April 15th, 2011

State of the Race
Yes Campaign’s Smoking Gun Memo

Yesterday can’t have been fun for the Yes campaign. Ed Howker was leaked a document from the the campaign’s biggest donor the Electoral Reform Society, that proved, despite the legal threats to the contrary, that they were set to profit from a Yes result.

They concede in the strategy memo that their commercial wing is a weak spot:

“It is possible that ERSL will profit as a result of a YES vote (increased business opportunities”

And they are well aware of how damaging it could be:

“ERSL fear that negative publicity might affect union clients, Conservative Party or other No supporters which in turn, might affect future dividends.”

The Sun and the Mail have gone to town and even the pro Yes Guardian found it worthy of a thorough writeup. It all makes yesterday’s denial look a little silly. It’s not best to try cover these things up if you put it in writing yourself.

Elsewhere the shock IPPR YouGov poll that found 45% in favour of AV has been shredded by the experts due to the fact that its leading questions read like a Yes press release. Even more money going on No this morning


162 Comments

  1. 1
    Calamity Clegg says:

    I pledge to win the Yes Vote by a whopping 90%!

    Where’s my Party gone ?

    Like

    • 4
      Southern Softy says:

      And Clegg should be made to pay the estimated £80million which is being wasted on this predictable outcome.

      Like

      • 8
        Jabba the Cat says:

        The bill should be given to the LibDims, equally divided between each member of the party.

        Like

        • 12
          Who cares about AV says:

          Can some news commentator please ask fatso precot the obvious “elephant in the room” question rather than all thier silly efforts to allow prescot to bang the “News of the World” phone hacking scandal

          The question being

          What was it when as Deputy Primeminister, and you were porking a colleague and parading a mistress in front the world, and you found there was the threat that your phone was being tapped – that prevented you ordering a full and frank enquiry and use all the means (MI5, Mi6) at your disposal to ensure no terrorist threat existed to the UK ?

          And secondly

          Who do you hold most responsbile for the scandal you state – the police – or the Labour Home Secretary at the time (was that the one with the porn issue?) ?

          Like

          • Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says: says:

            I do agree – the Lord is getting a lot of news/twitter coverage to bash Murdoch.

            Like

          • Rupert Murduch says:

            I’m very very very very sorry.

            Please stop taking all my money and arresting my reporters.

            Like

          • Fuzzy Dunlop says:

            This scandal took place years ago at (then) LABOUR supporting News International. Yet I still can’t think of any reason why the LABOUR Party never cared much about it until recently.

            Like

          • Leeds 2 - uk 0 says:

            every mobile phone is capabale of having its answphone messages accessed by an unauthorised user…. given you just phone the number and can guess a passcode… ?

            so millions could have been accessed wrongly

            but proving it was

            a) not accidental
            b) who held the other end of the line at the time
            c) if there is sufficient evidence for criminal case

            is not easy – so the police have tough job.

            I dont remember any labour minister saying at the time this was a major issue for the polis to look into – clearly they say it as minor

            Now – out of power – it looks like every newspaper and tv gives lord muck a chance to stand on his soap box and spout garbage….

            why cant one reporter – nail him ?

            i know he is good entertainment – but there is a limit

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            They jailed the 2 for hacking the Royals easily enough.

            Like

          • zebedooi says:

            probably case of poor defense laywers..

            So the police have details of which phone called to attack – but who was making call – where is that proof ,,, ?

            Hard to prove “who made the call” ?????

            lot of legg work to nail down clues to who using phone at time of call – lawyers just need to say – yes it was our clients phone – but someone else did this hacking…

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            They were the best defense lawyers Murdoch could buy, so no.

            In the Royals case they were jailed for conspiring to access the mobile phones of royal aides. The Prince of Wales and his sons William and Harry were among the targets, as illegal attempts were made to access their mobile phone voicemail in-boxes.

            Illegally accessing the mobile phone was enough and that was 6 months in jail.

            There is a reason these reporters keep being arrested you know.
            This new investigation is serious as a heart attack and Murdoch knows it.

            Like

        • 121

          What, all 3 of them?

          Like

      • 23
        Anonymous says:

        So who’s paying for the No campaign?

        Like

        • 32
          Anonymous says:

          Probably the doggy guys who live as tax exiles and fund the Tory party.

          Like

        • 37
          Anonymous says:

          I propose a three-way voting form:

          YES / NO / MAYBE

          Financial Backers of the MAYBE campaign could be paid dividends by Guido when government finally collapses and we have neither AV nor any other kind of VOTE system in place.

          Hope you’ve got big pockets Guido !!

          Like

          • Allan@Aberdeen says:

            What is written in capitals further down applies directly to the matter being discussed.

            The dream of Montagu Norman of the Bank of England was “that the Hegemony of World Finance should reign supreme over everyone, everywhere, as one whole super-national control mechanism.” (“Montagu Norman” by John Hargrave, Greystone Press, N.Y., 1942.)

            Montagu Norman, Governor of The Bank Of England, addressing the United States Bankers’ Association, New York, 1924.

            “Capital must protect itself in every possible way, both by combination and legislation. Debts must be collected, mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible. When, through process of law, the common people lose their homes, they will become more docile and more easily governed through the strong arm of the government applied by a central power of wealth under leading financiers. These truths are well known among our principal men, who are now engaged in forming an imperialism to govern the world.

            BY DIVIDING THE VOTERS THROUGH THE POLITICAL PARTY SYSTEM, WE CAN GET THEM TO EXPEND THEIR ENERGIES IN FIGHTING FOR QUESTIONS OF NO IMPORTANCE.

            It is thus, by discrete action, we can secure for ourselves that which has been so well planned and so successfully accomplished.”

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            Thank-you Alan@Aberdeen.

            Most intelligent and insightful posting I’ve seen so far.
            How can we be in contact?

            Like

          • sockpuppet #5 says:

            I shall start talking to myself too.

            How’ya doing #4.

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            How about thith inthtead

            Like

          • Postlethwaite says:

            Alan@

            Nice one – sums it up perfectly

            Like

        • 87
          Grumpy Old Man says:

          All together now, 1-2-3- ASHCROFT!!

          Like

      • 50
        Anonymous says:

        Its £250m not £80m and every time it is used, to count it will cost more. Then again this country is washed with money (look at how much Cameron is giving to other countries) so it is ok.

        Like

      • 92
        Tell it like it really is says:

        250 million

        Like

    • 17
      misterned says:

      I notice that both the Yes and the No campaign are using fear of the B&P as a weapon claiming that AV will hurt and help that party.

      Both are correct.

      The Yes campaign are correct in that in the South, the left-wing middle-class, multiculturalist, climate change believing ‘right-on’ progressives hate the B&P with a passion and will vote for all other parties instead. The B&P have no foothold at all in those constituencies anyway. The Greens may be the bigger benefactor of AV in these constituencies.

      However where the No campaign are correct, is in the many over-represented, tiny, Northern urban, industrial constituencies, the white, working-class, socialists keep labour in power, but they will welcome the opportunity to vote for renationalisation and British jobs for British workers. There could be a million second preference votes in these tiny constituencies.

      These constituencies and their borders are massively biased in labour’s favour and in many of them, the B&P would not have to increase their share by much to have an impact.

      Like

      • 28
        sockpuppet #4 says:

        Are you a northerner then ned?

        I’m rather familiar with many of those places. That party remains small enough not to get anywhere near third in many places, and doesnt happen to even bother standing in a northern constituency with the appropriate level of non-white people living there (ie not many).

        I don’t think anyone really expects re-nationalisation any more.

        Like

        • 36
          Stan Butler says:

          I’m in the North West and seem to remember the B+P getting a seat as our MEP!

          http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8088381.stm

          Like

          • sockpuppet #4 says:

            Its some sort of multi seat election for MEPs innit? That undoubtedly gets small parties seats.
            Under AV to get a seat one still needs to be in the sort of 25-35% region under FPTP.

            Like

        • 40
          misterned says:

          Yes I am a Northerner from a very working class town. And I know many people across the North West who have a great deal of sympathy with the socialist B&P. They would never vote for them in a general election, but would happily vote for labour AND the B&P given the chance.

          Like many tories I know, who would vote UKIP and Tory, or Tory and UKIP.

          Like

          • sockpuppet #4 says:

            I can see that, but I’m not really convinced there are the numbers for AV to make a difference.

            Like

          • misterned says:

            Some of the Northern constituencies will not need massive numbers. They are tiny, and with a low turnout….especially in the constituencies with large council estates where many residents might vote B&P as a first choice, knowing that they will not be letting their families and their class down, because they will still be voting labour as a second preference. All those racist white chavs, who voted labour previously because, well that is what you do at a general election….

            With AV could vote B&P and Labour.

            Like

    • 26
      Anonymous says:

      I will also vote No, just because Clagg is a lier I don’t want him or his party rewarded.

      More interesting news on how government waste money.

      Despite years of delays and soaring costs, Typhoon fighters – the RAF’s latest fast jet – are suffering from a shortage of spares, with planes being cannibalised and pilots grounded, according to a Commons investigation.

      The overall project is costing £20.2bn, £3.5bn more than first expected, says the report by MPs on the Commons cross-party public accounts committee. The RAF has had to spend an extra £2.7bn buying 16 additional aircraft it does not need to honour contractual commitments to other countries producing the planes. In 2019, it will scrap more than 50 Typhoon jets that became operational only three years ago to a cost of more than £4.5bn because it cannot afford to update them.

      Like

      • 35
        Leeds 2 - uk 0 says:

        anyone see this post as another “i am a nurse” – but turns out the be labour stooooge…

        typhons grounded cos labour wasted so much money not providing troops and pilots with the necessary equipment… doh!

        Like

        • 47
          Anonymous says:

          Why you all insist on replacing one bunch of idiots with another bunch of idiots? I accept Labour government made a lot of big mistakes, but what the point in replacing them with bigger idiots and fools. Just look at Cameron, Osborne, Clegg and Alexander; useless liars. This lot is worse than the last lot.

          Try to come up with some thing better.

          Like

          • Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

            Not quite , they havent trashed the econmy, sold the gold at low pr*ces, told lies to invade another country, Taken away basic rights like trail by jury .This lot are not as bad the last lot yet!

            Like

          • Mike Hunt says:

            Don’t forget the theft of pensions from every one who doesn’t work for the state.

            Saw the report yesterday about older workers who can’t afford to retire. This means no jobs for the young, another winner from McBroon.

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            Even Euro fighter started under the Tory government 20 years ago. If they haven’t trashed the country;

            1) why are all other countries except us are growing?
            2) debt is more now than the last government
            3) we have more immigrants now than in the last government
            4) unemployment is more
            5) NHS waiting time is increasing
            6) like for like retail sales is falling
            7) bankers are paid more bonuses
            8) FTSE has fallen

            Like

          • sockpuppet #4 says:

            Mike Hunt : one size of pie argument.

            Much loved by french socialists who thought that 35 hour weeks would increase employment rather than just make everyone poorer.

            You don’t make an economy richer by working less.

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            This is the idiot responsible for our countries finance.

            The gaffe, which will raise fresh ­questions over the Chancellor’s judgment, emerged as the debt-ridden Republic waited for an emergency bail-out of up to £85billion.
            At the time, Mr Osborne, then Shadow Chancellor, called Ireland a “shining ­example” of how to do business and urged the deregulation of Britain’s financial services to help us copy the success of the “Celtic Tiger”.
            He praised the “simple and effective approach” that lured firms such as Intel, Oracle and Apple to Dublin instead of London. And he attacked then-Chancellor Gordon Brown for failing to ask why ­Britain seemed to be losing out.
            In an article for The Times four years ago, he wrote: “They have much to teach us, if only we are willing to learn.”

            Like

          • Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

            Anon, You seem dependent on goverment sorting your life out , I think you need to learn not to rely on goverment and sort your own life out.

            Like

          • misterned says:

            Sorry anonymous, this current lot, whilst pretty piss poor, are nowhere near as bad as labour were. They are not even in the same league of incompetence or rank corruption or malicious spite.

            The tories have not had opposition MPs arrested for merely doing their jobs. They have not tried to tag, track an monitor every Brit. Quite the opposite, we actually are more free today than we were under labour.

            This lot have not launched an illegal invasion and occupation of another sovereign state

            This lot have not created a deficit the size of a black Wednesday happening every single week.

            Where is the integrated transport system labour promised? after 13 years?

            This lot are trying to get MOD procurement and management under control from the utter chaos that existed before.

            Considering the economy they inherited, it is a miracle (for the public sector) that there are not a million more unemployed former public workers.

            Whilst I fundamentally disagree with the current government on their policies of further capitulation to the EU and their “climate change” policies and the rate of their deficit reduction (too little too slow) and the amount of money that they are donating to other rich nations, (taking from the poor of this rich nation to give to the rich of other rich nations) I have to admit that they are, in general terms an improvement on what we had under labour. We now have two separate parties with different supporters working better together (just) than the previous labour party worked with itself.

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            misterned; hope this government fall soon, I simply don’t want this UK following Ireland.

            I accept we are more free now but poor than under the last government. But then again this government wants to close prisons and have lighter sentences for criminals, so are we really free?

            Like

          • Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

            Anon , Someone once said “you cannot have freedom and sercurity” and no-one in the private sector felt richer under the last goverment , maybe if you are in the public sector then yes.

            And before you mention the Banks , they should have not been bailed out.

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

            In the private sector having my own company I was doing very well under the last government. Now a days you cannot even get loan to grow your business or sustain it. Customers haven’t got the money to spend.

            Even 2008 or 2009 under Brown was better than now; people who inherited wealth and sit on their backside might me better off under this government but not the onces who worked hard in the private sector.

            Just ask any one who own small and medium size company.

            Like

          • Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

            Anon, It was Labour that rasied taxes on the the low paid, rasied taxes on all those that earn 150k (Yes thats right the goverment stealing half your earnings) , Increased red tape , So either you relied on goverment buisness to keep your company going or you telling a porkie.

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            I was relaying on the private sector and people (they might have worked in the private sector or public sector). I will prefer more red tape and more business than less red tape and no business.

            The only part that is doing well is the B&B that houses homeless people; there is a lot of demand from people who lost their jobs / business and home, social service need lots of rooms to house them, so it is doing very well. But I am not happy making money from other people’s loss.

            Like

          • misterned says:

            “1) why are all other countries except us are growing?” Not true.
            Wait and see what the latest quarterly figures say, most economists are predicting growth.

            “2) debt is more now than the last government”
            Overall debt is up, because the deficit created by labour was so insanely massive and was growing so fast. The deficit is now coming slowly down, but so long as the deficit exists, debt will increase. As it did under labour, even in the fake, debt created, boom times. Because labour were completely and totally and maliciously incompetent.

            “3) we have more immigrants now than in the last government”
            As the totals keep increasing that is true. More needs to be done to stem that tide, do you honestly believe labour would reduce immigration as they promised to do in 1997?

            4) unemployment is more Unemployment fell last month. More jobs were created in the private sector than were lost in the public sector.

            “5) NHS waiting time is increasing”
            Largely as a consequence of the enourmous numbers of health migrants that labour let in.

            “6) like for like retail sales is falling”
            true, keeping a lid on domestic pull inflation.

            “7) bankers are paid more bonuses”
            and are taxed more too.

            “8) FTSE has fallen”
            The FTSE is higher today than it was at the last election.

            Have you looked at the trace of the FTSE from 1980 to today? It is a gradual climb with a small blip in 1987. Then it rockets up from the mid 1990s to peak in the year 2000 and then slumps to 2003 then rockets back up to near where it was in 2000 again, only to slump again from 2007. The value of the FTSE almost halved under labour….. TWICE!!!

            It is a clear sign of repeated market booms and busts under labour.

            When will you back up your false and ridiculous assertions with facts?

            Like

      • 57
        sockpuppet #4 says:

        Where do you get the info that typhoons will be scrapped in 2019. Sounds like bollocks to me.

        While I’m at it – looks like we need relatively cheap lower tech planes for ground attack. Jaguars? Hawks ? Etandards?

        Like

  2. 2
    ampersfa says:

    Billy!

    Like

    • 58
      Guido fawkes says:

      nice to see guido wants the “No” to win but takes money (adds) from the “Yes” campaign…

      oh the irony – poor guido making money from promoting “Yes” when he wants “No”.

      Can loose then can he ?

      Like

  3. 3
    Down with Brown! says:

    I reckon it will be a 60%+ No vote.

    Like

    • 11
      ST says:

      I hope so, but the Yes vote is likely to be very motivated.

      Like

      • 15
        there may be trouble ahead says:

        If it’s a really low turnout it won’t matter who wins as the result will be seen as invalid.

        Like

        • 19
          ST says:

          Yes, I’ve been wondering if the Commons or Lords will comply with the result if the turn out is too low.

          Like

          • Anonymous says:

            There is no lower limit on turnout so they have no choice. It’s like a legal thing ??

            Like

          • Down with Brown! says:

            Yep, unlike other referrendums this is a binding one. The result must become law. So it is very important that anyone with any sense come out and votes no to AV.

            Like

          • there may be trouble ahead says:

            Oh they will have a choice all right.

            If it’s a low turnout they can cause chaos holding up or changing legislation and could even take legal action themselves.

            This isn’t a referendum on whether some town has a tram system or a police chief, this is about changing Britain’s democratic system in how it elects a government forever.

            Turnout will matter.

            Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.

            Like

  4. 5
    Robert Peston says:

    I can confirm that Prince Harry will be marrying Prince William in next months Royal Wedding

    Like

  5. 6
    BaggPuss says:

    “Electoral Reform Society” Strange name, that – talking up their own book.

    Like

    • 43
      Bled White Taxpayer says:

      Like the Howard League for Penal Reform – strangely they do not even give a moment’s thought into reforming prisons into a genuine place of punishment. It’s all about yuman rights and duvets instead.

      Like

      • 103
        misterned says:

        Exactly… They are in existence to lobby to get prisons reformed from places of punishment (as they were a few decades ago) into classy hotels for criminals to enjoy at tax-payer expense.

        Like

    • 149
      Sir William Waad says:

      Pamphleeter Mr Guido Fawkes revealed today that certain gentlemen who have lent their support to the Women’s Social and Political Union stand to make substantial personal profits if the demands of these strident viragos are concede. “Sir Bufton Tufton”, Mr Fawkes averred, “holds stock in the Flowery Hat Company of Luton, whilst Mr Edwin Cattermole is a well-known publisher of light romantic fiction. The additional trade that these gentlemen may drum up through their friendship with the Suffragettes can only increase the luxury of their already expansive styles of life. I say “Nay, nay and thrice nay!” to this rash experiment in electoral reform!”

      Like

  6. 7
    genghiz the kahn says:

    Funny how the celebs have gone to ground when something like this emerges.

    Perhaps Red Ed, Joanna Lumley, Colin Firth, Tony Robinson have all left their phones off the hook.

    Like

  7. 9
    Jane Pilgrim says:

    I hope you’ll now leave me alone.

    Like

    • 18
      Commonsense says:

      At last! The poor woman is being left alone.

      Not before time.

      Like

    • 74
      Anonymous says:

      Fair do’s to the *spit* BBC for covering this a little:

      “The political blogger Paul Sta ines focuses in Guido Fawkes’ blog on the nurse Jane Pilgrim who branded Andrew Lansley a liar:

      “But the problem for Jane is that some people have a better memory of event in late summer 2009. Sources at the hospital have confirmed that Jane ‘boycotted’ the meeting for political reasons, refusing to meet the then Shadow Health Secretary. Those that did attend say far from Lansley saying there would not be cuts, he infact stated that ‘he could make no promises and it would be up to local management’. Other people in the meeting have confirmed this version of events.” ”

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/seealso/2011/04/daily_view_pause_for_nhs_refor.html

      Like

    • 99
      Grumpy Old Man says:

      Rent-seeking off the NHS Budget is not a good way to lead a quiet and peaceful life, especially if you lie to drop a Minister of the Crown in the shit.

      Like

  8. 10
    Larry The Cat says:

    I like it when Mrs Cameron wears a skirt. I curl up by her feet when she’s standing and take a little peek. Pussy loves pussy.

    Like

  9. 13
    Fuzzy Dunlop says:

    The Tories can’t win a majority whether it’s FPTP or AV so I don’t really see what the big deal is for them. If we become like Australia where it ends up around 50/50 between Labor/Coalition give or take 5% then that’s not so bad. The idiot in all this is Red Ed why the hell does he support AV? Labour have just had a free run for 13 years – with 36% of the vote in ’05 – and could get another 13 years in ’15. Why would you risk that by changing the voting system? No wonder Two Jags is going nuts.

    Like

    • 33
      sockpuppet #4 says:

      A bit like Jerry Rafferty said in “Baker street”:

      “one more election and we’ll be happy”.

      Much good such misguided, misdirected optimisim it did him.

      Like

    • 48
      Calamity Clegg says:

      I want AV so my little party can be in any coalition government ad infinitum !

      Like

      • 51
        sockpuppet #4 says:

        Thats probably the start and the end of the argument actually.

        Ignore all the other bullshit.

        Like

      • 72
        Fuzzy Dunlop says:

        The Liberals won’t be in endless coalitions but there will probably be more than one every 70 years in future, however Clegg sees this as a stepping stone to PR. But Red Ed is bizarrely out there campaigning to change a voting system that is completely rigged in his favour. At the last election Labour got 29% of the vote but got 60 more seats than the Tories did in ’05 with 33%. Why would anybody in their right might want to change something so obviously to their advantage? No wonder the stalwarts of the Blair years are going crazy.

        Like

        • 115
          misterned says:

          Correct.

          2005 labour won 35.3% share of the vote tory won 32.3% a small labour lead of 3% points.

          This small vote, small share and small lead, gave labour 158 more seats than the tories.

          2010 tories won 36.1% share labour won only 29% (less than John Major in 1997) a decent 7.1% point tory lead, more than double the 2005 labour lead. The tory vote was bigger in every way in 2010 than labour won in 2005. More votes, bigger share of the vote, a much bigger lead over second place. Yet they only won 49 more seats than labour.

          There is your proof that there is a MASSIVE unfair in-built lead in the position of the constituency boundaries for labour.

          Like

  10. 16
    Andrew Lansley says:

    I will spoil my ballot paper on May 5

    Like

  11. 20
    Anonymous says:

    The BBC – File on Four? The Report? – ran a huge Yes2AV prog last week in which they allowed some woman to rubbish this suggestion, at length, and with just the right mocking tone in her voice. I wonder if they’ll now re-edit the programme and tell the truth?

    Like

  12. 25
    Tom Baldwin says:

    Taxpayers have paid over £41,000 for a Tory MP to be chauffeured between Westminster and his Essex constituency. Health minister Simon Burns doesn’t have a flat in London, so has been ferried back to his home in Chelmsford 154 times by drivers from the government car pool. The full cost is likely to be even higher when trips into the capital are included, reports Guido Fawkes.

    Though ministers are banned from taking departmental red boxes on public transport, the £276.82 cost per trip compares extremely unfavourably with a £65 mini cab bill or £12.90 cost train fare. With the huge number of journeys taken by Burns, even a second home in London would likely save the taxpayer money. His boss Andrew Lansley, who does own a home in the capital, made just 12 such journeys in the last 10 months.

    Perhaps Simon should have paid more attention to David Cameron:

    “If there is something that really annoys people it’s seeing politicians swanning around in chauffeur-driven cars like they’re the Royal Family.”

    Like

  13. 30
    Desperate Guido says:

    I’m not entirely what the problem is with a donor standing to profit from a particular political result… isn’t that why trade unions donate to Labour and bankers donate to the Conservatives…

    Like

    • 42
      Union Baron says:

      Yeah, we really prospered under the Tony & Gordon Show. We paid them millions of pounds and they repaid our members by letting millions of Poles into the country and depressing our wages because all that Islington lot wanted were cheap nannies, gardeners & plumbers. Bloody Tories the lot of them.

      Like

    • 46
      misterned says:

      No, the difference is that the tories will not benefit directly from the No vote, and have long held the policy that FPTP is the best of the available systems to choose a government. Whereas a company who has a direct financial stake in this particular vote going their way, should declare that interest.

      That is a crucial difference.

      Like

      • 158
        Desperate Guido says:

        No but I’m just saying, in elections most organisations finance the party they think will bring them the most financial benefit. I don’t think it is that dodgy that the Yes Campaign is financed by people who will gain from a yes vote just as how I don’t think it is dodgy that the Conservative party is financed by bankers who benefit financiall from less regulation, and the Labour party by unions who benefit financiall from the public sector.

        Like

    • 113
      Aussies hate AV so much they had to make it illegal not to vote says:

      Not to mention the Labour party’s deathbed conversion to AV

      Like

  14. 34
    Englishman Abroad says:

    I don’t know how these thiings work, but why would the yes to AV campaign choose to put a headline advertisement on Guido’s website??

    Like

  15. 41
    David Cameron says:

    You’re fucking well fired you utter and complete idiot.

    You are the epitome of a tory twerp

    Andrew Lansley says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation

    Says it all Andrew

    Like

  16. 44
    Just a reminder says:

    today, as yesterday and tomorrow and the next day………Brown and Balls decision to sell Gold reserves will cost the UK £2,500,000

    Like

    • 79
      crash says:

      peanuts compared to the public sector pension timebomb.

      Like

    • 98
      Gordon Brown's Darian2 says:

      Yeh and Balls still has the nerve to say they were right.
      They both should have done the decent thing, gone into the study, get the Webley out the draw, and pull the f #ing trigger.

      Like

    • 127
      Gideon Osboobery says:

      I happily bailed out the Irish for £7 Bilion and the Portugese for £5 Billion.

      How do you like them apples?

      Like

  17. 53
    Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

    I aint really bothered who wins, we will still end up with 3rd raters as politicons.

    Like

  18. 55
    Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

    I can see the Nick Griifin advert now , Wasnt missing much.

    Like

  19. 56
    I don't need no doctor says:

    Any policies from labour yet, or just the usual pathetic attempt at political point scoring.
    Ist class Red Ed, first class.

    Like

    • 66
      RED ED - SON OF BROWN says:

      I’m thtill a blank thyeet of paper with my new generation, patiently waiting till Ed and I can ruin the Country again.

      Like

    • 75
      Vile Union Puppet Miliband Labour Filth says:

      The only policy Labour have is to continuously bankrupt the country when in power. It’s the only consistent thing they do.

      Like

  20. 59

    The Jockanese are hold elections (not council ones) that day and it is expected that significantly more of them will vote because of it. AV is overwhelming a yes vote up there. They may hold the balance if the English don’t come out to vote.

    Like

    • 63
      I don't need no doctor says:

      Set up stalls giving away free deep fried mars bars. That should distract them from voting.

      Like

      • 69
        Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

        Or print leaflets saying Maggie supports the yes campaign

        Like

        • 80
          Jocky Jock says:

          I’ll be a busy bee that day, I have to cash my GIRO, go down the bookies and vote for AV. This is all the fault of the English stealing our oil.

          Like

          • Rab C. says:

            Fuckin’ English. They steal our oil, they steal our banks, they steal our leaders, they steal our jobs. If it hadn’t been for you lot we could’ve been like Saudi Arabia, except they treat their women better.

            Like

          • Ron E. says:

            it’s coz they has a chip on their shoulders innit?

            Like

    • 80
      Fuzzy Dunlop says:

      The fact that Cameron agreed to the referendum taking place on the day of the Scottish, Irish & Welsh parliamentary elections and no similar elections taking place in England to get out the vote tells you he really doesn’t care if AV wins. Either that or he is making Gordon Brown’s cancelled ’07 election look like a piece of strategic genius.

      Like

  21. 61
    I don't need no doctor says:

    Shortage of spare parts for the Typhoon.
    Let’s see was that under Captain Bob’s watch or some other labour dumbhead.
    Was Clown Brown writing the cheques?
    So who’s fault is it Red Ed?
    Do all socialists travel 1st class?

    Like

    • 123
      misterned says:

      “Sometimes we travel first class, sometimes we travel second class depending on the journey, but you know I think it is a mistake for any politician to claim to live an ordinary life” Ed Miliband.

      But in the labour party election broadcast a week or so ago:

      “This is the ordinary comprehensive where I went to school……”

      Hypocrite.

      Then he continued to extol the virtues of hard work which the teacher instilled and claimed it was a good school which worked well….

      …He just forgot to add that this was when Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister.

      Like

      • 134
        Anonymous says:

        A spokesman said they went first class because the train company prefer it when there’s a camera crew. Less disruption for other travellers, apparently.

        So why remove the seat covers if it’s all perfectly normal?

        Like

        • 145
          Just a thought says:

          Perhaps their mummies all forgot to make sure they had hankies in their pockets before setting off?

          Like

  22. 73
    Another Day nearer to AV says:

    AV will be decided by Scottish voters who are expected to be turning out in greater numbers for Scottish Parliamentary Elections and are in favour of AV which is already in use in Scotland…the LibDems are concentrating on getting the Scots out to vote. They know that the English voters are generally apathetic and that not all areas in England have local elections(which are notorious for poor voter turnout anyway)so there will be no desire to turn out to vote in the AV Referendum…the Scots will decide whether the Uk goes for AV….why do you think the LibDems weren’t keen to havemore than 40% of the electorate to deide this legally binding referendum ? It’s in the bag…the “YES” campaign will win in Scotland;lose in England but will still win overall.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1377054/AV-referendum-Scots-voters-force-AV-all.html

    Like

    • 136
      misterned says:

      [sarc] Fantastic, another way for the tiny Scot minority to screw over the English. [/sarc off]

      I shall be getting out there to vote no and encouraging every English person left here to do the same….

      …So that’s about three more no votes!

      Like

  23. 78
    Wanting real Democracy says:

    Oi Camerroon you jock twatt, have you noticed the lack of Ethnic faces in your native Scotland’s Parliament.
    How about you and all your jock friends from all sides who have palpitated yourselves in England piss of back across the border and give the English people a referendum on a parliament for England.

    Like

  24. 82
    Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

    FFS its bad enough finding one of the lying wankers to vote for.

    Like

  25. 86
    Cato Street Conspirator says:

    What a day it’s going to be: A Lib Dem wipe-out AND a No victory.

    Like

  26. 88
    AJS says:

    As bad as it looks, this is not, in and of itself, a good reason to retain the present unfair voting system.

    Like

    • 140
      misterned says:

      Nor is it a reason to replace the current unfair FPTP system with a much less fair AV system.

      I would like fair votes, but AV does not deliver them.

      Like

  27. 95
    Boba Job says:

    can you sign IMF documents in orange crayon?

    Like

  28. 96
    telling it like it is says:

    First Past The Post:

    Government of the poor, by the rich, for the rich.

    Like

    • 101
      Tony Blair Millionaire says:

      By the very rich, if you don’t mind.

      Like

    • 106
      Grumpy Old Man says:

      AV:
      Government of the poor, by a lunatic minority, for the rich.

      Like

      • 109
        Forrest Gump says:

        AV’s like a box of chocolates; you never know what you’re gonna get.

        Like

        • 150
          AJS says:

          But “First Past the Post” is still worse.

          Unless there are exactly two candidates, an unpopular candidate can win by default when the voters are split over a lesser issue.

          EXAMPLE: We have 4 candidates.

          A supports a total ban on dog ownership.
          B and C oppose a total ban on dog ownership, but disagree on some other issue.
          D is a minority candidate.

          A gets 33% of the vote, B gets 32%, C gets 31% and D gets 4%.

          Under FPTP, A (favouring a total ban on dog ownership) would be “duly” elected, despite at least 63% of voters opposing the ban.

          And this is by no means an unrealistic scenario. B’s and C’s supporters naïvely assume that almost nobody would actually support the dog ban (and they are correct, because roughly 2/3 of the voters oppose it); but the dog lovers are split by their disagreement over some minor issue. And human nature is such that when two people are in broad agreement on a big issue, then the little issues over which they disagree tend to get inflated.

          It’s quite likely that C’s supporters would give their second place vote to B, and vice versa, just in order to keep A out; but as long as they don’t think A is going to get in, they are polarised over the issue where B and C disagree, and this allows A a toe-hold.

          Like

  29. 100
    PCPlod says:

    Murdoch we’re coming to get you

    A criminal investigation into claims journalists paid police officers for information is being considered by Scotland Yard, it has been confirmed.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13092045

    Like

    • 105
      Billy Bowden is the greatest umpire ever ! says:

      I hope no-one involved is brazillion, The met have a final solution for them….

      Like

      • 116
        PC Plod says:

        The gentleman in question was boarding a train in a suspicious manner, and for this reason we decided to shoot him in the face 8 times at point-blank range.

        Upon further investigation, we discovered that he was non-white and also an illegal immigrunt and therefore he should have received all the courtesy of the Crown, as per our equality and diversity training. Only whites are supposed to be attacked by the Met.

        Oops. Accidents happen.

        Like

  30. 112
    Down with Brown! says:

    David Cameron’s target vote = Ian Foot

    Like

    • 118
      Panicking in the face of an election, Cast Iron Dave says:

      At some point, one day, maybe, perhaps, I will reduce immigration from an horrifically large number to merely an eye-wateringly high number.

      Possibly.

      Like

      • 141
        "Dave" ..tough on immigration and the causes of immigration says:

        Whilst being totally unable to control the numbers of immigrants from Eastern Europe who are taking all your jobs…although I have every confidence in IDS getting you scroungers(oops sorry I meant to say long-term unemployed)off benefits and into jobs although they may of course already been filled by Stanilas’ mate from Warsaw

        Like

    • 125
      Wavy Davy says:

      I got my numbers wrong yesterday because the bad immigrants were mixed in with the good immigrants.

      Like

    • 155
      misterned says:

      At least he is more honest than the labour party…..and more capable too!

      Like

  31. 126
  32. 143
    Anonymous says:

    your polling figure is wrong – it’s not 45%.

    Like

  33. 147
    Sir William Waad says:

    Guido is still conducting a smear campaign rather than coming up with a good reason for opposing a more modern and fairer system of voting.

    Like

    • 151
      AJS says:

      Well, exactly.

      The “no to fairer votes” campaign closely resembles the Young Earth Creationist movement. They have nothing in their favour, so they have to try to make the opposition look bad.

      Like

    • 156
      misterned says:

      Actually the No campaign IS fighting for fairer votes. Fairer than AV which is completely corrupt and unfair and counts all of some people’s votes, but not all the votes of others. It also unfairly gives equal value to second, third and fourth and subsequent votes as to the first preference votes in the final count.

      Very unfair.

      Like

      • 157
        AJS says:

        Yes, but AV is still fairer and less corrupt than FPTP, for reasons stated above.

        If you’re standing on the hard shoulder of the M5 trying to hitch a lift to Exeter, you don’t turn down a lift to Taunton, do you?

        The Powers That Be will take a rejection of AV as a rejection of reform in general. It will be easier to move from AV to an even fairer system at a later date, than to go straight from FPTP to PR.

        Like

  34. 162

    Cost of changing ballot papers: Zero, they’re the same.
    Cost of longer hours for counters: £50,000 every 5 years.
    Cost of shitty governments under FPTP: £hundreds of billions.

    http://www.tbpsw.co.uk/2011/04/06/fptp-vs-av-at-a-glance/

    Like


Seen Elsewhere

Mirror’s ‘UKIP Goggles’ App Backfires | Press Gazette
Woolas Agent Standing for UKIP | MEN
Compassionate Left in Action | Mark Wallace
Sainsbury’s Distance Themselves From Sick Cam Tweeter | Speccie
Elites Pay Price for Killing Grammar Schools | Jago Pearson
Thornberry Makes Burnham Leadership Favourite | Matthew Norman
Guido’s Column | Sun
BBC Still Ignoring Savile Evidence | Telegraph
Politicians Brought Down by Twitter | CityAm
Ed the Biggest Loser in Rochester | Trevor Kavanagh
A Just Way to Manage Migration | Mats Persson


Find out more about PLMR AD-MS


Boris on his fellow Islingtonista Emily Thornberry:

“It was an entirely run-of-the-mill English townscape, with some straightforward words to go with it. There was no obvious insult, no abuse, no overt sneering. She might have got away with it entirely, had some alert blogger not spotted it. He instantly detected the coded message that Emily Thornberry was sending to all her right-on, bien-pensant, Labour-luvvie friends in Islington, or wherever else it is that they follow her on Twitter.”



Left on Left says:

The lefties are attacking because the panellist is a millionaire and lives in a London home worth upwards of two million. Someone had best tell them he’s called Ed Miliband.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS




AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,604 other followers