Sentences with phrase «actually more labour»

She points out that wind power is actually more labour intensive than coal, and requires 2.5 time more units of labour for every MW of electricity produced.

Not exact matches

Some variations in labour rules aside, the Canadian and U.S. regulatory regimes are actually more closely aligned than they are with other parts of the world, which is good news for major sharing economy companies.

«Putting progressive elements into trade deals — labour protections, environmental protections — actually helps us make the case for trade and reassure people that the benefits of trade will be distributed more fairly and not just to the small number of people who've always benefited from it in the past.»

So you could argue that the current system is actually biased against Labour, and therefore PR will actually disadvantage Labour even more unless rates of voter registration are improved and compulsory voting introduced.

As a rule, they had a bad night: BNP leader Nick Griffin actually managed to decrease his party's share of the vote in Barking, while Esther Rantzen proved little more than a sideshow in the Luton South Labour - Tory struggle.

Labour must reassess what it actually stands for, and can not simply define itself as a more progressive and softer round the edges version of Thatcherism.

For all these reasons, I think AV is actually a very good voting system and I would put the referendum result down to several things — an ineffective Yes campaign (if you typed AV into Google, they didn't even come up on the first page of results), lies and smears spread by the No campaign, the association with Nick Clegg, the split in Labour over AV and finally, and not insignificantly, the fact that the Electoral Commission sent leaflets to every household containing an overly complex explanation that made AV look more complex than the insides of a nuclear reactor.

Whilst the economic circumstances might make it more difficult to actually implement the New Labour mantra of increased investment in public services funded by a growing economy, there's little to suggest that the terms of debate in the political centre ground have undergone a paradigm shift such as the one experienced in the post-Thatcherite era.

At first, this does not appear to be a major change in the electoral fortunes of the parties but when we look at the revised national shares, the impact is more significant as this suggests that Labour and the Conservatives would be neck and neck in England & Wales rather than the 2.5 point lead the Conservatives actually had.

I don't put much store in opinion polls, but if true it would only indicate roughly what you would expect to happen at this point in the parliament - 32 % isn't that much lower than Labour got in the 2005 General Election and all it would suggest is that the Liberal Democrats are having a reversal - tactical voting could see them holding onto many of their current seats, indeed it is even possible that if they got 17 % of the vote that if it focused in an area that they could actually end up with more seats, where the switches in support are occuring is crucial - if they are focused then if the Conservative Party were to get 39 % then it might still result in them getting fewer seats than Labour or in extremis winning a 150 seat majority or so?

I have no doubt that the Conservative Party will make major gains in votes and seats in the next 10 years that will build to their return to power ultimately, but they are a long way off actually winning a majority and it has to be said that a Hung Parliament now looks more improbable than at any time since 2001, demographic factors are working against the Conservative Party as well - Labour seats mostly are held with far lower turnouts which is partly why Labour can get fewer votes than the Conservatives and end up with an overall majority and far more seats than the Conservative Party.

While the party had fared especially well in the more working class parts of the city at the 2009 Local and European elections and the 2011 General Election, Labour actually fared (slightly) better in the more middle class Dublin constituencies at the 2014 Local Elections than they did in the more working class electoral areas.

The useless official campaign run by Johnson was a key cause of the failure to pull out more Labour votes, although as election guru John Curtice has told us Labour actually did quite well here.

I get that Corbyn cultists see Blair's great crime being that he actually won elections and see winning as a sign that you are not pure enough, but on these numbers Labour can not even mount a credible opposition which means May fears her extreme right more than she does Labour, this can only lead to awful things for working people in Britain.

If you look at the cross-tabulation with how people actually voted though, considerably more people told Populus they had voted Tory to stop Labour winning than voted Labour to stop the Conservatives winning (however some people were obviously confused by the question — 32 said they voted tactically against Labour, but voted Labour).

So UKIP is actually drawing more support nationally from Labour than the Conservatives, right?

Despite the fact that even David Miliband estimated that there were no more than ten Labour backbenchers who actually believed in the war, enough ignored their constituents» wishes and any residual principals and voted «yes», simultaneously saving Blair's skin and condemning the Iraqis to years of carnage and chaos.

For all the Conservative party rhetoric about Ken being a lying reptile who'll say anything to get into power, it's actually the criticism from fellow Labour people which I find more convincing.

I'm genuinely finding very few Labour to Tory switchers and I've actually found more Tory to Labour switchers because of the shipyard, which I was surprised about.»

Labour's drive to register new voters ahead of the election has not had an impact in other targets - the number of voters registered in Newcastle - under - Lyme, a key Tory target, has actually fallen by more than 2,000 since 2015.

Actually, I say «infographic», but it's a more a digital raspberry blown in Labour's collective face.

[165] It was reported after the election that private pollsters working for the two largest parties actually gathered more accurate results, with Labour's pollster James Morris claiming that the issue was largely to do with surveying technique.

While it is certainly true that far more people vote for third, fourth and other parties nowadays than in the mid-20th century, some of the numbers suggest that the amount of «nottle» MPs (not Tories and not Labour) may stay the same or actually decline at the next election.

But he claimed Labour has actually had more money from non-doms like Lord Paul than the Conservatives.

«It's not true actually, and we are spending more than Labour on this... We're investing in the frontline services now to get these rail lines repaired, to protect homes along the Thames at the moment, the homes in Somerset, bring in the army and all that kind of thing.»

However, while Labour argue that this would help to make living in high - demand cities like London and Oxford more affordable, these plans actually run the risk of deepening the housing crisis rather than solving it.

All Jeremy's «right on» liberal sentimentality is doing is reinforcing the neoliberal status quo which empowers Capital against labour, and is alienating millions of actual, ex, and potential Labour voters — looking for a radical Left agenda (or of course, failing that — a radical Right populist one via a more Left - faking UKIP Mk 2) that actually tries to stand up to the power of the neoliberal mlabour, and is alienating millions of actual, ex, and potential Labour voters — looking for a radical Left agenda (or of course, failing that — a radical Right populist one via a more Left - faking UKIP Mk 2) that actually tries to stand up to the power of the neoliberal mLabour voters — looking for a radical Left agenda (or of course, failing that — a radical Right populist one via a more Left - faking UKIP Mk 2) that actually tries to stand up to the power of the neoliberal market.

Aides say the vote is a symbolic endorsing of the policy but accept it does not necessarily make the party more or less committed to it - reflecting the limited influence which the Labour conference actually has on policy decisions.

Historically Labour have actually tended to do worse, not better, in the regional vote, so the pattern here is somewhat unusual — looking at the data it seems to be because people who would vote Green or SSP in the regional vote are more likely to vote SNP in the constituency vote.

But opponents of the Labour party say this would actually give the unions more power because all those affiliated members will actually take up more of the membership block than the unions were getting in the leadership election.

With Miliband, the closer you looked, the more you realised that he was actually quite a long way to the Left in the Labour Party.

Robert regarding your view that labour cold win with 35 %, yes, but we won in 1974 ′ with 37 % and I believe Callaghan actually got a few more votes in 79 ′ than 74 although the percentage was the me, the point was that the 74 manifesto was so far from what the public felt, that the following election lots of liberals or stay at home voters came out and the Tories would get 13 + million for the next f our.

Labour as currently organised and funded is actually considerably more effective as an opposition than a government — its competencies and enthusiasms are well suited to holding an incumbent government to account, less so to the actual business of government.

When Labour announced it was to open Britain's borders to the eight eastern European nations new to the European Union in 2004, it claimed no more than 13,000 a year would actually come here.

If we had known that, say, the majority of second preference votes had been for Labour where first preference votes had been for the Green Party, the Lib Dems or the Nationalists, this would have made a coalition involving Labour far more likely, making the coalition a much better reflection of what people actually wanted.

Are you really gullible enough to believe this is some Damascean conversion, or is it far more likely that Gurchuran, who stood for Labour in the Hillingdon & Ealing GLA seat twice, has been on the London Labour Board until recently, and as I say was Deputy Labour Leader on the Council is actually defecting because Labour completely and utterly botched its selection process.

Amongst Sun readers though it was CON 42 %, LAB 29 %, LDEM 12 % — so while there isn't much difference in Conservative support, Sun readers are actually a bit more Labour and a bit less Lib Dem than the population as a whole, meaning the Tories have a lower lead amongst Sun readers than elsewhere in the country.

«It was incredible that my colleagues in the Labour party thought it more important to turn in on themselves and have a dispute about who should be leading the party than to actually stand at the despatch box and attack the Government for the crisis that they had precipitated,» he said.

AM, if you think that new labour caused damage to the working class, I take it you feel people who bought their council homes and consider themselves to be middle class, are actually middle class, fact is, they would still fit the demographics of working class, those are the people that Labour in the 80's list and new labour got back, but yes lebour did lose, the unskilled Borthern working class because labour were more interested in getting the lower middle class, and we'd never had won if we hadn't, so think if that before we criticise new lebour giving up on the lower working class, as we had to do it too win, unless you dint think winning is impolabour caused damage to the working class, I take it you feel people who bought their council homes and consider themselves to be middle class, are actually middle class, fact is, they would still fit the demographics of working class, those are the people that Labour in the 80's list and new labour got back, but yes lebour did lose, the unskilled Borthern working class because labour were more interested in getting the lower middle class, and we'd never had won if we hadn't, so think if that before we criticise new lebour giving up on the lower working class, as we had to do it too win, unless you dint think winning is impoLabour in the 80's list and new labour got back, but yes lebour did lose, the unskilled Borthern working class because labour were more interested in getting the lower middle class, and we'd never had won if we hadn't, so think if that before we criticise new lebour giving up on the lower working class, as we had to do it too win, unless you dint think winning is impolabour got back, but yes lebour did lose, the unskilled Borthern working class because labour were more interested in getting the lower middle class, and we'd never had won if we hadn't, so think if that before we criticise new lebour giving up on the lower working class, as we had to do it too win, unless you dint think winning is impolabour were more interested in getting the lower middle class, and we'd never had won if we hadn't, so think if that before we criticise new lebour giving up on the lower working class, as we had to do it too win, unless you dint think winning is important.

Given that John Reid's speech was on the final day of conference, his boost was probably more to do with his «victory» in Newsnight's focus group on the Labour leadership (or more to the point, given that not many people actually watch Newsnight, the media speculation that followed it).

Often two things happen: many voters — more than in a general election — tend to make up their minds at the last moment; and Labour often has great difficulty in persuading their supporters actually to vote.

It sounded much more practical than Byrne's assertion that Labour must «move on decisively from the New Labour package, but remain on centre ground,» which came across a little bit like a suggestion that Labour must appear to move on, while actually continuing to tread the same water as 1997.

This Tory sees a more likely political difficulty arising from Corbyn's defeat and victory for Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper being misinterpreted as a triumph for Labour moderation when, in this cabinet member's opinion, Burnham and Cooper are actually «running left».

Asked by a Labour MP to vacate the Tory leadership because David Davis beat him in the first round of the 2005 contest David Cameron joked that in the vote of Tory members he won more votes than David Davis (twice as many actually).

I'm not actually convinced Nandy is much more than a fairly standard left of centre 2010/2015 intake Labour MP but she does seem to have a following among Labour supporters.

Most polls show Labour on considerably more than 35 per cent, but can they achieve it when it actually counts?

This time around I expect much of the Labour tactical vote to return to the Lib Dems as a) more people actually realise the Lib Dems actually did a good job holding the Tories in check during the Coalition and because Labour is doing so badly so wavering Labourites will once again vote Tom to stop the Tories here.

The old one had more poetry, but the new one was more in tune with what Labour could actually do.

Writing is hard — I'd done enough of it to know that much — and, what's more, I'd seen my mother — both parents actually, my father is also a novelist — sweating blood over their work and I just didn't feel that that sort of hard labour was for me.

Although many people actually benefit from a paid day off on these holidays, the Québec Act respecting Labour Standards explicitly sets out the conditions surrounding those payments and what happens when you're required to work on a statutory holiday or how you're paid if you're... [more]