forward Osborne to the country as the man to deal with the crisis.
He would be the youngest Chncellor for 123 years and the “no time for a novice tag” is going to stick and hurt the Tories.
310 OOPS.. that was supposed to be referring to 308.
310-That no time of a novice tag is another overused phrase. It is the exact antithesis of time for change, and just as meaningless:
2008, Obama - no time for a novice
1997, Blair - no time for a novice
and so it goes on.
298 Thanks for the vote, URW!
Will Nottingham High provide the 2009 betting movers? - new thread
310 Penny4Them - if there was going to be an election this Spring/Summer (as you believe) then “no time for a novice” might carry weight. Once though voters see that Brown/Darling haven’t averted a recession, its deper than forecast and their much vaunted expertise hasn’t delivered then “time for a change” is more important.
Lets see how the polls develop first half of this year, and more particularly post Budget.
302- Andrew
I agree that Djoko is overrated but Gulbis was clearly a very very tough first round opponent. he would have beaten Djok last year in the French open quarter final if he had not completely lost his nerve. Gulbis will not win the australian open but on a good day he can beat any of the favourites. remember that he was the only one (except Fed of course) to take a set against Nadal in Wimbledon last year.
Tsonga is one of the very best… when he’s healthy (he missed nearly half of last season and ended it ranked number 7 anyway) . If he plays like he did at the end of last season he will reach at least the semi-finals. It will be easier to assess his chances after Brisbane but if he does well his price will likely collapse…
Nadal, with the number 1 seed should have an easy first week but would probably be happy just to reach the semi-finals again.
I read somewhere that George Osborne was described as permanently looking as if he’s just had a good lunch. Perhaps this is why some of the shadow front bench have been ordered on diets. Still allowed two/thre/four salaries though …
Still (returning to the original topic of this thread) isn’t it about time that the Conservative Party made up their collective minds where they stood on Europe?
This is interesting! http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2009/01/tory_watchlist_of_potentially.html
219
Or boring rubbish, depending on what floats your boat.
‘Political Party pays attention to what its PPCs say in public shock’
I bet New Labour never do this!