|
OwlFancier posted:I believe most campsites aren't allowed to let you live there full time, however there is one near me where you can buy a static caravan and live there as long as you move out for about 2 weeks a year. You don't have to let anyone else use the house, you just have to not be residing there all year round, then it still counts.
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 09:46 |
|
|
mediadave posted:Why are most seat predictions showing the Tories winning substantially (20+) more seats than Labour? Even taking Scotland into account, surely the vagries of FPTP and seat boundaries mean that if Labour and the Conservatives are neck and neck on votes Labour will win substantially more seats? To add to everyone else, using national polls to try and predict this election is a mugs game. You need to look local. http://lordashcroftpolls.com/category/the-ashcroft-national-poll/ - the Tories dark lord is doing amazing work This place is good as well http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html What you then want to do is average out the lot and gives you.... Hung parliament with a slight advantage to the labour party, even if they are throwing away a deal with the SNP
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:25
|
|
|
Jedit posted:The problem with that being Labour will point at an SNP contingent that doesn't support them and say "It's us or the Tories and the SNP don't want us". After Labour have very publicly rejected repeated offers from the SNP, I doubt that's a narrative that'd do well here. I'm not sure how the telegraph's hit piece on Nicola Sturgeon went down in England, but it was just laughed at in Scotland. The Supreme Court fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Apr 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:25
|
|
|
The Supreme Court posted:After Labour have very publicly rejected repeated offers from the SNP, I doubt that's a narrative that'd do well here. The SNP and Labour have both ruled out a formal coalition with each other haven't they?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:27
|
|
|
twoot posted:In past elections the incumbent government (of either side) has usually performed better than in the last weeks of polling. So the models which use historical data will plot a small movement back to Tories with the uniform-national-swing calculation. Labour has a small edge in a lot of Con-Lab marginals and most Lib-Lab ones but the tories will pick up seats from the Lib dems. 3 way marginals will be most interesting also UKIP could cause headaches to strategists by swallowing floating voters and "concerned" pensioners. I like that Miliband ruled out a confidence and supply arrangement, is he going to whip labour into voting down their own queens speech if the SNP back it? Lavender menace fucked around with this message at 10:30 on Apr 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:27
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:The SNP and Labour have both ruled out a formal coalition with each other haven't they? I'm not sure about the SNP, but Ed Miliband and Jim Murphy both turned down Nicola Sturgeon's coalition offer during the debates, then Ed ruled out an informal supply deal on telly recently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:31
|
|
|
mediadave posted:Even taking Scotland into account, surely the vagries of FPTP and seat boundaries mean that if Labour and the Conservatives are neck and neck on votes Labour will win substantially more seats?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:33
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:in every other election, sure. in this one, fptp is loving labour because >51% of people in most every scottish constituency are voting snp. if snp support was at the same levels as the last election, labour would be polling at 310 seats or so I think the long term polls show it's closer to >40%, but with FPTP that's still more than enough to totally screw Labour's chances.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
If I were in Scotland I'd vote SNP just because the Scottish Labour guy I have on twitter constantly retweets the pettiest shite about Alex Salmond.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
Lavender menace posted:I like that Miliband ruled out a confidence and supply arrangement, is he going to whip labour into voting down their own queens speech if the SNP back it? The absence of such an agreement doesn't require Labour to vote against whatever position the SNP take.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:41
|
|
|
Lavender menace posted:I like that Miliband ruled out a confidence and supply arrangement, is he going to whip labour into voting down their own queens speech if the SNP back it? no. are you on crack? bit early in the morning for that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:49
|
|
|
I like vices take on the subject http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/queen-palace-coup-miliband-snp-cameron-huitson-345
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
Yeah Labour can run a minority government and hope the other parties will vote on their stuff without arrangement. It's more awkward but a little safer for Scottish Labour, and if it goes well next election they might be able to make a big deal of their "leadership" and regain some seats in Scotland. I doubt that will work, it's very easy for the SNP to counter, but Milliband is in an impossible position regarding the SNP and he probably sees this as the least worst option.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/04/six-more-marginals/ UKIP on course to take Thurrock, but probably won't hold Rochester and Strood. Lib Dems into third place in Bristol West, which they previously won with an 11k majority. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:03
|
|
|
The Supreme Court posted:I'm not sure about the SNP, but Ed Miliband and Jim Murphy both turned down Nicola Sturgeon's coalition offer during the debates, then Ed ruled out an informal supply deal on telly recently. e: also, the head of the DUP wrote a really quite sensible piece about the SNP and the irresponsible drivel the Tories have been spewing: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/26/uk-legitimacy-snp-nicola-sturgeon-tories-english-votes-law quote:The general election is exciting in Scotland and Scotland is exciting the rest of the country. Not many expected the result now rolling down the length of Britain towards Westminster, but we need to come to terms with what this is going to mean. For the UK does not just need good and stable government after 7 May, it needs responsible politicians too, whether in office or opposition. At the moment, the current state of the campaign greatly concerns me. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 11:08 on Apr 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:04
|
|
|
The Supreme Court posted:After Labour have very publicly rejected repeated offers from the SNP, I doubt that's a narrative that'd do well here. I'd have to check the dates, which I can't do at work, but I'm pretty sure the SNP were the first to rule out a coalition with Labour.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:10
|
|
|
Prince John posted:I can't see a good way out for them with respect to their potential Scottish voters. If they don't move to the left, the SNP can point the figure and say "Tories-lite". If they do move to the left, it validates the SNP narrative of them being needed to keep Labour honest. strategically speaking, they don't need to pull voters back to Labour inasmuch as disillusion voters of SNP given the fractious nature of the SNP tent, that might not be difficult
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:20
|
|
|
Jedit posted:I'd have to check the dates, which I can't do at work, but I'm pretty sure the SNP were the first to rule out a coalition with Labour.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:32
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Oh great, that was clever wasnt it, cheers scots. Surely that now means the most likely gov is more con-lib right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Oh great, that was clever wasnt it, cheers scots. Surely that now means the most likely gov is more con-lib right? Not if current polling is any indicator - the Tories + Lib Dems would not be able to form a minority government providing the SNP were being honest when they said they will do what they can to prevent the Tories forming a government. They've already locked themselves into a loose alliance with Labour regardless of what happens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:34
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Oh great, that was clever wasnt it, cheers scots. Surely that now means the most likely gov is more con-lib right? if labour and snp have a majority, a tory government will fail a vote of confidence. if labour and snp have a majority, a labour government will pass a vote of confidence because voting down a labour minority would not play well in scotland unless current polling is miles off, we're getting a labour minority government. the press can scream their heads off all they want; given miliband's current relationship with murdoch, im not sure he gives a poo poo coffeetable fucked around with this message at 11:42 on Apr 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:38
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Oh great, that was clever wasnt it, cheers scots. Surely that now means the most likely gov is more con-lib right? The SNP initially ruled out a formal coalition because there are no benefits to it over a looser arrangement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
I wonder whether the Tories would whip their own members into voting down Trident renewal just to watch the SNP squirm (nah, they won't. It'd be funny though)
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
Jim Wells, the DUP Health Minister at Stormont and noted homophobe, has resigned after a bad couple of days in which he claimed gay couples were more likely to abuse children and allegedly verbally assaulting a lesbian couple whole canvassing. http://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/dup-minister-jim-wells-quits-as-gay-abuse-comments-cause-huge-online-backlash-31173893.html His wife is extremely sick but still, Jim Wells is an absolute fucker...
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
ronya posted:I wonder whether the Tories would whip their own members into voting down Trident renewal just to watch the SNP squirm Trident renewal will just be ignored for five years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:41
|
|
|
Labour are announcing their housing policy, 1 million houses over the course of the parliament (not clear on whether they will be building them or just hoping someone else will), no stamp duty for first time buyers, 50% of new builds to be offered to local (resident in the area for three years) first time buyers first Too much about buying houses not enough about social rents etc business as usual
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:44
|
|
|
Phoon posted:Milliband is in an impossible position regarding the SNP and he probably sees this as the least worst option. Does anyone see any way of Scottish Labour countering the SNP short of reinventing themselves with a completely new message and identity? Prince John fucked around with this message at 11:49 on Apr 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:44
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Oh great, that was clever wasnt it, cheers scots. As this thread has helpfully beat into people's skulls over and over again, the SNP and the Scots aren't the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Does anyone see any way of Scottish Labour countering the SNP short of reinventing themselves with a completely new message and identity? Their best bet is to do a really good job in government tbh. Then they can say "sure the snp supported us but these were OUR ideas" - won't work though unless they genuinely move left enough for their ideas to appeal in Scotland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:47
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Does anyone see any way of Scottish Labour countering the SNP short of reinventing themselves with a completely new message and identity? Every SNP member standing at the election could be struck fatally by bolts of lightning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:47
|
|
|
Phoon posted:Labour are announcing their housing policy, 1 million houses over the course of the parliament That's a pretty lacklustre building programme as well. 200,000 a year is only 70,000 a year more than we managed in 2013. Viewing the raw data available here on house building (in open document format no less) did remind me of one of the great achievements of the coalition; the provision of raw statistics and government spending data to the public, for everyone to access. That, along with the adoption of truly open standards for holding data in government, will have a long lasting legacy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:49
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Does anyone see any way of Scottish Labour countering the SNP short of reinventing themselves with a completely new message and identity? Hugging the SNP to death, talking about how they are working so well together in Westminster, talking about how they want to form a progressive coalition with the SNP in Holyrood, hoping that the SNP decide against proposing another indyref in 2016 Holyrood manifesto (which actually seems likely), hoping that the more fanatical SNP new members start to splinter away to more fundamentalist pro-indy parties, hoping that the new cohort of SNP MPs make a fool of themselves... Basically, a lot of hope. And that depends on Scottish Labour at last being able to pretend to like and work with the SNP. They may not be able to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:50
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Does anyone see any way of Scottish Labour countering the SNP short of reinventing themselves with a completely new message and identity?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:scottish labour's biggest problem is that scottish labour swing voters now want something rather different from english labour swing voters. Such as?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:55
|
|
|
Prince John posted:That's a pretty lacklustre building programme as well. 200,000 a year is only 70,000 a year more than we managed in 2013. If it's a target for overall housebuilding it's rubbish but if its a commitment to government building its not too bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 11:56
|
|
|
Phoon posted:If it's a target for overall housebuilding it's rubbish but if its a commitment to government building its not too bad. Heh, I was being very cynical and assuming it was weasel words for public and private. I can't actually tell from the policy wording on the Labour website, it's also quite vague. I think my cynicism may be valid though, this link talks about using Housing Associations and suggests that Labour is spending £5bn. quote:The Labour leader will also commit his party to the biggest housebuilding programme "for a generation" - with one million homes planned by 2020 - with 'affordable' housing made a top priority. £5bn over 1m homes would only be £5k per home, so I think it's fair to say that the bulk of extra spend will be private. The Chartered Institute of Housebuilding has a report discussing the difficulties of reaching the figure of 200k here (pdf) if anyone's interested. Edit: Eught, on further reflection, I'm even more irritated if that £5bn is the real figure. It's just talking if they're not going to put any real money in. It's not a new policy either - it's been his since 2013, so doubly disappointing if they still haven't decided they want to borrow to fund it. The CIHB makes an interesting point about the size of housing benefit vs capital spend: quote:We need to rebalance welfare spending with capital investment. Currently a massive £23.5 billion a year is spent on housing benefit and only £1.5 billion on capital support. Capital spending to build homes let at social rents is more cost effective in the medium term than revenue support, and focuses on building homes, not on dealing with their consumption. Without new homes, housing benefit is just Prince John fucked around with this message at 12:13 on Apr 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 12:05
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Such as? Maybe the users of Grindr can answer that: Scottish Grindr users on the 2015 general election http://machotrouts.tumblr.com/ EDIT: probably NSFW, for text.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Such as? I can see their point, (or my own point which i've read into it). in England Labour's main threat is the Conservatives, while in Scotland their main threat is the SNP. Labour voters in England who would be inclined to vote for a party like the SNP don't really have much else to vote for - and if they did there'd be a much higher chance of letting the tories in. So the people Scottish Labour have to worry about are different to the people that most of rUK Labour has to worry about. This isn't because of genetic differences in voting intentions, just the difference in the political landscape.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 12:17
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:Paging Bozza to thread: what's all this about "ETCS could get hacked by terrists! Few pages back but... Hey now our current signalling systems work fine together thank you very much! The principles of colour light signalling have been sorted since the 1920s and absolute block since the late 19th Century so we're fine without the MEDDLING EU.  INCOMING TRAIN POST Anyway, short answer is no. The piece is a puff bit of PR which reveals itself at the end when it says the professor is working on something to make it safe (which isn’t required). Firstly, this categorically misunderstands how ERTMS works and how it actually controls the railway system. This is about to get a bit complicated so please bear with me. Firstly, ERTMS is actually a combination of three things: GSM-R, the railway telephony and data system based on mobile phone technology, ETCS, the train control system which manages the transmittal of the movement authorities which allow trains to go to places and the European operational rules which are in the process of being politely dropped as no European railway will agree to any procedures but their own. When the article talks about ERTMS, it is mostly referring to the ETCS as the GSM-R is simply the transmittal medium. ETCS works like this – a signaller, operating a bespoke control system, requests that a train is allowed to go from point A to point B using their control system. Then, via a hardwired or closed local area network connection, this request is made to the interlocking, which evaluates the route conditions of this request (such as if points are free to be swung to allow it or if opposing routes are set) and makes an instant decision if this is safe, if it isn’t, request denied, back to step one. If the request is successful, this is where the clever stuff happens. In the good ol’ days of colour light signalling, the interlocking would evaluate the condition of the train detection in the set route and if it was all proved clear, along with all points set locked and detected in the correction positions (plus other stuff…) it would allow the protecting signal to show a proceed aspect. ETCS works differently, but this is still the fundamental principle. This still takes place within the interlocking and when the route is proved clear for the passage of a train, the interlocking communicates this with the Radio Block Centre (or RBC), which bundles the information that the train is allowed to move from A to B in a series of data packets which are transmitted via GSM-R to the train. This is via heavily encoded key-management system using a variant on public key cryptography. To get from the RBC (which is in the control centre) to the GSM-R base station, this is sent via the internal railway fibre optic network (none of your BT circuit pish). The train decodes this data which contains not only the end point of the route but also the maximum speed and gradient profiles contained within it and then pretty much makes its own decisions from this point on within its own internal hardware, simply reporting back its position to the RBC which is backed up by the train detection in the interlocking. Reading the article, it somewhat misses the point that despite all this fancy pants technology the driver is still in total control of the train. They are not allowed to go faster than the speed curves but they can drive at whatever speed they want. So, in the Swiss cheese model of risk, we have a hacker (or rogue employee lol) that has somehow either managed to break into a secure network which is almost entirely disconnected from the outside world, managed to override either the hardcoded interlocking and not have this noticed by the monitoring signaller or tricked the RBC into issuing a movement authority somehow despite the RBC and interlocking being directly wired together. This has then been issued to the train and the driver, who will almost certainly have driven this route tens, if not hundreds, of times not noticing a rather egregious speed profile which is dangerous and then driving it! So basically, it’s bollocks. ARE TRAINS remain the safest way to travel even with the EU sticking their nose in.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 12:18
|
|
", is it just a bad excuse to continue using terrible frankenstein signalling systems?
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 09:46 |
|
|
Prince John posted:Heh, I was being very cynical and assuming it was weasel words for public and private. I can't actually tell from the policy wording on the Labour website, it's also quite vague. It's better to help Housing Associations build than to rely on private sector builders* but 5bn is rubbish - at least associations can borrow to build unlike councils. *Because housing associations build much nicer and more energy efficient homes generally and at least some will be for social/affordable rents Maybe there's something they can do to relaxing planning permission requirements for new housing association estates - I imagine they're often unpopular with locals in many areas (oh no poors!!)
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 12:20
|
|