Sean Fear on the power of incumbency
May 28th, 2010
Did this prevent a Tory majority?
It has long been the case that in American elections, incumbency has been an important factor. Until fairly recently, that was not considered to be the case in British elections. While it was acknowledged that Liberal Democrats could build up sizeable personal followings, the general view was that it was a very minor factor in the far more numerous Conservative/Labour contests.
This view must now be challenged, judging by the results from May 6th. Overall, in seats where Labour had a majority of 14% or less, in 2005 (the seats that the Conservatives had to win to achieve a majority) the swing from Labour to Conservative was 6%, 1% higher than the national average.
However, in seats which were being defended by Labour incumbents, the swing was reduced to 5.3%, whereas in seats being contested by new candidates, the swing was 7.3%.
This may not appear to be a huge difference, but it matters enormously in marginal seats. To put it into context, had Labour kept the swing down to 5.3% in all of these marginals, they would have lost net 9 seats fewer to the Conservatives, almost certainly sufficient to have made a coalition with the Liberal Democrats a distinct possibility. Had the swing been 7.3% across the board, then the Conservatives would have won an outright majority.
Striking differences can be seen in the same towns, between incumbents and non-incumbents. For example, in Milton Keynes North, where the incumbent was a Conservative, the swing to the Tories was 9.2%; in Milton Keynes South, where the incumbent was Labour, the swing was 6.2%. In Swindon North, where a new Labour candidate stood, the swing was 10%. In Swindon South, where the MP ran again, the swing was 5.5%. Most notably of all, perhaps, in Luton South, the swing to the Conservatives was 4.6%, while Luton North, where the sitting MP had distinguished himself during the expenses scandal, showed a rare swing to Labour of 0.5%.
Equally clearly, Conservative MPs who were elected for the first time in 2005, enjoyed a notable boost. On average, they enjoyed a swing of 7.5% in their favour, well above average. Were the pattern to be repeated with Conservatives elected for the first time on May 6th, Labour would need a big swing in their favour before they could expect to regain a substantial number of seats from the Conservatives.
As has been the case for some time, there was a substantial difference in the outcome where Liberal Democrat incumbents were defending seats, and where they stepped down.
Overall, Liberal Democrat incumbents suffered a swing against them of 0.6% to their nearest challenger, on average. New candidates suffered a swing against them of 5.1%.
Admittedly, this average conceals some huge variations in individual seats. Tim Farron, in Westmoreland & Lonsdale, enjoyed a swing of 12% in his favour; Lembit Opik in Montgomeryshire, suffered a swing against him of 13%.
Clearly, there is also a reverse incumbency effect. Many MP’s who had been heavily criticised, such as Lembit Opik, Jacqui Smith, Tony McNulty, Ann Keen, and David Heathcote-Amory, performed significantly worse than their parties did in their region. Equally, MP’s such as Kelvin Hopkins, Nick Palmer, Vernon Coker, Sara Teather, Grant Shapps, and Justine Greening, who were seen as effective, strongly outperformed their parties.
This must surely be a healthy development. MP’s who work well for their constituents ought to get an electoral reward. MP’s who don’t, should not expect to be automatically re-elected.
Sean Fear
MessageSpace Advertising
May not be doing Mr Woolas much good?
The implication seems to be that if more Labour MP’s had decided to fight this election instead of standing down then Labour could have done a lot better.
Looks as if this one will run and run.
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1241469_legal_challenge_to_woolas_election_victory
I was shocked how much incumbency seemed to matter in this election. Suggested to me a much more traditional view of the constituency MP re-emerging.
On the creation of more Peers, from the last thread:
I have never really liked the concept of an appointed legislature, however ‘effective’ it is supposed to be.
It rather discomforts me that, because the electorate might once or twice elected you to represent their constituency, and/or you served in government, you have the right to take a seat in the legislature for life.
To me that kind of runs contrary to the ‘vote ‘em in, vote ‘em out’ nature of democracy.
(Of course, some appointees haven’t even stood for election before or served in the Commons. Then you also get the accusations of cronyism and government control of the Upper House).
It wants ending, no matter how much their Lordships whine about it.
3.
“Mr Woolas said: “…… I am sorry that my opponent is such a bad loser.”
I am sure if he loses in court (possible imprisonment if found guilty) Mr Woolas will be a far worse loser. They’ll invite Joanna Lumley to the post-court party.
Independent thrashes Liberal in scandal-hit by-election:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/isle_of_man/10180165.stm
What a lovely sunny day it is here
Most unexpected.
Re Campbell on QT - I think the Coalition did the right thing, there’s nothing in it for them to put up a panellist who is responsible for what they say vs Campbell who will spout and then say he doesn’t speak for Labour despite doing exactly that.
Completely pointless. As Cameron said, HMG is not a branch of the entertainment business. I don’t have an issue with the odd bit of flippancy a la the racing tips since he was ambushed on it, but I don’t want to see HMG playing to the media’s tune whoever they are.
I can’t help feeling this a shot across the BBC’s bows.
Re Woolas - couldn’t happen to a slimier chap
I’m amazed he hung on - clearly his campaigning tactics helped…
I think its a bit more complex than this, to an extent only our best people were still candidates.
When yoiu had damaged MPs standing they got tanked.
wage slave @5:
I notice he makes no attempt whatsoever to refute the allegations made against him and his campaign.
Very interesting article, Sean. A couple of thoughts occur to me:
1) Are we seeing here a combination of better campaigning by incumbents over an extended period (compared with previous elections), combined with the effect of the Communications Allowance?
2) If it is better campaigning, then we might expect to see a similar effect benefitting those challengers who were selected early and who themselves campaigned well over a long period. Although I can think of a few examples (Berwick-upon-Tweed, Richmond Park), I don’t know whether the figures would back that up as a general point. If so, it’s an important lesson.
3) This election was an unusual one in many ways, not least the expenses scandal, but also confusion amongst the voters. Any effect might be a bit of a one-off.
Plato @7:
Should’ve just sent Andy Coulson along.
from previous thread
375.I have to say it seems like the tories on here are absolute clots that make osbourne seem like a tactical genius.
Why are you using your energy and time fighting this?
Stupid waste of capital for no reason.
I posted this at the bottom of the last topic. I would love to see Woolas lose this one.
Liberal Democrat Elwyn Watkins issues a legal challenge over Oldham election result
Posted by Helen Duffett on 28th May 2010; This entry is filed under Election law, News.
Tags: election petition, elwyn watkins, oldham east and saddleworth, phil woolas, representation of the people act 1983
The Liberal Democrat candidate for Oldham East and Saddleworth in the 2010 General Election has challenged the result.
Elwyn Watkins has submitted a petition for a hearing of an election court, alleging a breach of the Representation of the People Act (1983).
From the BBC:
Mr Watkins claims that Labour campaign literature, published and distributed he says with the consent of Mr Woolas, constitutes a breach of the act.
He said it was clear that some literature “contained numerous misleading and erroneous claims regarding my personal character and reputation, and that of my campaign”.
Under the act, anyone involved in an election campaign who “makes or publishes any false statement of fact in relation to the candidate’s personal character or conduct” is guilty of an illegal practice.
Mr Watkins’ complaints centre on an edition of The Examiner newspaper, an edition of the Labour Rose, and something called an “Election Communication” leaflet.
His said his case would focus on three areas: claims that he did do not live in the constituency, stories about him “wooing” Muslim extremists and an article regarding campaign financing.
Former Labour minister Phil Woolas beat Watkins by just 103 votes, following two recounts.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/liberal-democrat-elwyn-watkins-election-petition-oldham-east-saddleworth-19719.html
I would consider the SNP’s incumbent in Dundee East to have weathered the pro-Labour swing in Scotland at last month’s election. The result in 2005 went against the national trend and Stewart Hosie helped to blunt the last minute Labour advance in the seat that happened everywhere else.
Old Carp’s Almanac solemnly makes the following prediction: if Elwyn Watkins succeeds in his Petition, and there is another Old & Sad By Election, then Phil Woolas will give him the thrashing of a lifetime. Dockside hookers won’t be in the same league.
The public (believe it or not) don’t really like elections. It means that they have to see too much of politicians. And they like sore losers even less. Gerry Malone (Con, Winchester) will be able to tell Mr Watkins all he needs to know about the anger, hatred, contempt and sadism which the electorate visited upon him when he contested an election result on much firmer grounds than these.
Do the Lib Dems a favour, Watkins - take your punishment like a man, whether it is deserved or not.
How will this play out on all the bets for the Lib/Dems to win Oldham East if Woolas were to lose?
In horse racing they had the photo finish (with the two recounts), but now the 2nd has objected to the winner for interfering. !!!!
” (possible imprisonment if found guilty) ”
formally speaking, who will be held responsible if the legal challenge wins in court? The agent?
10 Communications allowance is no more….
15 - Not to mention all the Lib Dem MPs who would be looking nervously over their shoulder if this ridiculous application succeeded! Was noone locally able to talk him down from doing this?!
15 - AIUI If Elwyn Watkins wins this case then Phil Woolas will be disqualified as a result of his misconduct (either personally or by his agents). That puts it in a slightly different category to Gerry Malone/Winchester petition in 1997.
19. If all candidates described as “not live in the constituency” and “not being local” lodge a legal challenge…will there be any candidates left to run in the whole UK?
21 - It’s a waste of our time and their money
Perhaps Woolas would not want to be reminded about his expense claims.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5298364/Immigration-Minister-claimed-for-womens-clothing-and-panty-liners.html
How are panty liners a necessary expense in his line of work?
Clearly Nick Palmer of this parish was a very good example of incumbency. He came within a whisker of holding on when he should have lost by thousands.
Regarding Mr Woollas, if the LibDem candidate can establish that Joanna Lumley’s favourite former minister told serious porky pies then good luck to him and there can be few former Labour ministers more deserving of being prosecuted for lying.
Whether of course a re-run would result in anything other than a Winchester repeat is another matter. I gathered last night on SKY News that there is also to be a challenge in Northern Ireland. Was it Fermanagh and South Tyrone?
Good article Sean Fear.
It is possible that due to the expenses scandal that when (almost) all of the worst incumbents quit, they left demoralised constituency parties behind them. In addition, the remaining incumbents would be a better kind of individual, on average. I suggest that this means incumbency is more positively correlated with being a good MP in this election than in any other recent election.
In addition, when I look at your list “Kelvin Hopkins, Nick Palmer, Vernon Coker, Sara Teather, Grant Shapps, and Justine Greening”, I note that Shapps and Greening enjoyed the bounce that typically happens to MPs who win their second election. Tim Farron would be the classic example from 2010; Norman Lamb from 2005 enjoyed it as well. However, in their cases, they also got a large tactical Labour vote, which tends to defect immediately upon the election of a Lib Dem. At least until 2010, that is.
“I gathered last night on SKY News that there is also to be a challenge in Northern Ireland. Was it Fermanagh and South Tyrone?”
Yes.
And Dismore is thinking about challenging Hendon’s result
In many cases however this incumbency factor has been driven by public money, and not necessarily hard work by the sitting MP. The communications allowance and greatly increased staffing allowances (compared to 20 years ago) mean it’s much easier for an MP to campaign all year round at public expense. This is not a good development.
One for tim:
Toxicology tests have shown that two teenagers whose deaths were
linked to mephedrone and started a hysterical moral panic had not taken the drug.
The deaths of Louis Wainwright, 18, and Nicholas Smith, 19, in March 2010, sparked concern about the synthetic stimulant, which was then legal.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10184803.stm
F*cking Alan Johnson. What a useless waste of meat he was.
26 - “In many cases however this incumbency factor has been driven by public money, and not necessarily hard work by the sitting MP.”
Which cases specifically?
10. Good point about Berwick-upon-Tweed. That reminds me: It’s near-certain to go blue once Alan Beith retires, isn’t it?
28 - Tynemouth, for one.
In my patch, Wells, theres a good chance if they tories had selected someone else rather than Heathcoat-Amory, tainted by expenses, they would have held the seat.
Reading East and Reading West.
It definitely helped my MP Clive Efford keep his seat in Eltham. The swing against him was very low - around 2% I think. He was also untainted by expenses scandal, voted against Iraq war and most of his election literature was personal, ‘Everyone knows someone helped by Clive…’ (no mention of Brown).
Absolutely right, Sean.
Also Dudley N / Dudley S, Gisela Stuart etc etc.
Easterross @23:
Are there no ‘truth in advertising’ laws? If Frosties or Nescafe cannot make untrue claims, why should politicians be allowed to do so?
- or is it that political leaflets qualify as ‘free speech’ and so are above such mundane requirements as honesty?
@ Richard Nabavi
Early selections…here’s a list of Conservative selections made before end of May 2007
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/goldlist/2007/05/who-has-been-se.html
There’s some names who have resigned the party nomination before the GE and another candidate was selected (and so no “early selection” advantage there). However, it gives you a general idea to the seats to watch if you want to prove your idea
Expanding on Edward’s point, we have to be careful here about the direction of causation. It might be that MPs who realized they were likely to lose were more likely to stand down.
The power of incumbency in the U.S. in otherwise competitive districts derives overwhelmingly from three factors: money, cash, and greenbacks. If you had a campaign financing system similar to ours, you would also probably see much safer incumbents.
I recall at the hight of the expenses scandel, politians in general were seen as the lowest of the low, but, with a few notable exceptions, the local mp seen as ok.
I would have thought that the implications of this would have helped the increased incumbancy effect.
10. Thanks. Your point about years of campaigning by an opponent is interesting, and I’d want to look into it further.
Facing a challenger who is both very hardworking, and very well-funded, like Grant Shapps in 2005, or Zac Goldsmith and Richard Harrington, this time, must go a long way to outweighing an incumbency benefit.
15. Agreed. If your opponent claims that you’re corrupt or a paedophile, you should bring such a challenge (in 2006, a Lib Dem council canddiate in Waltham Forest brought a successful challenge after his Labour opponent had indeed told voters he was a child molester) - but otherwise, you’re just making a fool of yourself.
24 I think there’s definitely an element of self-selection here. I can’t imagine that Labour’s chances would have been enhanced had Barbara Follett, Margaret Moran, David Chaytor or Harry Cohen hung around to fight again. But, I still think there’s a real incumbency boost, as well.
32/34 Yes indeed, although Reading East had suffered a huge swing against Labour in 2005. Both the outgoing MP and the incoming candidate had got into hot water.
Vince lays it out on CGT….
Mr Cable said reforms to capital gains tax will be “fair for individuals and fair on businesses”.
He refused to give details on how the tax will be reformed, with details set to be unveiled in the budget on June 22, but said “it should affect business in a positive way”.
He said: “Taxation of individuals is different to that of business. We want to do what we can to encourage entrepreneurship and help business.”
What on earth does ‘fair’ mean? In leftie terms fair means increased..
The Times is reporting Des Browne is among those about to be made peers. This is the defence secretary people used to call Swiss Tony and not some other one I haven’t heard of?
“Fifa finds no basis to Lord Triesman allegations of referee bribery and will not pursue matter”
Now why doesn’t that surprise me…
I did find the Tory performance in Cardiff very interesting.
They picked up big swings against Labour in South and West, and a big swing from the LDs in central. But in North, their target seat - which presumably they spent plenty of money on, they only just made it.
- “While it was acknowledged that Liberal Democrats could build up sizeable personal followings… “
… and SNP MPs.
The last time an incumbent SNP MP (excluding by-election victors, and Labour-defector Dick Douglas) lost their seat was 1987, when Gordon Wilson was defeated by Labour’s John McAllion.
Now that Thirsk and Malton has been counted, it appears that the Conservatives with 10,726,614 votes have beaten Labour’s score in 2005 (9,552,436 votes) and 2001 (10,724,953 votes).
Andrea @26
I saw something about dodgy postal votes in Halifax - has that come to anything more?
Incumbents in Batley and Spen seems difficult to dislodge
42. “In leftie terms fair means increased..”
Whereas in rightie terms ‘fair’ only means frightful Alton Towers…
Superb article on the welfare mess
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/camilla_cavendish/article7138520.ece
With regards Fermanagh and South Tyrone I understand the Orange Five a side football team was in Scotland playing in a tournement and could not fly back to vote because their plane was delayed……..(smiley thing)
On incumbency - I went to bed on the night fearing the worst for Martin Horwood mp, defending a majority of 500 in Cheltenham (counting on Friday)as he had taken over from an incumbent in 2005. Next day I find he has had a 4.5% swing in his favour
48. Gasman, I think the police is looking at that. A court legal challenge wasn’t apparently launched because of time and money constraints.
@41/50:
This is a fundamental problem with the pursuit of “fairness” in public policy. Everyone wants it, nobody can agree what it is.
26 - I think today is the deadline for election petitions
I’m not entirely sure of the outrage over changes to CGT. It’s going to essentialy reverse Browns changes a few years ago. That was seen as a bad thing as ‘bad’ personal investment gains where then treated the same as ‘good’ business gains.
42 TimB
Probably ‘fair’ in the sense that money individuals receive should be taxed at similar rate whether it is derived through your own work or from owning an asset. Ultimately, these tax rates should be as low as possible to maximise growth but in the present deficit we will probably have to put up with a few years of higher tax rates.
Ideally we need to get as rid of as many of these different tax types and reliefs and have a system where investment decisions are influenced by growth potential rather than complicated tax schemes, eg. Gordon Brown’s film aid scheme
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250861/Stars-face-massive-payback-demands-HMRC-probes-2bn-film-tax-loophole.html
saramojtehed
Floaella Benjamin will be a lib dem peer
58. How many parish councillors will the ennobling?
51 - A family friend volunteers at CAB. He is a Oxbridge graduate and former top executive in a multi-billion pound a year company. Talking to him, he says the system is damn confusing and complex for him to understand, let alone the people who come through the doors of the CAB looking for help. He showed me some of the books he was provided with, omni-shambles doesn’t even go to start to describe the situation.
My partner has done some academic research in the field specifically relating to people with learning difficulties, benefits and work. It drove her absolutely mental a) firstly just trying to work out the actual situation many of these people were in, were they on the right benefits, what were they entitled to etc and b) the fact that a huge number wanted to work, but were repeatedly told not to by “the powers that be”, who were actually being employed to support them into employment. The reason being that they would lose their benefits / be financially so much worse off.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/28/hypocrisy-bbc-question-time
It is easy to jeer at the idea that one person has a different broadcasting value to another, but it’s true. Downing Street, let’s face it, had a reasonable point: in what way, exactly, does the unelected spin doctor, writer and journalist Alastair Campbell equate with a cabinet minister?
The police investigation in Halifax is into proxy votes involving a the Tory local election campaign. The Independent story at the weekend was about postal vote fraud in the parliamentary camapaign.
Those allegations have been referred to the police
http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/news/Demand-for-polling-day-probe.6323678.jp
58.
Ali G question applies methinks.
A lot more able people are not being made Peers.
Plato @51
Thought I’d post the top rated comment from the Times article about welfare and the impact on men. The other comments are equally angry about Labour’s client state/making themselves the father istead.
59 Andrea. Some time back I heard that there was a parish councillor in Great Addington, Northamptonshire called …. Nick Palmer !!
61. “in what way, exactly, does the unelected spin doctor, writer and journalist Alastair Campbell equate with a cabinet minister?”
That’s a defensible opinion that others may or may not share, but trying to impose that opinion on an independent broadcaster is another matter.
15.
“Phil Woolas will give him the thrashing of a lifetime”
It is quite likely, if Mr Watkins’ petition succeeds, then (even if not in Prison) Mr Woolas would be disbarred from standing for election anywhere.
And Malone’s petition was a pile of poo. He got the just deserts that befit any mate of Brillo.
torybear
RT @channel4news: The Queen has conferred a life peerage on former Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Ian Blair. <- f*ck that
JonathanD @57:
I’m starting to think that the ‘fair tax’ idea over here might be a goodie. (there’s that word ‘fair’ again)
Essentially - simplified in the extreme - you pick a number and send (say) 20% of your income above that as tax, no exceptions, no deductions etc. The number picked is such that it is way above the minimum wage and would take many lower paid out of the income tax system.
Tax is then levied at a higher rate (typically now it’s 6-8%) on spending rather than income.
Obviously there must be a mechanism for giving the taxes back and a subsidy to those who earn less than the number picked.
New working peers: 10 Con; 16 Lab; 6 Lib-Dem
Dissolution honours list: 6 Con; 13 Lab; Lib Dem 3; DUP 1
Excuse me, I have to go and vomit
http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2010/05/britains-new-peers-not-full-list-but-updating-rapidly/
‘New recruit for SNP (that’s Scottish Nappy Party)’
http://news.scotsman.com/news/New-recruit-for-SNP-40that39s.6326018.jp
Hearty congrats to John and Liz.
John Swinney is a thoroughly pleasant chap (unusually so for such a senior politician) and Liz is a friend of a friend of mine , and has had it tough with Multiple Sclerosis (she was diagnosed 10 years ago), so this is wonderful news for their friends, family and colleagues.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/scotland-has-more-cases-of-ms-than-anywhere-in-the-world-sufferer-elizabeth-quigley-who-last-year-wrote-movingly-about-her-illness-in-the-sunday-herald-is-determined-to-find-out-why-1.836898
65
Jack W, the “LD promoting Parish councillors to House of Lords” was first said by you some years ago
James Kelly @66:
Except that no-one did try to ‘impose’ that opinion. They merely declined to join in.
HoL most certainly can’t be described as the containing the Great and the Good anymore!
Another bizarre Miliband photo opportunity.
http://order-order.com/2010/05/28/friday-caption-contest-wacky-wonk-edition/#comments
Some new Peers:
John Presccot, John Reid, Des Browne, John Hutton and Quentin Davies
Richard Allan, Matthew Taylor and Phil Willis
Michale Howard, Michale Spicer, Simon Wolfson
Ian Paisley
TimMontgomerie
Bigotgate’s Sue Nye, Tory defector Quentin Davies and class warrior @JohnPrescott become Labour peers http://is.gd/ctbLk
Quisling Davies made a peer!!!
45 Punter, or Gwynfa may have information on that. I can only assume that Labour threw everything into holding Cardiff North, while ignoring the rest.
Cardiff Central looks like part of a trend whereby the Conservatives did suprisingly well in places which had had substantial Conservative votes in the past, but where they finished third in 2005 (eg Cambridge, Hampstead & Kilburn, Watford, Camborne, Hornsey & Wood Green).
71 - No General Dannatt…
Full list
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/9599/full_peerages_honours_and_appointments_list.html
Hilary Armstrong, Tommy McAvoy, Beverly Hughes, Helen Liddel, Jakc McConnell, Angela Smith, Paul Boateng, Jack McFall, Don Touhig, Jim Knight, Jon Cruddas’ wife, Sir Ian Blair…all to the Lords
these peerage lists are one of the worst things about british democracy.
74. Those arguing that the BBC were right to prefer Campbell over a minister have made much of “unelected” peers appearing as a precedent, but in the history of QT has the official Labour Party rep ever been an ex spin doctor?
Lord Blair of Stockwell….
83 - What’s democratic about them?
John Grummer, Angela Browning, Tim Boswell, Shireen Ritchie
John Shipley, Newcastle councillor
Why no Mark Oaten???
86: exactly….
70 Labour are already the largest party in the Lords, and they’ve just added another 29 to their total, compared to 16 Conservatives and 9 Lib Dems.
Adding nonentities like Quentin Davies and Ian Blair is a disgrace.
71. Is anyone going to argue against a wholly elected Lords now? (Well, apart from Don Touhig and co.)
Jack McConnell’s in there - I make that four Labour MSPs who are now double-jobbing at Westminster. Those attacks on Alex Salmond are ringing ever more hollow.
ARISE
Lord Prescott of Jaguarington
Lord Reid of Not Fit For Purpose
Lord Davies of Floor Crossing
Lord Hutton of Brown The F***ing Disaster
Lord Nye of Bigotgate
Lord Howard of Did Not Overrule
I remember back in the early 1970s, “I’m Sorry I’ll Read That Again” used to poke fun at the Honours List system - typical being the man who was made an earl and also given an OBE, thus becoming an earlobe.
But fast forward 35 years and we have “Lord Prescott of B Deck” and you just have to wonder if it’s not time to draw this whole honours system gracefully to a close before it gets even more tawdry.
Question regarding Gove’s Academies Bill:
Academies can currently select 10% of their intake for aptitude towards the school’s specialism, correct?
I presume that these arrangements will be carrying over to the new Academies we’re setting up?
According to the press release Sir Ian Blair is a crossbencher…FFS…can join the likes of Tanni Grey-Thompso as “independents” in the HoL…about as independent as Toilets Muckguire!
Jeepers Creepers: an awful lot of Scottish Labour dinosaurs in that list of new peerages.
Tommy McAvoy? Helen Liddell? Jack McConnell?
Lord preserve us.
91. Lord Browne of Switzerland.
at least Prescott ddint have to “loan” Labour any money for his peerage. Sickened by this list.
“Lord Davies of Floor Crossing”…no no no
Lord Davies of Bell-End…
Knighthoods to Ian McCartney
Dinky to the Privy Council
All these lords are just like nightmares from the past which refuse to fade away…
Do these people not want to frickking retire?
Slackbladder @99:
yes, but at your expense
94 Well, Ian Blair’s another one we can add to the Labour total.
“Do these people not want to frickking retire?”
They like all the expenses and perks available too much to retire…
100: too true. Someones got to keep prescott in sausage rolls and pork pies.
74/84. “but in the history of QT has the official Labour Party rep ever been an ex spin doctor?”
I’ve no idea, but the point is that it’s the BBC that decides who to invite from each party. It’s perfectly reasonable to decline that invitation if they wish, but to try to barter that person’s participation in return for the removal of someone you don’t like is (as I believe they say on EastEnders) bang out of order.
99. “Do these people not want to frickking retire?”
They have retired, on full taxpayers funded wages and expenses, with gold plated pensions to follow when they are too decrepit to actually make it to the chamber for their afternoon nap.
Privy Council
Alan Duncan
Nick Herbert
Greg Clarke
Dominic Grieve
Chris Grayling
Baroness Neville-Jones
Grant Shapps
David Willetts
Theresa Villiers
David Mundell
John Randall
Mark Francois
Nigel Dodds
Joan Ruddock
Baron West of Spithead
Carwyn Jones
Alex Fergusson
Knights:
Keith Hill
Ian McCartney
William O’ Brien
Lord Blair of St Ockewll and Shooting.
So Brown has given John Reid a peerage in his retirement list. LOL at that.
As much as I am disgusted by some many of those now in the HoL, the only problem with the call for an elected house is the worst of the worst would probably still be on their respected party lists. You think all the worst of the Labour lackies who got in this time wouldn’t have been near the top of any PR list? The same with the other parties. And the flip side, probably some of the more sensible appointments, say the guy who is head of Next, would probably never be in the picture.
108 Yes, well enobled, Dr Spyn!
respected -> respective
104. “it’s the BBC that decides who to invite from each party.”
Quite
From BBC
“Why did the beeb book Campbell? Clearly they were more interested in generating heated argument than constructive adult debate about important issues – as evidenced by the amount of time dedicated to endulging the irrelevant views of an alchoholic ex-spin doctor out only for his own engrandishment.
Maybe it was an own goal for the Gov not to put someone forward, however, it says more about the Labour Party that they are regularly represented by an un-elected alchoholic has-been with such a devisive reputation.
Perhaps Gavin Allen (Executive Editor, Question Time) thought the prospect of a punch up between Morgan and Campbell would serve the audiences interest better than constructive examination of the issues by elected representatives.
What point were the beeb trying to make by highlighting this at the start of the programe? And how impartial of them was it to allow Campbel to try to make a cheap joke at the end by producing a photo of Laws? I really have to question the sanity of a man who carry’s such a photo!
It strikes me the prgramme makers were more interested in ratings than producing a responsible informative debate about current issues! Really, does anyone think Morgan and Campbell would have changed their views about Iraq? Does anyone expect Campbell to say sorry when it was he who advised Blair not to say sorry?”
and
” pedthered wrote:
Since the BBC made such an error of judgement by accepting Alistair Campbell as the Labour representative, they cannot be surprised that the Government decided not to grace such daft behaviour with a representative.
Frankly BBC, you got the response you deserved.”
so no Ruth Kelly in the end?
110 Sad but true, Oracle, sad but true. In recent years, Peers of the Realm have been appointed either by God (Hereditary) or by the Prime Minister (life peers) - and it must be said that on balance, the Almighty has done a better job.
114 - Hasn’t she just taken a big city job? Too busy for this politics lark.
113. “Clearly they were more interested in generating heated argument than constructive adult debate about important issues – as evidenced by the amount of time dedicated to endulging the irrelevant views of an alchoholic ex-spin doctor out only for his own engrandishment.”
Behold the shocking state of literacy in Tory/Lib Dem Britain.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/7778734/Pigeon-held-in-India-on-suspicion-of-spying-for-Pakistan.html
78 Andrea. Another one of my historically prescient PB comments !!
No Lord Matlock of Beaconsfield …. again !!
69 TimB
Yes, if possible some sort of simple flat tax system on all income/wealth would be best. There may have to be a slightly higher rate as well to keep the lower threshold above minimum wage but a system like that would simplify the tax code and allow alot of accountants to do something productive with their lives.
117. “Behold the shocking state of literacy in Tory/Lib Dem Britain.”
Or SNP Scotland?
117, you can’t talk. Mr. Kelly. Labour wanted to rename the DTI ‘PENIS’.
121. “Or SNP Scotland?”
Only works if the comment in question was from a Scot!
Todays toady Peer list makes a great case for an elected 2nd chamber.
106. Andrea
Any reason why Alex Fergusson wasn’t already on the Privy Council? I assume he’s there because he’s Presiding Officer for the Scottish Parliament but he’s held that post for the whole of this term.
Baron Reid of Primarolo and Scorned.
http://blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/2010/05/28/david-laws-how-high-can-the-rising-star-of-the-coalition-climb
Split in the coalition Laws v Cable
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/6038703/laws-unto-himself.thtml
“A friend confirmed that for the past six months, as the official Lib Dem party line decided on by Vince Cable was no cuts, Laws had been telling friends he believed the markets wouldn’t tolerate it. ‘He has been saying privately the cuts have to start straight after the election,’ they said.”
124 - “Todays toady Peer list makes a great case for an elected 2nd chamber.”
As was previously pointed out there is no guarantee that electing them would result in any improvement in quality.
Plato @127
He’s got the Brown impression down to an absolute tee.
Labour Leader Betting
Balls @ 16s on betfair
Burnham on the drift : 13.5s
75s Abbot, 400 McDonnell
So no Lord Blair of Trimdon and Basra?
Not yet, anyway.
At least Paisley will wake the codgers up every time he gets up to speak!
129- Still, somehow is sounds better to have a legislative chamber composed of electable well-connected has-beens than unelected (and unelectable?) well-connected has-beens.
131 - I wonder will Paisley make a protest when the Pope addresses MPs and Peers in Westminster Hall! Or has he grown up a bit?
46
Stuart ,I think you will find that Gordon Wilson was not defeated until 1997!
132 - Meh, I’m not convinced. Ireland’s second chamber is mostly (indirectly) elected and is full of even bigger wasters than the lower house. I happen to think the HoL does a very good job as it is.
46.Stuart ,
Correction - it was indeed 1987!
132 Are you comparing Congress with the Supreme Court.
Bookies’ best prices - World Cup - England v USA (12 June)
England 8/15 various
Draw 10/3 Bet365, Victor Chandler
USA 13/2 bwin, Victor Chandler
OMG - what our money has been spent on…
http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/knit-a-tit/
135. There might be the same calibre of Labour wasters - but there would be less of them.
A shameless plug: I’ve got an article on the electoral impact of AV here:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2010/05/28/nick-palmer-ponders-the-politics-of-the-av-referendum/comment-page-1/#comment-493
- previously offered to Mike in more non-partisan form, but he felt it wouldn’t quite work as a pb.com piece. I wanted to draw atteniton to the way that AV will potentially change the electoral landscape in interesting ways.
Some good Lords appointments there IMO among some debatable ones. Hutton, for instance, will be an asset to the Lords, and to be fair it shows that Brown is big enough to get over someone calling him a f***ing disaster.
141
Do you plan to stand for election again Nick ?
Balls nominated according to http://www2.labour.org.uk/home
137- To some extent, sure! The Supreme Court is even more potentially dangerous than the House of Lords, though, since it has far greater powers. Unelected, unaccountable, and powerful institutions should always be viewed with a very wary eye.
140 - The number of Labour peers (as a proportion of the total) reflects their share of the GE vote quite well.
33 nominations for balls
Looks as if Balls now has a full house, or at least has passed the threshold.
http://www2.labour.org.uk/leadership-candidates/3/Ed_Balls
Ed Balls has scraped home to get the 33 nominees required.
Teresa Pearce is the 33th nomination for Balls
Balls still 16s on betfair for those that want a trading bet.
Seems like Teresa Pearce was the only nomination for anyone this afternoon.
144 / 147 - I cant believe Andrea was beaten to the news! I think there are still a few obvious Brownite names missing from Balls’ list so I would expect him to add to this in the future. Isnt this all good news for Miliband Junior though? If it comes down to him V his brother then surely Balls’ backers are much more likely to break for him?
150 Andrea. One might wonder now that Balls has coughed up the threshold that the numerous non declared MPs will assist Burnham over the line ?? …. IMO it will help.
153. I will hang my head in shame!
153 - Logically, under AV it shouldn’t make too much difference who your extra opponents are when it comes to your head-to-head battle. However extra opponents change the tenor and tone of the campaign, especially the debates, so the other runners may yet have an effect on Mili v Mili preferences.
Also, some voters may not cast full ballots and just put e.g. Balls 1, which would implicitly damage the candidate they would have voted for otherwise.
152- DM Andy, I guess many MPs are back to their constituency today and so not available to sign the papers
154- Jack, possibly. We should do a list of “available” MPs
Neil @153:
Yes, I think that is right. In addition, I think it is reasonable to assume that Ed M is more likely to get votes from supporters of Diane Abbott and John McDonnell (whether or not they are nominated) than David M.
153 Neil. Andrea wasn’t beaten, it’s simply not possible. He occasionally allows others to gather the odd laurel to encourage youth and re-skilling in the long term idle. It’s very Coalition thinking !!
Jack W @159:
Does 30 count as “youth”? If so, 2/2, Jack.
Nick Palmer @142:
Yes, but on the other hand if he wasn’t big enough to get over that sort of thing, he’d have had an embarrassingly small number of names to put forward.
*STOP PRESS*
The babe-i-liscious Susie Squire is back!
http://order-order.com/2010/05/28/susie-squire-slips-in-to-spinning-at-the-dwp-for-ids/
160 Aaron. I regard under 70 as youth !!
Jack W is 107.
160 - “Does 30 count as “youth”?”
When you’re 31 it does!
159 - Of course you are right, Jack. I feel rather foolish for failing to spot this obvious explanation until you pointed it out to me
I like this photo of Jonathan Dimbleby:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/05/27/article-1282026-09C9A2E5000005DC-753_638×329_popup.jpg
162, ding dong!
Miss Squire looks lovely.
162 - Two Shags and the Guardian are going to do their nut about the TPA again!
Got a list of the 101 Labour MPs still to nominate, any objections to posting it here?
168. Andy. I have 98 names “available”
I’ve not counted Gordon+Harriet and David & Diane (who have not nominated themselves yet).
Does it coincide with your analysis?
OT Crikey - this looks mean
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthpicturegalleries/7779298/Animal-pictures-of-the-week-28-May-2010.html?image=11
Sorry if already posted but - thank the feck - Al-Beeb have got rid of there HTML-1 anchors. Whilst I understand certain people from ‘Poplar’ consider it ‘normal’ it would appear the t1t5 which we pay too much for - via the TV poll-tax - disagree.
Rejoice, rejoice etc.
142. So you were not recognised for services to Nu Labour, Nick. That’s a darn shame!
I had hoped to see you cloaked in ermine at your swearing-in ceremony, broadcast from the House of Lords. Pity.
So your motto must be: Must try harder.
169. Yes, but take off Eric Illsley (Barnsley Central) as he’s suspended from the PLP and can’t nominate. That brings it down to 97 + GB, HH, DA and DB.
By the way, if another MP leaves the PLP before close of nominations - for example if an election petition against Woolas is successful, then the nominations needed would drop to 32.
Slugger O’Toole: ‘From the Scotland Bill to Scottish independence… ‘
http://sluggerotoole.com/2010/05/27/from-the-scotland-bill-to-scottish-independence/
173. I had Illsley out…but I can’t do maths!!
So 97
Fluffy Thoughts @171
Sorry, but what? Anchor tags, are anchor tags, are anchor tags. Aren’t they?
Oracle @167
If The Guardian put pics of Ms Squire in their rag, I’ll have to start buying the thing.
Take a look at Hammersmith. Labour did very well in the Council wards where Andy Slaughter was the MP. South of the older constituency Labour didn’t do nearly as well.
The Labour swings to Labour in College Park & Old Oak, Shepherds Bush Green, Wormholt & White City and Askew wards were the biggest in the borough whereas the rest of the seat lagged behind.
Dave B @5:
Should I underline the tax-w@nk failures? No serious Web-Developer would clutter a page with unfurnished-needs-of-furnishing*. I rest my case (lest wage-slave wakes-up)…!
* Please check Ed-in-Tokyo’s simple Web2-interface.
Excellent piece Sean.
Interesting that we always lump people together, expecting them to behave like a herd. I guess we do that because it makes statistics appear easier to understand and explain.
However, I decided that the 2010 election was far too complex to make generalised predictions and so I kept my council. My gut feeling was for a tiny overall Conservative majority, but on this occasion I used my brain instead of my entrails and waited to be shocked or surprised.
Your first class piece adds compelling evidence to my theory of ‘impossible accurate prediction.’ However I am prepared to glimpse into Mrs Malcolm’s tea-leaves and venture to say that we are entering a period of less easy prediction as more localised factors and personalities play more heavily in future elections.
Okay, so Labour Uncut’s list of declared supporters together with the list of nominations gives us:
David Milliband 63
Ed Milliband 46
Ed Balls 33
Andy Burnham 18
John McDonnell 8
Diane Abbott 2
That leaves 87 Labour MPs to nominate including Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman. They presumably won’t nominate leaving 85 MPs still to decide.
Heidi Alexander , Lewisham East
Rushanara Ali , Bethnal Green and Bow
Graham Allen , Nottingham North
Adrian Bailey , West Bromwich West
Margaret Beckett , Derby South
Luciana Berger , Liverpool, Wavertree
Clive Betts , Sheffield South East
Ben Bradshaw , Exeter
Nick Brown , Newcastle upon Tyne East
Richard Burden , Birmingham, Northfield
Liam Byrne , Birmingham, Hodge Hill
Martin Caton , Gower
Katy Clark , North Ayrshire and Arran
Tom Clarke , Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill
Stella Creasy , Walthamstow
Jon Cruddas , Dagenham and Rainham
John Cryer , Leyton and Wanstead
Alex Cunningham , Stockton North
Tony Cunningham , Workington
Nic Dakin , Scunthorpe
Simon Danczuk , Rochdale
Alistair Darling , Edinburgh South West
Ian Davidson , Glasgow South West
Geraint Davies , Swansea West
Thomas Docherty , Dunfermline and West Fife
Brian Donohoe , Central Ayrshire
Frank Doran , Aberdeen North
Jim Dowd , Lewisham West and Penge
Jack Dromey , Birmingham, Erdington
Maria Eagle , Garston and Halewood
Angela Eagle , Wallasey
Hywel Francis , Aberavon
Barry Gardiner , Brent North
Sheila Gilmore , Edinburgh East
Mary Glindon , North Tyneside
Roger Godsiff , Birmingham, Hall Green
Tom Greatrex , Rutherglen and Hamilton West
Kate Green , Stretford and Urmston
Lilian Greenwood , Nottingham South
Nia Griffith , Llanelli
Mark Hendrick , Preston
David Heyes , Ashton-under-Lyne
Meg Hillier , Hackney South and Shoreditch
Kelvin Hopkins , Luton North
Lindsay Hoyle , Chorley
Huw Irranca-Davies , Ogmore
Glenda Jackson , Hampstead and Kilburn
Sian James , Swansea East
Cathy Jamieson , Kilmarnock and Loudoun
Graham Jones , Hyndburn
Kevan Jones , North Durham
Gerald Kaufman , Manchester, Gorton
Elizabeth Kendall , Leicester West
Ian Lavery , Wansbeck
Tony Lloyd , Manchester Central
Andy Love , Edmonton
Denis MacShane , Rotherham
Fiona Mactaggart , Slough
Shabana Mahmood , Birmingham, Ladywood
Gregg McClymont , Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East
Alison McGovern , Wirral South
Michael Meacher , Oldham West and Royton
Ian Mearns , Gateshead
Alun Michael , Cardiff South and Penarth
Austin Mitchell , Great Grimsby
Graeme Morrice , Livingston
George Mudie , Leeds East
Lisa Nandy , Wigan
Chinyelu Onwurah , Newcastle upon Tyne Central
Toby Perkins , Chesterfield
Dawn Primarolo , Bristol South
Yasmin Qureshi , Bolton South East
Emma Reynolds , Wolverhampton North East
Lindsay Roy , Glenrothes
Frank Roy , Motherwell and Wishaw
Barry Sheerman , Huddersfield
Gavin Shuker , Luton South
Jack Straw , Blackburn
Graham Stringer , Blackley and Broughton
Gisela Stuart , Birmingham, Edgbaston
Jon Trickett , Hemsworth
Karl Turner , Kingston upon Hull East
Joan Walley , Stoke-on-Trent North
David Winnick , Walsall North
Shaun Woodward , St Helens South and Whiston
I hope that wee Jimmy Dowd (Lewisham West & Penge) stands aside from this contest. I know Mr Polly Toynbee (wee Jimmie Maple) was the former MP that I, and many voted for, so master Dowd should remember how far we Lewsh’am geezers can change our minds….
Andy Burnham is the last hope.Balls and the Miliballs spell disaster.
New Lord Mike German will vacate his Welsh Assembly seat which will go to the next person on LD South East Wales list…who is his wife, Veronica
Andrea @182:
It would be laughable - but the Germans have no sense of humour
181. I count around 30 from new intake (+2 “comeback kids”) and 6 former Cabinet Ministers.
Will outgoing PLP chairman Tony Lloyd stay neutral?
143/172: nah, weathercock, you just get a lordship at the end of your career. I am merely having a little pause - ’twas but a flesh wound, as the Black Knight said. Yes, of course I expect to apply to stand again, though obviously the CLP could choose someone else if it wished.
Paddy Power - First to Leave Euro?
Greece 11/8
Portugal 7/4
Spain 5/1
Ireland 10/1
Italy 10/1
France 12/1
Germany 12/1
Slovakia 14/1
Slovenia 14/1
Cyprus 16/1
Malta 16/1
Austria 20/1
Belgium 20/1
Finland 20/1
Luxembourg 20/1
Netherlands 20/1
182/183 Andrea/Tim B. Are either of those points germane.
I’ll fetch my cape.
OT. I must say the ToryDem proposal to raise CGT level tax to income tax levels is an excellent policy. It’s discomforting for many of us to have tax increased but it’s so obviously fairer I’m surprised it took a Tory government to do it.
Cons gain West Papua!
Perhaps incumbents are more “efficient” at “getting out” (to the postbox?) the postal vote.
Paging Morris Dancer
BBC pit lane reporter Ted Kravitz never ceases to amaze me. Not only does he bring us the news about whose hydraulics are playing up, or who has a nice new shiny front wing, this morning he brought us some news about Lewis Hamilton. This driver seems to be going through a mid life crisis in his mid 20s. He managed to rehabilitate himself towards the end of last season, after the disaster of the opening race when he lied to the stewards but he seems to have lost all the ground he gained then. This season has seen him petulant on team radio, showing off on public roads, something which has earned him a date before the beak in Australia and generally being outperformed by his team-mate Jenson Button, who has won two races this year.
Kravitz’s Hamilton scoop was not only had Hamilton had both ears pierced (and was now sporting black studs), but he had only had it done last week and wasn’t supposed to take the studs out. I love Ted Kravitz for actually finding the sporting regulation that it would contravene if he drove with the earrings in.
“Lewis Hamilton had both ears pierced last week in Los Angeles and when you get them pierced for the first time you have to leave the studs in for three to four weeks to allow the hole to develop. However, that would contravene article 2.2.1 appendix L of the sporting regulations, which states that the wearing of jewellery is prohibited. A few years ago Vitantonio Liuzzi had his eyebrow pierced and he had to have it the ring removed before racing because the medical teams said they didn’t like piercings.”
It’s not the fact he’s had it done that bothers me, but that he couldn’t wait until the 4 week Summer holiday. Surely he knew that his tight fitting helmet would cause problems for the sharp bits of metal in his ears. Honestly. Jenson Button can behave like a spoilt child at times, but he looks the picture of cool maturity next to his bratty team mate.
http://carons-musings.blogspot.com/2010/05/f1-boy-with-black-earrings.html
Just a quick raid…
Those of you who have met me will remember me for having a beard and a pony tail, well, that is going tonight at 8 PM to raise money for help for heroes.
See here, and you can donate online!
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2010/05/drastic-cut-for-armed-forces.html
On the Labour election, at least Milliband offered a more constructive idea of where he would like to take the Labour party today. The centre ground, whatever that may mean, is occupied right now. He needs to offer a fresher, and more up to date critique on the failures of both the state, public services and unchecked free marketeering.
I thought he at least made a step in the right direction today by talking about risk within the financial markets. I just hope there’s a good debate about the 21st century economy, and how individuals and the state need to operate within this. It seems to be that there are too many consensual positions, and that’s what has created many of the issues we face today. Yes, the public sector needs to shrink, yes people need to be given more responsibility to control their affairs, but also the excesses of the market need to be better planned for, and people need the education and the incentives to play a proper role in their lives. But this must not leave the most disadvantaged behind. I’ll be looking forward to offering my two pennies to the Labour leadership as the debate continues. I can now see some semblance of a proper intellectual debate on the horizon for the Labour party.
I am a Labour man, but i must admit that Cameron has looked very assured as PM. He is challenging the status quo, challenging his party, and attempting to challenge the country. I may not agree with much of what he says, but i still can give credit where it’s due. He has been very impressive (as has David Laws).
192.
I didn’t know that you had a blog Benedict.
135 -’46 ”Stuart ,I think you will find that Gordon Wilson was not defeated until 1997! by justin May 28th, 2010 at 5:29 pm
- Stuart is right - 1987 and I remember it rather more than I want to.
193. sabian
I think one of the problems you may have is it is not possible to determine from your post which of the Milibland clones you are praising…
195. marcia - “Stuart is right”
A sentence we ought to see far more often on PB. Marcia leads the way, yet again.
Jack W @187:
Isn’t he one of the Jackson Five (now Four)?
Paddy Power - London Mayoral Election - Labour’s Candidate
Ken Livingston 5/2 (shortening)
David Lammy 5/1
Alan Sugar 8/1 (lengthening)
Peter Mandelson 10/1 (lengthening)
180. I hope the 80 remaining undeclared MP’s think of their party before currying favour with a future leader and give Burnham the votes he needs. Two brothers and a lunatic lacks symmetry. They don’t need to worry about the egocentric publicity seeker Abbott. The last thing they need is a joke candidate
199. No odds on Oona?
197. “Stuart is right”
A stopped clock is right twice a day?
Sabian. Interesting. I think Cameron does deserve some credit for not behaving like Tories past and seeming to be consensual. Many of us who didn’t want a Tory win are quite pleasantly surprised.
It’s odd that even though the new government has the public broadly onside and they did take over from a stale government with a very unpopular leader there is none of the excitement of ‘97 when people had a smile on their face for months
97.
“Lord Davies of Floor Crossing”
Lord Quentin of Deadsheep in the county of Lincolnshire.
Lord Howard of Timisoara in the county of Translvania?
Ann Widders said there was something of the knight about him. Something of the peer, too, apparently.
203. The difference being, Roger, that in 1997 the outgoing government had not left the country facing decades of austerity due to their irresponsible handling of the economy.
Not many are smiling, the best most can manage is to grin and bear it.
@ Sean P 196 - Right there, that is actually my problem!! I was praising D Milliband, but i want to see a much more thoughtful analysis of Labours last 13 years, and what the future holds. I think D Milliband has the intellect, his brother has more rounded personal skills, but i’m yet to be convinced by any of them. In fact, I think Ed Balls has done this better than the others, and i think he’d be a disaster!! I’m despairing!!
But there’s time to get into this with the ultra long leadership contest. I argued on a previous thread that when Cameron was elected, there was a diversity of ideas from a wide selection of candidates who represented different wings and eras of the Tory party. I’m concerned that the Labour party won’t have the benefit of this. Where’s the Labour equivalent of a David Davis, or a Kenneth Clarke!! I’m concerned, but still a little optimistic this may happen.
Are you fervently anti Labour?? Many bloggers on this sight are?? I care most about the country, and will offer praise where it’s due. The most important thing for me is the future of the UK and for there to be a good, diverse and challenging ongoing debate about the future and a more honest appraisal of failings. Not a load of identikit leaders and ideas.
Excellent piece, Sean. The incumbency factor was obviously crucial. Ironically, there was a discussion over on fivethirtyeight.com in which Nate Silver was convinced to remove an originally postulated incumbency factor to his model as it was seen as an American aspect of elections that didn’t occur over here, apart from in Lib Dem seats.
The “first time” boost has been seen before as effectively a double incumbency effect - the previous holder’s incumbency boost vanishes (causing a swing to the new holder) and a personal incumbency boost is overlaid on top. I do remember seeing an estimate that personal vote/incumbency is worth about 500 votes - I think that has to now be way off. I’ve got to wonder whether the Communications Allowance may have been a contributor to this oversized incumbency boost.
It seems as though the marginal swing boost was pretty close to the 2% extra that the pollsters found (and close to what I’d expected for a 66% “unwind”) - it could be that when answering phone pollsters, people tend not to think about their personal MP and thus the incumbency effect would be harder for pollsters to predict.
I seem to recall an academic study being cited on PB suggesting that the MPs’ £10K ‘communications allowance’ would produce an incumbency effect.
I see the usual crowd of party hacks and bent business men have been given red cloaks and dead ferrets. How much longer do we have to put up with that nonsense?
You would have thought Cameron would have given that woman’s hairdresser a kinghtood.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/28/donations-tory-wives-businessmen
199 - Paddy Power has a very limited list unfortunately. Probably best to wade into the winner market (which includes Bozza and others of course) and hedge with bets on Boris.
To win (Ladbrokes unless mentioned) - Ken or Oona 6-1, Johnson 8-1, Purnell (Victor Chandler), Lammy, Cruddas or Sugar 20-1, Mandelson or Phillips 25-1, Izzard 33-1, Chuka Umanna, Harman, Butler, Jowell or Abbott 50-1, Nicky Gavron 100-1 (Victor Chandler).
Boris is 5-4.
203.
“the new government has the public broadly onside and they did take over from a stale government with a very unpopular leader there is none of the excitement of ‘97 when people had a smile on their face for months”
The reason for this is that virtually everyone knows that things are going to turn for the worse and they personally can do very little about it. They are hoping against hope that the government will soften the blow on themselves and their families in particular and want to feel good about this thought because frightened helplessness is pretty nasty feeling. Optimistic helplessness is slightly more bearable.
204
I have to say that hearing that John Prescott is to be ennobled has put me off my supper. The idea that such a man should be in the House of Lords is deeply offensive.
209.
“You would have thought Cameron would have given that woman’s hairdresser a kinghtood.”
Why, do they do his daily topknot weave?
Nick Palmer @142
Good article, Nick. You may be interested at the second vote preferences found by the British Electoral Survey for 1983, 1987, 1992 and 1997 quote by “unlock democracy” http://www.unlockdemocracy.org.uk/charter88archive/pubs/voting/av_apend1.html here.
On Brown getting over the insult - someone mischievous might suggest that giving someone a peerage ensures they can never re-enter the Commons if they ever changes their mind about retiring
P.S. The Diplomacy game is now ready for signups (PB #7 , password “pbcom” at the http://www.playdiplomacy site. Spaces free for other entrants still)
201. Andrea
Whoops!
Oona King 3/1
A different stench was left in 1997.
The stench of failed neo-conservative Thatcherism. For twas Hilda and all she stood for that did for poor honest John.
Mr Cameron has recognised that his party was unable to win with a right-wing programme a la NuLabour and was obviously delighted to be dragged [certainly not kicking and screaming] into a liberal conservative alliance.
The death of Thatcherism, and hopefully the coming demise of right-wing statist NuLabour will lead to a new liberal dawn in our nation. One of which we can be truly proud.
213
Hmmm, saw Dave being interviewed about the Bradford serial killer, he’s already looking strained, it took TB ten years to look that rough, Dave has managed it in ten days.
Heffer on ZanuConDem’s attempt to control QT.
The BBC get a Tory – by accident
Dave’s attempt to neuter the 1922 Committee by having one of his toadies elected to chair it backfired horribly this week. Such was the outrage at this monstrous interference with the rights of backbenchers that he was forced into a humiliating climbdown; and then had to watch someone who believes in the constitutional and democratic traditions of the Tory party, the excellent Graham Brady, take over the ’22 instead.
By far the most odious thing about this new administration is its unwillingness to be scrutinised, bred of Dave’s and Nice Nick’s determination not to have the PR gloss knocked off their shabby deal. We saw it again in the preposterous refusal to field a Cabinet minister on Question Time, for the bizarre reason that Alastair Campbell, one of Labour’s most important figures, was on the panel rather than a front-bencher. At least by having to get John Redwood to represent his party, the BBC found a genuine Conservative with convictions. There are hardly any of those in the Government
Its ironic that a cynical ol’ lefty like me has to find solace in RW columnists, they are the only ones worth reading at the moment.
Roger @203:
Because everyone knows that the profligate New Labour government has spent all the money we had, plus money we did not have, and there are now 60 billion pounds worth of public sector cuts coming down the line.
206. sabian
“Are you fervently anti Labour?? “
Yes.
I agree with your distaste for identikit leaders though. The prospective Labour Leader I would least like Cameron to face across the despatch box is
fortunatelysadly not standing; Yvette Cooper. It is possible though that she reckons the coalition will go the distance, and is looking to take over from whichever of the clones fails to make any impact over the next 5 years…It’s interesting that some of the contenders have made an attempt to distance themselves from the past with respect to the Iraq War, but as yet none of them have made any negative comment at all on the financial situation. My view is that at some point Labour will have to say “the overspend was a bad mistake we won’t make again”.
Its a poll
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2616
let the feeding frenzy begin.
Greetings from (a just downgraded) Spain.
I am in Palma, Majorca. Perhaps the reason Spain is in such deep ordure is related to the fact that I am staying in a 17th century nobleman’s mansion directly opposite Palma cathedral, in a suite with tapestries and chandeliers, courtesy of the Spanish taxpayer.
Ahem. *cough*. lo siento.
Very nice article from SeanF. Great result for the Coalition in Thirsk - as others have said, it puts paid to the ludicrous notion that there is a “progressive anti-Tory” majority in the UK.
If there was, Labour’s vote last night would have been enormous. It wasn’t, so there isn’t, if you see what I mean.
Finally, the honours list? The Viscount Quisling of Pompous Prick?? UGHHHHHH. Hurry up and reform the Lords and throw all these w@nkers out.
@ roger 203
Agreed. Although i think Cameron has done well, i don’t get the feeling that he has tapped into a narrative that connects with this generation of people. Blair, for all his faults did. I think many people are still adapting to this new, communications and technological age, wondering what the role of the UK should be both in europe and across the world, and also what personal responsibilities are reasonable. There are still many questions to ask, and i hope that the Labour party can do this. Energy, the environment, the role of the armed forces, how to rebalance the economy, how to utilise technology, an ageing society, etc, etc, have in my opinion, not been explored properly. We’re still tinkering and politicians are being tactical rather than strategic. Either way, i think there’s going to be some interesting thinking over the next five years to attempt to offer answers that are both more comprehensive and strategic. I think the Labour party must start doing this right now.
207/208: I remain to be convinced that the CA is (was? - has it definitely been abolished?) that useful. It got used in two ways. Some MPs did a glossy leaflet showing themselves in lots of local constituency events, on the pretext of ‘keeping people informed’ of their activities. It’s those that gave it a bad name, but are constituents really impressed?
Others used it mainly to get on top of local issues - e.g. when we were debating the route of flood defences, I wrote to everyone in the area asking their opinion on which route they preferred, and passed on the result to the planners. That sort of thing probably helps with the ‘diligent constituency MP’ image, but I’m not sure it shifts many votes.
207 More to the point that incumbency is gone even if the defeated MP tries again. The former MPs in Newbury and guildford tried again in those seats. There was no sign they had retained any following as both were hammered. A lesson for those who may think of trying again in their old homes.
Somebody left a good tennis tip on here—Kirlenko beat Kuzenova @9/4. Thanks very much.
Its easier to get on the tennis than the politics tips…
The country’s leading expert on taxation has spoken.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1282203/Now-Michael-Caine-joins-tax-revolt-Camerons-celebrity-backer-warns-exodus-crippling-hikes.html
There’ll be no raising of CGT now.
The sort of madness that drove Jim Davidson to Dubai, must not be allowed to happen.
@219 Scott P
I totally agree on the last point. I just don’t see how anyone will be credible to the electorate if they don’t do this.
On another point, wouldn’t it be interesting if as bloggers we put forward and supported a candidacy from PB?? (i’m not pitching for this at all). Mixing up the leaders we have with people we may not agree with, but whose knowledge, skills and ideas have been carved out and sharpened here rather than Westminster. This is an end of day, crazy thought, but one that i think is interesting and would show people that there are a variety of forums from which to share ideas and make the case for change.
A crazy idea!!! But it’s grabbed my thought for the evening (and not some ex candidate or a Guido Fawkes - a normal blogger!!).
Looking at the list of people who nominated Ed Balls, it really is a veritable boatload of wankers. Any list with Balls himself, Steve McCabe, Geoffrey Robinson, Tom Watson and Kerry McCarthy on it is a bad one to be near. No doubt Brown will be joining it shortly.
http://www2.labour.org.uk/leadership-candidates/3/Ed_Balls
sabian @227:
No, not a crazy idea!
A “normal blogger.”
An oxymoron.
So I guess the idea stinks after all.
225. That would be Morris Dancer, probably wondering this evening whether either Red Bull will make it to the end of the race on Sunday. Both in trouble today in practise
220.
Not much support there for devolution! 81% think that “the health service should be the same everywhere in Britain”.
It never has been, and it never will be.
sabian @222:
One of the problems with Labour has always been that its dogma and political philosophy fly in the face of the reality of economics, common sense, and people’s self-interest.
Labour governments have always been high tax and spend governments. This means they need a thriving economy to provide all the money they need through taxation revenue. But as the tax take increases and the government’s share of GDP rises above (about) 40% then the private sector starts to struggle to both provide the revenue the Labour government needs and to generate growth for the future. This inevitably ends up (every Labour government since 1945) with the economy in trouble, high unemployment, what used to be called a ‘balance of payments crisis’, the country’s credit rating on watch, and a currency devaluation, either clean or dirty.
The irony is that a Labour government is much more dependent on a thriving economy than a government that spends less, but its policies have the effect (deliberate or otherwise) of stopping the economy dead in its tracks.
coldstone @220:
But not a very good one! Stupid questions don’t produce useful data.
“Health Service should be the same everywhere in Britain” - 81%
There has never been a common Health Service in Britain. If 81% wish that then they are not only going to have to amend the Scotland Act and the Wales Act, but for the very first time place the Health Service in Scotland in the hands of Whitehall.
Did the respondents understand the question? No - but those in England (the vast majority of respondents can’t be blamed for their ignorance, since their media never explains the difference between England and Britain - or the UK.)
Did Ipsos-Mori understand the question? Clearly not. For them, there is no excuse for their stupidity/ignorance/carelessness.
Agree with David @27 - MPs were using not just communications allowances but IEAs and some were pumping out endless blanket letters week by week using taxpayers money to entrench their incumbency. Add this to a strange set of factors in the election, in which arguably the expenses saga benefitted more incumbent MPs than challenged them, as there was a perception that if the MP wasn’t publicly and strongly criticsed, they were clean. It seems that in quite a number of cases some voters took a safety first/devil you know line in this context.
@ Malcolm 232
That’s tickled me!! A normal blogger is indeed an oxymoron. But no where near the extent of a ‘normal professional politician’. Now that does not and will not exist!! I know these people, and trust me, it takes a willing suspension of disbelief to think that these people have any idea what many of us are doing day to day, unless it’s in a briefing document, report or when they meet us once every 5 years before elections!!
Endogenous growth theory!! Reenabling!! Personalisation!!! PB people could come up with better for half the price.
I’m still laughing!!
231. The Raven
You missed out King Wanker: Eric Joyce
222. Thinking is not easy, certainly when it is done properly. It hurts and not only mentally. It requires more than intelligence, but does need an element of being street-wise and possessing commonsense.
The prospective candidates for the Labour Party leadership have not shown much, if any, ability to think whilst in Government. They have had the attributes of sycophants but that is not normally a characteristic associated with being able to think.
They may yet surprise us. But on the other hand do not put the funds of widows and orphans on them coming up with anything close to what is necessary.
Frank @ 45 - Labour appeared to have absolutely hammered parts of key target seats in certain areas spending at least as much as the Tories in those fewer seats they targeted. They also deployed a much simpler gut message (even if it included lies) that resonated with their voters. In some seats there were astonishing and almost bizzare differential turnouts in just a few polling districts.
Great article SeanT.
Am I right in thinking the Coalition plan is to phase out the communications allowance?
O/T One of my childhood heroes is dead
Gary Coleman, star of Diff’rent Strokes, dies at 42
Former child star dies in Utah hospital after suffering brain haemorrhage in fall
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/28/gary-coleman-dies-child-star
242 - Apologies SeanF, not SeanT
@ 235 Tim B
Although i don’t entirely agree with the whole analysis, i do agree with some points and think that the next Labour leader must articulate the sort of values and structural change that the country needs, without it requiring spending a shed load of money. Much of it is wasted and not actually necessary. Labour politicians focus too heavily on state led solutions, when actually some of what they are trying to do requires individuals and small communities to change and take responsibility. But, there is still a role for the state in not allowing private sector largess to destroy economies and depriving the most marginalised of opportunities to actualise their ambitions.
Labour can and must move beyond this.
181/224 Thanks for your kind words.
210 Thanks also, and I think that’s quite right. I think that one should now assume that first-time incumbents will do about 2% better, on average, than their party, in general. Lib Dem first time incumbents often enjoy a far bigger boost, which then gradually disappates. 2% probably works out at an average of 900 votes, and that can mean a difference of 1,800 to the majority - critical in a marginal seat.
227 Now, that really is imponderable. Just sometimes, a defeated MP does retain a following, although the victorious MP may have had the chance to build up a following (and is obviously in a far better position to show that he can make a difference).
@ Screaming Eagle
Gary Coleman is dead!! I loved that programme!!
Nick @226 - Does that comply with the Green book? Not the way I read it!
I’m not at my laptop, but does anyone how well the Tories selected via the primaries fared? Did they do better or worse than the national trend?
sabian @238
The political parties were developed as a shorthand for ideas. However they have become a tribal entity for the attainment, maintenance and personal uses [and mis-uses]of power.
The blogosphere is able to shortcut much of the inanity and mindless boredom that party politics thrills to.
*Anecdote Alert*
I attended my first meeting of the Ince-in Makerfield CLP during my mid-20s, having been politically active in the Labour Party since the age of 15.
When we were asked for items of ‘Other Business” I proposed a motion on the political situation in Chile. An elderly and rather gruff retired miner shouted across the room “Ay up lad, we don’t do politics here.” He was telling the truth; we had spent the entire meeting listening to minutes of meetings and reports from other meetings and made nominations to Labour Party committees that would listen to minutes of previous meetings and reports from further committees that would in themselves produce minutes and reports and nominations to sub-committees.
Mindless boredom.
245 Any examples.
sabian @244:
Sabian, I am not by any means advocating laissez faire unfettered capitalism. There has to be some regulation and oversight.
But government cannot and should not attempt to pick ‘winners’. It was tried in the 60s Labour government - Wedgwood Benn’s MinTech, the ‘white heat of technology’, and it was tried in the 70s, and it simply never works. Likewise all the guff about ‘digital Britain’, the biotech revolution etc. Governments cannot ‘do’ innovation: the most they can do is set the rules to encourage participation and new company setups - lower taxes, less onerous regulation and a free labour market, and then stand back and get out of the way.
Labour politicians focus too heavily on state led solutions, when actually some of what they are trying to do requires individuals and small communities to change and take responsibility.
It’s classic Labour dogma - the state can make it happen. Unfortunately all the experience of trying this provides empiric evidence to the contrary. The statement above should read, instead of ’some of’, ‘most of’. Labour never seems to learn from experience - it’s always ‘we weren’t radical enough’, or some other reason, never the fact that they might actually be wrong.
depriving the most marginalised of opportunities to actualise their ambitions
Sorry, but I have simply no idea what this means.
Government is not in the ‘ambition actualising’ business.
I know I may sound a bit hard nosed here - and if so I apologise - but there are serious limits on what a government can actually do in reality, and wishing it were not so doesn’t make it so.
Evening all
Busy week for me this week so my first chance to catch up with my thoughts.
The “academy schools” proposals is fascinating but not without potential pitfalls. The “GM” schools experience of the 1990s provides some salutary lessons. After an initial flood of funding for those schools which decided to opt out of LEA control, the funding dried up and schools were soon struggling again.
In addition, the schools spent their money on books and children which is totally laudable but many neglected the fabric of the school itself. When the LEA went back into the GM schools they found enormous disrepair and faced a bill of hundreds of thousands in backlog miantenance.
The LEA provides a useful function in keeping the fabric of schools going and by pooling monies are able to carry out major works such as boiler replacement or roof repairs that schools could not afford to carry out on their own. The problem is that the dearth of funding has led some LEAs to hold on to all DFC monies to enable major capital projects to be funded.
What this means is that in most years schools will get only the most basic levels of maintenance but in other years a school will have a major project. The LEA, through its knowledge of the condition of all schools, is able to prioritise funds and ensure that the fabric deteriorates as slowly as possible.
The future may well not be individual schools as academies but a “cluster” system whereby a secondary academy effectively funds and supports a network of satellite primaries from which it draws its population.
This of course means a network of local quasi-LEAs and puts huge power in the hands of school Governors. To what extent will these Governors be accountable in the new era ? One of the concerns I had about this proposal was that it could be used to perpetuate Conservative control of schools in that once elected or appointed, it would be almost impossible to remove a Governor. Is there a provision for the direct election of school Governors on an annual basis ?
@ Malcolm 249
I had similar experiences where i was brought up in Dudley, and the CLp there. It get’s awfully anti-intellectual, where politics isn’t about ideas. It’s terrible!! Surely bloggers will influence this more (we already are and in the US it’s progressed much further). The agitator in me feels that something should be done to mix up the droll, redundant nature of the parties (especially at constituency level). I reckon some thread time should be devoted to this, and to try and get some one here elected for something. Even if there views are dodgy, getting candidates from different places and with different experiences would add value to our democracy. And at the heart of the rational is your comment that we’re trying to break tribal entities.
This might seem pie in the sky thinking, but i reckon it could be developed over a couple of years. Power to PB and bloggers is what i say!! (i might be giggling as i wrote the last sentence but i’m deadly serious!!)
sabian @253:
There’s nothing wrong with giggling, so long as it is tempered with a modicum of decorum
@ 245 Tim B
I left any semblance of decorum in my mothers womb!!! And that was a long time ago!! I’d giggle even more if someone like Coldstone was elected to office mind!!
sabian @255:
-unless it was open office…
openoffice.org
251 Not sure always the case. Remember the single most transformative act of the USA even above the Civil war was the trans continental railroad. That occurred after Congress and Lincoln took time out from fighting the south to pass a railroad act. As a result some entrepreneurs took the risk of trying to build a railroad from California. Why because if they did get a certain way the act promised millions in federal funding. So there maybe some contrary instances.
247 - MG, yes, I had it checked at the time (interesting question btw - are you an MP or in an MP’s office?). If you can send a leaflet showing yourself opening bazaars to 40,000 homes, why shouldn’t you be able to send a letter to 500 homes asking somwthing useful? What you can’t do is bring in a party aspect or use the results of the survey to build up a data base and keep writing to them.
Punter @257:
Things are rarely black and white. If you read Stephen Ambrose’s book “Nothing like it in the world” you’ll read all about it. Uncle Sam’s money was all repaid with huge interest payments.
There were two companies - Union Pacific and Central Pacific - one went west while the other went east, meeting at Promontory Point.
258: communications allowance has gone, according to my mp.
259 Yes and the eastern company had IIRC much the quicker progress because of easier terrain until they reached Indian territory. The Californians Chinese workforce still beat them with their amazing endurance. A workforce from the oldest civilization forging the newest. Is that well known the US.
David Laws — will he last the weekend? Looks doubtful.
See tomorrow’s Telegraph.
Unanswerable.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article7139361.ece
David Laws….TOAST.
gone by saturday noon.
How can a man who blatantly lied to the public about his police force shooting an innocent man dead is beyond Me.
Laws is fcuked
MPs’ Expenses: Treasury chief David Laws, his secret lover and a £40,000 claim
The Cabinet minister charged with rescuing the Government’s finances has used taxpayers’ money to pay more than £40,000 to his long-term partner, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/7780642/MPs-Expenses-Treasury-chief-David-Laws-his-secret-lover-and-a-40000-claim.html
Further to above.
Laws apologises and agrees to pay back tens of thousands.
PM Agrees with Laws decision to refer himself to the standards commissioner.
Sky News
262 - Weird how his hasn’t come out before don’t you think…wonder how long the Telegraph have been sitting on it?
262 Sadly, I think he’s finished.
And, he was shaping up to be a really good Chief Secretary.
265. He might get away with this, he is governments best performer. They will rally round.
267 - I think they only found recently the Landlord was his lover.
Wonder how Cleggomania would have been hit if this story had broken a few week back, given Nick was giving it large about Lib Dem being squeaky clean on expenses.
270 I don’t think it’ll work. If the government rallies round, they’ll show themselves just to be like New Labour.
Foolish, foolish, man.
194, Hamilton’s phenomenally talented, but also unsteady. That’s why Button’s beating him. Button has experience and has developed a really cool head on his shoulders.
228, that was me. I had about five bets, only tipped that one. Most of the others failed, I think. I may have discovered why I stopped betting on tennis
Anyway, glad that one paid off.
233, Mr. P, I think that’s not the case. Red Bull often do ‘poorly’ in the first two practice sessions. It does look like a McLaren-Red Bull tussle at this stage. Hope so, anyway. Backed McLaren at 6.4 or suchlike to win the race.
273 - Very foolish man. Is sad really, an independently wealthy man, risking the ruination of his political career.
267:It is a shame but why claim all that money seeing as he is wealthy if he wanted to keep his relationship private.
Bang goes Laws as future Tory leader then.
Will all come down to the definition of ‘partner’ and how the standards commissioner views his relationship in that light.
Difficult to see any other definition than partners though if they have sex and live in the same residence, and have done for many years.
Gone by Sunday. No sympathy - rich bloke decides to rip off taxpayer and pretend boyfriend is disassociated landlord - should have been up front about this when offered the post by the PM - given the fuss over expenses, he knew damn well he was in trouble.
less than a month in SLEAZY tory/lib…on the make.
What is really strange is we are told Laws is absolutely loaded, retired at 28/29 and took a £15k a year research job with the Lib Dem out of interest and desire to do something good. Why would you put yourself in such a silly position? Shakes Head…Reminds me a bit of the Bill Cash situation, although in Cash case he quite rightly moved out of his daughters place as soon as the rules changed (and was subsequently found innocent on appeal).
Just wondering, do we know he was seeing his guy when he moved in, or did the relationship with his “landlord” start after that?
277 Hammond to Chief Secretary and Simon Hughes to Transport I would think.
273 - s’funny, I was thinking earlier how the measure of change would be if the party could learn to love David Laws.
How deeply depressing.
one things for sure,Redwood and Davis wont be getting any calls to replace Laws.
277/279 - “Why would you put yourself in such a silly position?”
Love/Hormones makes you do the reckless and stupid
274. MD.
Vettel radio traffic mentioned a “water pressure” concern, seconds before Webber retired with his engine expired in a puff of smoke…
No wonder he didn’t fancy QT if he thought that was about to break.
283 Greed and Lust Eagles, Greed and Lust.
I am guilty of both, often. But I don’t charge the taxpayer for mine.
280, good, but it means the Lib Dems have less to do with cuts than they ought to.
Damned fool. Laws could’ve and should’ve been a key player.
285 - Hmm, makes you wonder doesn’t it if the QT stuff was actually something completely different….
284, oh, I beg your pardon, Mr. P, I just glanced at the times.
Hehehehe. If both go out then my backing of the McLarens looks veeery nice.
266. Ouch, not a great bit of news to start the weekend off with. Had it come out with the rest, at least he would have had cover.
What a tragedy that easily the best LibDem minister in the government is likely to have to fall on his sword. I agreed with Dyed at 280.
It was obvious to anyone with half a brain that David Laws is gay but his sexuality was his own business. I find it hard though that some colleagues had not worked out that there was more to the relationship than Landlord and Tenant/flatmates.
Yeovil = CON GAIN 2015
A bit sad he thought he had to keep his relationship secret from his family. I thought those days were gone
By the looks of it, the telegraph only found out recently, but were trying to do the story without outing David Laws,
Easterross @291:
He’s also current favourite as next LD leader, if there’s any betting opportunity to be had there.
290 - Well he certainly isn’t the only one that has had this kind of setup, there have been quite a few MP’s who have rented from family or those with vested interests or let said people live there free at the tax payers expense.
He’s finished. It’s too late to put your hands up, offer to repay and refer yourself AFTER the papers have got you bang to rights.
If Cameron & Clegg try to rally the troops and defend Laws it won’t save him, only call their judgement and priorities into question. The public will insist on a defenestration.
When I saw the Telegraph headline I thought ‘please G*d can it be a LibDem, I’m so tired of their holier-than-thou over expenses…’ and my wish was granted.
295 - Put your money on Tim Farron
Punter @261:
- and they had a terrible attrition rate too. At one point they laid ten miles of track in a single day. I went to the spot once, where there is a sign to commemorate the feat.
I also went to Promontory point where they re-enact the golden spike ceremony.
The irony is - the railroad doesn’t run to either place any more. At the 1 mile site there is no track at all, and at Promontory point there is just enough so the can do the ceremony.
Feel very sorry for Mr Laws. However,his excuse won’t really wash and he should do the honourable thing and offer his resignation.
The Screaming Eagles @294:
The Graun’s profile yesterday made a rather askance comment about how “he would have been a Tory except for Section 28″.
The most depressing thing about it all is that this has only come about because of his desire to maintain a private private life.
“It was obvious to anyone with half a brain that David Laws is gay”
I have to say I assumed he was gay, in fact I thought I had read he was somewhere before (must have been wrong), maybe I my brain wrongly just jumped a step when I read several profiles and no mention of wife, children, girlfriend, partner, etc. I was quite surprised in the Telegraph article all the cloak and dagger stuff, thought those days were well behind us.
Recall election?
301 - I think it may be the only thing that could save him.
Politician wanted to keep his sexuality secret.
BBC doing there usual…no mention he is an Lib Dem,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8712383.stm
My guess is that one of his collegues spilt the beans. Very competitive business politics when you get into the cabinet and I must say I feel sorry for him. However no need to resign.
303. Any recall election would be a Coalition hold. By the way a donkey wearing a yellow rosette could have held Yeovil against the Tory candidate they put up this year.
Poor Lawsy. He can remain my 2nd favourite Lib Dem though, provided he does the decent thing and steps down from the Cabinet for a while.
Laws will survive.
309 Thank You, Gloria Gaynor
My God! They’re all at it. David Laws is in deep doo-doo, and if he isn’t then i wantbto know why.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/7780642/MPs-Expenses-Treasury-chief-David-Laws-his-secret-lover-and-a-40000-claim.html
Coalition troubles heating up. New election by Xmas?
309 - Yay.
But I am doubtful Mike.
309
I hope so. As a supporter of the coalition, I have been very impressed with David Laws.
Dyed in some wool somewhere @310:
Aw crap, you can just imagine him on the karaoke…
309 - Mike: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DJC-ECU8IE
309..No chance.1/5 to go…NAP
306.cont….That colleague was possibly Vince though I have no evidence other than motive.
It sounds like he was his landlord for 2 years before they started a relationship. He might just get away with it.
I always thought David Laws was Gay - I wondered when it would be exposed.
Poor sod! 
That does not excuse the expenses but this country has had it really, If it is not expenses it is something else.
Look, I am telling folk how it is: the House of Lords and the poor sods who claim expenses is going to be next as well. For goodness sake expenses of any kind is going to screw the political system - Do politicians not understand this
I really do not think the political class understands this.
Take it from someone who is nearly finished financially and had a lot of emotional grief about accepting a car I once owned but do not want!
- the scroat of the political system needs sorting asap. The papers are just going to keep brining it up. Really - If cameron is looking for the best adviser in the UK in politics he should come to me. I would do it for nothing from home - Nothing ever changes! 
Just ring me on Tuesday as I will have a hang over on saturday, sunday and recovering on monday. I once taughted my political insight to Tory MPs by putting in the subject header on emails “Political Genius” - they all thanked me for the complement: I meant me!!!! 
Tells you all you need to know about many MPs - Frankly I am better than many of them.
318 - Link? I think that does make a small amount of a difference to the story if true.
Exeunt Omnes @313:
40k, a setup to milk the taxpayer (whether he is gay or not is nothing to do with it), and this is the man wielding the axe. His credibility “we’re all in this together, but at your expense” is shot.
The next 48 hours will tell.
I bet the P.M. and D P.M. have discussed options already.
- and you know what? It’s a crying shame. He really looked like the right guy in the right job.
AndyJay @319:
The what…?
309 Very, very hard for Laws to lead reform of public finances now. Credibility is through the floor, one rule for him …
E.g. Take this quote…
“The years of public sector plenty is over.”
Is this a personal statement?
But perhaps you’re right Mike, he should stay. He might be a little less holier-than-thou in future. That would do the govt some good IMO.
AndyJay @319:
- and win the award for the most smileys in a single post by anyone with a name beginning with A
- did you get new wheels yet?
317 - Now wasn’t Alastair Campbell waving a photo of David Laws on QT last night? But no one in their right mind could contemplate that Campbell could ever be implicated in leaking personal information to the media.
It’s really disappointing - he seemed an excellent politician and was grabbing the role he was in. I can’t see how he could survive in post. No, scratch that - I can’t see how he should survive in post. If he steps down voluntarily, maybe he could return to Cabinet at a later date, but if he hangs on and is supported by the Government, it would have a very bad whiff about it.
Cameron and Clegg would have to expend an extreme amount of political capital to hold him in place, surely? Maybe so much as to cripple their attempts elsewhere?
On the human side, I hope someone is with him tonight. Seeing as he’s gone from Opposition (and apparently for ever) to negotiating the key Coalition, rising to Cabinet, being lauded to the skies and moving into pole position as next Lib Dem leader (from Betfair a couple of days ago) and even talked of as a future PM, to being thrown out of the closet, exposed for expenses irregularities (words chosen carefully) and staring at the ruination of his political career - all in the space of a couple of weeks … that’s a hell of a crash for anyone.
309: I am so disappointed in Laws. I am a solid Tory (indeed we met and chatted at Tory conference), but laws was someone who inspired me despite not knowing that much about him. He was the very idea of competent, sensible and intelligent. I would have been very comfortable with him being chancellor, I would even go so far, that if I lived in his constituency I might even consider being a libdem activist.
This is a terrible blow to the coalition, if this was a labour government they would see how it played in the Sunday papers, and if they can get away with it, they would. Will the new government be any better?
320. It was from his statemnet read out on BBC news.I think it makes a difference. His claim was legitimate when it started. He was actually living there. He started a relationship which he wished to keep secret. It’s all down to the status of his relationship.
I can’t see he did much wrong other than not declaring it correctly. No reason at all to resign though the prurient masses in this country will probably make his life difficult if not unbearable (see 319 above)
This love-in for Laws is sickening. The man has behaved in a morally indefensible way. Another wealthy politician who had to use his position as an MP to steal more money from the taxpayer.
Mr Cameron should sack him immediately. Not to, stinks of NuLabour behaviour and of tribal hypocracy. The man is no better than the awful Hazel Blears.
We should have known; the man used to be a banker.
Laws is my local MP and I don’t give a flying fig that he’s gay. However I do object to him siphoning taxpayer’s money for something that he shouldn’t have claimed for.
The crime’s even worse in my opinion because he made a massive thing of the fact that he was clean on “expenses” in his re-election campaign.
The notion that David Laws will have to resign from the government in the same week that Quisling Davies gets elevated to the Lords is infinitely depressing.
This is modern British politics in a nutshell: the triumph of the mediocre and repulsive over the talented but flawed.
I can’t see any hope for him though, the damn fool. Unless he finds some miraculous excuse.
I see Guy Ritchie’s step-mother is to become a Baroness. Traitor Davies also getting one as a Labour peer. I doubt Wee Jack will be remaining in the Scottish PArliament next year given that he is becoming Lord Wee Jack and Stalin’s granny is becoming Baroness Monklands as is her successor Lord Parkhead.
So, the Telegraph are trying to f*ck over Laws because he’s gay?
Screw them right in the ear.
How long have the Telegraph known about it,and why have they come out with the story now?
If they are still looking into all these expences there could be a number of stories to come out.
I hope he does not stand down.
319: people don’t “expose” gay people anymore. We all like a bit of gossip, but most people, while sharing a revulsion for the act do not share the revulsion for the individuals, that is true across the political spectrum. This is a change from times gone bye. If however, he hadn’t told his parents, he must be devastated.
328
prurient masses = UK taxpayer, you pellet.
Puts a new slant on why Laws was pulled from Question Time.
Surely the bigger question in all this is: Will the Sun be able to resist a pun involving the phrase “rent boy”?
323. Tim B May 28th, 2010 at 10:49 pm
No - Refused it and upset my gran.
I have not told them the dire straights i find myself. My dad was going to finance it but he would never let me here the end of it and knowing him would have asked for the money back. I would rather marter myself than be dependent on any of them!
I am going to do a runner - F*ck it and start again! 
SeanT @331:
Too true.
328 The problem is a lot of people are going to have a hard time believing that he has had this relationship for nine years,yet his lover cannot be described as a partner. It reeks of sophistry,and in these hard economic times the general populace are not going to be forgiving.
You have to feel sorry for Laws. He has been very silly. Credibility on public finances now zero I’m afraid.
All of which goes to show what a vile, debased little rag the Telegraph has become.
How dare they unleash their sordid little act of malicious Victorian prurience on somebody decent like Laws?
So who would replace him?
From what Laws has said so far, it sounds like he had an “open” relationship with his landlord. It depends on what’s the definition of living with someone as a civil partner.
AndyJay @338:
I think the answer is you need to get Mr Eagles to adopt you, and then come over here with him
343 - Martin calm down.
Laws committed a technical breach of the rules.
The telegraph it appears held onto the story for a few days because they didn’t want to out Laws.
Regardless of the circumstances, there is a clear choice of message to the electorate. Either
“Westminster carries on as usual”
or
“Troughing MP is sacked”.
Oracle @305:
Even though it’s no longer just a “breaking news” holding page, they still haven’t added that he’s a LibDem.
Sorry, cant resist:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d0GARTk_Nk
348 I don’t see how the story could run without him being outed.
@348:
Bollocks.
If Laws wasn’t living as a spouse with his landlord, there is no technical breach of the rules. This reads like what it is, a deliberate and vicious outing of an intensely private man, played as part of some sick game by the Telegraph.
But if the other chap was not his “partner”, then there is no problem with the financial claims, is there?
Is it possible for somebody to have a “partner” and not even his parents are aware of the relationship?
Frankly, in what way does the Telegraph’s story serve the public interest?
It looks like Laws kept the payments up in order to hide the fact (from his parents and others) that he was in a relationship with his male landlord. Clearly that isn’t very impressive at a time when cuts are coming, but it is understandable (provided, of course, that the payments were at market rate).
All LDs are gay until they came out as straight
Sad news.
The “was his landlord/lover also his partner” stuff all sounds a bit angels on pinhead.
I think the best thing for him personally, his friends and family, and the reputation and credibility of the coalition would be for him to step down with immediate effect, move away from the limelight.
If the coalition is still going in a couple of years he can sweep back in a reshuffle.
If the coalition falls apart he’s better off out anyway.
340 / 345 - I think a problem for Laws is his lover / landlord moved in 2007 and he also moved with him.
Now say he did genuinely move into the first place, things developed with his landlord and they had a relationship (during which the rules did change regarding renting from relatives, partners, etc), to me that isn’t the sort of tax payer fiddle that so many MP have been up to.
However, then following the rule change in 2007, he moved with his landlord to a new property, now we are on much dicier ground. At that point if he had taken the opportunity to get his expenses in order, I personally probably wouldn’t see a huge problem.
This will be an interesting test of Cameron. kicking out his duck ponders was easy though he got credit for being decisive. This requires the wisdom of Soloman and the ruthlessness of Lawrence of Arabia (or not if he did nothing wrong)
Notme May 28th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
Frankly David Laws could mate with Donkeys - I dont care one jot: Fact is he is good at his job. The relationship he is in does not matter one jot to me and it is the crappy expenses system again that has done for him.
The expenses system just needs to be replaced IMO - The Government should compulsary purchase enough central London Flats and be done. Constitiency offices should be paid for on a basis that takes into account local rent/property prices and Council tax should be waved for the MP pads in London. All utility bills should be paid for directly by the state and there should be no need for these silly media stories.
Travel expenses tend to be controlled by the office that contolls expenses. It can very easily be killed as an issue. Do I have to think about everything and advocate it
Just do it!
Martin Coxall @353:
Let’s hope that that’s his saving grace. It’ll take some generous coverage elsewhere in the press.
342. If you read Laws’s excuse there is some tiny wiggle room which may just save him - was this really his “partner”?
However it does look very bad, its a huge mistake, especially for a man in his job, where utter probity is surely required. What a crying shame.
And yet, and yet - has he done anything demonstrably worse than say, Gordon Brown, with all his dodgy claims (and remember Brown has to pay back £13,000) - or Alistair Darling, with his multiple flipping, or Jack accountancy Straw or Creases Huhne?
None of those guys resigned. As someone says upthread, perhaps Laws’s biggest *crime* is getting caught a year after everyone else. He is cruelly exposed.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. We don’t get fooled again
The partner sold the flat for a profit of £193,000 in 2007. We paid the mortgage, where’s our cut?
Stop bleating about gay victims, I want my stolen money back. And when does the MP recall thing start? The chiefly rat should face the electorate.
309 onward.
Laws has got to resign of his own accord by tomorrow. If he doesn’t then Camo or cleggo will have to do the chop.
If they fail to move, then the Coalition as constituted is doomed and no matter what good policies or intentions the government has, will make one iota of difference.
What other surprises will now emerge from L/Dem stable the I wonder?
But in this Mike Smithson is wrong: Laws has to go.
336 Sorry but you are wrong. Possibly in metropolitan land people no longer “expose” the sexuality of prominent people as gay but in large parts of the country where the Guardian is not the toilet paper of choice, a great many people over the age of 40 are still very homophobic and people still regularly see their lives devastated by being “outed” against their wishes. What people say and what people really think are often totally different.
“he Government should compulsary purchase enough central London Flats and be done.”
they can build a university campus and put all MPs there together
Maybe I’m missing something in the detail, but I don’t see Laws’ transgressions as that bad, there were much worse claims coming to light a year ago, and lots of them. The problem for him, and on which he should stand his ground, is his affair. The conservative right will hate it. I hope he stands it out and Cameron and Clegg back him.
361. and his magic cleaner that he and his brother paid *cough*.
305/349 - Sky News’ breaking news ticker doesn’t mention that Laws is a Lib Dem either, are they biased too?
Martin Coxall @352:
And the electorate are going to love that! If MPs hadn’t been so corrupt for so long, or if those standing for re-election had repaid anything that was dodgy, then there would have been no problems.
As it is, “we the people”, are going to be distinctly unchuffed by this story!
This is politics, not some court case in which TSE successfully gets a villain cleared on a technicality.
It’s a damn shame.
Laws was a star in the making. This is clearly less straight-forward than most of the expenses issues - it seems partially due to trying to keep his sexuality secret (poor chap, even in this day and age to feel the need to keep it hidden….well, poor chap) rather than necessarily trying to make money, but it’s hard to see how he can stay after the events of the election and previous months.
356. …cont.
Interesting that some of the Journo’s on twitter are of the opinion he might survive.
He’s clearly the right man for the job he is in, but competence in public life is rarely enough to avoid the whiff of scandal.
Deeply unfortunate for all concerned.
361. No excuse , he had plenty of chances to clarify it, caught red handed and trying to use an extremely dodgy excuse to eplain away pocketing £40K. Funny that he only comes clean after getting caught, rubbish about protecting a partner is laughable.
369 - On the Sky website, big red text,
The Liberal Democrat Cabinet minister….
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Chief-Secretary-To-The-Treasury-David-Laws-To-Pay-Back-40000-Pounds-In-Expenses/Article/201005415640156?lpos=Politics_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15640156_Chief_Secretary_To_The_Treasury_David_Laws_To_Pay_Back_40%2C000_Pounds_In_Expenses
There are few enough talented politicians around and Laws’ sexuality wouldn’t affect his career, but a cbination of expenses fiddling and his role as Chief Sec talking austerity is impossible.
The Mail Telegraph and Sun will crucify him as part of their CGT campaign if he tries to hang on.
@370:
So, the Court of Public Opinion wants to tear a poof apart?
THROW IN THE QUEER.
364. I also wonder how long the Daily Telegraph has slept on this story, and why they released it tonight?
Andrea @366:
Lots of people, on lots of blogs, suggested something similar. MPs chose to try to make as few changes as they could get away with.
They have to take the political consequences.
If Laws wants to do penance, perhaps he could announce that he’s not going to take his ministerial salary?
@375:
I’m hoping the suspicion that The Telegraph have mainly done this out of a sense of prurient homophobic spite might give Laws enough cover to atone and survive.
365. easterross, Come on that is no excuse for trousering £40k, if he is so private he would not hav efiddled teh cash by giving it to his partner. You cannot believe people are stupid enough to believe that as an excuse. Why can these people not jsut take their medicine, they get caught wit htheir hands in the till but still try to wriggle out of it. Extreemely bad show.
If David Cameron doesn’t want to waste all his political capital so early in the coalition then he will do the decent thing tomorrow and tell David Laws to resign or be sacked. And I’m a Lib Dem.
David Laws’ explanation does have the ring of truth about it. But it doesn’t matter. It’s an extraordinary length to go to, involving £40k of taxpayer’s money, in order to keep your sexuality private. Why didn’t he just pay for the flat himself and avoid all doubt?
It seems to me to be a serious error of judgement. For that, the papers will have a field day, and the Coalition cannot afford to be tainted by the “old politics” so soon.
Sorry, David. You have to go.
376. It’s touching that you have become so concerned about the plight of gay troughing MPs.
We may all be over-reacting, of course. It’s not unknown on pb.
i.e. - do the public care about this stuff any more? Look at all the scammers who got re-elected, like Hazel Blears. And Darling. And Straw.
The voters have surely concluded that all politicians are greedy bastards milking a rotten system, consequently the public might not give a fig if their prejudice is yet again confirmed.
376 - Martin, this would still be a story if Laws was a raving heterosexual and his landlord/lover was a woman.
Martin Coxall @376
Don’t be even more stupid than usual.
If his landlord had been a landlady, the political consequences of that £40,000 claim would have been the same.
346. Tim B May 28th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
You may well see me in the states sooner than you think!
To be honest I have only been hanging here for emotional reasons - But despite how sexy she might be. It is doing me no good!
I am finished here in the UK - Might as well have a good time somewhere else! 
If i go to the states I will be a millionaire by 40 and likely a billionaire by 50! 
If I stay here I will have just more miserable crap and unhappiness! Its what the UK does best!!! I have never been happy here so why would i wish to stay! 
Apart from a few snatched hours I have never been happy - why would you stay in a place that offered only unhappiness 
380. Martin , Grow up and get a life.
377
because Spring Bank Holiday weekend and will dominate the news for three whole days.
Well played the Tel, we have the best media in the world.
387
The fact that most people are saying he should go appears to have passed you by.
“he Government should compulsary purchase enough central London Flats and be done.”
they can build a university campus and put all MPs there together
by Andrea May 28th, 2010 at 11:10 pm
I think that could lead to a few stories!!!!
It’s such a bloody shame. It’s horrible to see a decent man being queer bashed by the Victorian moralist tendency of the Telegraph, and even more vile to see lefties cheering them on.
Laws could stay and see if the Standards Commisioners report clears or excoriates him. I think it would be better for the government if he stepped down with immediate effect-they should hold themselves to a higher standard than the previous government.
Jack Petersen’s idea is a jolly good one. Laws should stay in the job but draw only an MP’s salary. That way the bloodthirsty voters get his resignation as a minister, but the Coalition gets to keep his talents at the Treasury.
Good scheme.
375. For once i agree with you tim. Laws has put himself and his Leader (Clegg) in an impossible situation; something will have to give and it wont be the PM or the DPM.
My view would be that if it’s market rate, what does it matter to taxpayers who he’s paying?
However those aren’t the rules, and a sophistic defence isn’t the greatest; against that there will be plenty of sympathy for him amongst some of the media, and Labour may not call for his head. Though no doubt Jan Moir will call his finances an unnatural arrangement.
I reckon this is close to 50:50 whether he survives to next week or not.
In Law’s statement, he did mention that he and his landlord had “seperate social lives.” It doesn’t sound like a civil partnership. Let’s not pretend that there is an exact equivalence between straight and gay relationships.
@385:
I very much doubt it. The Telegraph isn’t in the routine of outing heterosexuals for claiming expenses on where they live, even if he was knobbing is landlady.
This is a malignant homophobic attack from the Telegraph, pure and simple.
“My view would be that if it’s market rate, what does it matter to taxpayers who he’s paying?”
Yes, well, our “best media in the world” went thoroughly mad over expenses, to the extent that it appears claiming any money at all was seen as dishonest.
It might be a good idea for Laws to stay. It would be good for this govt if it lost it’s holier-than-thou streak. He will be in no position to deliver any more lectures.
have any of you Laws lovers read the article?
He typically claimed between £50 and £150 a month for utilities and £100 to £200 for maintenance. Receipts were not provided to back up the claims.
However, in April 2008, the rules were changed and MPs had to provide receipts for any claims above £25. Mr Laws’s expense claims dropped sharply. For example, he claimed only £37 a month for utilities.
Mr Laws, a former investment banker who is said to be independently wealthy,
384. Being caught out with expenses is a big minus for the coming election. Blears saw her majority cut from 32% to 14%. If she’d been in a more marginal seat she may have been out on her ear. Laws has a 20% majority in Yeovil, but the Tories did have a very poor candidate.
I think that if the next election was in 2015 then Laws would survive with a trimmed majority, despite his troughing.
394. I don’t think that will fly.
The sentiments echoed by tim up thread and by Labour bloggers will be the frontpage of the Mirror from now until the day he resigns
I think it’s very unlikely that Laws will lose his job - he’ll just carry on ruining the lives of people who aren’t millionaires.
398 - Check out the job they did on Bill Cash IIRC who had a similar set up with a family member during the expenses saga
“to the extent that it appears claiming any money at all was seen as dishonest.”….and letting the mega troughers get away with some outrageous claims! I still can’t believe the Goggins story got little more than a side mention!
” It doesn’t sound like a civil partnership”
They just had to be a couple. And yes, it’s not a well defined term
1. A most interesting article on incumbency. Most of us knew already it applied to LibDem incumbents and there is evidence it may now apply to particular candidates of other parties. We may have to wait till May 2015 or even May 2010 to judge if the benefit applies most to first time incumbents ( I am inclined to believe this) or to incumbents in general providing they are not tainted of course.
2. Perhaps it is slightly surprising that the turnout in the last seat of the GE at Thirsk held up reasonably well whereas it did not in the delayed result to the 2005 GE.
3. I am sorry to hear of the Laws story tonight. I hope his career is not over. He will have a bright future if either he does not have to resign from cabinet or if he does have to but his absence from it is short.
394. Sean, what twaddle, we have had enough dodgy gits running the finances of the country. Hung by his own petard, if he was so concerned he should not have claimed £40K of our money or ay least should have come clean.
Shows he is far from as smart as all you groupies are rabbiting on about.
398. You’re being paranoid Martin. There are loads of queers who WORK at the Telegraph - I personally know a few of them.
This really isn’t a homophobic attack. That’s not the Telegraph’s style.
Martin Coxall @398:
That’s not going to surprise anyone!
Your certainties are legion. Your judgement doubtful.
398. Martin, you’re right on this one.
The historic social experience of homosexual men in this country is such that there should be a presumption for any publication against running any story which would result in “outing” someone.
The Telegraph has flagrantly ignored that presumption, in the interests of what? Selling a few newspapers and undermining our government.
392: I’m certainly not “queer bashing” as you pithily put it Martin Coxall.
It is the fact that Laws himself seemed ashamed of his homosexuality, otherwise why hide it.
Also the fact that he has been caught bunging public money to his lover is the real stopper.
I have attacked Labour for far less than this, and if it was a Tory doing this I would be up in arms just the same.
“It would be good for this govt if it lost it’s holier-than-thou streak”
Pointing out Labour’s profligacy and scorched earth methods isn’t holier than thou. It’s a public service.
406. I think the rules specifies that if they are living together “as if they are civil partners”.
Isn’t this all similar to what James Purnell was caught doing with his fiancee? She wasn’t the landlord, but they were supposed to pay half rent each, then he’s caught out claiming the majority of the rent on his expenses.
Whatever else they were or were not caught doing, I do not know, but he certainly didn’t step down because of it.
398- Martin, aside from what you think of the Telegraph’s journalistic practices, what do you think of the actions of Laws?
411. Another nutter.
So Mike, why did you pull my latest contribution?
415. Darling’s multiple flipping and Straw’s blatant theft (”accountancy is not my strong suit” - yeah, right) were both arguably WORSE than this.
415 - Don’t forget anybodies favourite on PB, Sion Simon, bunged his sister £40k…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/6836348/Minister-in-secret-40000-payment-to-sister.html
@409:
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…
If someone was claiming Housing Benefit in the same situation they would end up with a criminal record and saying “we weren’t a couple, we had separate bank accounts” would be laughed out of court.
It’s hardly Bernie Ecclestone league. Odd parallel though.
I can’t say that I’m sorry to see a sanctimonious Liberal getting his comeuppance.Will not be the last I suspect.
Laws went to a catholic school. Maybe his parents are deeply religious
didnt want to upset them.
419. Sean, He has been caught and if he has any principles should be resigning, no excuses.
He was in the City which would explain why he probably wanted to keep his private life private. I have some sympathy with that.
I don’t like the way the Telegraph is outing him in this way. It smacks of bullying + I wonder what Campbell’s role in this is.
@416:
It looks to me like Laws was claiming expenses on his main residence, as he was entitled to do. It looks a lot to me like his main crime has been that of being a private man and gay.
So there’s a Lib/Lab coalition and Mr Brown appoints Mr Laws to the post of Chief Secretary.
The Telegraph then posts the same story. And you Tory Boys would say?
Don’t bother to answer we all know what you would have said.
425. There are parallels with the Simon Hughes situation. It’s very sad.
And let’s not forget Peter “perfect” Hain and his litany of crimes, sorry, mistakes - didn’t he pay his 108 year old granny a cool £20k to “do his ironing” or something?
390. David May 28th, 2010 at 11:20 pm
Not sure that is aimed at me but if it is i would say if cameron wants to make ago of his government - he should bring me into no.10. I am not authodox but i am good at fighting his corner. Sure I am eccentric but apart from my own (financial) crisis i can deal with it all better than any of them.
My experience comes from years of crisis management from pissing the bed in someone elses house to alsorts of other stuff!
You have to think on your feet and think of strategies to deal with everything! 
Sadly his team cannot think on its feet!
429
Pretty much what most of us have been saying here - a shame, but he has to go.
429
Pretty much what most of us have been saying here - a shame, but he has to go.
431 - I am still eagerly awaiting the maiden publication of that think tank he is involved with…
I did wonder whether it was market rate, and if so, my personal view is similar to Aaron’s - that if we as taxpayers aren’t out of pocket, no problem.
However, the rules don’t seem to reflect that and his defence looks like sophistry. The fact that he moved in before the relationship and his desire to protect his sexuality could provide a way back into Cabinet after a while out - let the story subside and get the perspective of distance.
But retaining someone as Chief Secretary - wielder of the axe - who is apparently tainted, would seem untenable. I very much regret it, but he has to go. I want him to be able to return after a purgatorial period, because everything I have seen of him as a politician is that he is one of the most able people on any bench in the House, and deep down I still would like to see him as Chancellor or even PM one day (and I don’t give a stuff about his sexuality - that’s his affair, no pun intended).
@429:
In that situation, you’d be howling with rage about ‘Tory homophobia’. But now, you’re now gleefully embracing an evening of fun-for-all-the-family solid queer bashing.
425. But does his mum still check his bank account?
He could have kept his private life private even without paying him for the rooms. The rest of the world would have assumed he was paying the landlord even if he wasn’t and just the commons expenses office clerks would have known he was living there for free.
But maybe the landlord didn’t want to give the room away for free. From Laws’ wording, it doesn’t sound as they were a couple in a fairlytale romance!
Without being rude, it sounded they were fuc* buddies more than anything else
432. Time for bed I think, you are rambling.
And the transgressions of Darling, Straw, Brown, Hain, Sion Simon, etc - they don’t excuse anything. The excuse “yeah, but they’re just as bad” excuses nothing. If “cleaner politics” is to mean anything, we can’t simply say “well, only as dirty in some patches”.
426. I agree - he should resign. It would make a stark contrast to those lefty leeches like Darling and Straw and Blears et al, who had - and have - no shame.
The Coalition needs to be better than Labour. After all, it’s not hard.
However I see absolutely no problem with the Jack Petersen solution: let him resign his ministerial salary (and any ministerial perks) but let him keep the job he’s got, on a basic MP’s pay.
So he does his penance, but the Coalition - and the nation - keeps his talents. Let’s face it, we need them.
Then everyone’s happy, surely?
436 “But retaining someone as Chief Secretary - wielder of the axe - who is apparently tainted, would seem untenable.”
But it might do the govt some long term good to lose the holier-than-thou tone. A little humility now, might go a long way later.
Laws clearly can no longer preach. Surely a good thing.
Martin Coxall @437
Garbage. Laws sexuality is immaterial. The man is a trougher. He took money from the tax-payers whom he intends to bash from his well-paid post at the Treasury.
Laws, if he had the dignity of David Carrington, would resign immediately.
422. No it wouldnt as it would be very very difficult to prove. It wouldnt get to court. Can we please have some honesty. Living as a couple may not be well defined by the Parliaments fees office, but you rightly make the point that it is clearly defined for benefits purposes.
Are they living together as man and wife, are they sharing a household (a household, isnt how it seems, students living in a flat are all individual households), the most important one, is probably do they share a bed, dressing facilities etc.
If so, he is toast and has no defence. If he is just knobbing the landlord every now and then, then he is in the clear.
438. Because Laws is independently wealthy then he could have easily made out that he was paying for his second home out of his own pocket. Yeovil electors know he’s a millionaire ex-banker after all.
From his website:
http://www.yeovil-libdems.org.uk/blog/1329.htm
David’s Blog
A new politics for Britain
I am proud of our policy agreement …………. cleaning up politics – and I want to help deliver it.
Ha-ha f***ing-ha.
terrible news about Laws
I think it would be ridiculous to lose him over this but at the same time the activity of lining your pocket at taxpayers’ expense is unacceptable.
I admit to not knowing what to do - perhaps I should put my tory hat on and celebrate the puncturing of Lib Dem holier-than-thouness but Laws is one of the most able people to be in government for a v long time. I’d hate the Telegraph for doing it to him but the fact is they are telling the truth and he has behaved appallingly.
A spokesman for Prime Minister David Cameron said: “The prime minister has been made aware of this situation and he agrees with David Laws’ decision to self refer to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner.”
Is the above the get out of jail card: do not pass go, do not collect £200 get-out?
If so, it stinks of sanctimonious cant.
326: Andy Cooke: “a hell of a crash for anyone” - that’s a typically decent reaction from Andy C. I used to be on the same (Treasury) Select Committee as David Laws - other members felt he was a bit more party political than the norm of the committee culture, but undoubtedly extremely clever and hard-working.
When all the expenses stuff started, there were some cases of MPs renting from relatives, and I remember thinking at the time that, so long as they were paying no more than the market rent, that wasn’t really a big deal. In theory the same result for taxpayers is achieved if the partner rents for £X to some unknown tenant Y, while the MP pays £X rent to unknown landlord Z. If they’re partners, I can see it seems a pity when they can simply live together.
The problem about renting from a partner, though, is that the couple may be jointly profiting by it - if e.g. you go on holiday together and your partner pays the hotel bill. The system isn’t supposed to come down to you effectively paying yourself. And the distinction between partners and spouses really does seem to me to be hair-splitting.
438. Yeah, it does get into weird territory–when is a person a “partner,” as opposed to a “girlfriend” or “boyfriend” or the aforesaid “fuc*buddy”? Do “friends with benefits” count?
I suppose it is one more incentive to marry, as Cameron wants us all to do.
Anyway, when is there going to be a Tory sex scandal? At least one of them has to be doing something that frightens the horses.
SeanT @441:
Sean, I really don’t think he can be the axeman now. Not after this. Virtually any other Cabinet position, maybe he could get away with that solution, but not Chief Secretary.
It’s a bloody shame, because he was looking as though he was going to define the role as no previous Chief Secretary had done, and after a couple of years, the case for him to become Chancellor might have been so overwhelming as to be irresistible.
The other interesting thing is the precedent this sets. I can think of a number of other senior MPs who aren’t openly gay, but might potentially get outed with this sort of story. Hopefully this sort of journalism doesn’t become de rigeur for the Telegraph.
441. I like the idea. It might wash, give up his ministerial salary for the next three years. Costs him a fortune…
We do need him.
444. Knobbing the same landlord over a period of 9 years and following him when he moved? Likes like a long-time partnership to me.
A post on the Beeb blog
MrJSmith wrote:
Interesting plot twist tonight.
Imagine a situation where David Laws declines to appear on QT because he fears AC is in a position to out him (directly or indirectly) on national TV. The easiest way to avoid an awkward situation might be to focus on the make-up of the QT panel and simply decline to appear. Not entirely honest perhaps, but fairly understandable.
At this point, I would like to know the answers to a couple of things:
1) How much of the Laws story did the BBC know about?
2) Why was AC allowed to make reference to Laws non-appearance on QT?
Might be just as well you have (as an earlier poster suggested) the words of the DG to hide behind Gavin. If you knew about the Laws story in advance your credibility is next to zero.
I never cease to be amazed about the ability of the Tories here to turn any story into an opportunity to bash the BBC.
Hammond to the Treasury, Grayling to Transport.
If Cameron/Clegg were going to sack Laws would they not have done it by now, unless Cameron wants to sack him and Clegg wont agree.
457.. Good moves, but would Clegg countenance not filling a L/Dem post by another of the party? Idon’t think so.
If there are moves now, surely we need for:
- Another Lib Dem to move into the Treasury somewhere (so if the Chief Sec slot goes to a Tory, than one out of Justine Greening, Mark Hoban or David Gauke has to move (assuming Sir James Sassoon stays put as a handpicked expert)
- Another Lib Dem Cabinet post is needed for the Lib Dem Five. So a Tory will have to make way (and a Lib Dem in whichever Dept that is would be shifted for another Tory at a lower level).
The complexity of a Coalition reshuffle has just been brought home.
A lot of the hysterical antis are implying, or indeed outright stating, that Laws has somehow benefitted financially from this. But he hasn’t, surely? If he’d been renting any other place as his second home, he’d still have been entitled to claim for it. If he’d chosen to marry his partner, he’d also have been entitled to claim. So the only “story” is, surely, his decision to keep his private life private, creating a technical breach of the rules. An error of judgement, almost certainly. But anything close to multiple flipping of properties or maxing out the expenses limit for extravagant home improvements? No way.
I totally get that this is a story. Because the Telegraph, ably assisted by the rest of the media, have ensured that anything that has the words “MPs expenses” in it is. But if my analysis is correct, he’s not “on the take” in any way, and I simply don’t agree he’s lost his moral authority to continue to sort out the monumental car crash of an economy Labour has left the Coalition to deal with.
To Mr Pundit at 457, who thinks the next appropriate move is to promote utter non-entities like Hammond and Grayling, I can only despair. To lose someone brilliant like Laws over Telegraph prurience and innuendo, and replace him in the way you suggest would be lowest common denominator politics.
This doesn’t look good, I have to concede. But scratch the surface and it sure doesn’t stink. Just has the faint whiff of personal tragedy about it.
I hope enough of the rest of the media, and enough decent Tories beyond Cameron show some nerve and face down the Telegraph in this one. There was some good in what they did with expenses. But it has long since gone beyond that into a witchhunt that damages politics and democracy. At some point someone has to stand up to the paper and tell them they don’t “own” the right to pass judgement on MPs alone. I hope this might be the point.
Laws is a good thing for the country. The plaudits he’s gathered in recent days are deserved. This doesn’t detract from those plaudits, in my view. I hope he survives.
Post 460 - Cameron/Clegg should bring John Thurso or Tim Farron in as Ministers if Laws goes.
Thurso is a respected businessman - perhaps the only other LD MP who could do the Chief Sec role. He’s a Scot though - so he may not want to be seen as the face of the cuts.
Transport has to tackle Boris, I’m sure the Mayor would love Grayling but it’s not happening.
Shapps to the Treasury, bring Housing back into the Cabinet and give Farron the job of reversing the decline in public Housing - v.imp in his constituency and- suits Clegg having him inside the tent.
“463 Shapps to the Treasury, bring Housing back into the Cabinet and give Farron the job of reversing the decline in public Housing - v.imp in his constituency and- suits Clegg having him inside the tent.”
No - make Sarah Teather housing minister. She is a real fighter on the issue and represents a deprived inner London seat where social housing shortages and overcrowing are a scandal. She is a bit lost at Education - she doesn’t approve of academies which is Gove’s big agenda ticket.
Shapps is a bit lightweight - Justine Greening or John Thurso are possibilities for Chief Sec.
A lot of the hysterical antis are implying, or indeed outright stating, that Laws has somehow benefitted financially from this. But he hasn’t, surely? If he’d been renting any other place as his second home, he’d still have been entitled to claim for it. If he’d chosen to marry his partner, he’d also have been entitled to claim. So the only “story” is, surely, his decision to keep his private life private, creating a technical breach of the rules. An error of judgement, almost certainly. But anything close to multiple flipping of properties or maxing out the expenses limit for extravagant home improvements? No way.
I totally get that this is a story. Because the Telegraph, ably assisted by the rest of the media, have ensured that anything that has the words “MPs expenses” in it is. But if my analysis is correct, he’s not “on the take” in any way, and I simply don’t agree he’s lost his moral authority to continue to sort out the monumental car crash of an economy Labour has left the Coalition to deal with.
To Mr Pundit at 457, who thinks the next appropriate move is to promote utter non-entities like Hammond and Grayling, I can only despair. To lose someone brilliant like Laws over Telegraph prurience and innuendo, and replace him in the way you suggest would be lowest common denominator politics.
This doesn’t look good, I have to concede. But scratch the surface and it sure doesn’t stink. Just has the faint whiff of personal tragedy about it.
I hope enough of the rest of the media, and enough decent Tories beyond Cameron show some nerve and face down the Telegraph on this one. There was some good in what they did with expenses. But it has long since gone beyond that into a witchhunt that damages politics and democracy. At some point someone has to stand up to the paper and tell them they don’t “own” the right to pass judgement on MPs alone. I hope this might be the point.
Laws is a good thing for the country. The plaudits he’s gathered in recent days are deserved. This doesn’t detract from those plaudits, in my view. I hope he survives.
Having seen the substance of the allegations, for once (and once only) - I agree with Martin Coxall.
It’s the nasty ’secret lover’ innuendo that gives the Daily DavidDavisograph’s game away.
Laws will survive - he’s done nothing wrong (other than claim reasonable living expenses when he probably didn’t need to).
test
Rob @465
Emotive language (”hystericals antis”, “prurience and innunendo” only clouds the issue. If Laws has been breaking the rules (and let’s not try wheeling out that “technical breach” defence) and dishonestly taking public funds, is matters not that he is competent in his job, or that he’s offered to pay the money back. He should be dismissed immediately. This government has no chance if it begins with bent moral principles.
Having seen the substance of the allegations, for once (and once only) - I agree with Martin Coxall.
It’s the nasty ’secret lover’ innuendo that gives the Daily DavidDavisograph’s game away.
Laws will survive - he’s done nothing wrong (other than claim reasonable living expenses when he probably didn’t need to).
And it would be a Lib Dem who would go to the Treasury - Ed Davey? - if Laws is forced out.