They say a week is a long time in politics. The world has changed

A week ago Britain voted to leave the EU.

Since then the political landscape has changed quite a lot.

Firstly the PM has resigned and will be gone by 9th September. David Cameron has been a good Prime Minister and has led this country out the worst of the credit crunch. He gave us a good Olympics, gay marriage, and some great Education reforms. Unfortunately, he also gave us the NHS reforms which were not well thought through. I think he ended up surrounded too much by his own clique, but he did give us the referendum, on which he found himself on the wrong side. We may find that we miss David Cameron more than we thought!

The doom-mongers seemed to have a point as Friday markets opened. Both the pound and FTSE plunged. There two days of falls, and now three days of rises and now the FTSE 100 is at a ten month high. The FTSE 250 and 350 indices have also nearly reached their pre-brexit values. The pound however is still low, but I'm sure it will come back.

There has been a series of warnings from some companies taking about relocation, but these are the same warnings as before brexit. We don't know whether they will carry out their threats for a number of years.

The EU has gone into full fingers in ear mode, and Juncker is looking like a right pillock. Hopefully Angela Merkel will be the voice of sanity.

On the trade front, the PMs of Australia and New Zealand have reached out for full trade deals, as has Paul Ryan, the speaker on the US House of Representatives. So much for being at the back of the queue.

Predictably the remainers have signed a petition to try to get a second referendum. Just like the Corbynites and countless others they will continue to be deluded. There will be no second referendum.

What annoys me, is the refrain 'Old people have stolen the future of the youth'. The youth may have voted 75% to 25% in favour of remain, but that's of those who chose to vote. In fact only 24% of those eligible to vote went for remain, so it's not like they were overly exercised by the issue. Decisions are taken by those who turn up.

For most of us, we have been wanting a referendum for years to put right the bad decision made in 1975 - and I still have plenty years left. Remainers have been putting it to the youth that they will not be able to travel or work abroad after Brexit. What crap, we were able to before being a member of the EEC and we will be able to after Brexit!

What is despicable is the number of hate crimes against members of the public by racists and xenophobes. What a crying shame that's happened and I would have thought that we cold be a more civil society. I wanted brexit to be a more fully committed member of the world rather than as part of an insular club.

The Tory party has started to choose a new leader. It looked likely to be a predicted Boris vs Theresa contest but was thrown into the air by Michael Gove ditching Boris, going it alone leading to Boris pulling out of the contest (though he never officially entered). It appears to be to do with Gove losing confidence in Boris, but it has left a lot of Boris supporters screaming blue murder about betrayal.

I wasn't sure who to support. I'd like to support Gove as Theresa May is a bit too cold and we need some optimism and vision. I'll wait to see if any of the contenders have some interesting policies up in their pocket.

What I think is clear is that the poison of Europe will gradually leave the Tory party and it can once again be the political winning machine that it was for most of the 19th and 20th centuries.

You may not recognise the person above. It is Paul Flynn, 81 year old Labour MP. Today he made his debut at the despatch box after being an MP for 29 years. The Labour party is a complete joke. Every day has seen resignations from the shadow cabinet and shadow ministerial teams. Pat Glass made history after being appointed as shadow Education secretary on Monday and resigning on Wednesday. A whole 2 days.

I think Jeremy Corbyn has scraped the barrel of Labour MPs to form his shadow team but he can only fill around 30 positions (he needs around 90). The rest of the PLP has voted JC down in a vote of confidence by 172 to 40. Any normal leader would know that he should resign, but Jeremy Corbyn and his socialist workers misfits know that it's probably their only chance to shape the Labour party in their image and so they are clinging on.

It looks like Angela Eagle will challenge in the next few days, but if JC stands in the subsequent selection, he will probably win and then there would be a serious split in the party. This has been on the cards for some time, but brought into focus by the referendum.

Fascinating times. Let's see what the next week brings!

Squiffy.

David Cameron resigns

I suppose it was inevitable, but I hoped the mould could be broken and David Cameron could hang on but alas not.

David Cameron has just announced that he will step down before the Tory party conference in October. It's sad, very sad. They say that all political careers end in failure, and so that is how this last act will be seen.

Such a shame.

Squiffy,

The referendum is over: Brexit

We will find out what David Cameron is going to do within the hour.

Squiffy

Eu referendum: Update 4 p.m.

Leave are now leading the votes by roughly 500,000. 51.3% to 48.7%.

I don't think Remain can win now and that Leave will get it.

The sun is about to rise, and I would like to go to bed soon. Alas the excitement of where we go from here will keep me awake. Will Cameron resign? Will he trigger article 50 of the Lisbon treaty today?

Exciting times.

Dare to believe in democracy.

Squiffy.
Very tired, slightly more tipsy.

Eu referendum: Update 2 a.m.

It's 2 am. My initial thoughts that Remain would win have now been dispelled. It looks increasingly clear that Leave might make it (we still have most London votes to go).

The current outlook is Leave 53%, Remain 47%.

So far I have yet to see any area of England, apart from London, voting in favour of Remain.

It looks like we're going to be in for some rocky times over the next few days before the impact sinks in.

It's going to be a long night.

Squiffy.
Quite tired, a little tipsy

Some thoughts about the referendum: Re-alignment

I think there could, just could, be some seismic changes to the British political landscape following the referendum.

The Tory Party is split down the middle. If Leave wins, I think the party will coalesce around a new Brexiteer leader, Boris Johnson or maybe Micahel Gove if he can be persuaded. If Remain wins then I can foresee a split like what happened to Labour in 1981. The Brexiteers will feel extremely let down by David Cameron's behaviour, using the Government machine for propaganda will not have gone down well. George Osborne is nearly a dead man walking.

The Labour parliamentary Party is united against Jeremy Corbyn. The Labour Party at large are now largely for him. Everyone knew that Corbyn would be a Leaver had he not been leader. The referendum has added a new cleave between the parliamentary party and a large section of their voters. There are now so many disconnects within Labour it could rupture quite quickly. It may even disappear completely.

If Leave wins then UKIP can disappear along with Nigel Farage with their voters finding new homes. If Remain win then this party could unite with Tory malcontents to form a new party. Otherwise a similar change to what happened to the SNP could occur under new leadership. Europe was not a big deal for most people, but it will be now. I expect UKIP to do quite well after a Remain win, but Farage would have to resign - he is now toxic. I would prefer to see Suzanne Evans as leader, in fact I think leave would have had a better change with her at the helm.

Farage may not stand down though, and maybe he wanted them not to win to continue as leader of this party. He may sense an SNP type surge, but I can't see it with him at the helm.

The SNP and Lib Dems are the only ones who would be untouched.

Alternately, we may just trundle on as before.

Squiffy.

Some thoughts on the referendum : The polls

The polls were all over the place for a long time and were level pegging for most of the campaign. For a while Remain was ahead, then it swung to Leave, in the final days it swung back to Remain.

The betting markets have been majorly for Remain all along, bobbing about the 75%.

The most fascinating thing about the polls is that it is so difficult to work out the turnout. Older people are more likely to go for Leave, hyoung for Remain and we all know older people turn out to vote far more than the youth.

Also, though, ABC1s are more for Remain and more likely to vote than C2DEs.

Both these factors conflict and so it will be interesting to see if these correlate to what happens in a few hours. Not long to go now.

My view is that it will be 54% remain, 46% leave. But I'm just as in the dark as everyone else!

Squiffy.

Some thoughts on the referendum : Stars and Duds

Some people have starred in the campaigns and others have been found wanting. Here's my round-up.

Stars

Ruth Davidson - Anyone who followed the Scottish referendum debates knows that the Scottish Tory leader is a star with a big crossover appeal. She's like an a completely authentic Boris Johnson with appeal but none of the perceived faults. She was great in the big BBC debate and was a surprise to some.

Sadiq Khan - Also at the BBC debate the new London Mayor shone calling the Leave campaign 'Project Hate'. Together with Ruth Davidson they really made a big impression for the Remain campaign, where as the Remain campaign was lacklustre on the ITV debate.

Andrea Leadsom - Was very good at both debates with common sense responses, though overdid the 'as a mother...' line. Maybe a future star of the Tory party.

Gisela Stuart - Has always been an impressive backbencher for Labour, she impressed at both debates making the good leave arguments.

Michael Gove - Firm and assured with courteousness, he would be my choice for next PM. Logical without invective.

Dominic Raab - Another Leaver who made sensible points in a calm measured way.

So-So

David Cameron - The PM is very good when on his own talking to an audience and he was good again. Unfortunately all 'project fear' has wasted a lot of the good will to him. If Remain wins, he will be a confirmed winner. If Leave wins he will have ruined his career.

Boris Johnson - Had plenty of chances to shine but was generally outperformed by others at the debates. The one time he shone was at the end of the BBC debate where he got a standing ovation.

Duds

George Osborne - The punishment budget, the dodgy statistics (£4300 per household worse off by 2030) for project fear have severely weakened the chancellor. Other times he has come back from it, but I don't think he can this time. Expect to see him immediately resign if Leave win, and be moved if Remain wins.

Alan Johnson - The leader of Labour Remain. Where was he? Didn't see him at all. All those saying that he was the best PM we never had, had better have a rethink.

Jeremy Corbyn - Again he was useless. He didn't believe in Remain and would have been more convincing if he'd gone for Leave, though his parliamentary party would be out for more blood.

Nigel Farage - The man who has worked for so many years for this opportunity became a liability as did the Leave.EU compaign. Bad posters bordering on racism has no place in UK politics. One would think he didn't want to win this campaign - more on that later.

Special mention

Dan Hannan - He has been making great Leave debating points, videos and arguments for years. It's a shame he wasn't used in any of the main debates because he is a star when talking about the decrepit EU.

 

Squiffy.

Some thoughts on the EU referendum: The campaigns

The EU referendum campaign has come to an end and so I'm going to give some thoughts on it before the result is declared.

I don't think either campaign has done justice to their case.

The Remain campaign went far too far with doom and gloom. By going so heavy with predictions on everything getting worse such as GDP, employment, house prices, and even the impact on bees they made arses of themselves. If they had been more temperate in their views and saying that Britain would be worse off if we left and there would be some turmoil, I think they could have gotten away with being believed.

£4300 per household worse off by 2030 was the worst statistic used by remain. It was split as GDP per household, a completely bogus metric which isn't used anywhere else. Who knows the number of households by then, especially as this didn't take account of current levels of migration.

The worst move was George Osborne's threat of an emergency budget. Everyone knows that if we leave it will take at least 2 years for it to take happen, and so this had only one effect. It trashed the Chancellor's remaining credibility with half the Tory party and the public. I used to quite like him, now I wanted him moved or sacked.

The worst aspect of the remain campaign was that there was absolutely nothing positive at all. When confronted by this, they just said more jobs etc. (which cannot be disproved or affirmed) before going back to rubbishing leave.

Now that I've complained about it, I think it has worked to some extent and people are scared shitless to leave. A lot of people think there will be mass unemployment and disaster if we leave.It's such a shame.

The Leave campaign kept a few simple messages, but some of these could be easily challenged by commentators.

The worst was the £350m we send every week to the EU. It's not true, it's more like £275m of which we get a third back. If they had started with £275m then commentators would not have been able to challenge it and say its a lie. Maybe, though, it's my naivety though because, apparently, £350m was the one item of both campaigns that stuck in people's minds.

As someone on the Leave side, I was disappointed by the focus on  immigration. Of course this was part of the wider but more intangible argument around sovereignty, but it was a negative and could be perceived as racist by anybody wanting to! Of course, if Leave wins then immigration probably won it, but it is a shame. The focus on Turkey was a shame, it may be true that they will join before we have a chance of another referendum but they are not going to imminently join.

The good side of Leave was that there were some positives about trading with the rest of the world. It's a message that works for me. I don't think the argument of how the custom's union works was explained well enough making it easy for Remain to scare people that EU trade will be turned off if we Brexit.

The one argument that was not made well enough at all was that the EU is on a certain path. It has been since inception and nothing is changing that. Our biggest threat was this referendum and to possibly leave but they couldn't account for any significant change of direction even with this threat. If we remain we will be discounted as all talk. It should have been said that if people genuinely believe in a United States of Europe then they should vote Remain, otherwise they should vote Leave - give the EU the shake it needs to reform itself.


Both campaigns were poor and people are voting on prejudice (immigration or economy) rather than facts, it's a shame as it could have been so much more impressive.

Squiffy.

F1: I woke up at 5 a.m. for this

Empty Track

It's been a ritual of mine for many years. March is the start of the F1 season. It usually coincides with my birthday, so I'm happy. And for the first race in Australia I get up ridiculously early for qualifying and the race as it's on really early in Britain.

This year has been no different. What is different is the disappointment. Not because my favourite driver didn't so well, because he did and he's on pole. But because F1 is a laughing stock. The new qualifying procedures left drivers in the pits having done their laps and being knocked out. It was all wrapped up with four minutes to go. As the chequered flag came out, Lewis Hamilton was at the back of pits signing autographs. Damon Hill on Sky quipped that he could have waved the chequered flag for himself.

It was all so predictable. Drivers, mechanics, engineers all warned that this was likely to happen but the F1 bigwigs put their fingers in their ears and blew raspberries. Well you guys now have a raspberry creme brulée all over your faces.

There's many things wrong with F1. Qualifying wasn't one of them, in fact it was the only thing working well and now that has been turned into a joke.

How did F1 get here? Actually, it started with a good proposal from Bernie to have an hour long qualifying race on the Saturday. The TV companies complained though, they need the breaks between qualifying sessions for advertising as most don't interrupt the races. Once the hare had been set running on changes to qualifying, something was bound to be done and they came up with this crackpot scheme which sounds good on paper but would always be optimised to being boring. It is terrible.

Change it back, now! Don't try to tinker with the steaming pile you have created. Just change it back.

The main problems with F1 stem from it's governance. Team principals can veto changes but have a vested interest in keeping it the same way (for successful teams) and changing it (for failing teams). Bernie Ecclestone and the FIA don't have the power to impose, and there needs to be someone to set the direction, though I think Bernie has lost the plot. The way teams are paid is incredibly unfair, too, and needs to be changed too.

If the governance was sorted, maybe we could get some good regulations formed to make cars which can overtake. I like the ideas of faster, wider cars with bigger tyres. Reduce the aerodynamics, reduce the number of planes on the front wing, take away some of the turning vanes and barge boards. Increase the ground effects and mechanical grip.

If these three things were fixed, F1 would be on the mend.

Instead F1 is heading in the wrong direction, and today proved it.

Squiffy.

The question the Remain camp has to answer: What does IN look like?

Ever since the EU referendum campaign started, the INners have been shouting out 'What does Out look like?'. Today Dan Hodges sent the same in a tweet:

"Some people say there's a shark in the water. They're just trying to scare you. There almost certainly isn't". That Project Fear rebutle.

— Dan Hodges (@DPJHodges) February 29, 2016

I don't know the fine details, but I'm pretty sure that Out will look like the UK having control over all its legislation again, but having to adhere to EU constraints on products and services we supply to the EU. It may be that we have some requirement to adhere to a portion of free movement of peoples, but we are a big country and will have clout when the negotiations happen. I also think we will have free trade with the EU as it is in nobody's interest to put up trade barriers.

And that's where I would expect to be 2 years after we vote to leave. I expect we'll be in the same position 5 years after that, and 10 years and 15...

The OUTters need to be throwing the question back at the INners. What does IN look like? I know what it will look like in one year. It will have a Euro & migrant crisis. I think it will be the same state in two years.

But what about 5 years after? Will the Euro still be in crisis, will the problem be solved and how? What about the migrant crisis? Will Shengen be restored or will it have completely dissolved? Will Greece still be a member or will it have been thrown out. Will the banking union be complete? Will there be Euro-bonds? What about 5 years after that? Will there be a Euro-army? Will there be two Euro-zones? Will the EU have taken our place on the UN security council? Will Turkey be a member? Will Ukraine? Will the migrants let in by Angela Merkel have German citizenship and be making their way en mass to the UK? What about a further 5 years after that? Will there be a country called Europe?

I don't know the answer to any of these questions and I doubt the remain camp do too. In my mind the bigger unknowns are with IN rather than OUT.

Squiffy.

Why it's time to leave the sinking ship

After the outcome of the EU draft text was released this weekend, I made a quick post to say that I had decided that we should now leave the EU. I've now found the time to give my reasons.

It has been a journey for me. I thought for a long time that our destiny was better served by being a member of a large trading block, with shared regulation to tackle problems such as climate change. Over time my enthusiasm has lessened as the EU has pushed ever further into grabbing more powers whilst being completely inept at handling the responsibilities it already has. The EU has been pushing my buttons for a while and the renegotiation was the last chance to keep me wanting to stay in.

Initial negotiations

Let's first look at the Bloomberg speech David Cameron in January 2013. In this great oratory the Prime Minister spoke eloquently about how as Britain we had a different outlook but shared many aims of the EU for prosperity and peace. He set out a series of issues on which he wanted fundamental reform.

• Fix the issues regarding the Euro and our place outside the Eurozone should not diminish our influence. We should not have Eurozone policies foisted on us.
• Increase EU competitiveness by restricting regulation.
• The EU is seen as remote from the people

In answer to these issues he made some suggestions. He wanted to limit the size of the EU commission, control its spending, simplify its controlling structures and complete the single market. He wanted flexibility without the same level of integration, and to abandon the principle of 'ever closer union'. He wanted power to be placed back with member states and a more significant role for national parliaments. He mentioned legal judgements of the European Court of Human Rights should be subservient to the EU. 

When I heard this speech I thought "some good ideas, maybe not far enough in some cases but enough to convince me."

When this was filtered into negotiating points by November 2015, it became:

• Protection of the single market for Britain and other non-euro countries
• Boosting competitiveness by setting a target for the reduction of the "burden" of red tape
• Exempting Britain from "ever-closer union" and bolstering national parliaments
• Restricting EU migrants' access to in-work benefits such as tax credits ad child benefit for 4 years. 

At this stage, completion of the single market had become protection, there was still mention of boosting competitiveness and exempting Britain from ever-closer union. But there is no mention of the size of the commission, its spending, the controlling structures, or the position of the ECHR. At this stage about half his proposals had disappeared. 

Outcome

Finally, this week the draft was published which had:

• Removing Britain from the compulsion of 'ever closer union' and red card system for national parliaments to block legislation from the commision (if 55% of parliaments agreed)
• Some words about strengthening the internal market.
• Some words about there being more than one currency in the EU.
• A gradual increase in in-work benefits and child benefit to be paid at the rate of country from where the migrate came

As can be seen, the migrants access to benefits has been watered down, boosting competitiveness has been reduced to the same loose words as previous treaties, and that there being more than one currency in the EU is self evident. We will be removed from ever closer union but the red card system will never fly, not enough national parliaments would ever organise to block a regulation.

A disappointment.

A big disappointment.

I have no reason to believe that the EU would be any better if the draft is enacted. There would be very little change. Rules and regulations would come from on high as now, our parliament would be as subservient as it is now. The EU will be just as un-democratic. They would continue to ride roughshod, in fact I believe more so as I will explain later,

Overall position

We now know that the renegotiation is pretty insignificant so let's look at the overall position of the arguments in favour of the EU or Brexit.

The main reason for being in the EU is access to the single market. But do we need to be a member for access? Norway, Iceland, Switzerland all have access, but still have to adhere to regulations without much influence. Canada has access with not quite so onerous terms. If we were to leave I'm pretty sure that during the negotiations to leave we would quickly have an arrangement for access to the free market. The other countries would not want to put up barriers to the fifth largest economy in the world. 

And how much influence do we have anyway? We've objected to regulations 55 times since David Cameron came to power, and 55 times we've been outvoted. So no influence.

Erm, is there any other reason we would want to be a member of the EU? I can't think of any.

So, what problems would we be rid of or alleviate by not being a member?

• The British parliament would regain full sovereignty
• We would be able to get rid of the hated Common Agriculture and Fisheries policy and stop the crazy incentives for growing stuff we don't need
• We would regain full control of our borders and be able handle immigration in the way we wanted
• We would not have regulations foisted upon us arbitrarily, we would only need to abide by regulations to trade with the single market when trading with the single market
• We would be free of the EU attempts to try to get a common foreign policy
• We would be able to set our own VAT rates in the way we wished
• We would be free of threats to take away our seat as a permanent member of the UN security council and to set up an EU army.
• We would be able to sign free trade agreements with other major trading partners such as the US, China and India (we have been waiting for 40 years for the EU to do such things)
• We would be able to save money being spent by the EU bureaucracy
• Our EU contributions could be spent at home in better ways and we could be forever rid of our EU partners trying to reduce our EU rebate
• We would be able to provide aid to some badly hit industries such as steel
• The democratic deficit would be vastly reduced

There are so many political reasons to leave, but the arguments will inevitable come down to economic arguments. Will we be better off?

The arguments are often made that three million jobs are dependent upon our membership of the EU, which may be true. But they don't mean to say that we would lose 3m jobs they just mean to sound like that. There is no reason to believe that we would lose jobs, many investors in Britain have gone out of their way to say that it wouldn't matter to them.

We are also told that half of our trade is with Europe, which is true, but it is declining. It used to be more than half, it is now less than half. The continent's economy has been in poor shape for far too long and there doesn't appear to be much appetite for change. Do we need to be continually shackled to this aging behemoth?

We need to raise our sights on the rest of the world where new opportunities lie. So I have come to the conclusion being in or out of the EU will not have much of a difference on how wealthy we are as a country or individually in the short term. 

In the longer term though, with increasing globalisation, I think a large organisation such as the EU is doomed to gradually fail while smaller, faster acting countries will sweep all before them. We should be a part of the fast thinking free world, able to exploit new opportunities and not be tethered to the ideas of the last fifty years. I think we will be better off in the longer term being outside the EU.

We have also seen how undemocratic the EU is. Greece and Italy had Prime Ministers foisted upon them. Portugal elected left leaning anti-austerity parties in their election but has been told not to allow them to form a Government by the EU.

When the public has a say, and the EU elite does not like what it hears it either asks the public to think again or finds a way to ignore them completely.

As for Britain, we are seen as trouble makers sniping from the sidelines and are brushed aside as much as possible.

We finally have our chance to have a say. What does it imply that even if we have the chance to leave, we choose to stay? They will then completely ignore us and be deaf to our whinging, even more than now. We will be locked in forever. We will not be able to threaten to leave again and be taken seriously.

I fear staying far more than leaving.

It is time to go.

Squiffy.

EU Turn if you want to. I want to: Tatty Bye

Today David Cameron unveiled his plans for a renegotiation of our arrangement with the EU.

When he announced in his Bloomberg speech that he was planning for a comprehensive renegotiation of Britain's place in the EU I was ecstatic. Finally a Prime Minister who would have the guts to take us back to a trading relationship with our EU partners. We could lay the EU matter to rest at last knowing there would be no more power grabs from the bureaucrats.

By the time of the election I was disappointed, three platitudinous aims worthy of an EdStone and one small tactic to try to nudge immigrants into not coming here. Nothing about the ruinous Common Agriculture and Fisheries Policies, nothing about the primacy of the British parliament, nothing about protecting our service industries such as finance away from the loony schemes on the continent. Still, I thought, maybe he was trying to give us low expectations so that we could be amazed by the sheer scale of his renegotiation when it was revealed.

It's become clear, and today's reveal makes it crystal clear, that we haven't even got the crappy aims of the manifesto.

It's with a heavy heart that I will have to refuse the appeal of the Prime Minister and vote Leave at the referendum. I will give my fuller reasons this weekend, but it has come time to get off the fence, and say that I don't think we can ever get a good deal from Europe and so it would be better for us to be out.

Squiffy.

The Report of Reports

This week there have been two reports published into the failures of the 2015 General Election, one by the Labour party and one by the pollsters.

The Labour Party's report shows how far the party has to travel in order to be electable. Not by the eloquent way in which it describes how Labour had piecemeal populist policies, but no overriding economic plan. Or by the way in which it aptly suggests that they chose the wrong leader in 2010 and couldn't ever recover from that. Or even that Labour became a complete joke with the EdStone.

No, the report didn't tackle these issues. It said that Labour had let them be blamed for the economic crisis but it wasn't their fault. Ed Miliband was a great leader, but those nasty media types had it in for him. Or that their policies were great but most people didn't know about them.

Ostriches and sand come to mind.

Labour lost due to the horrible Tories, the nasty media, and I guess, the public's stupidity. Not a problem with Labour at all.

It should be remembered that only three Labour leaders have ever commanded a majority in parliament in their 100 year odd history. In my lifetime there has only been one, in which there have been three Tory PMs. The only Labour leader in recent times to be successful has been the one nearest the centre of the electorate and not on the left. This is where the public is. And if there is no viable centre, the public likes to dress to the right rather than the less.

Since the election Labour has moved even further left under Jeremy Corbyn. I guess Labour will have to wait for the next electoral disaster report.

The second report went into the reasons why the pollsters got it all wrong in the lead up to the election. This report was more reasoned and explained that the methodologies weren't really to blame. It also said that there wasn't much bunching of polls, although that is slightly hard to believe. Their main finding was that they hadn't sampled enough Tories.

Which when you think about it - is obvious, after all that was the outcome. But what they mean is that the voters they contacted - and had responses from - were more likely to be Labour voters and so were more represented. The theory is that Tories are less likely to answer the phone to pollsters and have less time to fill in online polls. That's probably a reasonable theory, but it's difficult to make adjustments, maybe they have to add more weight to the Tory voters. They already have to do this since the 1992 election fiasco. But it makes you wonder if the bias is so great smaller fluctuations will be exaggerated.

There's two ways joe public can handle these polls until any new polling techniques have been proven to tally accurately with election results. On normal voting intention polls, add three percent to the Tory percentage and subtract three from the Labour percentage.

Alternatively, if you just want to know who will win the general election for sure forget voting intention polls and look at the leader ratings, and who the voters trust with the economy. If both these are favouring one party (and they invariably do) then that party will win. This has been proven in each election since 1979 even in 1992 and 2015.

Maybe this is the last time to discuss the 2015 GE, but it's making me want to watch the election programmes again!

Squiffy.

The Labour re-shuffle has finally come to an end

Starting at Monday lunchtime, the Labour party has been having a re-shuffle, and it has finally come to an end. Four days later. The longest re-shuffle in history. So it must be a real night of the long knives with lots of changes then? Not at all. Two sackings from the front bench, and one move.

After briefing in December that Hilary Benn was going to be sacked, that Diane Abbott was going to be the new Foreign Secretary there was no change in this respect.

Michael Dugher was sacked, as was Pat McFadden. Maria Eagle was moved from defence to make way for Emily Thornberry, Corbyn's fellow unilateralist.

Dugher and McFadden were dismissed as being disloyal and incompetent - which when compared against Corbyn's record is pretty laughable.

The supposedly even handed review of Trident looks like a joke now, with both Thornberry and Ken Livingstone both being unilateralists. Livingstone even went so far to say we should pull out of NATO today.

Following the front bench re-shuffle, three shadow ministers went onto resign, one live on TV. There were bitter tweets from MPs. Some MPs have blocked other MPs on twitter. There was a spat between Diane Abbott and Jonathan Reynolds.

This is a party at war with itself. 

To think that 8 months ago this party could have formed the Government. We had a lucky escape.

To Corbyn's credit, the re-shuffle has slightly moved the front bench his way, but Labour is heading for oblivion whilst the moderates do nothing but snipe. They need to act and soon, otherwise Labour will pass into history.

Squiffy.

2015 rolls into 2016

It's that time of year again when I have to review my predictions from the last year and make some new ones. So let's review the last year:

1. The economy will continue to recover, and will grow by 2.5% this year. Wages growth will really begin to outstrip inflation. 1 point
2. The General Election will be close, final tally Tories 36%, Labour 31%, Lib Dems 10%, UKIP 12%. 1 point (very close)
3. Tories and Lib Dems will form a second coalition. 0 points
4. Lewis Hamilton will win the F1 World Championship again. 1 point
5. Sebastien Vettel will not perform as well as Alonso at Ferrari, and Ferrari will end the year in greater turmoil with Raikkonen being sacked. 0 points
6. Labour will have a leadership election with Chukka Umuna winning. 1/4 points
7. Vince Cable will lose his seat in the election (hopefully) 1 point
8. UKIP will gain 2 seats at the General Election, but Rochester & Strood will not be one of them. Douglas Carswell will be re-elected. 1/2 point
9. Hilary Clinton, Jeb Bush and Rand Paul will all run for the US Presidential primaries. 1 point
10. Nick Clegg will resign the leadership of the Lib Dems. 1 point

Overall 6.75 points is not bad. I was caught out by Ferrari being a lot stronger than planned, and who could have predicted Jeremy Corbyn being elected as Labour leader?

Now for 2016.

1. Lewis Hamilton will win the F1 World Championship again.
2. Sebastien Vettel will be second in the F1 World Championship and will win more races.
3. Nico Rosberg will leave Mercedes at the end of the year, and Raikkonen will retire.
4. It will be Hilary Clinton vs Marco Rubio for the US presidency.
5. Marco Rubio will win the presidency.
6. The EU referendum will happen this year with Remain winning by roughly 58% to 42%
7. The Tories will beat Labour in the local elections by a small margin, with the Lib Dems coming back quite strongly in third.
8. There will be a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn's leadership
9. Douglas Carswell will leave UKIP and stay independent
10. At least 2 MPs will defect from Labour

Let's see how well we go this year.

Squiffy.

Labour: A sorry excuse of a party

It's been several months since Labour elected Jeremy Corbyn and it looks like Labour has completely turned its back on being a sensible party of opposition, let alone Government.

Corbyn (& sidekick McDonnell) is a complete disaster zone. I give you:

• Failure to appoint a single woman to the top three jobs in the shadow cabinet
• Appointing John McDonnell as shadow chancellor
• Not singing the national anthem at the Battle of Britain service
• Not knowing whether to join the privy council
• The DJ phone-in at PMQs
• Appointing Seamus Milne as communications director
• Appointing Andrew Fisher who wanted people to vote for class war
• Lifting half his conference speech from a speechwriter who had sent the same speech to each leader since Keir Hardie (almost)
• Old footage of Corbyn saying the killing of Bin Laden was a tragedy
• Corbyn saying that British born IS fighters should be arrested rather than targeted in Syria
• Corbyn saying he would not use shoot-to-kill even after the Paris attacks
• Appointing Ken Livingstone as joint chair of the review into Trident
• Keeping Ken Livingstone as joint chair when Ken had insulted the mental faculties of a defence shadow spokesman who suffers from depression
• John McDonnell's citing Chairman Mao during the response to the Autumn statement
• Publishing a letter statement he would not agree to bombing Syria, whilst in a meeting with the PLP saying that they would take the weekend to consider the matter

I'm sure there's a few more...

I feel sorry for the moderates in Labour, they are watching their party being driven to the left, taken for a ride to obscurity, whilst being pummelled daily by the cyber-corbynites.

All the while the shadow cabinet cannot claim to have a policy. Any policy. Whatever. Would they have more or less borrowing? Are they in favour of Trident or not? Would they bomb Syria or not? These are really important issues and the party is a laughing stock with no particular position. 

It is embarrassing listening to their front bench spokesman trying to contort themselves through various positions. Even the shadow foreign spokesman says that he cannot speak for Corbyn! If he can't, then what is supposed to be collective responsibility?

It's a complete joke. A mess. A car-crash. 

From across the aisle of British politics, it's entertaining, but it means that the Government is not being held to account and that's bad for democracy.

Squiffy.  

Lewis Hamilton: Three times World Champion

Last weekend Lewis Hamilton got his dream come true: he matched Ayrton Senna's number of world championships. The race in Austin was the best of the year, and until the last few laps it looked like Lewis would have to wait another race to claim the championship.

Last year we watched Lewis mature, this year he is at the height of his powers. The only weakness he had last year was qualifying, and this year he has well and truly beaten Nico Rosberg, He is driving at his best and the results are showing it. Off track, he seems to be very happy too and a happy Lewis is a fast Lewis.

Nico Rosberg looks well and truly beaten. After Austin he had a face like a slapped arse. He was complaining about Lewis being aggressive into turn one. It was wet and Lewis got the better start to be alongside the pole sitter. When they came to brake they found it difficult to turn in and their wheels touched. It was fine and Nico needs to grow a pair.

In fact it is now apparent that Lewis is faster and a better racer. Nico will not be world champion in the same team as Lewis. Whether he comes to the same conclusion and settles into a number two role next year or, as I expect, make all the noises of coming back better and faster next year only to be blown away again is up to him.

What next for Lewis? It would be brilliant to have a real Lewis vs Seb Vettel battle next year but I wouldn't bet against a fourth world championship. He should be able to get close to Prost's win tally, and the Senna's pole tally. I think 5 world championships are in reach.

Well done Lewis.

Squiffy.

Viewing the F1 scene

We have 5 races to go until the end of the season, and it's time to look at how the season has been going and draw some conclusions.

The Mercedes team are still the class act with the fastest car. Lewis Hamilton is the master of all currently, with 11 pole positions and 8 wins. Nico Rosberg looks like a beaten man, whatever he throws at Lewis Hamilton the champ has an answer. They have dropped the ball three times. Monaco must have been awful for Lewis, to see his perfect weekend blown up by a bad call and the win gifted to his team-mate. In Hungary, Lewis had an off-day maybe triggered by the gathering before the race to celebrate the life of Jules Bianchi. Mercedes were off the pace in Singapore.

The Ferrari team have shown much improvement, with Vettel having three wins and a pole. It's good for F1 that the team are competitive and that they have a media friendly boss in Mauricio Arrivabene. I think it would have been better for Ferrari if they had let Kimi Raikkonen go, he's past his best and there needs to be some young blood.

Williams have disappointed this season. They're still good enough for third place but have not advanced since last year.

I've been impressed by Max Verstappen and Carlos Sainz. Both have been good racers and on certain weekends have shown good pace. Verstappen's pass on Nasr at Blanchimont, Spa, was amazing. He knows no fear - yet!

The Red Bull is a good chassis but the Renault engine has disappointed badly. How can the engine have got so worse since last year? It has been disappointing to see them bad-mouthing Renault after winning 4 championships with them. It's no surprise that Renault have decided to pull out from engine supply. It's also no surprise that Red Bull are finding it hard to get another supplier. If I was Christian Horner I would pay Ferrari for the design to their engine and get a third party involved to build engines and take it forward.

I really hope Renault buy out Lotus as the Enstone team deserve to be in F1 due to their heritage. I wish Renault would decide what they want to do with F1. They're in, they supply engines, they're out, then they're in and then back to supplying engines. Make your mind up.

And now to McLaren Honda. What a disaster. When the McLaren-Honda tie-up was announced everyone thought, wow the two powerhouses are getting back together, everyone hould look out. I wasn't convinced. This is Honda's fourth time in F1, and only their second venture as an engine supplier to Williams and McLaren was successful. At the end of that period they had been superceded by Renault. Their third coming was poor. McLaren isn't the power it used to be either. Their last constructor's championship would have been 2007 (apart from the spying scandal) and was 1998 before that.

The car is slow, the drivers de-motivated and cracks are appearing in the management structures. Honda has a policy of rotating technical staff into the F1 programme and then out into the road cars. They don't bring people in from outside. This time they have bitten more than they can chew and they need to eat some humble pie. It's such a shame.

The other teams have not really changed their positions or outlook.

As for F1 itself. The season has been more dull than last year with poor races, apart from Silverstone and Hungary. I quite like some of the suggestions to spice up the action. Wider cars, bigger tyres, more horsepower, bigger batteries, ground effects, reduce the number of planes on wings: all these things would improve the racing. A flatter payment system as described in earlier posts would also be a big help.

Now, only a few more weeks until we crown the 2015 champion.

Squiffy.

Just three weeks to go for Labour to regain sanity

September 12th is only just three weeks away. All the signs are that the Labour party is about to elect Jeremy Corbyn as its leader.

A few weeks ago I posted that the polls show Corbyn in the leader, but I didn't believe that the party would be stupid enough to go through with it. It now looks like I was wrong and Labour is in a kamikazi mood.

We now have to consider what would happen if he won. I previously pondered that he would step down immediately, now I don't think so and he will try to oppose. How that will be done though, I don't know. 

There are some challenges. Firstly, Corbyn has said that he will pick his own shadow cabinet after previously saying that he would bring back shadow cabinet elections. He actually gave his Labour opponents a good idea for ruining his leadership with his earlier plan. There may be movements to bring back shadow cabinet elections before the leader is announced on the 12th. If many moderates stand in this election and have to be appointed to the shadow cabinet they can make it pretty impossible for Corbyn to effectively oppose. There will be splits in the shadow cabinet on a daily basis.

Maybe Jeremy Corbyn will get to appoint his own people, but with so few supporters amongst his own MPs would he be able to fill enough posts? And will these people, who are a permanent awkward squad, be able to show loyalty to their leader? They've never been able to do it before!

Even if Corbyn gets a shadow cabinet, how on earth can he command a majority of his own MPs for the parliamentary votes. David Cameron and George Osborne will bring forward votes on lots of policies which moderate Labour MPs agree with. It will be like two cats playing with a mouse.

Let's say that the majority of moderates stay silent and go along with Corbyn's votes for the most part. What happens when the polls and elections show Corbyn to be a loser (as they surely will)? Will they still keep their counsel?

Meanwhile, and you can guarantee this, the Tories will bring up every past dubious association that Corbyn has shown in the past 30 years. We've had a taster the last few weeks with some stories of dubious appearances to some extremists, I'm pretty sure that it's the tip of the iceberg.

Also, there's been some fleeting shows of Corbyn's hot temper. Given some tough questioning by our more difficult interviewers it's clear that he will lose his rag. How will this come across?

There are also questions about what the other moderates will do? Will there be a split? Probably not. They will easily be able to get enough signatures to trigger a new election, but will they want to against a big democratic mandate for Corbyn? Will they stay to agitate while waiting for Corbyn to crash and burn?

This is definitely the most interesting period of politics for the last thirty years, and I haven't even starting talking about Corbyn's crackpot policies. Let's tackle them if and when he becomes leader.

It's so gripping.

Squiffy.