Sunday round up

The full tables for the YouGov/Sunday Times poll are now up here. On the leader ratings David Cameron is back down to a rather more typical minus 6 (from minus 1 last week), Ed Miliband is on minus 45 (from minus 48 last week) and Nick Clegg’s rating declines again to minus 47 (after rising to minus 38 last week). The rest of the questions covered the treatment of bankers and education, amongst other things.

Two-thirds of people supported the decision to strip Fred Goodwin of his knighthood, and a similar proportion (63%) would support stripping other senior executives of those banks that needed bailing out of their honours. There was also high support (72%) for Stephen Hester being pressurised into forgoeing his bonus. Relatively few people agreed with the arguments that stripping bankers of honours and stopping their bonuses was damaging the business environment (25% agreed), or was detering foriegn companies from coming to Britain (17%).

On education, there are divided opinions – on whether academies will improve school standards marginally more people think they’ll make things better (27%), than think they will make things worse (24%). 29% think they’ll make more difference. On free schools the balance is in the other direction, with significantly more (33%) thinking they’ll make things worse than make things better (23%), with 23% thinking they’ll make no difference. In a separate question 44% of people said they were opposed to private companies being commissioned to manage free schools.

One other question that’s worth noting. YouGov asked if the current historically low interest rates were good or bad for respondents’ own finances. 23% said good, but 36% said bad (with 31% saying they made no difference). As one might expect there was a heavy age skew here – people between the ages of 25 and 59, that is, people most likely to be taking out mortgages, were most likely to be positive about low interest rates. People over the age of 60, that is, people most likely to be living off savings income, were most likely to be negative about low interest rates. None of this is surprising and we’ve seen results like this before, but it’s good to have a reminder that low interest rates are not a good thing for a large chunk of the electorate.

There was also a Panelbase Scottish survey in the Sunday Times. On the referendum question 37% supported independence, 42% opposed it and 21% were undecided. The Sunday Times’s website doesn’t appear to show voting intention figures, but I have seen them reported elsewhere as having shown CON 14%, LAB 29%, LD ??%, SNP 50% for the Holyrood regional vote and CON 13%, LAB 29%, LD ??, SNP 48% for Holyrood regional vote. I haven’t had them conformed at all.

Finally, alongside the normal swingometer on the site, I have now added a version using the provisional recommendations of the Boundary Commissions for the new boundaries here. Note that the seat projection based on the average polls is still based on the current boundaries, since those are the ones that would be used if there actually was the proverbial “general election tomorrow”.


197 Responses to “Sunday round up”

1 2 3 4
  1. I must be the only person who thinks that now the indendence question is known, it would be in the interest of accuracy if poll questions stopped giving a `dont know` option, as that isnt likely to be on the question paper after all.

  2. Anthony (presumably not Wells)

    Yes you are.

    Partly because we don’t actually know what the question months (years!) of tedious debate lie ahead on the exact wording – all we have so far is the SNP’s first proposal.

    In addition you can always spoil the ballot paper or (more likely) not vote at all. So ‘don’t know’ is implicitly on the ballot paper after all.

    Also we are not near the date of the referendum yet so YouGov at least are not asking about likelihood to vote and so on which you would need to get a definitive prediction.

    But the main reason not too exclude ‘don’t knows’ is because of the real purpose of opinion polls. This is to gauge what the public really thinks. And if a lot of the public are uncertain or indifferent, that should be reported. Predicting the outcomes of elections and referendums is a way of checking how well the pollsters are doing, but it’s not the reason why polls are taken – or taken seriously.

  3. As I suspected, Polling Report’s swingometer based the new boundaries is slightly better for Labour than the Electoral Calculus one it appears (though not by much). It looks like both the Tories and Labour will find it hard to get a good majority in 2015 based on both models. Probably heading for another hung parliament, or perhaps a very small majority government it seems (in either party’s favour).

  4. @Anthony Wells (FPT)
    Phil – 1 & 2 are at least partially the same. One of the main differences with the new methodology was to get a more accurate level of SNP support in the Scottish break (and consequently, a lower level of Labour support in Scotland).
    ____________

    I don’t think they are, although admittedly my earlier comment was a bit cryptic. So to clarify, this was my meaning:

    – I can recall you calculating the methodology change as reducing the Lab share by 0.8% on the basis of applying the same data to the different methodologies. That’s where the 1% fall due to methodology change comes from.

    – Irrespective of that, on a very rough ball park, the Labour GE vote share in Scotland might now be some 10% down on the levels it hit in March, before the SNP surge began. Perhaps a bit more, perhaps a bit less. But 10% would equate to a roughly 1% loss across GB as a whole.

    All of which means that the Labour vote share across the rest of England and Wales must be very largely holding up, accounting for only 1% of the fall since the 43% peak in March, despite all of E Miliband’s travails.

    @Amber

    AW likewise calculated the methodology change as increasing the Con share by 0.4%. Apart from that, I haven’t really thought about the Cons – Sorry!

  5. Phil – fair enough, I thought you were looking at the shorter term drop in Labour’s vote share in Scotland in the YouGov cross breaks, which is due to the method change.

  6. @Phil,

    Judging by the recent Welsh poll, I’d say a portion of the extra Labour vote has gone to Wales. As someone said last night (can’t remember who), if you couple this with the Midland/Wales crossbreaks, it suggests that they may not be doing as well in the Midlands.

    I personally suspect the Tory vote has held up very well, if not increased, in Southern England and the Midlands, and the Labour vote has increased in Northern England and Wales. The implied current failure of both parties to make inroads into areas beyond their strongholds suggests the chances are probably high of a hung parliament in 2015. Only time will tell, I guess.

  7. I note that several posts have been on the situation in Syria. There seems to be a perception among certain Western leaders that the UN has a mandate to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign member state – it does not, and Russia/China were quite right to veto the recent resolution on Syria, however grim the events taking placing there. Civil war is always extremely unpleasant, but Assad’s internal use of extreme force is none of the UK’s business, and the regime is facing an armed uprising by Saudi-backed terrorist gangs.
    Interference in other countries’ internal affairs is wrong and always resented. DC, NC, Red Ed et al should be very wary of meddling in this way – this includes the forthcoming referendum on the right of the Scots to determine their own destiny.
    Of possibly greater interest to the UK are recent opinion polls from France, which place Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Front, running not far behind Mr. Sarkozy in the polls (20% vs. 25% in a recent IFOP poll). If Le Pen does displace Sarkozy from the run off, there is a real possibility that she could be elected president, given the distaste of La France profonde for “red” politicians and its preference for real French leaders who stand up for non-cosmopolitan French folk. However, Hollande is a better candidate for the socialists than the foreign Strauss-Kahn.

  8. Ambivalentsupporter

    As being a fan on watching political machinations I have a rather sadistic hope that you are right.

    If we assume a small lead for one of the two large parties but a collapse in LD vote to <15% which will lead to significant seat losses then how will this hung parliament sort itself out – very interesting!

  9. Milliband is +8 for the last 2 weeks,and this would support the general impression of improved performance.
    Not much change for the other two leaders over the same period

  10. Asking the general public whether attitude towards banker’s rewards deters investment in the UK makes no sense – they just don’t know, any more than you or I do. Common sense says it must have an effect, but we may have to find out the hard way. By that time, the damage could well have been done and the transfer of investment to our rivals irreversible. I personally believe the government took a cowardly line which we shall regret. I hope I am wrong.

  11. collin

    Investments? Didn’t their last tranche of investments cost us trillions of pounds?

    We don’t want the rogue bankers here.

  12. @Hannah

    FPT “I’ve been home over the weekend so I’ve had the chance to talk about the news, with my Dad. He hadn’t picked up on the veto as having been an issue recently, ”

    Not surprising, since the government made sure their bad headlines on the issue were swamped by anti-Fred hysteria. A piece of simple news management, and the media was only too happy to be led by the nose.

  13. Voting Intention figures

    LDs not quoted, as they are so low. Included among others below.

    Constituency
    SNP 50%
    Lab 29%
    Con 14%
    Others 7%

    List
    SNP 48%
    Lab 29%
    Con 13%
    Others10%

    Scotland Votes gives that as a 2 MSP gain for SNP from LD,with little other change in number of MSPs overall. Considerable churn, however in the balance between constituency and list MSPs as SNP gain 11-13 constituencies from the others, but with Lab & Con numbers being maintained through the list.

    Leader satisfaction ratings

    Alex Salmond has the only positive satisfaction rating at +17.

    Others : Clegg -54 : Cameron -43 : Miliband -41 : Davidson -32 : Rennie -27 : and Lamont as the least unpopular opposition politician at -18. The last 3, however, will have a lot of DKs (which weren’t published) as they are all fairly new in post.

  14. I wonder what a sustained period of figures like this will do to SLAB’s attempts to attract talent north from Westminster as opposed to the recent brain drain south from Holyrood.

    Having said that Ithink the terms talent and brain might be a bit on the generous side.

    It’s got to a sorry state of affairs when George Foulkes Is the man with fresh ideas.

    Cllr Peter Cairns (SNP).

  15. Yes, the new swingometer does seem to be more favourable to Labour than I’d assumed. Everything is currently pointing at a hung parliament, new or old system.

    Under the new system, with these vote shares, two parties can’t make a majority between them (unless we try grand alliance) – just imagine the negotiations.

    .

  16. I have just punched in Con 40, Lab 39.7 LD 13.5. This would, under the new boundaries give a hung parliament, with Tory 7 seats in front of Labour (288 to 281) and the LD’s with 10.

    If this is not very much fairer than the current situation where Labour would win a working majority, I don’t know what is.

  17. Peter

    That’s an interesting point about Labour candidates, and on I hadn’t thought of before.

    Regardless of party, the main aim of politicians is to get elected and then to build on that to secure a safe base. List MSPs can’t build a secure base – just look at Shirley Somerville in the Lothians.

    On those figures Labour would only have 5 constituency seats – Dumfriesshire, Coatbridge & Chryston, Renfrew South, Glasgow Provan and Eastwood.

    That’s not an attractive prospect to build a career.

  18. Not too many surprises, however please note the Scotland referendum question asked by Panelbase is a “do you agree…” Please see the piece by Anthony Wells below “The problem with “Do you agree or disagree with this statement” questions

  19. The Scottish National has welcomed the findings of the Panelbase poll for the Sunday Times and Real Radio Scotland – which puts support for independence at 47 per cent, compared to 53 per cent opposition – and finds that support for the SNP is at a high of 50 per cent. An Ipsos MORI poll last week put SNP support at 49 per cent.

    The poll puts SNP support at 50 per cent in the constituency vote for the Scottish Parliament, compared to 29 per cent for Labour, and 14 per cent for the Tories.

    Compared to last year’s election, SNP support is up 5 points, and Labour are down 3 points. SNP seats at Holyrood would increase from 69 to 71, while the Lib Dems would slump from 5 to 3.

    In terms of net satisfaction ratings, this is the first poll to ask about attitudes towards all Holyrood and Westminster leaders – and finds that Alex Salmond’s ratings are hugely positive, and he is the only leader north or south of the Border with a positive figure:

    Alex Salmond: +17%David Cameron: -43%Ed Miliband: -41%Nick Clegg: -54%Johann Lamont: -18%Ruth Davidson: -32%Willie Rennie: -27%
    ___________

    The independence figures the SNP have quoted are from those who are likely to vote!!

    Also we have had two polls with in a week which shows the SNP are on about 50% of the vote.

    And Dundee unt have dumped Rangers out of the Scottish cup. :)

  20. OldNat

    Where did you get the details of the Panelbase survey? Or will you charge me £2.20 before you tell me? :D

    I wouldn’t get too excited about the results of the Panelbase survey. They seem a consumer specialist and a good one, but without any political experience or method for publishing results or methodology. There’s nothing on their new website or that of their parent company Dipsticks Research[1]:

    http://www.dipsticksresearch.com/index.html

    I wonder particularly about weighting. I can’t find it now, but when I looked at their previous website the panel demography was very biased toward young members[2] – they even had a children’s panel. Also I doubt they would have the sort of political affiliation and past voting record that YouGov does.

    [1] You can see why they called themselves that. On the other hand you can see why they shouldn’t have.

    [2] I suggested to Anthony at the time that they do a transfer for some of YouGov’s oldsters, but nobody takes any notice of what I say.

  21. PAUL GODDARD

    “Not too many surprises”

    Oh, I don’t know. They also asked about attitudes to assisted suicide since Margo is reintroducing an amended version of her Bill on that topic. Since the ST haven’t quoted the actualquestions, I don’t know whether they used the “I agree” format, but I found the responses surprising.

    69% agreed that assisted suicide should be allowed, with only 14% against and 16% unsure.

    On a related question, voters were asked if relatives should be allowed to help without fear of prosecution. This had even greater support with 76% agreeing, 9% disagreeing and 15% unsure

  22. I see some people are still questioning the SNPs question on independence. I don’t remember voting for Ashcroft or Cameron in the Scottish election nor did I see anything about referendums in any of the Unionists manifestos!!

    That aside, I would like a say on how much Medway Council are planning to spend on park benches..Could you imagine what the locals would think?? Yeah stop interfering!!

  23. Roger Mexico

    It’s all in the Scottish print edition . I’ll sell you my copy for half price!

    Panelbase have polled on Scottish politics before – their poll before the Holyrood elections was pretty well in line with other pollsters at the time.

    Like most others on this site, I prefer to see the detailed tables and weightings for every poll – and we don’t get that from non-BPC members. As it is, we have to rely on what the ST chooses to pick out to publish.

    For example, we can calculate that the responses to the single question were Yes 37% : No 42% : Don’t Know 21%.

    Because the ST didn’t give the DK’s on the multi-option question, we can’t calculate how the Devo Max first preferences split on the single question.

    The multi option question (% of those who had an opinion) was

    “Support Independence” – 37%
    “Devolve financial powers but not defence and foreign policy” – 30%
    “Keep things as they are” – 33%

  24. Your posts seem to have deteriorated even further. “we don’t want the rogue bankers here”. We don’t want any rogues here, including rogue politicians.The city ,as a financial centre of great value, has to involve bankers and to treat them all as if they were criminal is merely stupid and, like your party, completely irresponsible.

  25. ALLAN CHRISTIE

    You’ll remember that there was only moe difference between the Scottish Government’s phrasing and Ashcroft’s change to question “Do you agree or disagree that Scotland should be an independent country?”

    I’m quite happy for the technical experts to field test the actual question – as the Scottish Government has proposed happens.

    What would be unacceptable would be to phrase the question in a way that conflates different issues. People can argue as to whether Ashcroft’s other variant simply introduced confusion – which is what field testing is designed to remove – because Ashcroft didn’t (and YG allowed him not to) include the DK/Undecided/”Confused by the question” option.

    As such Ashcroft’s intervention was deliberately unhelpful.

  26. Collin

    I note that you are actually agreeing with NickP – it’s just that you want to reintroduce transportation to get rid of all the other rogues! :-)

  27. @Daodao
    ” I note that several posts have been on the situation in Syria. There seems to be a perception among certain Western leaders that the UN has a mandate to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign member state – it does not, and Russia/China were quite right to veto the recent resolution on Syria, however grim the events taking placing there. Civil war is always extremely unpleasant, but Assad’s internal use of extreme force is none of the UK’s business, and the regime is facing an armed uprising by Saudi-backed terrorist gangs.
    Interference in other countries’ internal affairs is wrong and always resented. ”

    Agree 100%. I also feel it’s somewhat hypocritical for the US representative to have got quite so hysterical about a couple of countries holding the UNSC to ransom, as the US does this regularly. Often when the overall vote is 14-1.

    I don’t think the US/UK/Fr really understand how arrogant they are being. They deceived Russia over the manner they intended to enforce the Libya resolution and expected Russia to fall into line over Syria.

    And what moral force does the US believe the Arab League holds? Governed by puppet dictators, busy violently suppressing their own domestic dissenters and those of other countries (Saudi Arabia in Saudi Arabia, and S Arabia in Bahrain, Yemen)?

    All these dictators and autocratic puppets in the ME/Iran should be replaced, and in time it will happen. But these are largely domestic events. The UN should not get involved.

  28. @Allan Christie
    “Some people” may still be, and are quite within their rights to, despite your unconvincing protestations. But some other people can’t be bothered to any longer, safe in the knowledge that the question as worded doesn’t stand a cat in hell’s chance of making it past the Electoral Commission.

  29. Phil

    I admire your confidence that you can predict the conclusions of field testing and technical analysis.

    The UK could save such a lot of cash in these straitened times by dumping the EC, and just hiring you for the odd half-hour.

  30. OLDNAT

    Totaly agree with you and it was Ashcroft’s 3rd question which was totally idiotic.

    “As such Ashcroft’s intervention was deliberately unhelpful”

    You’re no kidding!!

  31. PHIL.

    Have you been to see Gypsy Amaliae? Did you ask her what the question would be? I asked her when she was at the winter gardens in Edinburgh this year if Scotland will win independence. Sh said, “Yes of course”

    At least I got my moneys worth!!

  32. @OldNat
    Thanks but I must decline. It’s bad enough to be breaking AW’s embargo on this thread, let alone to be touting for his lucrative commissions at bargain basement rates.

  33. PS. Just noticed – this is an embargo-free thread!

  34. Phil

    I missed the saltire on a previous thread too!

    Anthony is clearly a separatist. :-)

  35. The attitudinal questions on the effects of independence were interesing in this poll.

    To a series of questions on what the effects of independence would be, responses were overwhelmingly positive as to how Scotland would benefit from independence, and certainly not suffer.

    Pos, NoDiff, Neg, Issue
    64%, 27%, 9%, Culture
    59%, 22%, 19%, Confidence
    42%, 41%, 17%, Health
    47%, 14%, 19%, Education
    50%, 35%, 15%, Environment
    27%, 56%, 17%, Crime
    35%, 37%, 28%, Welfare Benefits

  36. This is totally off-topic but I wanted to share this article on yesterday’s Nevada Caucuses. I know Ron Paul has his fans here but I have to say his supporters (the ones who can vote and caucus for him) are completely looney.

    http://www.lvrj.com/news/tempers-flare-at-chaotic-sundown-caucus-138725814.html

    All I can say is what a sh*tshow.

    Even though they had very low turnout (way down from 2008), Republicans still struggled to count ballots and in fact are still not finished counting. They want to run the country (or perhaps the world) and yet they can’t run their own caucuses.

  37. It may be this issue has been discussed…We were told that under the new boundaries,Tories would require a lead of 7 and Labour a lead of 4 to gain a majority…Using the swing calculator,a Tory majority is achievable with a lead of 4 and a Labour majority with a lead of 3…Are these the new benchmarks then?

  38. “One other question that’s worth noting. YouGov asked if the current historically low interest rates were good or bad for respondents’ own finances. 23% said good, but 36% said bad (with 31% saying they made no difference). As one might expect there was a heavy age skew here – people between the ages of 25 and 59, that is, people most likely to be taking out mortgages, were most likely to be positive about low interest rates. People over the age of 60, that is, people most likely to be living off savings income, were most likely to be negative about low interest rates. None of this is surprising and we’ve seen results like this before, but it’s good to have a reminder that low interest rates are not a good thing for a large chunk of the electorate.”

    I’m curious about this aspect of polling. People over the age of 60 seem to be the strongest supporters of the Conservatives. Now, they don’t favor low interest rates (this is something I find interesting btw because here there seems to be uniform support behind the idea that low interest rates are a good thing). The whole point of austerity and deficit cutting is to ensure low interest rates. Why is it then that those over 60 continue to support the Conservatives so strongly?

  39. @Smukesh,

    I don’t have any evidence to show, but I expect that the “raw figures” slightly underestimate the performance of the LDs. Whether people vote LD or not is quite a subtle, tactical process based on who they perceive to be in a position to win a seat. Simply slicing up the electorate of LD-held seats and apportioning them to the new seats probably doesn’t capture that.

    If you take 1/3 of a LD held seat and merge it with 1/3 of a Tory-Labour marginal where the LDs are usually squeezed to virtually nothing, then the seat you end up with will probably have totally different dynamics to either of them. There is every chance that anti-Tories could switch from Labour to LD, for example, if they thought it was a Tory-LD battleground.

  40. @SoCal,

    You’re slightly mixing up two definitions of “interest rates”.

    Historically when Brits talked about “interest rates” they meant retail lending/savings rates – ie what they would pay for a loan or get for their savings.

    Recently there has been a tendency to refer to “historically low interest rates” (mainly by the government) and mean the yield on government bonds.

    Austerity is designed to protect low bond yields, not retail interest rates.

    Old people may well rue the loss of income from low retail interest rates, but on the other hand support efforts to stabilise/reduce government borrowing in order to keep our national borrowing rates cheap.

  41. @ Neil A

    “You’re slightly mixing up two definitions of “interest rates”.

    Historically when Brits talked about “interest rates” they meant retail lending/savings rates – ie what they would pay for a loan or get for their savings.

    Recently there has been a tendency to refer to “historically low interest rates” (mainly by the government) and mean the yield on government bonds.

    Austerity is designed to protect low bond yields, not retail interest rates.

    Old people may well rue the loss of income from low retail interest rates, but on the other hand support efforts to stabilise/reduce government borrowing in order to keep our national borrowing rates cheap.”

    Ohhh! I see. Thank you for pointing that out to me. When I think of interest rates, I think of the first definition you mention. The second definition we don’t really use.

  42. @SoCal,

    Whatever anyone says about the USA, as a nation you’ve never really had to worry about whether lenders think you’re good for the money (even recently…)

  43. Neil A

    `I don’t have any evidence to show, but I expect that the “raw figures” slightly underestimate the performance of the LDs`

    If there was a by-election in Eastleigh,then things could become clearer…I wouldn`t wish one though because of what needs to have preceded it

  44. @ Neil A

    “Whatever anyone says about the USA, as a nation you’ve never really had to worry about whether lenders think you’re good for the money (even recently…)”

    It was David Frum who was a Bush Administration official who has made this point repeatedly. He’s actually leveled the only legitimate conservative criticism of Obama.

    The prospect of self-inflicted default was pure madness and borderline treason. Someone on here told me I was just being partisan by saying that. But do you know who made that point repeatedly and used those very words (treason) to describe proposals to not raise the debt ceiling? Ronald Reagan.

  45. @DaoDao and @RAF
    Re. the question of the UN intervening in a counjtry’s domestic strife. Actually, there *is* a duty of intervention in very serious cases. Since conflicts are usually messy, the first thing that has to be established is verification of the conflict’s pattern. The it has to go through the UN’s debating structures, and then to the Security Council. Syria is partly covering itself by blaming ‘outside terrorists’ which clouds the issue, whereas Libya was more clear-cut as Ghaddafi had threatened, on air, to level Benghazi street by street. This duty of intervention has always been a judgment call. In 1994, when people were being murdered at the rate of 8,000 a day in Rwanda, the UN Security Council was disgracefully avoiding the word ‘genocide’ which would have triggered an automatic UN military response. The problem is one of weighing the intensity of the conflict with the likelihood of intervention not making it worse, or indeed stopping the violence, not to mention the geopolitics of the region and the conflict’s protagonists’ arsenals. Some interventions are almost impossible, not matter how bad they get, and I suspect Syria falls into that category.

    The point of the UN was, although it is based around the sovereignty of nation states, there are thresholds beyond which intervention is permissble. The question is how to work out when one has crossed it.

  46. @Allan Christie

    Why do you have to bring such an uncivilised tone to any discussion that involves Scottish politics?

    I read Phil’s posts with interest as they contain thoughtful and reasoned comment. Unlike yours!

  47. Valerie

    Allan was, doubtless in error, to introduce a humorous reference to a particular incident in Scottish politics. He should have known that those furth of Scotland would be wholly ignorant of it, as they would be of a reference to the politics of Uzbekistan.

    A reference to “Gypsy Amalia” isn’t uncivilised – unless you take a particularly Establishment view of fortune tellers.

    If you want to understand the reference, instead of assuming the import of matters that I doubt thay you appreciate, here’s the reference.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-14842176

  48. Last two questions from the Panelbase poll that I haven’t mentioned so far.

    Since no one knows how the current eurozone crisis is going to work out, Scots clearly agree with the SNP assessment that the sensible answer to “Do you believe Scotland would be better off financially if it adopted the euro?” would be a resounding No for the foreseeable future. 82% agreed with that. Only 7% favoured entry to the euro.

    When asked “Do you believe your personal tax burden would rise or fall in an independent Scotland?” 56% thought they would end up paying more in tax, 30% envisaged no change, while 14% thought their taxes would fall.

    Students of polling questions might ponder whether the term “tax burden” meant that respondents were pushed in a particular direction.

  49. @Old Nat

    Old Nat, I find you an informed and shrewd observer of all things political. But on occasion you do use words which are a little patronising

    .”I you want to understand the reference, Instead of assuming the import of matters that I doubt thay you appreciate……..”

    Is there really any need to address me in that manner?

    Do you use that tone with Mrs Nat? :-)

  50. Valerie

    Do you use that tone with Mrs Nat?

    Only when I want to annoy her. It works a treat! :-)

1 2 3 4