[Kizzy]

Youtube video

[arista]

[billy123]

Interesting.
Ed Miliband enters the final lap of the election boosted by a poll today showing Labour has regained the lead over the Tories.

The Survation survey for the Daily Mirror reveals Labour has overturned a 4pt lead for David Cameron to take a point advantage.

Just a week ago Ed Miliband was trailing on 29%.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/po...tories-5618314

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by bobnot

Interesting.
Ed Miliband enters the final lap of the election boosted by a poll today showing Labour has regained the lead over the Tories.

The Survation survey for the Daily Mirror reveals Labour has overturned a 4pt lead for David Cameron to take a point advantage.

Just a week ago Ed Miliband was trailing on 29%.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/po...tories-5618314

for the Daily Mirror

[Kizzy]

And why are the suns yougov polls more accurate?...

[Kizzy]

Exercise of regulatory functions: economic growth

(1)A person exercising a regulatory function to which this section applies must, in the exercise of the function, have regard to the desirability of promoting economic growth.
(2)In performing the duty under subsection (1), the person must, in particular, consider the importance for the promotion of economic growth of exercising the regulatory function in a way which ensures that—
(a)regulatory action is taken only when it is needed, and
(b)any action taken is proportionate.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...on/108/enacted

[Jack_]

yaaaaasssss even more of a Ronnie fan than I already was now, what a great man

[Shaun]

what a guy

[Tom4784]

I'm sick of getting a lot of **** through my letterbox every morning, I live in a marginal constituency so everywhere you go you get harassed by campaigners and leaflets.

I'm getting quite irked with it all.

[arista]

Farage is on Marr now

Then Its Clegg

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by arista

Farage is on Marr now

Then Its Clegg

Do you know, I really think Nigel Farage made the best points this morning. He was so right to suggest with 4 days left, can there be discussion as to the 'issues' of policy in the election rather than deals with who after the election.

Absolutely staggering too,from Nick Clegg, after the last tuition fees fiasco,that to Yvette Cooper's question,as to would he vote to increase tuition fees further, he cold not say a firm 'no' to that.
Beyond all belief.

I also have to say,Andrew Marr has now become sadly one of the worst interviewers, he stays on topics that are a waste of time to even start and his programme has gone down dramatically.

[arista]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Do you know, I really think Nigel Farage made the best points this morning. He was so right to suggest with 4 days left, can there be discussion as to the 'issues' of policy in the election rather than deals with who after the election.

Absolutely staggering too,from Nick Clegg, after the last tuition fees fiasco,that to Yvette Cooper's question,as to would he vote to increase tuition fees further, he cold not say a firm 'no' to that.
Beyond all belief.

I also have to say,Andrew Marr has now become sadly one of the worst interviewers, he stays on topics that are a waste of time to even start and his programme has gone down dramatically.

Yes thats why I like to hear Farage

[arista]

Farage is now on SkyNewsHD

[joeysteele]

I was also pleased to learn this morning that Nigel Farage has admitted he got Ed Miliband wrong as to changing his mind on an EU referendum.

His addition to that because he didn't, has made any agreements between those two parties impossible, I think Nigel Farage is actually slightly disappointed as to that.

[arista]

CNN now
UK Election Debate

In or Out of Europe


UKIP , Labour, LibDem
Conservative there


They have LCD touch screen votings

Repeated at 10:30PM

[Kizzy]

you know, I'm feeling pretty confident that the other parties will work together to keep the toxic tories locked out.
If you look at the legislation that's been rushed through and has achieved assent in the last year its clear why they should never be let back in.

[Kizzy]

Financial crisis not caused by Labour over-spending, says top Treasury official

Patrick Wintour Patrick Wintour
Sir Nicholas Macpherson, the permanent secretary to the Treasury, has argued that the 2008 financial crisis was “a banking crisis pure and simple”, contradicting Conservative claims that it was caused by Labour over-spending, Patrick Wintour reports.

[Macpherson’s] surprising remarks come after Ed Miliband came under pressure on a leader’s question time debate last week that Labour government had overspent, a view strengthened by the notorious letter left by the former Liam Byrne treasury chief secretary to his successor saying there is “no money left”.

In a largely challenging review of Mr Osborne’s Economic Experiment, a book by William Keegan, the Observer economics columnist, Macpherson wrote “some of Keegan’s book resonates. The 2008 crisis was a banking crisis pure and simple. Excessive risk had built up in the system; the regulators failed to appreciate the scale of that risk or to address it.

“As he puts it, it was ‘a failure of the Group of Seven economic policymaking establishment’, myself included. Inevitably, countries with bigger banking sectors, notably the UK, were worse affected.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...b0fc4f1b18c06b

[bitontheslide]

It was the labour party that over spent, selling off all our assets that made it an event we couldn't cope with. Simple.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Financial crisis not caused by Labour over-spending, says top Treasury official

Patrick Wintour Patrick Wintour
Sir Nicholas Macpherson, the permanent secretary to the Treasury, has argued that the 2008 financial crisis was “a banking crisis pure and simple”, contradicting Conservative claims that it was caused by Labour over-spending, Patrick Wintour reports.

[Macpherson’s] surprising remarks come after Ed Miliband came under pressure on a leader’s question time debate last week that Labour government had overspent, a view strengthened by the notorious letter left by the former Liam Byrne treasury chief secretary to his successor saying there is “no money left”.

In a largely challenging review of Mr Osborne’s Economic Experiment, a book by William Keegan, the Observer economics columnist, Macpherson wrote “some of Keegan’s book resonates. The 2008 crisis was a banking crisis pure and simple. Excessive risk had built up in the system; the regulators failed to appreciate the scale of that risk or to address it.

“As he puts it, it was ‘a failure of the Group of Seven economic policymaking establishment’, myself included. Inevitably, countries with bigger banking sectors, notably the UK, were worse affected.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...b0fc4f1b18c06b

He is right.
You know Kizzy,I wanted to vote Conservative in 2010,however I never blamed Labour for the financial crisis, I just felt they had run out of steam and I was disappointed with Gordon Brown's performance as PM.
Anyway like you, for my sins I voted Lib Dem in the end mainly because of tuition fees.

In both elections after 1997 however, in 2001 and 2005,both under William Hague and Michael Howard, the Conservatives said they would keep to Labour's spending plans if they had won those elections.
So little would have been different once the crash came likely anyway.

Where they differred before 2008,was once David Cameron became leader in 2005, he and the Conservative opposition then felt that the Labour govt; was actually regulating the Banks 'too much'!!

I do criticise heavily Gordon Brown for selling off the gold reserves,they would have certainly offset some of the effects of the crash,he also made bad decisions as to pension funds too.

By the same token to be fair, the Conservative govts; of the 80s sold off the public utilities very cheaply too,gas, electricity and water.
It seesm to be a problem govts; have as to getting really good and the very best deals..

There would have been the same crash, the same massive recession,the same baling out of the Banks and subsequently some really enormous mess and task for the nex govt; after the financial crisis hit globally.
Whoever had been in,would have left chaos in 2010.

It may well have been under the Conservatives, more human cost as to massively high unemployment,rather than a financial mess but some really nasty situation would have been left no matter what govt; had been in power.
No way could I have seen the Conservatives letting the Banks go to the wall and the massive fears ensuing for savers funds and other customers accounts.

I think Liam Byrne's letter was a stupid thing to even write by anyone for any new govt; to see, however to have someone like Lib Dem. David Laws highlighting that at the time was equally a sick joke too.

Govts' get it wrong, I do think myself, with 11 unbroken years of growth and no hint of recession,despite their spending between 1997 to 2007,really Labour should have,and were in the position to, planning more for any bad times that may come.

That was a failure on their part but no way did I blame Labour for the crash itself,(I don't think any so called brilliant forward looking worldwide financial institutions even saw that banking crisis coming either), and I doubt much of any planning for bad times would have avoided the massive effects of the crash and recession that came from it.
It didn't help,I admit, that they didn't prepare for times like that 'possibly happening' however.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

He is right.
You know Kizzy,I wanted to vote Conservative in 2010,however I never blamed Labour for the financial crisis, I just felt they had run out of steam and I was disappointed with Gordon Brown's performance as PM.
Anyway like you, for my sins I voted Lib Dem in the end mainly because of tuition fees.

In both elections after 1997 however, in 2001 and 2005,both under William Hague and Michael Howard, the Conservatives said they would keep to Labour's spending plans if they had won those elections.
So little would have been different once the crash came likely anyway.

Where they differred before 2008,was once David Cameron became leader in 2005, he and the Conservative opposition then felt that the Labour govt; was actually regulating the Banks 'too much'!!

I do criticise heavily Gordon Brown for selling off the gold reserves,they would have certainly offset some of the effects of the crash,he also made bad decisions as to pension funds too.

By the same token to be fair, the Conservative govts; of the 80s sold off the public utilities very cheaply too,gas, electricity and water.
It seesm to be a problem govts; have as to getting really good and the very best deals..

There would have been the same crash, the same massive recession,the same baling out of the Banks and subsequently some really enormous mess and task for the nex govt; after the financial crisis hit globally.
Whoever had been in,would have left chaos in 2010.

It may well have been under the Conservatives, more human cost as to massively high unemployment,rather than a financial mess but some really nasty situation would have been left no matter what govt; had been in power.
No way could I have seen the Conservatives letting the Banks go to the wall and the massive fears ensuing for savers funds and other customers accounts.

I think Liam Byrne's letter was a stupid thing to even write by anyone for any new govt; to see, however to have someone like Lib Dem. David Laws highlighting that at the time was equally a sick joke too.

Govts' get it wrong, I do think myself, with 11 unbroken years of growth and no hint of recession,despite their spending between 1997 to 2007,really Labour should have,and were in the position to, planning more for any bad times that may come.

That was a failure on their part but no way did I blame Labour for the crash itself,(I don't think any so called brilliant forward looking worldwide financial institutions even saw that banking crisis coming either), and I doubt much of any planning for bad times would have avoided the massive effects of the crash and recession that came from it.
It didn't help,I admit, that they didn't prepare for times like that 'possibly happening' however.

Pretty balanced summary I think

I was angry at the qt debate last week when Ed failed to acknowledge this misspending. In an ideal world we would have both parties modifying their proposals such that they don't over spend or underspend, but it seems that will never happen. Given that, while we have a massive deficit, I personally am more comfortable with an underspend as that will at least get us back to an equilibrium where continuous overspending won't.

If there was a genuine protest party that didn't have the sinister under currents that UKIP has, I think all those undecided and disillusioned potential voters would flock to it. At the moment there just isn't a real alternative and to me that is what is wanted at this time

[Kizzy]

What misspending? Does the opinion of Mcpherson not trump that of the sun?
Maybe Labour should focus more on the misselling of current and past conservative govts instead of proactive forward thinking?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Pretty balanced summary I think

I was angry at the qt debate last week when Ed failed to acknowledge this misspending. In an ideal world we would have both parties modifying their proposals such that they don't over spend or underspend, but it seems that will never happen. Given that, while we have a massive deficit, I personally am more comfortable with an underspend as that will at least get us back to an equilibrium where continuous overspending won't.

If there was a genuine protest party that didn't have the sinister under currents that UKIP has, I think all those undecided and disillusioned potential voters would flock to it. At the moment there just isn't a real alternative and to me that is what is wanted at this time

Thank you for that.

I also agree totally with the part of the post in bold.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

If there was a genuine protest party that didn't have the sinister under currents that UKIP has, I think all those undecided and disillusioned potential voters would flock to it. At the moment there just isn't a real alternative and to me that is what is wanted at this time

Yes, there is a reason that the SNP are expected to get 90% (or maybe even more) of Scotland's 59 seats, and this is a pretty huge part of it. People are completely disillusioned with the Con/Lab endless seesaw and are being offered a real alternative with a very different vision.

[Kizzy]

Youtube video

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Yes, there is a reason that the SNP are expected to get 90% (or maybe even more) of Scotland's 59 seats, and this is a pretty huge part of it. People are completely disillusioned with the Con/Lab endless seesaw and are being offered a real alternative with a very different vision.

I agree with that and even in northern areas of England I have been to, many would like to see what happens with a result, as is being expected from the polls.

Somehow,it may be that Labour can still do better than the polling suggests in Scotland.
They will lose seats heavily and badly but in polling,it is generally assumed the rise of SNP support ad the fall of Labour support will be the same in all seats across the Nation.

However,many Labour MPs have likely strong personal votes,so I can see them scraping home in more seats than would be expected from the polling.
I am sure the SNP will stack up vote after vote in the seats they already have and I am certain they will romp home in Lib Dem held seats.

Although,I still cannot see the Scots voting out Charles Kennedy for the Lib Dems,he did after all vote against going into this coalition and must have a really strong personal vote up there.

All eyes will be on Scotland however,no doubt as to Thursdays results.
What feeling do you get Toy Soldier?