After four days without a GB voting intention poll (which suddenly seems like quite a long time!) we’re back into the normal cycle. Topline figures for the daily YouGov/Sun poll tonight are CON 36%, LAB 41%, LDEM 10%.

UPDATE: The poll also asked about AV. Adjusted for likelihood to vote and excluding don’t knows and won’t votes, NO now has a 18 point lead, 59% to 41%. The change from YouGov’s previous AV poll is only minor, but it suggests the NO campaign are consolidating that big lead that opened up last week. Conservative voters remain overwhelmingly opposed to AV (by 82% to 18%), Lib Dem supporters remain overwhelmingly supportive (84% to 16%) and Labour voters remain split almost straight down the middle (49% pro, 51% anti).

Full tabs are here.


358 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 36, LAB 41, LDEM 10”

1 3 4 5 6 7 8
  1. @ Old Nat

    “I have no idea what Salmond’s personal views are on the monarchy, but you are totally wrong to say that he “doesn’t want to recognize the Queen”.

    He has never argued a republican stance. He has argued that the question of monarchy is a total irrelevance as to whether Scotland should be independent or not.

    Lizzie will be Queen of Scots (her successors Kings of Scots) until the people of Scotland decide otherwise in a referendum.”

    Again, my comments about who was on the wedding invite list were intended with humor. I apologize if you got offended.

    @ JR Tomlin

    ““Simma down” is both condescending and unnecessary since I expressed no anger, but simply said that there is no such policy.

    As OldNat just pointed out, it would be a decision of the Scottish people. What that has to do with someone who isn’t American being governor of California, I don’t know.

    The queen is not Canadian and is recognized there; she isn’t Australian and is recognized there; etc. I happen to be rather fond of accuracy in these discussions whether you are being facetious or not.”

    First of all, “simma down na” is a phrase from an 11 year old (maybe older) Saturday Night Live sketch starring Cheri Oteri, where her character (usually in customer service situations) would yell at people to “SIMMA DOWN NA!” regardless of whether they were angry or not. It was just a general directive. I started laughing when watching the PMQs and I noticed John Bercow telling an MP to “simmer down.” So I apologize if you were offended. It was not intended that way.

    As for Salmond’s views on the monarchy, I actually kinda find it surprising that he would advocate independence from Great Britain but then advocate recognizing the Queen. But that’s an aside. The point is, notwithstanding the absence of Blair, Brown, and Michelle O, there are plenty of people on the guest list who are not traditional right wingers from privileged backgrounds. That would include Alex Salmond (regardless of his views on the monarchy).

    I hope this clears up any confusion.

  2. @Socalliberal – re interest rates & deficit cuts; the argument from your ex boss is one you hear a lot from people who believe that only interest rates matter. The truth is it’s much more complex and nuanced than that. We do need to ensure high deficits don’t drive up rates as this would be bad, but it’s all about timing and how fast you reduce the deficit and the methods employed.

    On payrolls – I’ve always favoured pay cuts to redundancies. It’s much more egalitarian as everyone shares the pain, but also is cheaper – you keep payroll taxes coming in, rather than welfare payments and redundancies going out.

    In the UK context I would have favoured a 5% average pay cut (structured so higher earners lost a greater amount) allied to an end to national pay rates to reflect real living costs in different regions.

  3. Alec,

    You’re no economist either.

    If you were you wouldn’t have spent most of your lief working for tuppence in the charity sector.

    You’re a doom merchant. And they don’t earn a penny.

  4. ALEC

    “Record low interest rates – not a good thing – merely confirmation that the BoE sees the economy as flatling so dare not raise rates, despite inflation running at 4% + –”

    I have to agree with you on this Alec.

  5. @Colin

    “Q2 & Q3 will be MUCH more significant indicators-as has been said, public sector job cuts start in earnest then.

    As always Stephanie Flanders is on to this & gives a fair commentary.”

    Thus far the effect of the announced spending cuts has been on expectations.

    Faisel Islam (channel 4 news) and Paul Mason (Newsnight) are both tonight being very gloomy about the economy.

    Principally because the massive spending cuts are yet to have a real impact on employment and incomes- because thay have noe been implemented yet. That impact is yet to come as you honestly point out.

    Ditto the trio of private sector commentators on newsnight just now are equally negative- despondent about today’s (and recent) economic data. The average UK household has 6% less income than it had this time last year.

    However we have the hysterical notion from the usual suspects (not you) proclaiming today that an Osborne inspired election victory moves ‘a little closer’ with today’s data (‘shurely shome mishtake’…).

    With such farcical, and totally premature, pompous pronouncements they merely show themselves up to be the pontificating economic illiterates that they are- and have always been.
    ***

    Tonight’s YouGov

    -CON 36%, LAB 42%, LDEM 10%
    -Latest government approval: minus 24 (31% approve, 55% disapprove)

    VI remains within the long term trend moe – despite monarchical over-exuberance.

    Disapproval on the higher end of recent numbers.

    I wonder if today’s ‘flashman’ example will have any short term effect…?

  6. @Eoin – “You’re no economist either.
    If you were you wouldn’t have spent most of your lief working for tuppence in the charity sector.
    You’re a doom merchant. And they don’t earn a penny.”

    That sounds suspiciously like personal abuse, but I’m untroubled by it. I’ve obviously struck a nerve, methinks.

    For what it’s worth, I have advanced qualifications in economics and two degrees (not in economics but in related areas) but no, I don’t call myself an economist and I don’t have all the answers.

    As for my motivation for working in the charity sector, being an economist or not has nothing to do with it – that’s a weird statement for a contextual analyst to make.
    We make life choices for complex reasons, but I’m assuming you think that economists always seek to maximise personal financial gain and therefore wouldn’t wish to work in the charity sector. Perhaps your knowledge individual work ethics and individual decision making in the labour market is also a little shaky?

    As for being a doom merchant, I’ve just been watching Nicola Horlicks and some bloke from Asda on Newsnight sounding very alarmed about the state of the UK economy, saying that we haven’t really got growth, the cuts haven’t started, the largest growth in the GDP numbers came from government spending and domestic consumer sectors, neither of which are sustainable, and that exports and manufacturing growth is slowing and won’t be enough on their own.

    Presumably these people are also doom merchants, but they earn a small fortune – something else you’ve slipped up on?

    Really Eoin, I love you to bits and enjoy your many and varied posts. Like the rest of mortal humankind, you have great strengths but some weaknesses. All I’m suggesting is that sometimes you could join the rest of us and accept that sometimes you miss the target.

  7. Come on Eoin you can do better than that

  8. SoCalLiberal

    Not offended – but we are in the middle of an election campaign, and (while you meant nothing by it) that kind of thing is said by the SNPs opponents in an attempt to persuade those who like the monarchy that they couldn’t vote SNP.

    Think of it as a birther conspiracy. :-)

  9. I detect that someone has been on the sauce

    :D

  10. Rob Sheffield,
    Tel: +44 (0) 28 9097 1417
    E-mail: s.oconnell @qub.ac.u k [delete space between U and K]
    Those are the contact details of my Phd supervisor 2007-10.
    Either
    a) contact him to ask whether I finished my Phd a year ago
    or
    b) retract your erroneous allegation
    _________________________
    Second,
    I have set up an run a Labour thin tank with the UK no.1 tax expert on board..
    either
    a) email him and repeat the accusation [if you wish to know his identity and email address mine is eclarke04 @qub.ac.u k [delete space between U and K]
    or
    b) retract…
    ______________
    Third,
    Email or telephone
    Professor of Gender History
    Tel: +44 (0) 28 9097 3427
    E-mail: m.odowd @qub.ac.u k [delete space between U and K]
    And ask her to confirm that I have been tutoring history at Queen’s University from 2008 to the resent day and beyond…
    I have put up with enough silliness from your cronies to do me a life time. I think Anthony will permit me standing up for myself.
    Do me the biggest favour of 2011,
    call my bluff,

  11. “But one thing I’ve noticed from looking at UK elections is that how the economy is doing is not always a decisive factor in an election”

    This is spot on.

    The problem for the Tories and their re-election chances in 2015 are largely structural. It may sound harsh, but Tory voters tend to be older, and old people eventually die. The core Tory base over the last 30-odd years has shrunk considerably due to this demographic pressure.

    You really have to ask yourself – if the Tories could not win in 2010, when the tide was with them, and the nation was fed up with Gordon Brown… then when? You could not have wished for more favourable electoral conditions, and the result was still a hung parliament.

    The collapse in Lib Dem support does not help the Tories – since the evidence is that these voters have switched to Labour. The Tories remain static in the polls whilst Labour have opened and maintained a solid lead.

    Mervyn King called the 2010 election ‘the one to lose’ – and he was right. After 5 years of savage cuts, this government will be nothing less than loathed. Given the Tories apparent inability to reach out beyond the core vote, a sensible prediction for 2015 remains a Labour majority.

  12. !

  13. Alec,

    I teach economic history. My credentials & the data I psoted are reeasonable enough to deem your comment that
    “I’m no economist” as unfair.

    As for qualifications. Don’t get me started. I came second in the UK in 1998.

  14. @Rob Sheffield & Colin – the bit that really bothers me is the debt overhang. In practical terms this has been largely hidden by ultra low interest rates the like of which we have never seen before.

    As a result, while there has been some unwinding of debt by households and companies, the main effect has been to mask the pain and avoid a big correction through bankruptcies and home repossessions. However, economic growth has not been anything like robust enough to substantially shrink the debt:income ratio, so that when rates climb, as they surely must, we will see significant delayed pain.

    The other concern I have was picked up by the BoE in the last set of trade figures. They noted that the weak pound has had no impact on domestic substitution of imports. This is actually far more critical than driving exports in many ways, but it looks like UK industry is doing what it always does and looking to increase margins and short term shareholder value rather than take market share.

    Still – what do I know. I’m a penniless doom merchant who has taken the wrong path to a life of penury. I’ll go and find a shop corner to sleep on with a dog on a piece of string with a sign reading ‘Doom merchant with wife and two kids to support – please help (although I know you won’t)”

  15. Alec,

    Not one to lie
    h ttp://www.abbeycbs.co.uk/eoinclarkepoliticswall.html

  16. New yougov poll Lab 42 Con 36 LD 10

  17. @crossbat11
    “Changing the subject, I’m amused at the mini-row about the alleged snub to Blair and Brown resulting from them not being invited to Friday’s Royal Wedding. ”

    I’m highly amused as well, though probably for different reasons. Mrs Blair refused to curtsey to the queen and wore a white veil (reserved for heads of state) when meeting the Pope. Her husband tried to hi-jack the Queen Mum’s funeral by rushing in front of the Queen and glad-handing the crowd. If the Royal Family choose to ignore the Blairs, who can blame them? It would be like inviting your neighbour who insulted you last summer when you invited him to a barbecue.

    This wedding is not a state occasion, and therefore William can invite who he likes, though there is certain protocol.

  18. @Alec

    the debt overhang was picked up by one of the three private sector commentators during newsnight tonight: it’s the same OBR factoid being identified by various Labour apparatchiks recently.

    Namely that Osborne is relying on- NOT private sector job creation- but private household *debt extension*- to make up the gap in effective aggregate demand created by his arguably ideological attack on the public sector (both as a means of employment and as an entity in itself).

    Bonkers.

  19. The new LAbour Think Tank [founded by myself] launches in the Houses of Westminster on 2nd June 2011.

    Seven MPs, 18 Councillors and several valuable colleagues including academics, parliamentary researchers etc are involved.

    Since I am the founder of a new Labour think tank, I cannot have erroneous and contemptuous allegations hanging over my head.

    I ask that that they be a) repeated b) withdrawn or as is most likely given their foolhardiness, never repeated again.

    It is very unfortunate that I had to meet my bullies head on but their silly lies might jeopardize the futre of GEER.

  20. I chose my time carefully bully boys…

    Time to retract or repeat… you decide.

  21. @The Green Benches

    Do I gathe from some of the comments that you are Eoin? If so, I thought I remembered you saying some time ago that you had never voted. Is that true?

  22. Pete B,

    Hi,

    I am the same said character and yes, that is true. In NI our choice is mostly between sectarian parties, and I am not sectarian.

  23. @Eoin – I really don’t want to turn the site into a personal war zone, but I don’t really get where you are coming from. I’m aware that Rob is sometimes a bit naughty in the way he describes you, but unless I’ve missed something I don’t think he has suggested you haven’t completed a PhD, lecture in history or run a think tank.

    For my part, I questioned your role as an economist, based on a very one eyed use of valid data, with some key misunderstandings of what the data represented from an economic point of view. It wasn’t (in my view) a personal attack and I provided reasons why I disagreed with you.

    As to whether or not you really are an economist, as far as I have gathered from information you’ve put into the public domain on this site, you lecture in history and your PhD was something to do with women and republicanism if my memory serves me right. In technical terms, I would suggest this adds some weight to my comment, if you want to get textually analytical.

    None of us are always right, and all of us need to allow space for others to criticise our views. Sometimes its a bit robust, other times more genteel, but you do go a bit overboard on the indignant repost sometimes. I shudder to think how Colin and I might engage with each other if we took your approach, but you know what – I imagine I would rather like him if we ever met, despite us rarely agreeing on many things here and often sharply rebutting each other.

  24. Roger,

    You’re right. I can. And I have. :) Not tonight though.

  25. At your (drunken?) *behest* I’ve checked the current 2011 personnel listing for the History department at QUB:

    – the ‘academic staff’

    h ttp://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofHistoryandAnthropology/Staff/AcademicStaff/

    – the research staff

    h ttp://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofHistoryandAnthropology/Staff/AcademicStaff/

    – and the listing for ‘University Tutors’ in your department

    h ttp://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofHistoryandAnthropology/Staff/UniversityTutors/

    No sign of you in these three though I did find this listing

    h ttp://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofHistoryandAnthropology/Research/HistoryResearchStudents/EoinClarke/

  26. @Greeny
    It just struck me as odd that you are obviously very interested and knowledgable about politics, (and have now set up a think tank!) and yet have never voted?

    I thought Labour had stood in some seats in NI. If not, then surely there are some non-sectarian parties such as the Alliance Party?

  27. “But one thing I’ve noticed from looking at UK elections is that how the economy is doing is not always a decisive factor in an election”

    A point I made this morning.
    If you get it wrong in government you can exepect to pay dearly at the ballot box as Brown did. But if you get it right the public might just have other concerns which will come to the fore.

    “This wedding is not a state occasion, and therefore William can invite who he likes, though there is certain protocol.”

    Which is why it surprised me as I thought it would be a no brainer that Brown and Blair would be invited to avoid even the appearance of partisanship. Doesn’t bode well for William if can’t even get such a simple thing right while loathesome individuals like the despots of Bahrain, Jordan and Saudi Arabia get an invite.

    “If the Royal Family choose to ignore the Blairs, who can blame them?”

    Not that I would invite Blair to the opening of a bag of crisps personally, but Liz has a short memory since Blair’s public relation skills saved her bacon when she got the public mood so hopelessly wrong on Diana’s death.

  28. @Mick Park

    “Blair’s public relation skills saved her bacon when she got the public mood so hopelessly wrong on Diana’s death.”

    Are you saying that Blair prevented a Republican revolution? I don’t remember him doing anything at the time. All that rubbish about the flag not flying at half mast at the Palace was because the flag only flies where the sovereign is, and she wasn’t there.

  29. Alec,

    Your first paragraph detaches significantly from reality. But that is understandable since you are not expected to account for someone else’s words. But Mr Sheffield has in fact alleged much. It is now for him to decide how he would like to proceed with his allegations.

    Regarding my ability or your ability in economics. I have 28% of the workplace experience that you have. On that basis I do alright I think. If an when I one day reach your heady heights perhaps I might be better placed to enter the economics field. For your peace of mind however twice in recent weeks, theories of mine that you have rubbished have been published is multiple places & received plaudits from respected economists..

    If necessary I can post links but that is not my wish

    point being, you are unduly dismissive of my economic nouse when if I wished I could point out many many mis forecasts by yourself

  30. Rob Sheffield,

    Call my bluff, email the said professionals.

    Otherwise, I will be forced to issue legal proceedings for slander.

    Using out of date urls is childish..

    I give you 1 hour to retract.

  31. I rather doubt that Prince William was involved in deciding which politicians to invite (or probably 90% of the rest of the guests either). More cock-up than conspiracy, I imagine.

  32. Rob,

    Some of your urls are that out of date its embarrassing…

    59 minutes and counting

  33. I don’t think it’s the URLs that are embarrassing.

  34. I have been bullied once too often on UKPR.

    Tonight is my night

    Please see the attached link for a scanned copy of my Queen’s University Belfast contract.

    h ttp://eoin-clarke.blogspot.com/p/my-queens-contract.html

    Rob,

    52 minutes.

  35. “Are you saying that Blair prevented a Republican revolution?”

    I’ll just check by looking at my post…

    Nope.

    I’m saying it’s common knowledge that behind the scenes Blair helped diffuse anger at the Royals by using himself and Campbell to persuade the Royals and their flunkies to hoist the flag, get Liz to go out to the crowd and help her make a statement to the nation while his own “people’s” PR, though mawkish in the extreme, set the correct tone.

    I believe they even made a film about it after which a certain Helen Mirren was made Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire, so pleased was Liz with the film.

  36. It was not my preference to pursue this path. But I should have unfettered freedom to pursue my political career without slander.

  37. @Eoin – it’s really getting very silly. I think you have grossly over reacted to some perfectly normal debate here and have flown off in all kinds of odd directions. The fact that you think some chat on UKPR could derail a new think tank is fanciful, and somewhat odd.

    I’m entirely prepared to accept you lecture in economic history – what on earth is the point of debating this if this is what you say you do? I note your PhD didn’t sound like it had much economic content in it, and your claim

    “As for qualifications. Don’t get me started. I came second in the UK in 1998.” was supported by a link showing you were second in Northern Ireland for history A level in 1998 – a subtly different statement, but not necessarily exclusive of your claim.

    What does it matter? If you think you’ve been ‘bullied’ tonight then I’m very saddened. Speaking for myself, I think I’ve been quite complimentary to you in places but critical in others – quite rightly, in my view.

    I’m unclear as to what the allegations are that you think might have been made about you tonight, but if you could let me know what, if anything, you would like me to retract, I’ll review whatever it was I said that could apparently cause a stellar career implosion and make whatever apologies I feel are necessary if I feel I have overstepped the mark.

  38. @The Green Benches

    You do realise that Rob Sheffield may have gone to bed by now? I’ve looked back at all the posts on this thread and I can’t see anywhere where he’s slandered you (not that I’m a lawyer, I just can’t see anything offensive). Was it in some other forum, or does he sometimes post under a different name?

  39. @Pete B

    I suppose my real wish is for the only avowedly mainstream radical and left-wing political party that we have in this country, Labour, to show a bit more of its old anti-Establishment and non-conformist tendencies; no better displayed than when we see some republican and anti-monarchist stances struck every now again.

    Now, I know that our Constitution requires our politicians, especially when in government, to observe some of our ancient and absurd royalist protocols, and that they risk outraging the good burghers of Tunbridge Wells if they don’t, but shouldn’t we ask, in the 21st Century, why so few of our democratic representatives speak up for the republican majority in this country?

    As so often, public apathy and political cowardice combine to allow the Establishment elite to pretend they represent the consensus and, by so doing, they are allowed to perpetuate and consolidate their hold over a great deal of our national life. The Monarchy is a very good example of how this corrosive cocktail of apathy and cowardice has allowed an obsolete institution to survive and, unbelievably on current evidence, to prosper too. Instead of us bemoaning it’s continuation as a symbol of privilege and class, we fawn and defer. A cultural cringe too far, in my view.

  40. Alec,

    1. Silly you might think. Not fancilful. Not odd. [you’ve obviously missed a portion of Mr Sheffield’s comments]

    2. But according to your lingo I have been over cliffs, in dream land, no economist, innumerate… Simple fact is that neither of us are economists. You are no different to I. I merely sought to remove your pedal stool. Egalitarianism and all that.

    3. Take for example today, I listed 15 separate economic pieces of data earlier all founded on ONS data. You rubbished them without a single constructive point. Economist I might not be, but I certainly went about it the right way, putting an economic point.

    4. Ps.. It was UK, my school was simply Éire centric… [being Roman Catholic and all that..]

    5. as on many many occasions. I wished to avoid utter dialogue with you. And I have made that clear. It is yu who have felt the need for periodic jibes.

  41. Pete B,

    It’s a weekly thing.

  42. Slightly off topic (but not entirely, since this is about a country whose citizens are Her Majesty’s subjects), has anyone noticed what is happening in Canada? Federal election is in five days, and for the first time ever Social Democrats (New Democratic Party / Nouveau Parti Democrate) are poised to overcome the Liberals as the second party. All polling institutes now converge in predicting a) that the incumbent conservative government will not get OM this time either, instead it will see its number of seats decrease and b) the NDP/NPD will get a record of votes (perhaps more than 30%) and seats (perhaps more than 100 out of 308). So what before the start of the campaign seemed highly improbable, now is a distinct possibility, i.e. a center-left socialist-led government, for the first time in Canada’s political history.

  43. Simple fact now folks for all to see is that Mr Sheffield has not repeated his accusations. There is a reason for that.

    I hope that is the end of my name being slandered on UKPR.

  44. “More cock-up than conspiracy, I imagine.”

    Possibly so, but it is at the very least a cock-up.

    Apart from the glaring error in her judgement over Diana the reason Liz gets so many plaudits from those who worship her is usually put down to her ability to stay above the fray and remain non-partisan. You have to wonder if Charles will have the same skill as the amusing prospect of ‘Queen Camilla’ looms and whether William understands the importance of it too.

    I hold no brief for Blair or Brown but their absence is going to get noticed as the world’s media go into feeding frenzy mode for the next week.

    I have no wish to shock the gentle readers of this blog but one of our esteemed tabloids has front paged the astounding story that William was on a motorcycle. I know, it’s a great deal to take in and still remain calm and level headed. :-D

  45. @Crossbat11
    “Now, I know that our Constitution requires our politicians, especially when in government, to observe some of our ancient and absurd royalist protocols, and that they risk outraging the good burghers of Tunbridge Wells if they don’t, but shouldn’t we ask, in the 21st Century, why so few of our democratic representatives speak up for the republican majority in this country?”

    First of all, let me say that I respect your views, but I would ask what is your evidence for a republican majority? Also, it’s not just ‘burghers of Tunbridge Wells’ who are Royalists. I think you’ll find that many people from all parts of the country and all social classes support the Royals.

    Funny story about your first point. The Wilson cabinet of 1964 had their first audience with the Queen. They’d been out of power for 13 years and most of them had never been in government. They were waiting nervously in an anteroom, when one courtier caught sight of another and called out “Neil!”

    They all knelt.

  46. @alec

    “@Eoin – it’s really getting very silly. I think you have grossly over reacted to some perfectly normal debate here and have flown off in all kinds of odd directions. The fact that you think some chat on UKPR could derail a new think tank is fanciful, and somewhat odd. ”

    It became apparent to many of us last summer that there is no point in regular direct dialogue with ‘the superego’: other than- from time to time- pointing out the more glaringly pompous and narcissistic contradictory postings. Or-as someone (I think crossbat) once put it- ‘a desire to triangulate yourself up your own ass’.

    Just today he has insulted (gratuitously ore otherwise) myself, Mike N and yourself!! Then there is the paranoid conspiracy mumbo jumbo now as well.

    I am wholly unsurprised he is not a FT permanent employee of QUB.

  47. @Eoin – “point being, you are unduly dismissive of my economic nouse when if I wished I could point out many many mis forecasts by yourself”

    Feel free to criticise my posts by all means – I’m often wrong and like most people, at times cherry pick data that suits my viewpoint.

    I criticised your original post because it was, in my view, really quite poor quality. Economists are taking variant views of the current UK situation for sure, but that doesn’t justify stringing together selective and poorly analysed data and basing a case on that.

    It sounds like you’re not looking to take action against me for slander – (just as well for you, as the allegation would need to libel, as we’re talking about written word here) but I hope you sleep on this and leave the gung ho stuff behind in the morning.

    @Rob Sheffield – in the spirit of UKPR decency perhaps you also could draw a veil over tonights proceedings – if my memory serves me well I recall you left UKPR for a while complaining about treatment by others, so you might appreciate how Eoin feels, rightly or wrongly.

    I’m busy shuddering as I think of AW’s reaction when he sees this in the morning. Really no need for it and I think we should all do the decent middle class thing and pretend it ever happened.

  48. Rob,

    So, I thought I did not work for QUB? I thought I was a mere student… you retraction will have to be a little bit more explicit than that…

  49. “Really no need for it and I think we should all do the decent middle class thing and pretend it ever happened.”

    Ohhh… Can’t we do the Celtic thing and harbour resentment for hundreds of years?

    This is meant to be a joke people! :)

  50. Alec,

    ‘quite poor’

    1. Of the 15 points listed were any not based on fact?

    2. For 15 points all to be based on published economic data and be ‘quite poor’ is feat.

    3. You, if you wish to enhance your own economic credibility might wish to point out some of the 15 points that are erroneous?

    Now that really would make it quite poor…

    4. To repeat what I said earlier… It moves the tories a “little closer”… to election victory… for that to be quite poor.. it means that you think it must move the Tories nowhere near election victory..

    5. Or do I understand you wrongly?

1 3 4 5 6 7 8