UK General Election 2015

[JustAnotherLogin]

We are now officially in the 2015 campaign (party budget restrictions for the 'long campaign' period start today), so it seems time to star this thread.

No throwing insults at other PHers
No insulting politicians you don't like

Just facts, analysis etc please

So, given that an outright victory seems unlikely for any single party, we have to consider what the viable coalitions could be. They would have to be centred around one of the main parties, so, my view

Tories:
UKIP- possible in return for referendum (which is Tory policy anyway)
Lib Dems- possible if Tories are close to mark, but would split what is left of tne
SNP- can't see it
Irish parties: not as coalition, but support possible
Greens- unlikely

Labour
UKIP; would seem unlikely
Lib Dems: yes
SNP: Yes, but dangerous for labour
Greens: yes

And then the wild card, that would get some Kippers jumping up and down that they were right all along

A tory-labour coalition - or some sort of support arrangement. I can only see this happening if neither major can form a coaltion with the enough minors because they are all demanding too much (e.g. UKIP demand not referendum but exit, SNP demand independence). Even then it seems unthinkable, but we have to form a govt somehow

[JustAnotherLogin]

FiF said:

Mr_B said:

Some how the Tories will remain in power and they'll engineer a way to avoid delivering a meaningful referendum.

I 'd also like to know the answer to the fixed term parliament vs snap election question.

Unless I'm missing something, zbc answered your question.

Although out of scope of this thread, I am interested what you think they may do to make any referendum not meaningful.

[JustAnotherLogin]

FiF said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

FiF said:

Mr_B said:

Some how the Tories will remain in power and they'll engineer a way to avoid delivering a meaningful referendum.

I 'd also like to know the answer to the fixed term parliament vs snap election question.

Unless I'm missing something, zbc answered your question.

Although out of scope of this thread, I am interested what you think they may do to make any referendum not meaningful.

By that I meant what I understand his intended strategy. This is to make a lot of huff and puff about negotiations, but actually only agree sufficient that somehow he can spin it to give a govt recommendation for a stay in vote. The premise being that a sufficient number of the electorate will be sufficiently uninterested to do anything other than rubber stamp what the govt wants.

Thus it's a referendum over reforms which aren't meaningful in terms of the reforms which the EU needs.

Of course some will think that the EU is just fine and dandy as it is and they are entitled to that view but suspect in the minority. Forget the actual figures that came out on that now but iirc they were definitely in the minority.

If Cameron gives people a vote on leaving EU, no matter what reforms he has achieved (if any) and no matter what recommendation he gives, then it is meaningful. Even if the vote goes against you.

And in fact, without renegotiation, more people would vote to stay in than leave on the last 2 polls
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_referendum_o...

Though given the number of unsures, margin and past history, I think we can agree that it is too close to call


Anyway. Back to the subject if we may

[JustAnotherLogin]

McWigglebum4th said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

so, my view

Tories:
UKIP- possible in return for referendum (which is Tory policy anyway)
Lib Dems- possible if Tories are close to mark, but would split what is left of tne
SNP- can't see it
Irish parties: not as coalition, but support possible
Greens- unlikely

I would say the tory party would love to take the greens onboard if they could

Even if you were right, I can't see the greens agreeing to it

Economic policy might be a bit of a hot topic for one thing:
http://greenparty.org.uk/values/fair-society.html

[JustAnotherLogin]

Can we try and drop the pejorative terms on this thread please. If you want to criticise a party you like then use facts and analysis, not just blanket insults

[JustAnotherLogin]

flyingvisit said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

...
No throwing insults at other PHers
No insulting politicians you don't like
...
some Kippers jumping up and down that they were right all along
...

Nice start.

You think that is an insult? Doesn't seem it to me, and wasn't intended that way. If you have taken offence from that then I apologise

[JustAnotherLogin]

AJS- said:

Yeah I really meant "winning" in a wider sense than just number of seats. Labour may just scrape enough to form a majority but it won't be because of any great desire for a Labour government so much ad a lack of any viable alternative, except for a Tory party who are virtually identical but slightly more obnoxious to a slightly larger slice of the population.

The Tories are not virtually identical or even remotely close to Labour unless you fixate on 2 policies (EU and immigration). On the economy, benefits, defence, NHS and many others they are well apart. The most important item in my view is the economy where they are massively apart. On that subject we don't unfortunately know where UKIP sit. Their official policies do not give sufficient information, and their previous statements on the subject are mutually contradictory. Woolfe and Farage in particular seem to have very different views.

[JustAnotherLogin]

FiF said:

It's the trend that matters. One poll is merely a snapshot and not a prediction.

National % means nothing much really. The LD will win far more seats than that poll would suggest. UKIP will win far fewer seats than the LD but receiving, as things stand, a much higher % of the national vote.

I agree its the trend. On which you can pick your period and take your choice: Pick the last 3 months and the trend slightly downwards. Last 12 months and it is slightly upwards. Shall we call it flat?

I disagree with you however that it is seats not national % that matters. Normally that is true, but in the case of UKIP at this election, the bigger impact will not how many seats they take, but how many votes they take off the Tories and to a less extend labour, and thus the impact they have on the seats taken by others

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

apart from Labour, just about everybody is advocating slimming down the public sector? (and to be fair to the Tories, they are actually doing this!)

Ukip's stated policy is to reduce the size of government, yes they have made comments about beefing up borders, and that probably will require more front line staff, but with luck as a balance to reducing the bloated home office that seems incapable of doing anything either right or on time no matter how many people or outsourcers you bring in.

Where is it stated that is UKIP ppolicy to "reduce the size of government"?

I can see pledges to scrap a couple of departments (with no statement on where their functions will be fulfilled) and several policies that look like increasing the size of govt.

But i can't see a pledge to cut it overall

Are there more "official UKIP"policies than at
http://www.ukip.org/policies_for_people
?

[JustAnotherLogin]

XJ Flyer said:

AJS- said:

XJ Flyer
So trade barriers and import taxes?

Unless you want the country to eventually go the way of Greece absolutely.

They have problems that have nothing to do with free trade - although I would agree are accentuated by the Eurozone

Going down the protectionist route has been tried. Ever read about the 1930s?

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

problem is, free trade only works when all parties are on a level(ish) playing field.

as soon as you look at the US, China, Russia, etc then you can start to understand whilst the principal is great, there are fundamental issues that need to be accounted for.

everybody loves to use the words 'state subsidized' but no matter what you call it, everybody does something that creates an unlevel base.

the UK's biggest failing is we have pretty much followed the letter and even inference of non-subsidy agreements when it's pretty clear others have either ignored or hidden their use, hence we end up with the kind of un-balance we see now.

Add to this the climate change bullst and hey presto, we put ourselves at a massive disadvantage (relative to china/US/etc).

the biggest single issue facing the UK's industrial base is energy costs, and if this is not sorted soon, we might as well kiss goodbye to manufacturing.

Why let facts get in the way of a strongly held belief?

"Economy on target for strongest growth in six years as manufacturing output storms ahead"

Figures from a year ago (after all energy prices are falling at the moment so I can't use this years figures

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-25...

Or over longer term?

"Although the manufacturing sector's share of both employment and the UK's GDP has steadily fallen since the 1960s, data from the OECD shows that manufacturing output in terms of both production and value has steadily increased since 1945. A 2009 report from PricewaterhouseCoopers, citing data from the UK Office for National Statistics, stated that manufacturing output (gross value added at 2007 prices) has increased in 35 of the 50 years between 1958 and 2007, and output in 2007 was at record levels, approximately double that in 1958."

No-one has yet managed to explain why manufacturing is more important than other sectors either.

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

And, asif by magic....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30585678

Because the figures were revised down from a growth of 3% to 2.6% you think that justifies your view that the entire manufacturing industry is about to collapse?

The doom is strong in this one

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

Keep reading...

read it all.

So one bloke reckons growth next year will be weaker, another reckons stronger

GDP per head measured from start of recession to now is slightly down. No surprise, that is what a recession does after all.

Nowhere does it say that UK manufacturing is about to disappear

Indeed, only last month we had this set of good news from the manufacturing sector (growth accelerating, optimism up, job creation accelerating

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29876956

Some concern about Eurozone and strength of sterling it is true, still hardly in your league of foretelling disaster

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

You missed this bit...


http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/bop/balance-of-payme...

You mean this bit?

The trade deficit narrowed to £9.0 billion in Quarter 3 2014, from £9.2 billion in Quarter 2 2014, mainly due to a larger surplus on trade in services. The surplus on trade in services equates to 5.1% of GDP which is the largest proportion since records began in 1955. This was partially offset by a widening in the trade in goods deficit.

So the trade deficit narrowed? That is good news.

Now remind me why manufacturing is more important than services. I asked but can't find your response

Doesn't say how much goods trade balance worsened. But that does happen you know. Things fluctuate. Still don't see your Revelations style horsemen of the apocalypse coming to scythe through the car industry, or aerospace, or pharma.

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

Still a deficit...

When was the last time we had a trade surpass?

And services us all very well, but it only takes a hickup and we are screwed for another 5+ years.

I'm a big fan of making st rather than selling financial services.

Lots more to it than that.

And your preference is not a big argument for manufacturing being more important than services

[JustAnotherLogin]

fblm said:

How are the polls so tight.

Partly because the average voter is not terribly hot on economics

Partly because of the attitude like one person interviewed on R4 yesterday who agreed that the Tories were doing what was needed to correct the mess Labour left behind, but they would vote Labour anyway

Partly because the Tories have lost approx 15% of the electorate to UKIP, whereas Labour have lost only 5% -including according to Ashcroft's polling, many whose preferred outcome is a Tory Govt (not part of a coalition).

[JustAnotherLogin]

Odd on a 2nd general election this year cut from 7/1 to 6/1

Evens on UKIP winning 7 or more seats

6/4 on Farage failing to stay teetotal through Jan

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30682983

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

The Hypno-Toad said:

Errr... didn't Beaker tell Miss Klass that the money from the mansion tax would be going straight into the NHS as a whole?

Errr... didn't Balls say that the mansion tax would be going to help pay off the deficit?

So I'm guessing they are going to have to collect the tax three times?

the sad part is they are all as full of it as each other.

let's face it, Clegg/Millipede/Cameroon are all full of it.

sad though it seems, only Farage seems to be brave enough to tell us how it actually is, however, it's a leap of faith to know if he can follow though.

Brave enough to tell it as it is?
By having fully costed polices?
By really addressing the ever increasing cost of the EU?
By addressing the pensions crisis?

No, as well as the EU/Immigration stuff he has chosen a few populist policies and ignored all the really difficult issues.

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

for the BBC that's not a bad article..

the Green/SNP/Plaid Cymru policies are really in the land of fairies...

I didn't know these:

UKIP plan to Opt out of the Dublin treaty to allow the UK to return asylum seekers to other EU countries without considering their claim

UKIP plan scrap tuition fees for students from poorer backgrounds who take degree courses in the sciences, technology, maths or engineering had the "poorer backgrounds" caveat"

UKIP plan to scrap sex education for children aged under seven- are there any schools doing at that early? 11 seems to be the earliest

Conservatives plan for First-time buyers in England under the age of 40 would be able to buy a house at 20% below the market rate, with 100,000 starter homes to be built for them.

[JustAnotherLogin]

Steviebee states a view that seems to be prevalent in Ashcroft's polling. Most oeople (irrespective of voting intentions) think that the Tories will win. It doesn't matter that's not what the polls say, or what the "experts" think, its what people think.

I can offer no explanation, nor do I know if its important, but it is curious.

Could it be an example of the Wisdom of Crowds?
Could it be an example of the ignorance of the general population?