Firstly, they seek to compensate the poor (or 80% of the losers) for losing out from the 10p shambles - well, ok, they have done a reasonable thing there.

Secondly, however, they are ‘giving’ a tax handout - but guess what, who are the losers there? Two lots, first the rich (which is ok), but also those poor who previously lost out relative to the 10p debacle! The latter EITHER get compensation OR they get the handout but not both!

So, by not targetting the money, NuLabour have, on the one hand, compensated the initial losers, but, on the other hand, they have then made them losers with respect to the tax rebate. You just couldn’t make it up. Surely, the problem remains!

We have a week to make the positive case for a Tory MP for Crewe & Nantwich while hoping that the Labour vote falls away. Looking at the ICM poll putting us on 43% , Labour on 39% and the Lib Dems on 17% we can point out to the Lib Dems that they cannot win & if they want to send the government a message then voting Tory is the way to do it . Labour’s mindless campaign of class hate is stupid. (Disparaging remarks about Conservatives left out as ed thought them grossly inaccurate) Simply pandering to the worst instincts of a section of your core vote will not reach the wider electorate & thus cause defeat. Labour have not learned from the errors of messars Hague & Howard . At least we are clearly in second place & led Labour by 16% in Crewe & Nantwich in the local elections of a fortnight ago. That is a 16% swing compared to the 2005 general election - we only need about half that to win the seat .

Nantwich is more Tory - rather like the outer areas of London. So if turnout is higher in Nantwich while the Labour vote stays at home in Crewe we can win . This Labour bribe is too little too late & voters in this seat are more angry about Gordon Brown’s failings than the Tory PPC being pretty well off. The Lib Dems as in London are failing to make up much ground & telling people that voting Lib Dem is helping Gordon Brown might be an idea !

Didn’t Gordon announce the removal of the 10p before Tony decided to stand down ? Do you think there’s any chance he planned for this to come to light shortly before the local elections where Tony would then have got a drubbing. Gordon would then come to the rescue with a revised budget and then take the leadership ?

Nah, he couldn’t be that Machivelion. Could he ? ….

Well, it probably isn’t the case. because it would have been difficult for it to look like it was him comming to the rescue of his budget. But the alternate explanation is that he was either stupid to see what his tax change would do, or too proud to listen to the advisers telling him this is what it would do.