But would the outcome have been different with AV?

When voting in the PB Poster of the Year election closed at bang on 5am Plato had just one more vote than Antifrank and I declare her the winner. The final vote which enabled her to nose ahead was cast at 4.57am.

Well down to her and all the others who took part. Thanks also to those who voted.

Plato is our first female Poster of the Year and is one of a number of women who in the past couple of years have become regular contributors. It used to be the case that almost all those who posted comments were men.

This is the second year in succession that that election has gone down to just one vote. Twelve months ago Richard Nabavi just squeezed ahead of Yellow Submarine by a similar margin.

But would the election have been any different if it had been held under AV? Who knows - but without taking anything away from Plato I am supporting a move by Rod Crosby to run an experimental unofficial POTY election using the Alternative Vote system.

Check out the voting form here - it’s quite a good guide to the proposed new electoral system that will be voted upon in the UK referendum later in the year.

Whatever the outcome it will take nothing away from Plato’s achievement.

Mike Smithson

Why are punters moving away from Labour?

As one or two people reported on the previous thread there’s been a lot of movement this evening on the Old & Sad market on the Betfair betting exchange.

The above screen shot was taken at 2148 and shows that the last price traded on Labour was 0.58/1. A week ago it was at 0.18/1.

At the same time the price on the Lib Dems has moved in sharply.

The question is whether this is based on some information. Who knows? But a number of people seem ready to be ready to bet against Labour tonight.

Mike Smithson

Your chance to vote

As was announced on the previous thread voting in the first round was suspended before the end time because of attempts to multi-vote. the the top five are those who were leading when the voting was stopped and I am satisfied that their totals were legitimate.

Voting will continue overnight until I close the poll at about 5am tomorrow morning.

Best of luck to all five - all of who have made exceptional contributions to PB during the past year.

Mike Smithson

What happened to Osborne’s Fair Fuel Stabiliser?

Two years ago, George Osborne launched a consultation on reform of Fuel Duty, with the aims of mitigating petrol prices when the they were high, keeping government revenue roughly neutral and providing greater certainty for motorists, business and government alike. We’ve not heard much of it since.

That’s a shame because motorists are currently being hit by a triple whammy that’s pushed petrol up to record levels and will increase it still further. The crude oil price rose to its highest level in over two years last week, including an increase of more than $20 a barrel in the last four months alone; fuel duty rose on New Year’s Day by the equivalent of 1p/litre after VAT, in line with Labour’s pre-election announcement which this government maintained; and VAT itself will increase on 4 January by 2.5%. In addition, sterling has drifted down in the last two months making oil - priced in dollars - even more expensive.

This is a particular problem for the Conservatives because rather like the Lib Dems and tuition fees, it’s an issue on which they’ve campaigned one way in opposition and appear to be going another way in government.

Even if the precise mechanics of a negative-tax stabiliser were too difficult to work through, the edge could be taken off high prices and volatility if VAT on petrol and diesel were reduced to the lower rate of 5% and the difference made up in duty.

Politically, petrol is a particularly volatile consumable. It’s not just that it’s an essential for so many people, it’s that it’s one of the few items whose exact price most people know. Any change in that price is therefore very visible - literally, as it’s advertised on main roads all over the country.

So an increase of 4p/litre, at the same time as other prices are going up due to the VAT rise, could be quite a major driver of opinion, especially if there are more increases in the pipeline should oil continue to rise. No doubt Osborne, now he is in the Treasury, appreciates the revenue all this brings in and perhaps that’s been a factor in his thinking not to cancel the scheduled increase.

The next scheduled increase is on April 1: a somewhat inauspicious day. With the budget due to take place before then is before then Osborne would do well to revisit the principle behind his Fuel Stabiliser. After all, it’s always better to be seen to lead the change than to be forced into it.

David Herdson