Looking grim for Labour

[The Red Baron]

I think the Lib Dems will have around 30 seats after the election. A substantial reduction but not a wipe out.

I think they have lost their  "protest vote" tag and that's where a lot of their support has gone. Protest voters will go to UKIP or the Greens.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

I have to say that the lack of overall movement in the polls points in one direction. Basically the same one before a shot was fired in the campaign. There will be a hung parliament and Labour will be the largest party.

I have to say though that unless the eventual arithmetic allows for a deal between Labour and the Lib Dems it is unlikely to end well. The Nationalists will, I think, provide Labour with dangerous allies.

As for the Tories, I think they have run a very poor campaign. You might argue that they have some unpromising material to work with in policy terms. However I think the big question that will be asked in the inevitable inquest is why they failed to cut some sort of deal with UKIP.

I would agree with this. 

I also think it has been the dullest most uninspiring election with not much innovation in terms of policy from either side.  I think the next few years will be a mess.  Perhaps a good election to lose?

The tory campaign should focus on the economy and how they're better equipped to deal with that over Labour - an argument they could win easily, but they haven't done that, which is a shame really.

The SNP mixing with Labour will be a bit of a problem for the country but that's probably where the smart money is.  What a headache for all!

[Glyn_Wigley]

The tory campaign should focus on the economy and how they're better equipped to deal with that over Labour - an argument they could win easily, but they haven't done that, which is a shame really.

Not after achieving sod all in the last five years they won't.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

The tory campaign should focus on the economy and how they're better equipped to deal with that over Labour - an argument they could win easily, but they haven't done that, which is a shame really.

Not after achieving sod all in the last five years they won't.

Really?  Sustained, steady growth, defecit lower (only just granted), wages now increasing above inflation, taxes lower for all, unemployment down, more people employed than ever before....

They are all positives.  It's far from perfect but it is not a bad job at all...

Today's analysis will prove interesting;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32424739

On a second note all miss an opportunity on the NHS.  It's clearly an issue for many and it is clear that Labour in Wales has not done a good job.  The Tories should be hammering home how it is doing better in England than Labour in Wales are and SNP are in Scotlad.  They could turn what has been one of their negatives in to a huge positive.

[BillyStubbsTears]

BFYP

The fact that it's generally accepted that the Tories have done a grand job of running the economy shows what a good politician Osborne is. He has dominated the political debate and bent it to his will by simply repeating the mantra that he has managed the economy well.

Unfortunately, he is a shocking economist. The fact is that in May 2010, he inherited an economy that was starting to recover from a horrific recession. He then implemented policies which choked off that recovery. The FACT is that we have actually experienced the worst recovery from recession since the South Sea Bubble in the 1700s. The OBR reckon that, directly due to Osborne's policy in 2010-12, we have lost, permanently something like £1500 of economic output for every single person in the country. Other economists argue that the number is more likely to be 2-3 times bigger than this.

And what was the benefit of that? We massively missed his aim of reducing the deficit anyway. 

An utterly catastrophic period of economic management. It beggars belief that ANYONE can look at this graph, recall that Month 27 was the last General Election and call the Tory economic policy a success. But that's politics.



AND the growth that we HAVE had over the past 2 years has been exactly matched by an increasing workforce. For the first time ON RECORD, we are not growing the economy faster that the workforce is growing. Productivity has followed and almost perfectly stable growth path for at least 100 years. Until the last 5 years, when, unprecedentedly, it has stopped growing. And THAT is the terrifying thing. If productivity doesn't improve we are unarguably set for a poorer future. It is THE most important issue for politicians over the next decade.

Have you heard anyone mention it?

[wing commander]

Alternatively we can give the keys to Balls and Milliband and destroy us like they did last time..At least they cant sell off the whole of the countries gold reserves this time at the lowest price on record and I quote Philip hobbs of the economist at the time "im dumfounded they have decided to do this it's schoolboy stuff and beyond belief) every economist in the world advised them to wait...Twelve months later we could have funded the nhs for months just in the difference...Every business leader big and small don't want the Labour back in and that should give the whole country a clue as to were they think the country will go if they do....

[BillyStubbsTears]

Wing Co

I run a small business. I want Labour back in.

[IC1967]

BFYP

The fact that it's generally accepted that the Tories have done a grand job of running the economy shows what a good politician Osborne is. He has dominated the political debate and bent it to his will by simply repeating the mantra that he has managed the economy well.

Unfortunately, he is a shocking economist. The fact is that in May 2010, he inherited an economy that was starting to recover from a horrific recession. He then implemented policies which choked off that recovery. The FACT is that we have actually experienced the worst recovery from recession since the South Sea Bubble in the 1700s. The OBR reckon that, directly due to Osborne's policy in 2010-12, we have lost, permanently something like £1500 of economic output for every single person in the country. Other economists argue that the number is more likely to be 2-3 times bigger than this.

And what was the benefit of that? We massively missed his aim of reducing the deficit anyway. 

An utterly catastrophic period of economic management. It beggars belief that ANYONE can look at this graph, recall that Month 27 was the last General Election and call the Tory economic policy a success. But that's politics.



AND the growth that we HAVE had over the past 2 years has been exactly matched by an increasing workforce. For the first time ON RECORD, we are not growing the economy faster that the workforce is growing. Productivity has followed and almost perfectly stable growth path for at least 100 years. Until the last 5 years, when, unprecedentedly, it has stopped growing. And THAT is the terrifying thing. If productivity doesn't improve we are unarguably set for a poorer future. It is THE most important issue for politicians over the next decade.

Have you heard anyone mention it?

Hahahahahahahahahahahaah!

[IC1967]

Wing Co

I run a small business. I want Labour back in.

If you run your business in line with your hard left views I'd be very surprised if it isn't struggling and destined eventually to go bust.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

BST equally you could argue the government is now finally finding more stable growth, rather than more artificial government spending backed growth that Labour tend to favour more of.  We could spend hours providing graphs to prove our points couldn't we?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32424739

Here's the IFS analysis - as ever Labour will lead to higher spending and debt, why the Tories aren't pushing this as number one point I do not know, particularly with the SNP pushing for even more spending if they power share....

The tories have some weakness in not having explained how they will cut etc and they should have worked this out and had it all laid out, that really would have caused Labour a problem, big opportunity missed there.

It's actually amazing how many people don't know who they'll vote for though, nothing really grabs the average man's attention.

BST question though why do you want Labour in?  What exactly are they going to do for you?  A lot of the stuff they've talked about probably doesn't help your business does it?

[Glyn_Wigley]

The tory campaign should focus on the economy and how they're better equipped to deal with that over Labour - an argument they could win easily, but they haven't done that, which is a shame really.

Not after achieving sod all in the last five years they won't.

Really?  Sustained, steady growth, defecit lower (only just granted), wages now increasing above inflation, taxes lower for all, unemployment down, more people employed than ever before....

They are all positives.  It's far from perfect but it is not a bad job at all...

"Sustained, steady growth"

You mean exactly like they inherited five years ago? Erm..no...they let the economy shrunk in those five years and it's only now growing back to what it should have been.

"defecit lower (only just granted)"

Remind me, what exactly did that safe pair of hands the Tories promise us about where we'd be regarding this five years ago..?

"wages now increasing above inflation"

Erm...who put them below inflation in the first place..?

"taxes lower for all"

What do you say to those who don't pay income tax but had to cope with VAT increases? Are they included in your "all"?

"unemployment down, more people employed than ever before"

These I will concede. However, on the whole the current government have achieved virtually nothing that they said they would. It comes to something when instead of a situation where a government would normally be crowing about their economic achievements and the opposition trying to smear them, the situation is the absolute reverse - Labour are ones pushing the economy and all the Tories do is continually try to smear Labour and the SNP. When asked about the economy, all a Tory will say is 'our record speaks for itself' (a non-answer of the weakest kind)...instead of seizing such a golden opportunity and trumpeting what a success they've made of it! Even the Libdems don't seem to have anything much to say about it. That says everything.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Here's the IFS analysis - as ever Labour will lead to higher spending and debt, why the Tories aren't pushing this as number one point I do not know

Why not? Because 'their record speaks for itself', that's why not!

[BillyStubbsTears]

BFYP

Two reasons I want Labour back in.

1) Over the past 50 years, there have been two catastrophic, ideologically-driven economic experiments. Those caused major lasting damage to the economy. They were both committed by Tory Govts. Howe in 1981 and Osborne in 2010. In both cases, the Tory Chancellor went against straightforward basic economic theory and in both cases they drove us into serious and long lasting loss of economic performance.

No Labour Govt has EVER done that. They HAVE been caught up in the inevitable collapses that bedevil the Capitalist system. All countries and all Govts do. But that is very different from choosing to hobble your economy because you ideologically disagree with discretionary, expansionary Govt spending. That's deciding to reduce your performance for ideological reasons.

So there's reason number 1. I believe that we'd have a healthier economy if we had a Govt that is prepared to follow sensible economics, not the economics of Austerity. So that would benefit my company.

2) I believe in a strong public sphere. I believe that there are many things that are better when funded centrally by us all, collectively, from taxes. I would go much further than Labour. I believe that health, education, transport and pensions are fundamentally ill-suited to private enterprise. Either because they are natural monopolies (look at train ticket prices from Doncaster to Bristol, where there is no competition) or because the market argument is predicated on the assumption that the consumer has all the information it requires to make an informed choice as a consumer (you reckon that as a 20 year old, you can choose a pension fund that will perform well over the next 50 years? No way. You can't. You guess and you gamble your future prosperity on nothing more than a hunch.)

So there you go. Hard-headed decisions why I really, really don't want another Tory Govt. It's not a gut reaction. It is a decision made from a combination of my philosophical outlook and my assessment of the sort of country I want to live in.

[IC1967]

Oh dear. Comres have Tories on 36% and Labour on 32%. Survation have Tories on 33% and Labour on 29%.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

BFYP

Two reasons I want Labour back in.

1) Over the past 50 years, there have been two catastrophic, ideologically-driven economic experiments. Those caused major lasting damage to the economy. They were both committed by Tory Govts. Howe in 1981 and Osborne in 2010. In both cases, the Tory Chancellor went against straightforward basic economic theory and in both cases they drove us into serious and long lasting loss of economic performance.

No Labour Govt has EVER done that. They HAVE been caught up in the inevitable collapses that bedevil the Capitalist system. All countries and all Govts do. But that is very different from choosing to hobble your economy because you ideologically disagree with discretionary, expansionary Govt spending. That's deciding to reduce your performance for ideological reasons.

So there's reason number 1. I believe that we'd have a healthier economy if we had a Govt that is prepared to follow sensible economics, not the economics of Austerity. So that would benefit my company.

2) I believe in a strong public sphere. I believe that there are many things that are better when funded centrally by us all, collectively, from taxes. I would go much further than Labour. I believe that health, education, transport and pensions are fundamentally ill-suited to private enterprise. Either because they are natural monopolies (look at train ticket prices from Doncaster to Bristol, where there is no competition) or because the market argument is predicated on the assumption that the consumer has all the information it requires to make an informed choice as a consumer (you reckon that as a 20 year old, you can choose a pension fund that will perform well over the next 50 years? No way. You can't. You guess and you gamble your future prosperity on nothing more than a hunch.)

So there you go. Hard-headed decisions why I really, really don't want another Tory Govt. It's not a gut reaction. It is a decision made from a combination of my philosophical outlook and my assessment of the sort of country I want to live in.

BST, I respect your opinion completely, but totally reject your notion that all economic problems under Labour are not their fault but that under the Tories it's their wrong ideals - that is just typical pro labour stance.  Quite clearly in the more modern world a large proportion of our economic success is driven by factors outside of our control and largely we can only focus on what happens in our country.  I'm actually not one who blames the last Labour government completely, equally I don't agree that the economy in 2010 ended up going badly wrong, it just didn't and the long term gains are proving better than the short term.  But I can understand what you're saying and why you're saying it, I just don't agree on how you view the modern economic world.

On your second point I really do not agree.  There is a clear benefit in private companies supporting and working with public organisations.  Take health as an example, why can't private companies run a lot of services?  With good contracts that bring benefits to the public and strict monitoring it clearly does work.  Equally in schools, why can't private comanies successfully run schools to a great extent?  I work in this area and there is a clear benefit to local authorities in that they can pay out less to companies than it would cost to run the services theirselves.  The private companies can then deliver that at a profit to themselves and to a high standard.  The key there is ensuring that the contracts are watertight and hold down companies to deliver exactly what they promise - it does work and the phobia of the left in using companies that make profits is just wrong.  Granted some companies get it wrong but that's why you put the safeguards in the contracts to protect the services and ensure that competition in the market delivers excellence.

Equally, you say that the public sector can make better decisions on things, well clearly it can't.  The people don't change whether they work for a public or private company it is still the same people and the systems aren't hugely different are they?  A pension fund still has to grow whether it is in the private or public sector.

What I will agree with you on is that all public services should stay free to use at the end user.  Health should be free, education should be free up to 18 in my view etc.  I don't disagree at all one bit on that, it is fundemental to British society and any party that substantially changed that would lose my vote (and I say that as someone who has health insurance).

But I will ask you one question which may intrigue me as an answer.  Do you really think that this Labour government is going to change any of the things that you mention?  They will still go for huge amounts of outsourcing (Because it works), they will still keep trains etc in the private sector (because they can't afford not to) and they will never change the fundementals of the finances of the country because it would be electoral suicide.  This country is not at all left wing enough to go down that route and it would not work.  There's no mention of any of this in a Labour policy anywhere because they know how the electorate will react.

The tory campaign should focus on the economy and how they're better equipped to deal with that over Labour - an argument they could win easily, but they haven't done that, which is a shame really.

Not after achieving sod all in the last five years they won't.

Really?  Sustained, steady growth, defecit lower (only just granted), wages now increasing above inflation, taxes lower for all, unemployment down, more people employed than ever before....

"Sustained, steady growth"

You mean exactly like they inherited five years ago? Erm..no...they let the economy shrunk in those five years and it's only now growing back to what it should have been.

"defecit lower (only just granted)"

Remind me, what exactly did that safe pair of hands the Tories promise us about where we'd be regarding this five years ago..?

"wages now increasing above inflation"

Erm...who put them below inflation in the first place..?

"taxes lower for all"

What do you say to those who don't pay income tax but had to cope with VAT increases? Are they included in your "all"?

"unemployment down, more people employed than ever before"

These I will concede. However, on the whole the current government have achieved virtually nothing that they said they would. It comes to something when instead of a situation where a government would normally be crowing about their economic achievements and the opposition trying to smear them, the situation is the absolute reverse - Labour are ones pushing the economy and all the Tories do is continually try to smear Labour and the SNP. When asked about the economy, all a Tory will say is 'our record speaks for itself' (a non-answer of the weakest kind)...instead of seizing such a golden opportunity and trumpeting what a success they've made of it! Even the Libdems don't seem to have anything much to say about it. That says everything.

Glyn a few points on your comments;

Wages - Labour saw drops in their last spell and below inflation rises for the last 2 years with the exception of one period - the Tories inherited that.

Growth - Done pretty well after the initial period where it was rocky, but in comparison to Europe etc pretty well and the IMF even supports the process undertaken now after some scepticsm.

They are all positives.  It's far from perfect but it is not a bad job at all...

VAT - Yes it went up, but given we appear to have little problem in supporting consumer spending in this country at a sensible level it was perfectly achievable.  As an accountant I implore everyone to keep it at 20% it is much, much easier than 17.5% that's for sure.  Equally will Labour reverse this?  No they won't.  Will they put up taxes for middle incomes?  Probably.  Will they put fuel duty up?  Probably?  But hey they can fund the country by taxing bankers (large amounts of which will simply move offshore to avoid it).

I say this though, I still expect Labour to be in power in a months time though I would like to be wrong.  I'm disappointed with the lot of them and it is telling how many people are.  There is not a great amount to choose from at the moment.  There's clearly not much that supports your view BST and not that much that supports mine.  I have just about made my mind up (which is largely irrelevant in a super safe seat) but I won't deny that the Tory campaign has been poor, Labour lack ideas and ideology, the Lib Dems perhaps talk the most sense in a lot of areas but are largely unvotable, UKIP make sense in some areas but are just far too right wing and talk rubbish in some others.  As for the Greens, well they just live on a different planet, or at least seem to prefer to.

Essentially, it's not a good bunch!  I keep waiting for somebody to do something game changing and it hasn't happened.

[wing commander]

bst....

   I know mate and I respect your opinion...But reality is that the vast majority of business in this country do not want Labour back in wether it be big or small and  you will be hard pressed to argue that point ..I believe it would be a disaster for this Country..Personally I think the torys have done a admirable job of putting this country into the economic position its in..I wont forget that treasury letter that said "sorry theres no money left" left for the tory incumbent by his Labour counterpart...The last two years I have given 3 and 5% rises to my 28 staff...It's my firm belief if Labour get in they will be back to 1% again as they borrow and borrow...
    In truth one of my biggest issues is that in there last term..Labour made financial descisions that had most economists scratching there head with the incompetence of it all..The gold one I mentioned above which if the common man knew how much that crazy descision cost would be aghast is just one example...And with Balls and Milliband the faces haven't changed nor has the brain...If labour do get a coalition with there friends from across the border who seem destined to want to rule us, The very next day you watch how the footsie100 and Aim markets react and I bet you a pre match steak dinner it wont be positive..

[IC1967]

Oh dear. Labour not doing very well in the marginals.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

[BillyStubbsTears]

bst....

   I know mate and I respect your opinion...But reality is that the vast majority of business in this country do not want Labour back in wether it be big or small and  you will be hard pressed to argue that point ..I believe it would be a disaster for this Country..Personally I think the torys have done a admirable job of putting this country into the economic position its in..I wont forget that treasury letter that said "sorry theres no money left" left for the tory incumbent by his Labour counterpart...The last two years I have given 3 and 5% rises to my 28 staff...It's my firm belief if Labour get in they will be back to 1% again as they borrow and borrow...
    In truth one of my biggest issues is that in there last term..Labour made financial descisions that had most economists scratching there head with the incompetence of it all..The gold one I mentioned above which if the common man knew how much that crazy descision cost would be aghast is just one example...And with Balls and Milliband the faces haven't changed nor has the brain...If labour do get a coalition with there friends from across the border who seem destined to want to rule us, The very next day you watch how the footsie100 and Aim markets react and I bet you a pre match steak dinner it wont be positive..

Wing Co

From the figures I've seen, the very biggest cost of that decision might be judged at £8bn. That's assuming that the Treasury had the wisdom of Solomon and sold that amount of gold at the very height of the market instead of when they actually did.

OK. I'll accept that. It's equivalent to about 0.4% of GDP.

Perspective. The OBR reckon that the Austerity we had in 2010-12 has cost us as a nation about £100bn through lost output. There are very many economists who think this is a grossly conservative figure. The biggest estimate I have seen is about £300bn. That's somewhere between 5-15% of GDP.

And Osborne is planning the same spending cuts over the first 3 years of the next Parliament!

And you wonder why I want this lot out.

[wing commander]

  With figures like that Bst you would think British business would be clamouring for a Labour government but they have no business support at all zip...?? So Why do you explain how the Tory's can get endless big and small businesses backing but Labour cant produce one letter of business support..You could argue zero hours contracts which was a big labour push a few weeks ago,until someone reminded them about the amount of zero hours contracts offered by labour councils that is ? You can produce predictions and calculations like the one above all you like but the cure sometimes needs a bit of pain, but our economy is in miles better shape because of Austerity..I know my business is...
I try and keep an opened mind on these things...However if Millipede and Balls are the very best Labour has to offer I wouldn't want to trust them with my kids pocket money...

[BillyStubbsTears]

Wing Co.

I despair at this comment: "You can produce predictions and calculations like the one above all you like but the cure sometimes needs a bit of pain, but our economy is in miles better shape because of Austerity". By what measure do you conclude that we are in better shape BECAUSE OF Austerity?

By coincidence, Simon Wren-Lewis has been talking about exactly this topic over the past few days in his series on macro-economic myths. Here's what he has to say today.
http://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/mediamacro-myth-7-strong-recovery.html

What you call "a bit of pain" is actually an utterly unprecedented collapse in productivity growth. The graph at the start of that blog scares the living daylights out of me. It says that something has happened over the past 7 years that appears to have permanently knocked us off the path of increasing productivity that we had been on since the War (in fact, as S W-L has shown in another post, since the 1820s http://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/disaster.html )

Now, you can argue the toss about what the cause of that productivity collapse is. You can argue that is was down to Labour wrecking the economy. You can argue that it was down to the Coalition wrecking the recovery. What you CANNOT say (at least you can't find evidence to support saying) is that we're in great shape now as a result of the decisions that have been made by the Coalition. We've had growth. Eventually. But the growth we've had is totally unprecedented. It's come because we have more people doing lower value, lower productivity work, not because our economy is more productive. That is an appalling situation to be in, because it says that we've gone onto a trajectory that will make us significantly poorer over the next generation. If there was ANY evidence that we have had to go through a "bit of pain" to sort this out, but that going through that pain, we HAVE sorted it out, I'd be on your side of the argument. But there is none. Not a scrap. We took a decision in 2010 that went against the sort of basic economics that is taught to first year undergraduate students. We carried on that experiment for 2 years, with disastrous results. We then changed tack and went to a slightly more conventional approach. We got moderate growth as a result, but we have not come remotely close to making up the gap that we allowed to build up while we were experiencing that "bit of pain". Everything has panned out EXACTLY as the basic economic textbooks say it should. And now, Osborne is telling us that he's going to do EXACTLY the same thing again if he's Chancellor after 7 May.


I'll bet YOU a pre-match steak dinner that if he DOES get a chance to implement that policy, and if he DOES cut as hard as he says he will over the next 3 years, those productivity graphs will continue to flat-line. I wonder how long that would need to go on before someone would admit that mistakes have been made?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Back on to election(maybe we should have an election thread?), polls really quite split today showing they don't really know.

Few things came up, stamp duty one, not so sure it'll make much difference to getting first time buyers in to new homes.  Rent controls is another and I'm still unsure on how that works well really it's certainly messy but all parties need to do something to address the market issues.

The Tories then have a letter from small businesses. Bit of tokenism there, but really is anyone inspired by any of this?

[donnyproletarian]

It is clear from reading between the lines of this debate that whoever gets in under whatever name the electorates wishes are going to be ignored with some sleazy back room deal.Austerity will continue, food banks will become the norm and the bankers will continue to make money.Thats why I will be voting TUSC

[IC1967]

Oh dear. Latest poll in Scotland shows the SNP will win every seat in Scotland. 54% for SNP and only a pathetic 20% for Labour.

[Glyn_Wigley]

I really hope that Cameron's (or more likely his campaign manager's) adoption of trying to portray himself as a descamisado blows up in his face when people realise what a marketing con it is.

[The Red Baron]

Cameron looks like the old boxing champion who has taken one too many hits, and will be glad to retire, it's only in the last few days he has put any effort in, it's as though he has had a b..locking.
He seems resigned to his fate of losing, as though he already knows that is beyond him to get back in.

I have heard it said of Cameron that he only puts in the effort when he really has to, hence he has become more assertive in the last few days because the polls refuse to budge.

It was noticeable that in the three debates before the last GE that he performed better as they went on. Although in many ways the damage was done in the first one when Clegg ran rings around him.

[IC1967]

Oh dear. Ipsos MORI had Labour 2 points ahead last week. They've now got the Tories ahead by 5 points! 35% to 30%.

[Metalmicky]

Has anyone mentioned Labour's PFI's debts yet....?

It is estimated that we (the taxpayers) will end up paying five times over for building projects funded by Private Finance Initiative deals commissioned by the last Labour government. 

Great deals arranged by Labour that we are still saddled with.

New analysis shows that the 544 PFI projects agreed under Labour will cost every working family in the country an average of nearly £15,000 each, even though the original building cost stands at just over £3,000.

[BillyStubbsTears]

MM

How "new" is that "new analysis"?

Only the Telegraph used precisely your words 5 years ago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8225864/Labours-PFI-debt-will-cost-five-times-as-much-Conservatives-claim.html

And the "new analysis" was actually done by one Tory MP, not an independent economics analyst.

Owt else to add?

[IC1967]

Has anyone mentioned Labour's PFI's debts yet....?

It is estimated that we (the taxpayers) will end up paying five times over for building projects funded by Private Finance Initiative deals commissioned by the last Labour government. 

Great deals arranged by Labour that we are still saddled with.

New analysis shows that the 544 PFI projects agreed under Labour will cost every working family in the country an average of nearly £15,000 each, even though the original building cost stands at just over £3,000.

Ignore silly Billy. He'd argue black was white if he thought he could get away with it. Labour used PFI to keep the costs off the balance sheet. They weren't bothered it was vastly expensive. I've dealt with this issue comprehensively in the FAOIC1967 thread. You won't be surprised to know silly Billy tries to defend this national disgrace.

[The Red Baron]

Oh dear. Ipsos MORI had Labour 2 points ahead last week. They've now got the Tories ahead by 5 points! 35% to 30%.

I think we should beware of a single poll that shows a sudden shift like that. There will be plenty of other polls over the weekend so we can see if this represents the start of a trend.