2015 General Election

How does rate relief create jobs? Surely the only way to create jobs is to increase demand.

She is saying that if you cut rates on small businesses they will be more profitable, and may be less likely to go under (fewer redundancies), or have money to create new jobs. Problem is the money to cut rates has to come from somewhere - either increasing another tax, cutting spending somewhere, or more borrowing. Each of which could also have implications for jobs. You can't magic money and you can't magic jobs.

And it isn't really about 'creating demand' either. What we face now is not a problem of low aggregate demand, but a problem of zero productivity growth. The amount of output produced per hour of work is the same now as in 2008. That's 7 yrs ago. In the previous 7 years it had increased more than 15%. This is the worst 7 year period for productivity since at least the 1920s, maybe since the 19th century! That fundamentally is the biggest problem facing the country - and none of the parties discussed it.

My personal view on how this will affect votes.

1) Don't pay too much attention to the snap "winners poll". Most people's minds will already be made up. So to a large extent the polls will reflect people's political preferences.

2) Instead think of the impact on swing voters.

3) On this measure I think the following parties will get a boost (not saying I agree with them or their policies - but I think they will go down well with swing voters).

a) In Scotland, SNP will get a boost which should shore up support that might otherwise have leaked away a bit as the campaign got fully into swing. Sturgeon is very canny and managed to play both to Scotland and rUK. She was sufficiently vague on her anti-austerity stuff to allow her to make vague promises of more investment in lots of nice things, and managed to avoid any probing into the inconsistencies between that and plans for "full fiscal autonomy".

b) I think UKIP will get a boost among some politically disengaged working class voters. I think many people buy the "cut aid, cut EU" line, and the health tourism. Not really challenged on the fact that we only give 70p of every £100 of national income in aid (we spend far more on booze!), nor about the economic impact of leaving the EU on trade and investment.

c) I think the Lib Dems might get a little boost in some key marginals for them. I think his "middle of the road" line will appeal to some swing voters.

On the big guys, I'm not sure there's much in it between Cameron and Miliband. But I think Labour might get hit a bit harder by any increases in support for the 3 parties listed above - especially in Scotland.

I think Natalie Bennett started off poorly, and got a bit better towards the end. Not sure how it will play out.

I think Leanne Wood really did poorly - her constant mentions of Wales, Welsh etc - will go down badly I think even in Wales. As a Welsh person living in London it seemed to incredibly parochial to not attempt to link to the wider issues in the rest of the UK that Nicola Sturgeon attempted to do. I think many Welsh people will consider that a big error of judgement. So even if they like Plaid policy, they will worry about her performance.

Overall will it have a big impact? Probably not. I think it will have made it harder for Plaid to pick up seats, it will have shored up the SNP - the net effect of which will be to hit Labour a little. I think the Libs might be bolstered in a few key marginals. And if UKIP get a slight boost - well, I think it will boost their working class support most. Not sure if that will hurt Labour by allowing Tories to keep more of their marginal seats; or will hurt Tories by allowing UKIP to cling on to their 2 seats, and possibly get a few more like Thanet South (Farage), Castlepoint, Thurrock etc.

I think that in fairness, Leanne Wood actually had a very difficult tightrope to walk this evening . If you bear in mind that (a) she is totally unknown outside Wales and (b) the electorate and media outside Wales really couldn't give a shit about Welsh politics, then the only logical strategy was for her to focus on her core audience in Wales - and risk being called parochial - which, interestingly, is never a charge levelled at UKIP or even the Conservatives with their overt 'Britishness'.

I do sympathise with the difficulties that the political parties in Wales have with engaging with the electorate. I thought I'd listen to the ITV Wales news immediately after the show to get their vox pop reactions...and was met with ITV from across the border !

I live 100m from ITV Wales studios in the Bay (admittedly they don't actually broadcast from there) but nevertheless, in the capital city of Wales, it is a shocker that , even though I was interested in getting a Welsh perspective on politics on ITV (which I never usually watch) , I still couldn't ( without retuning the TV ).

I think that Plaid might initially gain around 5% in the Wales wide polls actually, but whether that will last and whether it will lead to any more seats under the first past the post system I'm not so sure. I'm just guessing though. I increasingly feel like an outsider these days

The Libs and Lab also were overtly "British" in that sense.

And this is an election for the UK parliament, so In that sense being focused on Britain as a whole is not "parochial". What Sturgeon did well was push the buttons to appeal to Scotland (and avoid the tricky topic of full fiscal autonomy), while at the same time say to the rest of the UK "look, don't be scared of us, we think we can be a force for a good for the UK as a whole". Now I'm not saying I buy it, but I think it will go down well with Scots and leftish Labour supporters. In effect she made it easier for some form of deal with Labour.

I agree the calculus for Leanne Wood was different. But she wouldn't have had to change much of what she said in order to mimic that. Just mention a couple of times about working for more progressive government across the UK. As with Sturgeon that's somewhat meaningless waffle. But it would have made her seem more relevant to a UK-wide political debate. And I think that is where Wales differs from Scotland - that UK wide stuff is still much more important in Wales, so I think this will cost her.

Why do you think Plaid will gain? I can't see a "publicity" bounce. Because I don't think its a recognition thing. I think if she had performed well, there could have been a bounce a la Clegg 2010. But she didn't. She performed poorly. I don't think she really scored any major points. And I think her £1.2 billion number may actually seem unrealistic and make people think they aren't "serious".

I really don't think that Leanne Wood had anything to gain by talking in a more UK wide context. I suspect that doing so could actually have made her seem less relevant to her intended audience - Labour voters in Wales.

Whilst I think that she had a bit of a tightrope to walk, the person who REALLY had the most difficult balancing act ahead of him was Ed Miliband. He virtually can't say anything ' left - leaning' for fear of getting smeared Red Ed.

I think Leanne Wood might gain a few percentage points (ok maybe 5% is a bit too much!) mainly because she managed to come across as much more anti austerity and leftish than Ed could get away with. I think this kind of talk might resonate with the folk she was aiming at. It does of course really depend on how many of her intended audience actually bothered to watch the debate as opposed to Masterchef etc.

Our only serious newspaper in Wales gave Leanne Wood a score of 8/10 for her performance, which probably says more about the standard of journalism here than anything. As much as I can't stand Sturgeon or Salmond, both are canny operators in fairness. Labour are going to get destroyed north of the border, electing Blairite Jim Murphy didn't help their cause either.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/news- ... es-8975244

Nicola Sturgeon could well have 50 MPs in the next parliament and will probably be involved in putting together the next UK government, so her job last night was completely different to Leanne's, who quite rightly focused completely on the Welsh electorate. If Leanne hadn't been in the debate last night the only mention Wales would have got would have been Cameron's now ritual slander against the Welsh NHS.

The Plaid manifesto in 2010 was criticised for focusing on UK-wide measures like pensions, which people quite rightly pointed out could never be implemented. The current manifesto concentrates on Wales and gets crticised for being parochial by people like Dai, who with the best will in the world is never, ever going to vote Plaid anyway.

Last night's performance by Leanne will go down well with wavering Labour voters in the Valleys, which is precisely the target audiience we are aiming for.

The WM review is dreadful - there is no way, even in a Welsh context, Leanne Wood did best. Is the WM showing some colours here? It surely knows that the vast majority of people didn't watch, and the news clips and reported polls and verdicts probably have more impact.

I don't think Plaid should have focused on UK-wide measures. That isn't what I am saying. But by not mentioning how she felt Plaid would influence the UK-wide policy decisions more generally to make it "more progressive", I think she made her self seem less relevant for a UK parliament election. I don't think people in the Valleys would have thought "oh no she mentioned those Saes over Offers Dyke.. she doesn't care about us". She could have kept her discussion of people in the valleys and said "these problems are also affecting former industrial communities in the rest of the UK too. It's time we had a progressive government, for Wales, and for the whole UK, and that's what Plaid will fight for". It makes her seem more influential. Because at the moment, Plaid's challenge is to seem relevant to this election. To break out of the "I'll vote Plaid for Assembly but Labour for Westminster" trap, which the SNP has so successfully smashed through in the post referendum period.

Now maybe I'm wrong. Maybe by focusing so narrowly on Wales, and issues which can only be dealt with in the Welsh Assembly, she'll win votes by getting poor confused saps to vote for her party at Westminster. Despite MPs having no power to vote on those issues. In that case I pity the saps, and consider such campaigning rather cynical and disingenuous.

I also think the £1.2 billion number will go down pretty poorly. People in Wales tend to feel Scotland gets "too much" - so asking for the same might just seem unrealistic at a time when we still have a £75bn deficit. It might make Plaid look like they aren't really serious or professional.

My expectation is that UKIP will get the biggest % boost in Wales. No chance of winning any seats of course, but could they cause upsets in places like South Pembs, or Aberconwy or Clwyd West by hitting Tories (taking lots of English incomers votes) and therefore helping Labour win a couple more seats?

Dai

Can you explain why it's mot an issue of low demand but low productivity growth? I'm well aware of the productivity puzzle, but my point was that the Welsh economy can only grow if we have an increase demand for what we produce. Whether we increase productivity to meet that demand is another point altogether. The UK economy has sufficient slack in it to meet any increase in productivity required. if thats the case then the Welsh economy at 75% is GVA must have lots of potential to increase productivity.