Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh SERIOUS.

The FT has turned on OSBOURNE.

Osborne has now been proved wrong on austerity
By Martin Wolf 2 Oct 2013

Nobody thought a recovery would never happen – merely that it would be delayed......

The UK economy is recovering. The government is vindicated. Its critics should crawl into a hole. This, in essence, is what George Osborne, the chancellor of the exchequer, claimed in a rousing speech delivered earlier this month. In particular, he argues, Plan A has worked. Those who have been advocating a Plan B – slower fiscal tightening – have proved to be wrong. Here, then, is my response.
Yes, the economy is recovering. But the performance since Mr Osborne took office in May 2010 has been dismal. Over three years, the economy has grown by a cumulative total of 2. 2 per cent. In June 2010 the Office for Budget Responsibility forecast that the economy would expand by 8.2 per cent between 2010 and 2013. The real figure may end up being a third of that. In the second quarter of this year, gross domestic product was still 3.3 per cent below the pre-crisis peak and 18 per cent below its 1980-2007 trend – the slowest British recovery on record.

Financial crises do cause havoc. That explains some of this awful performance. But Spencer Dale and James Talbot of the Bank of England have shown that UK performance is dismal even by the standards of other crisis-hit, high-income economies. The eurozone has performed as badly as the UK. But, given the mess there and the UK’s control over all policy levers, that is hardly something to boast about.

Mr Osborne can (and does) point to a strong labour market performance. This has been a saving grace for Britain. Had the UK enjoyed normal productivity performance, unemployment might now be more than 15 per cent. Unemployment has remained low because labour productivity has now fallen back to 2005 levels. That is hardly something to boast about.

Mr Osborne responds that fiscal policy did not cause the dismal underperformance. That was due to inflation shocks and the eurozone. Since Mr Osborne was a cheerleader for the eurozone’s austerity, he cannot wash his hands of all blame. But the more important point, as Simon Wren-Lewis of Oxford university has pointed out, is that the debate is not about what caused the unforecast slowdown. What matters is whether the economy has been weaker with austerity than without it.
Little doubt exists over the answer to this question. With interest rates at the zero bound, austerity weakened the economy relative to what might otherwise have happened. The question is only how much it has done so. It is impossible to know counterfactuals. But Oscar Jordà and Alan Taylor of the University of California, Davis, concluded that in 2013 UK GDP will be about 3 per cent smaller than it would otherwise have been. Is that right? Nobody knows. But it is in the right direction.

Oh no, it is not, proponents of austerity respond. This ignores the fact that the programme delivered credibility and lower interest rates. In the febrile circumstances of 2010, when people thought, foolishly, that the UK might become Greece, that view might have made some sense. But it soon became clear it did not. In June 2010, the OBR forecast cumulative net borrowing of £322bn between 2011-12 and 2015-16. In March 2013 this was up to £564bn. In June 2010 the structural current budget was forecast to be in surplus by 2014-15. By March 2013 this had slipped two years. In June 2010 the ratio of public sector net debt to GDP was forecast to start falling in 2014-15. By March 2013 this had moved back to 2017-18. The peak level of net debt also jumped from 70.3 per cent to 85.6 per cent of GDP. Yet the impact of this slippage on long-term interest rates was zero. Only improved prospects for recovery and so of earlier rises in short-term rates raised longer-term rates.

So the chancellor had other options. As I have argued before, he could have stuck to the same plans for current spending, while temporarily lowering rather than raising value added tax. He also could have taken advantage of low borrowing rates to increase rather than reduce public investment. In fact, he is too hard on himself. He has allowed the fiscal position to slip and used the public balance sheet to support investment and the housing market. Call it Plan A minus. But he could certainly have been more deliberate and aggressive about it.

To this the chancellor would reply that none of this matters because the economy is recovering strongly anyway. Moreover, he insists, his critics thought this was impossible. But nobody thought recovery would never happen under austerity, merely that it would be damagingly delayed. The politics of this policy may not be too bad for Mr Osborne if the unnecessarily slow recovery becomes a faster bounceback in the run-in to the 2015 election. But it is hard to see an economic case for it.

One thing ought to be quite clear: the fact that the economy grows in the end does not prove that needlessly weakening the recovery was a sound idea. This has been an unnecessarily protracted slump. It is good that recovery is here, though it is far too soon to tell its quality and durability. But this does not justify what remains a large unforced error.

martin.wolf@ft.com

Morning exec, looks like a bad start to the day for Call Me Dave to be taking the stage at Manchester.

Having said that come voting day as per usual it will be the party on the day that offers more in pound notes that takes the prize.

Looks like the tory's have given up on the next election.



A return for Boris MP is embraced by Cameron

Boris Johnson could return as an MP and even join the Cabinet, David Cameron said today, as he embraced his former rival ahead of the next election


By Peter Dominiczak, Political Correspondent
8:09PM BST 01 Oct 2013



The Prime Minister said that Mr Johnson could be “very good” for the Government, after hearing the Mayor of London back his leadership in a conference speech. He has said that he will support the mayor if he wants to stand as an MP in 2015.

It prompted speculation that the pair may have reached an understanding whereby Mr Johnson succeeds him as Conservative leader in exchange for remaining loyal in the build-up to the election. Following the speech today, the Prime Minister went backstage and hugged the mayor.

He later denied that any “deal” had been done but indicated that he would be prepared to give Mr Johnson a Cabinet position if he becomes an MP.

Despite the show of loyalty, Mr Johnson dropped hints that he has ambitions to lead the party.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/borisjohnson/10348538/A-return-for-Boris-MP-is-embraced-by-Cameron.html

Everyones turning on them Max.

Its the 2 at the top that need replacing.

Agreed, altho I don't see how Osborne has any choice in the matter.

Looking forward to Cameron's speech. Conservatives on target to win next election.

Hays,

So am I.

I wonder how many times he will mention the putrefying remnants of maggie.

============

Your post 30334

Disagree.

Labour has moved to the centre and the con party has moved farther to the right than they would have considered under Thatcher.

This is an attempt to woo UKIP and BNP deserters back into their fold.

Besides, what do you define as socialism or toryism?
=======


I can see HQ trying trying to crank up their smear campaigns on the road again, as in the Kinnoch period.

Not sure that it will work this time round as it even leaves a feeling of distaste with some torrid voters.

======


Actually, what I find amusing, is when then the tory gentry saying they have put money into tis and tat, without acknowledging that they are using taxpayers money and that is using what some see as "socialist" principles.

Of course they are hoping for more back.
=====

But so far the star of the conference has be FARAGE or Fauxpage.

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL........ Hays Ill give you this you never give up even though you are sadly deluded and Im beginning to think you must have had learning difficulties as a child.

"Its the 2 at the top that need replacing."

Hey! That's at least two things we agree on, GF.

I'm a Boris fan and think he''d be OK for PM. He's a very, very clever guy and tells it mostly how it is. I think Cameron is too full of rhetoric.

But I'm not sure who I want for Chancellor.

Suggestions on a postcard, please.

Exclusive: Government 'has its head in the sand' over extent of zero hours



Simon Neville


Wednesday 02 October 2013





The Government is failing to recognise the true extent of workers employed on controversial zero-hours contracts, by continuing to use data that is acknowledged by the Office for National Statistics – which publishes the statistics – to understate the problem, according to MPs and campaigners.


The ONS had previously said 250,000 workers were on the contracts, which leave workers with no guaranteed hours each week and subject to last-minute changes in working patterns. But it has since admitted that the data undershoots the true number, and some estimates put it at as high as 1 million.

Campaigners have argued that the "head in the sand" attitude to the extent of the problem could be behind the Government's failure to take action to defend employees' rights.

Companies using zero-hours contracts include Sports Direct, McDonald's and Burger King. Despite the ONS's concerns, the Government stated in a recent answer to MPs that it continues to believe the low number is correct.

The ONS's regulator, Sir Andrew Dilnot, chairman of the UK Statistics Authority, has promised it will change the way it calculates zero-hours contracts, admitting the estimates were probably too low as individuals do not necessarily realise contracts are "zero hours". The ONS will now start polling employers instead of just workers.

The shadow Business Secretary, Chuka Umunna, said: "Ministers have their heads in the sand and are refusing to admit the huge proliferation we've seen on their watch of growing insecurity at work. Labour has recently announced plans to outlaw zero-hours contracts where they exploit people. In contrast, out-of-touch ministers have failed even to properly investigate the issue or how widespread these contracts have become."

The insistence of the Department for Business that the 250,000 number is correct is also at odds with the admission of the Government's own care minister, Norman Lamb, that there are 307,000 workers on zero-hours contracts in the care sector alone.



more:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/exclusive-government-has-its-head-in-the-sand-over-extent-of-zero-hours-8852326.html

Poor speech from Cameron. Uninspiring nothing new. READING FROM A SCRIPT.

He says the land of opportunity for all!!!!!!!! who is he trying to kid.

Come up North Davey and tell that to all the unemployed kids up here.

Also very smug and patronising towards labour. That does you no good Camoron, wins you no freinds.

ps, forgot to say .........looks like a big fat budgie.

Don't know why, but Cameron and the orchestrated clapping, stand ups and views of the audience and henchmen reminded me of :




Who are the scapegoats for a failing government?

Looks like Cameron is UKIP's sacrificial lamb.

I like mine with mint sauce.

======

Like the joke about burning and effigy of him.

Pity it wasn't the real thing.

It's no different at a No Lab Conference.

Land of Hope and Glory.

Eton Old Boys at the front.

Fix bayonets. Over the top and at them.

A party led by a donkey.

=======

What is the average age of the tory party followers?

No mention of 'The Big Society' no mention of 'we are all in this together'.

Wont have picked up any new voters with this speech.

As ExecLine says bring on BORIS, the conservatives need his passion and personality.

Good speech.

lol :-)

ha ha he he ho ho..........Hays, hes a comedian that chap.