Quoth the BBC:
“The government has rejected a request from train companies to make sure fares keep rising, the BBC has learned.”
Prices are way too high as it is (an obvious statement, but then I’m still bitter about a delightful journey on Sunday…). This is only good news in a small way, I guess, but that’s better than…
Tuesday’s Sinfest: http://www.sinfest.net/archive_page.php?comicID=3087
I do so hope that the helicopter in the third panel is a direct reference… probably not, actually, but the possibility amuses me anyway…
“Tories propose more council power” says the BBC headline. Surprised, I read the article and it quickly became clear that they aren’t proposing anything of the sort.
The main idea seems to be to scrap rate-capping (good) and replace it with local referendums that would allow residents to “veto” council tax increases (beyond awful. If you want to see why this is such a boneheaded idea, have a look at California…). As much as I loathe rate-capping, this Californianisation of local taxation would be infinately worse and could, potentially, cripple local government even further.
Another thing seems to be directly elected Mayors in twelve local authorities (none of which, incidently, are even slightly likely to be run by Tories by the mid-term of a Tory government if the present system is kept). The article doesn’t mention whether or not local people will get a vote on whether they actually want a directly-elected Mayor* which is mildly disturbing, as a switch to a Mayoral system always results in major change (even if it’s only within groups) to the patterns of local politics. If a future Tory government just imposed directly elected Mayors on these cities (and only on these cities) then it would amount to, at best, a series of coups against existing local administrations.
There’s more there, though I’m tired and canna be bothered to look further. But one thing that I did not notice in the article was anything that would actually increase (for real) the powers of local authorities or do something about the poor state of local democracy in this country. Nothing. Nowt. Zilch.
Quite a few things that would make the Daily Mail reading classes happy though.
*My view is that you either have elected Mayors (or elected Leaders or whatever you want to call them) everywhere or only in places where it’s clear that the people actually want an elected Mayor…
Well no. Not really. Not from me anyway. Frankly, the Tories are welcome to the idiot. It’s just a shame, such a shame, that he should have had influence over government policy beforehand…
Wales beat the Forces of Darkness by a fairly comfortable margin in the rugby earlier today. And what do the BBC headline it as?
“Wales edge past improved England”
This is both utterly shameless and totally predictable. The BBC’s bias towards the England rugby team is as absurd as it is obvious.
…did Alfred Russel Wallace look oddly like Nye Bevan with a beard?
Oddly appropriate when you consider Wallace’s politics, I guess.
First, the results for the some of the larger cities in Israel:
1. Jerusalem: Likud 24%, UTJ 19%, Shas 15%, Kadima 11%, NU 7%, Yisrael Beitenu 6%, Labour 6%
2. Tel Aviv: Kadima 34%, Likud 19%, Labour 15%, Meretz 8%, Yisrael Beitenu 6%, Shas 6%
3. Haifa: Kadima 28%, Likud 20%, Yisrael Beitenu 16%, Labour 13%, Hadash 4%
4. Rishon Letzion: Kadima 33%, Likud 27%, Yisrael Beitenu 14%, Labour 11%, Shas 6%
5. Be’er Sheva: Likud 28%, Yisrael Beitenu 25%, Kadima 20%, Labour 7%
6. Petah Tikva: Likud 26%, Kadima 23%, Yisrael Beitenu 15%, Labour 9%, Shas 8%, Jewish Home 6%
7. Netanya: Likud 28%, Kadima: 23%, Yisrael Beitenu 16%, Shas 11%, Labour 7%
8. Ashkelon: Likud 31%, Yisrael Beitenu 27%, Kadima 16%, Shas 11%, Labour 6%
9. Kfar Sava: Kadima 36%, Likud 23%, Labour 15%, Yisrael Beitenu 9%
10. Nazareth: Hadash 52%, Balad 23%, UAL 17%
Figures are all from Haaretz. Irritatingly, they don’t have figures for some other large cities. Will try to find them later. Anyway, some sector results now:
1. Bedouin: UAL 80%, Balad 5%
2. Kibbutzim: Labour 31%, Kadima 31%, Meretz 18%
3. Jewish communities with a population between 100,000 and 200,000: Likud 25%, Kadima 23%, Yisrael Beitenu 15%, Shas 11%, Labour 8%, UTJ 7%
4. Jewish communities with a population between 2,000 and 10,000: Kadima 24%, Likud 23%, NU 12%, Labour 10%, Yisrael Beitenu 9%, Shas 8%, Jewish Home 6%
5. Non-Jewish communities with a population between 2,000 and 10,000: UAL 26%, Hadash 24%, Balad 22%, Labour 9%, Kadima 6%
And, finally for now, the result in Ma’aleh Adumim (largest West Bank settlement)… Likud 45%, Yisrael Beitenu 15%, Kadima 13%, NU 9%, Shas 8%
Basically… and accounting for the tendency of Israeli exit polls to get it wrong… too-close-to-call between Kadima and Likud for first place, too close to call between Yisrael Beiteinu and Labour for third place. If the exit polls are right (a big if, perhaps) then Kadima have done quite a bit better (and Yisrael Beiteinu quite a bit worse) than pre-election polls had been predicting. We’ll see.
Just thought I’d mention a few rumours about the Israeli election that be flying around the interwebs at the moment.
*Turnout is up on 2006 (more of a fact than a rumour, actually).
*Polls conducted during the dead of night apparently show Likud’s lead gone completely.
*Arab turnout is “low” (not sure whether this is compared to the electorate as a whole or compared to normal).
*The Haredi parties are worried about the higher turnout.
*Likud politicians (including Bibi himself) seem to be worried about their vote fragmenting and heading to smaller parties.
Are, of course, today. Anyway, it’s worth pointing out that as polls in Israel are bad (really, really bad) as a general rule, almost anything could happen. Any one of the top four parties could top the poll, any one of them could come fourth (and as for the other parties…). Yes, it is likely that it will be a Likud, Kadima one-two (and probably in that order) but don’t be surprised if it isn’t.
Early indications are that turnout may be a bit higher than in 2006; this is a little surprising.
