FWIW my answer to the question in the headline is: No. I make it 95% chance he will not be a Tory MP again, an 85% chance he will resign.
Someone who is prepared to watch porn whilst chairing a Select Committee clearly has a higher level of "Fuck your norms" than most, so I think your 85% is off.
And I say this as someone who has met the guy several times and found him to be a delightful, engaging chap. Obviously I must have risen above the tedium threshold where he got his phone out....
All very weird.
I suspect he has an addiction and needs help. He should not remain as an MP though while he is getting that help.
“I’m not a grotesque perve who doesn’t give a f*** about basic decency and maintaining standards in our seat of democracy! No! I’m an addict, a victim that needs help.”
Please. This guy should already have had his access pass revoked and a bi election called.
I don't disagree. My point is he can appear to @MarqueeMark to be "a delightful, engaging chap" but have a porn habit at the same time.
The HoC needs rules of behaviour at work that match the sort of standards any large company would have. Then he could be dismissed as an MP and his constituents can choose a new MP.
I'm not a fan of the idea of general recall powers, I think that is too easily abused by partisans. So recall after sanction seems appropriate to me and so the question is if the balance is right on what triggers a recall.
Not too sure the LibDems have that great a chance in any by-election. Of course it is possible, but they are extravagantly weak here having dropped out of the top two since 2010. Most of the councillors are gone, there is now no activity to speak of, you never see LibDem comment in the local media.
T and H and its forerunners have been Tory for 100 years, and the LibDems no longer have anything in common with the kind of traditional Liberals who supported them in places like this.
They may be 3rd now and a long way behind, but they have been under 2000 votes in the past. I think their by election team would walk it provided Labour don't put up a fight.
They don't have any local figure of any kind of stature at all to build a focus on. Any outsider will cost a sackload of potential votes. I couldn't even begin to guess who they would get to do it. I suppose Boris could gaffe them some help.
You underestimate the LD by election m/c. It is entirely dependent upon Lab only putting up a paper candidate from 2nd place.
I'm very familiar with the LD by election machine and also very familiar with the state of the LDs both activity and support wise in Tiverton and Honiton. Like I said it is not impossible in the right circumstances but it is the toughest ask imaginable.
I don't think they would be wise to go with the candidates for 2015,17 or 19 and the second placed 2010 candidate is certainly not available.
In fairness you clearly have more local knowledge.
In fairness sometime insiders are blinded to what is obvious to an outsider!
Sometimes it is difficult to understand the meaning of what is written, unlike face to face . I assume you are local and I am not so I am deferring to your local knowledge. I can't tell if your reply is a kind self deprecating post or whether you think I am a deluded local (I might be deluded but not local)
I think the latter, so nice post.
How should I have read your reply?
@JonWC Oh for goodness sake I am hopeless this morning. I meant 'I think the former not latter'. I turned a complement to you into an insult. Sorry.
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
FWIW my answer to the question in the headline is: No. I make it 95% chance he will not be a Tory MP again, an 85% chance he will resign.
Someone who is prepared to watch porn whilst chairing a Select Committee clearly has a higher level of "Fuck your norms" than most, so I think your 85% is off.
And I say this as someone who has met the guy several times and found him to be a delightful, engaging chap. Obviously I must have risen above the tedium threshold where he got his phone out....
All very weird.
I suspect he has an addiction and needs help. He should not remain as an MP though while he is getting that help.
It's not an "addiction". There are plenty of real ones. Alcohol, smoking, shooting heroin. Plenty manage to hold down a job with those. However, they know when and where is appropriate, and understand there are consequences if they don't. 30 a day isn't an excuse for lighting up wherever and whenever you like. It's something else. But addiction is just a cop out denying agency.
FWIW my answer to the question in the headline is: No. I make it 95% chance he will not be a Tory MP again, an 85% chance he will resign.
Someone who is prepared to watch porn whilst chairing a Select Committee clearly has a higher level of "Fuck your norms" than most, so I think your 85% is off.
And I say this as someone who has met the guy several times and found him to be a delightful, engaging chap. Obviously I must have risen above the tedium threshold where he got his phone out....
All very weird.
Or he fancied you Mark.
I watched his interview on the news. Inclined to believe Mr Mark. Delightful chap, but quite capable of doing something daft.
Has he confessed to/admitted to watching porn while Chairing a Committee, though? If he has, of course, that is not only stupid but extremely rude. To all concerned.
I'm struggling to make sense of JRM and his supporters on here.
If not doing checks on imports from the EU is a 'benefit of Brexit', then why on earth have we spent the last five years planning to do such checks? We've now missed several deadlines for implementing such checks, and have spent millions (or billions - I don't know?) of pounds investing in the infrastructure needed to carry out such checks. And now we've abandoned it and wasted that money. Doesn't smell right to me.
Have the checks been abandoned or just postponed again?
As to why we're spending money preparing for them... If we don't spend money preparing for them, it becomes obvious that they will never happen. And whilst some voted Leave to reduce border checks, others voted to strengthen them. JRM may well be happy if they never come in, but the NFU won't be.
There were a lot of bait and switch moves on both sides in 2016. The most obvious was the EEA types who have been royally shafted. The shakeout of those is ongoing, and it's unlikely to be pretty.
Not too sure the LibDems have that great a chance in any by-election. Of course it is possible, but they are extravagantly weak here having dropped out of the top two since 2010. Most of the councillors are gone, there is now no activity to speak of, you never see LibDem comment in the local media.
T and H and its forerunners have been Tory for 100 years, and the LibDems no longer have anything in common with the kind of traditional Liberals who supported them in places like this.
They may be 3rd now and a long way behind, but they have been under 2000 votes in the past. I think their by election team would walk it provided Labour don't put up a fight.
They don't have any local figure of any kind of stature at all to build a focus on. Any outsider will cost a sackload of potential votes. I couldn't even begin to guess who they would get to do it. I suppose Boris could gaffe them some help.
You underestimate the LD by election m/c. It is entirely dependent upon Lab only putting up a paper candidate from 2nd place.
I'm very familiar with the LD by election machine and also very familiar with the state of the LDs both activity and support wise in Tiverton and Honiton. Like I said it is not impossible in the right circumstances but it is the toughest ask imaginable.
I don't think they would be wise to go with the candidates for 2015,17 or 19 and the second placed 2010 candidate is certainly not available.
In fairness you clearly have more local knowledge.
In fairness sometime insiders are blinded to what is obvious to an outsider!
Sometimes it is difficult to understand the meaning of what is written, unlike face to face . I assume you are local and I am not so I am deferring to your local knowledge. I can't tell if your reply is a kind self deprecating post or whether you think I am a deluded local (I might be deluded but not local)
I think the latter, so nice post.
How should I have read your reply?
@JonWC Oh for goodness sake I am hopeless this morning. I meant 'I think the former not latter'. I turned a complement to you into an insult. Sorry.
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
FWIW my answer to the question in the headline is: No. I make it 95% chance he will not be a Tory MP again, an 85% chance he will resign.
Someone who is prepared to watch porn whilst chairing a Select Committee clearly has a higher level of "Fuck your norms" than most, so I think your 85% is off.
And I say this as someone who has met the guy several times and found him to be a delightful, engaging chap. Obviously I must have risen above the tedium threshold where he got his phone out....
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
You are trolling us former Remainers this early in the morning?
Anyway, a great parody post.
Bart always provides a chuckle, always makes me think of someone sitting in the corner with a pointy hat with a big D on it. He is a real Tory.
Not too sure the LibDems have that great a chance in any by-election. Of course it is possible, but they are extravagantly weak here having dropped out of the top two since 2010. Most of the councillors are gone, there is now no activity to speak of, you never see LibDem comment in the local media.
T and H and its forerunners have been Tory for 100 years, and the LibDems no longer have anything in common with the kind of traditional Liberals who supported them in places like this.
They may be 3rd now and a long way behind, but they have been under 2000 votes in the past. I think their by election team would walk it provided Labour don't put up a fight.
They don't have any local figure of any kind of stature at all to build a focus on. Any outsider will cost a sackload of potential votes. I couldn't even begin to guess who they would get to do it. I suppose Boris could gaffe them some help.
You underestimate the LD by election m/c. It is entirely dependent upon Lab only putting up a paper candidate from 2nd place.
I'm very familiar with the LD by election machine and also very familiar with the state of the LDs both activity and support wise in Tiverton and Honiton. Like I said it is not impossible in the right circumstances but it is the toughest ask imaginable.
I don't think they would be wise to go with the candidates for 2015,17 or 19 and the second placed 2010 candidate is certainly not available.
In fairness you clearly have more local knowledge.
In fairness sometime insiders are blinded to what is obvious to an outsider!
Sometimes it is difficult to understand the meaning of what is written, unlike face to face . I assume you are local and I am not so I am deferring to your local knowledge. I can't tell if your reply is a kind self deprecating post or whether you think I am a deluded local (I might be deluded but not local)
I think the latter, so nice post.
How should I have read your reply?
@JonWC Oh for goodness sake I am hopeless this morning. I meant 'I think the former not latter'. I turned a complement to you into an insult. Sorry.
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
It's a lovely day - go for a long walk!
I've got broken legs! Did I mention it?
Actually just a few more weeks to go and I am released.
Not too sure the LibDems have that great a chance in any by-election. Of course it is possible, but they are extravagantly weak here having dropped out of the top two since 2010. Most of the councillors are gone, there is now no activity to speak of, you never see LibDem comment in the local media.
T and H and its forerunners have been Tory for 100 years, and the LibDems no longer have anything in common with the kind of traditional Liberals who supported them in places like this.
They may be 3rd now and a long way behind, but they have been under 2000 votes in the past. I think their by election team would walk it provided Labour don't put up a fight.
They don't have any local figure of any kind of stature at all to build a focus on. Any outsider will cost a sackload of potential votes. I couldn't even begin to guess who they would get to do it. I suppose Boris could gaffe them some help.
You underestimate the LD by election m/c. It is entirely dependent upon Lab only putting up a paper candidate from 2nd place.
I'm very familiar with the LD by election machine and also very familiar with the state of the LDs both activity and support wise in Tiverton and Honiton. Like I said it is not impossible in the right circumstances but it is the toughest ask imaginable.
I don't think they would be wise to go with the candidates for 2015,17 or 19 and the second placed 2010 candidate is certainly not available.
In fairness you clearly have more local knowledge.
In fairness sometime insiders are blinded to what is obvious to an outsider!
Sometimes it is difficult to understand the meaning of what is written, unlike face to face . I assume you are local and I am not so I am deferring to your local knowledge. I can't tell if your reply is a kind self deprecating post or whether you think I am a deluded local (I might be deluded but not local)
I think the latter, so nice post.
How should I have read your reply?
@JonWC Oh for goodness sake I am hopeless this morning. I meant 'I think the former not latter'. I turned a complement to you into an insult. Sorry.
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
It's a lovely day - go for a long walk!
I've got broken legs! Did I mention it?
Actually just a few more weeks to go and I am released.
Trust you're still progressing well. Can you get yourself, or be got, outside? Nothing like a bit of fresh air.
I see Sunak has missed his pledge for his £150 council tax rebate wheeze to happen in April.
Why oh why not just subtract it from the bill? This Tory government just adores complex red tape.
Bewcause it has to be in a gift-wrapped package saying "Present from Mr Sunak" on it.
It is, of course, your money anyway ...
Bit odd for a Brexiter, given that his ilk was always complaining the EU regional development funding was "really" our own money in mthe context of seeing placards for such things as the Mallaig road doubling scheme.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
Isn't the point that we can't really 'choose' otherwise, since to do so would be an "act of self harm".
Hobson's choice is the definition of no choice.
Well we accepted those standards as safe for almost 50 years because we were members of the EEC/EU. I would agree that in the wider picture that was indeed an act of gross self harm but not, I suspect, in the way you are trying to convey.
We influenced and accepted them... is what I think you meant to say.
Actually in many instances - such as animal welfare - we failed to influence them as our standards remained much higher than those in the rest of the EU and we were unable to drag them up to our standards.
Now as it happens I disagree with JRM and BR on this and think we should be imposing the checks. Indeed I think we should be insisting on higher standards than have hitherto existed during our membership of the EU particularly in areas such as animal welfare. But the idea that we are exposing ourselves to any more harm by not imposing checks than we were exposed to when we were members - and had no checks - is simply wrong and logically incoherent.
You're, er, forgetting what happens next, if no checks are brought in. Other non-EU countries will want the same treatment (or lack of it) under WTO.
FWIW my answer to the question in the headline is: No. I make it 95% chance he will not be a Tory MP again, an 85% chance he will resign.
Someone who is prepared to watch porn whilst chairing a Select Committee clearly has a higher level of "Fuck your norms" than most, so I think your 85% is off.
And I say this as someone who has met the guy several times and found him to be a delightful, engaging chap. Obviously I must have risen above the tedium threshold where he got his phone out....
All very weird.
I suspect he has an addiction and needs help. He should not remain as an MP though while he is getting that help.
“I’m not a grotesque perve who doesn’t give a f*** about basic decency and maintaining standards in our seat of democracy! No! I’m an addict, a victim that needs help.”
Please. This guy should already have had his access pass revoked and a bi election called.
Not too sure the LibDems have that great a chance in any by-election. Of course it is possible, but they are extravagantly weak here having dropped out of the top two since 2010. Most of the councillors are gone, there is now no activity to speak of, you never see LibDem comment in the local media.
T and H and its forerunners have been Tory for 100 years, and the LibDems no longer have anything in common with the kind of traditional Liberals who supported them in places like this.
They may be 3rd now and a long way behind, but they have been under 2000 votes in the past. I think their by election team would walk it provided Labour don't put up a fight.
They don't have any local figure of any kind of stature at all to build a focus on. Any outsider will cost a sackload of potential votes. I couldn't even begin to guess who they would get to do it. I suppose Boris could gaffe them some help.
You underestimate the LD by election m/c. It is entirely dependent upon Lab only putting up a paper candidate from 2nd place.
I'm very familiar with the LD by election machine and also very familiar with the state of the LDs both activity and support wise in Tiverton and Honiton. Like I said it is not impossible in the right circumstances but it is the toughest ask imaginable.
I don't think they would be wise to go with the candidates for 2015,17 or 19 and the second placed 2010 candidate is certainly not available.
In fairness you clearly have more local knowledge.
In fairness sometime insiders are blinded to what is obvious to an outsider!
Sometimes it is difficult to understand the meaning of what is written, unlike face to face . I assume you are local and I am not so I am deferring to your local knowledge. I can't tell if your reply is a kind self deprecating post or whether you think I am a deluded local (I might be deluded but not local)
I think the latter, so nice post.
How should I have read your reply?
@JonWC Oh for goodness sake I am hopeless this morning. I meant 'I think the former not latter'. I turned a complement to you into an insult. Sorry.
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
It's a lovely day - go for a long walk!
I've got broken legs! Did I mention it?
Actually just a few more weeks to go and I am released.
Just so you didn't feel the only one being insensitive.... 😉
FWIW my answer to the question in the headline is: No. I make it 95% chance he will not be a Tory MP again, an 85% chance he will resign.
Someone who is prepared to watch porn whilst chairing a Select Committee clearly has a higher level of "Fuck your norms" than most, so I think your 85% is off.
And I say this as someone who has met the guy several times and found him to be a delightful, engaging chap. Obviously I must have risen above the tedium threshold where he got his phone out....
All very weird.
I suspect he has an addiction and needs help. He should not remain as an MP though while he is getting that help.
“I’m not a grotesque perve who doesn’t give a f*** about basic decency and maintaining standards in our seat of democracy! No! I’m an addict, a victim that needs help.”
Please. This guy should already have had his access pass revoked and a bi election called.
Does this mean you can do the election on either FPTP or STV?
I see Sunak has missed his pledge for his £150 council tax rebate wheeze to happen in April.
Why oh why not just subtract it from the bill? This Tory government just adores complex red tape.
Bewcause it has to be in a gift-wrapped package saying "Present from Mr Sunak" on it.
It is, of course, your money anyway ...
Bit odd for a Brexiter, given that his ilk was always complaining the EU regional development funding was "really" our own money in mthe context of seeing placards for such things as the Mallaig road doubling scheme.
Just says "District Council payment +£150" on my statement.Admittedly I've only looked on my phone.
Not too sure the LibDems have that great a chance in any by-election. Of course it is possible, but they are extravagantly weak here having dropped out of the top two since 2010. Most of the councillors are gone, there is now no activity to speak of, you never see LibDem comment in the local media.
T and H and its forerunners have been Tory for 100 years, and the LibDems no longer have anything in common with the kind of traditional Liberals who supported them in places like this.
They may be 3rd now and a long way behind, but they have been under 2000 votes in the past. I think their by election team would walk it provided Labour don't put up a fight.
They don't have any local figure of any kind of stature at all to build a focus on. Any outsider will cost a sackload of potential votes. I couldn't even begin to guess who they would get to do it. I suppose Boris could gaffe them some help.
You underestimate the LD by election m/c. It is entirely dependent upon Lab only putting up a paper candidate from 2nd place.
I'm very familiar with the LD by election machine and also very familiar with the state of the LDs both activity and support wise in Tiverton and Honiton. Like I said it is not impossible in the right circumstances but it is the toughest ask imaginable.
I don't think they would be wise to go with the candidates for 2015,17 or 19 and the second placed 2010 candidate is certainly not available.
In fairness you clearly have more local knowledge.
In fairness sometime insiders are blinded to what is obvious to an outsider!
Sometimes it is difficult to understand the meaning of what is written, unlike face to face . I assume you are local and I am not so I am deferring to your local knowledge. I can't tell if your reply is a kind self deprecating post or whether you think I am a deluded local (I might be deluded but not local)
I think the latter, so nice post.
How should I have read your reply?
@JonWC Oh for goodness sake I am hopeless this morning. I meant 'I think the former not latter'. I turned a complement to you into an insult. Sorry.
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
It's a lovely day - go for a long walk!
I've got broken legs! Did I mention it?
Actually just a few more weeks to go and I am released.
Trust you're still progressing well. Can you get yourself, or be got, outside? Nothing like a bit of fresh air.
I am progressing very well thank you. I can get about pretty fast now. I hate crutches as they have a mind of their own. Can't carry a cup of tea or glass of wine so always have a flask and a bottle next to me. Cut out the beer as putting the boot on and off to go to the loo is a pain. I have been gardening. Sat on the compost heap filling a wheelbarrow which my wife takes to the rhubarb. I can now look after myself so my wife and the dog have deserted me and gone to our Southwold home. If she had stayed here my broken legs would have been the least of my concerns.
The surprise to me is Erdogan, when Turkey (despite previously fighting a proxy war with Russia) has played a relatively neutral role, not been a big weapons donor (though I think it has sold some), and held peace talks.
Not too sure the LibDems have that great a chance in any by-election. Of course it is possible, but they are extravagantly weak here having dropped out of the top two since 2010. Most of the councillors are gone, there is now no activity to speak of, you never see LibDem comment in the local media.
T and H and its forerunners have been Tory for 100 years, and the LibDems no longer have anything in common with the kind of traditional Liberals who supported them in places like this.
They may be 3rd now and a long way behind, but they have been under 2000 votes in the past. I think their by election team would walk it provided Labour don't put up a fight.
They don't have any local figure of any kind of stature at all to build a focus on. Any outsider will cost a sackload of potential votes. I couldn't even begin to guess who they would get to do it. I suppose Boris could gaffe them some help.
You underestimate the LD by election m/c. It is entirely dependent upon Lab only putting up a paper candidate from 2nd place.
I'm very familiar with the LD by election machine and also very familiar with the state of the LDs both activity and support wise in Tiverton and Honiton. Like I said it is not impossible in the right circumstances but it is the toughest ask imaginable.
I don't think they would be wise to go with the candidates for 2015,17 or 19 and the second placed 2010 candidate is certainly not available.
In fairness you clearly have more local knowledge.
In fairness sometime insiders are blinded to what is obvious to an outsider!
Sometimes it is difficult to understand the meaning of what is written, unlike face to face . I assume you are local and I am not so I am deferring to your local knowledge. I can't tell if your reply is a kind self deprecating post or whether you think I am a deluded local (I might be deluded but not local)
I think the latter, so nice post.
How should I have read your reply?
@JonWC Oh for goodness sake I am hopeless this morning. I meant 'I think the former not latter'. I turned a complement to you into an insult. Sorry.
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
It's a lovely day - go for a long walk!
I've got broken legs! Did I mention it?
Actually just a few more weeks to go and I am released.
Trust you're still progressing well. Can you get yourself, or be got, outside? Nothing like a bit of fresh air.
I am progressing very well thank you. I can get about pretty fast now. I hate crutches as they have a mind of their own. Can't carry a cup of tea or glass of wine so always have a flask and a bottle next to me. Cut out the beer as putting the boot on and off to go to the loo is a pain. I have been gardening. Sat on the compost heap filling a wheelbarrow which my wife takes to the rhubarb. I can now look after myself so my wife and the dog have deserted me and gone to our Southwold home. If she had stayed here my broken legs would have been the least of my concerns.
Good to read. If the weather in Southwold is anything it is here, about an hour away and to the SW, it's a lovely day there.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
Isn't the point that we can't really 'choose' otherwise, since to do so would be an "act of self harm".
Hobson's choice is the definition of no choice.
Well we accepted those standards as safe for almost 50 years because we were members of the EEC/EU. I would agree that in the wider picture that was indeed an act of gross self harm but not, I suspect, in the way you are trying to convey.
We influenced and accepted them... is what I think you meant to say.
Actually in many instances - such as animal welfare - we failed to influence them as our standards remained much higher than those in the rest of the EU and we were unable to drag them up to our standards.
Now as it happens I disagree with JRM and BR on this and think we should be imposing the checks. Indeed I think we should be insisting on higher standards than have hitherto existed during our membership of the EU particularly in areas such as animal welfare. But the idea that we are exposing ourselves to any more harm by not imposing checks than we were exposed to when we were members - and had no checks - is simply wrong and logically incoherent.
You're, er, forgetting what happens next, if no checks are brought in. Other non-EU countries will want the same treatment (or lack of it) under WTO.
Yes, that's right, as I understand it, and if we allow imports below EU standards for that reason, then the checks on our exports to the EU will be much less of a formality.
Also, it's unfortunately not quite true that our standards are much superior to the rest of the EU. They are superior to much of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, we ban sow stalls, many EU countries don't) and inferior to some of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, Holland bans non-stun slaughter and we don't).
By and large, they are much the same, and the non-ideological pragmatic approach is just to agree to maintain the same minimum standards (with the option to go beyond), in which case there is no need for any checks either way. But effectively that does leave agriculture inside the EU, and prevents us from deciding to reduce our standards below the EU level (unlikely but not impossible, e.g. for prophylactic antibiotic use).
The surprise to me is Erdogan, when Turkey (despite previously fighting a proxy war with Russia) has played a relatively neutral role, not been a big weapons donor (though I think it has sold some), and held peace talks.
Turkish drones, probably, even if it is not the Turkish government supplying them.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
Isn't the point that we can't really 'choose' otherwise, since to do so would be an "act of self harm".
Hobson's choice is the definition of no choice.
Well we accepted those standards as safe for almost 50 years because we were members of the EEC/EU. I would agree that in the wider picture that was indeed an act of gross self harm but not, I suspect, in the way you are trying to convey.
We influenced and accepted them... is what I think you meant to say.
Actually in many instances - such as animal welfare - we failed to influence them as our standards remained much higher than those in the rest of the EU and we were unable to drag them up to our standards.
Now as it happens I disagree with JRM and BR on this and think we should be imposing the checks. Indeed I think we should be insisting on higher standards than have hitherto existed during our membership of the EU particularly in areas such as animal welfare. But the idea that we are exposing ourselves to any more harm by not imposing checks than we were exposed to when we were members - and had no checks - is simply wrong and logically incoherent.
You're, er, forgetting what happens next, if no checks are brought in. Other non-EU countries will want the same treatment (or lack of it) under WTO.
Yes, that's right, as I understand it, and if we allow imports below EU standards for that reason, then the checks on our exports to the EU will be much less of a formality.
Also, it's unfortunately not quite true that our standards are much superior to the rest of the EU. They are superior to much of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, we ban sow stalls, many EU countries don't) and inferior to some of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, Holland bans non-stun slaughter and we don't).
By and large, they are much the same, and the non-ideological pragmatic approach is just to agree to maintain the same minimum standards (with the option to go beyond), in which case there is no need for any checks either way. But effectively that does leave agriculture inside the EU, and prevents us from deciding to reduce our standards below the EU level (unlikely but not impossible, e.g. for prophylactic antibiotic use).
Tories need to be careful they don’t let something in, foot and mouth or swine flu or something we are not even thinking of. Maybe lots of instances of scrapie won’t be a good look if you’ve messed up border control and necessary red tape.
Not too sure the LibDems have that great a chance in any by-election. Of course it is possible, but they are extravagantly weak here having dropped out of the top two since 2010. Most of the councillors are gone, there is now no activity to speak of, you never see LibDem comment in the local media.
T and H and its forerunners have been Tory for 100 years, and the LibDems no longer have anything in common with the kind of traditional Liberals who supported them in places like this.
They may be 3rd now and a long way behind, but they have been under 2000 votes in the past. I think their by election team would walk it provided Labour don't put up a fight.
They don't have any local figure of any kind of stature at all to build a focus on. Any outsider will cost a sackload of potential votes. I couldn't even begin to guess who they would get to do it. I suppose Boris could gaffe them some help.
You underestimate the LD by election m/c. It is entirely dependent upon Lab only putting up a paper candidate from 2nd place.
I'm very familiar with the LD by election machine and also very familiar with the state of the LDs both activity and support wise in Tiverton and Honiton. Like I said it is not impossible in the right circumstances but it is the toughest ask imaginable.
I don't think they would be wise to go with the candidates for 2015,17 or 19 and the second placed 2010 candidate is certainly not available.
In fairness you clearly have more local knowledge.
In fairness sometime insiders are blinded to what is obvious to an outsider!
Sometimes it is difficult to understand the meaning of what is written, unlike face to face . I assume you are local and I am not so I am deferring to your local knowledge. I can't tell if your reply is a kind self deprecating post or whether you think I am a deluded local (I might be deluded but not local)
I think the latter, so nice post.
How should I have read your reply?
@JonWC Oh for goodness sake I am hopeless this morning. I meant 'I think the former not latter'. I turned a complement to you into an insult. Sorry.
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
It's a lovely day - go for a long walk!
I've got broken legs! Did I mention it?
Actually just a few more weeks to go and I am released.
Trust you're still progressing well. Can you get yourself, or be got, outside? Nothing like a bit of fresh air.
I am progressing very well thank you. I can get about pretty fast now. I hate crutches as they have a mind of their own. Can't carry a cup of tea or glass of wine so always have a flask and a bottle next to me. Cut out the beer as putting the boot on and off to go to the loo is a pain. I have been gardening. Sat on the compost heap filling a wheelbarrow which my wife takes to the rhubarb. I can now look after myself so my wife and the dog have deserted me and gone to our Southwold home. If she had stayed here my broken legs would have been the least of my concerns.
Good to read. If the weather in Southwold is anything it is here, about an hour away and to the SW, it's a lovely day there.
Yes. She seems to be enjoying her time away from me.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
So do you agree that the Brexit Deal as negotiated is "an act of immense self harm" or is JRM as wrong as he usually is?
As far as I understand under the terms of the Brexit deal as negotiated we are entitled to do checks, but we aren't obliged to do them.
Choosing not to do checks, is simply a choice. Choosing to do them is also a choice. The deal is neither here nor there, unless the deal obligates us to do them but AFAIK it doesn't.
That was the whole point of Brexit - allowing us to make our own choices in the future and not be bound to choices made in the past or by others.
Our choice to be ****ing incompetent and letting all and sundry in, including serious animal and plant diseases?
Looser immigration in recent decades has (I believe) let tuberculosis back into the country after eliminating it - I must have missed your strongly worded protests about that, or is it just when Brexit is implicated that you go all Daddy bear on us?
I see Sunak has missed his pledge for his £150 council tax rebate wheeze to happen in April.
Why oh why not just subtract it from the bill? This Tory government just adores complex red tape.
Bewcause it has to be in a gift-wrapped package saying "Present from Mr Sunak" on it.
It is, of course, your money anyway ...
Bit odd for a Brexiter, given that his ilk was always complaining the EU regional development funding was "really" our own money in mthe context of seeing placards for such things as the Mallaig road doubling scheme.
Just says "District Council payment +£150" on my statement.Admittedly I've only looked on my phone.
No sign of my money. I gather some councils are saying they can't process it until the autumn.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
So do you agree that the Brexit Deal as negotiated is "an act of immense self harm" or is JRM as wrong as he usually is?
As far as I understand under the terms of the Brexit deal as negotiated we are entitled to do checks, but we aren't obliged to do them.
Choosing not to do checks, is simply a choice. Choosing to do them is also a choice. The deal is neither here nor there, unless the deal obligates us to do them but AFAIK it doesn't.
That was the whole point of Brexit - allowing us to make our own choices in the future and not be bound to choices made in the past or by others.
Our choice to be ****ing incompetent and letting all and sundry in, including serious animal and plant diseases?
Looser immigration in recent decades has (I believe) let tuberculosis back into the country after eliminating it - I must have missed your strongly worded protests about that, or is it just when Brexit is implicated that you go all Daddy bear on us?
When I was concerned with such things I don't think we thought unpleasant diseases were brought in by other Europeans.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
So do you agree that the Brexit Deal as negotiated is "an act of immense self harm" or is JRM as wrong as he usually is?
As far as I understand under the terms of the Brexit deal as negotiated we are entitled to do checks, but we aren't obliged to do them.
Choosing not to do checks, is simply a choice. Choosing to do them is also a choice. The deal is neither here nor there, unless the deal obligates us to do them but AFAIK it doesn't.
That was the whole point of Brexit - allowing us to make our own choices in the future and not be bound to choices made in the past or by others.
Our choice to be ****ing incompetent and letting all and sundry in, including serious animal and plant diseases?
Looser immigration in recent decades has (I believe) let tuberculosis back into the country after eliminating it - I must have missed your strongly worded protests about that, or is it just when Brexit is implicated that you go all Daddy bear on us?
Tuberculosis was never eliminated in this country, particularly in animals. What has happened is due to a relaxation of the vaccine programme in several counties during the 1990s it has become again much more prevalent in humans.
The surprise to me is Erdogan, when Turkey (despite previously fighting a proxy war with Russia) has played a relatively neutral role, not been a big weapons donor (though I think it has sold some), and held peace talks.
Turkish drones, probably, even if it is not the Turkish government supplying them.
I suspect so too, and very good they are. But the Turks are not plundering the vaults and writing blank cheques to arm the Ukrainians, or the Russians would never have partaken in the Turkish process.
It would be interesting to see Xi Jinping's rating.
I see Sunak has missed his pledge for his £150 council tax rebate wheeze to happen in April.
Why oh why not just subtract it from the bill? This Tory government just adores complex red tape.
Bewcause it has to be in a gift-wrapped package saying "Present from Mr Sunak" on it.
It is, of course, your money anyway ...
Bit odd for a Brexiter, given that his ilk was always complaining the EU regional development funding was "really" our own money in mthe context of seeing placards for such things as the Mallaig road doubling scheme.
Just says "District Council payment +£150" on my statement.Admittedly I've only looked on my phone.
No sign of my money. I gather some councils are saying they can't process it until the autumn.
My council paid it nearly a week ago.
It is a stupid, ridiculous, unhelpful and badly thought through policy, but criticising Sunak for some councils being unable to organise an orgy in a brothel is slightly unfair.
The surprise to me is Erdogan, when Turkey (despite previously fighting a proxy war with Russia) has played a relatively neutral role, not been a big weapons donor (though I think it has sold some), and held peace talks.
I can't speak to the military importance but the Turkish drones are legendary.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
So do you agree that the Brexit Deal as negotiated is "an act of immense self harm" or is JRM as wrong as he usually is?
As far as I understand under the terms of the Brexit deal as negotiated we are entitled to do checks, but we aren't obliged to do them.
Choosing not to do checks, is simply a choice. Choosing to do them is also a choice. The deal is neither here nor there, unless the deal obligates us to do them but AFAIK it doesn't.
That was the whole point of Brexit - allowing us to make our own choices in the future and not be bound to choices made in the past or by others.
Our choice to be ****ing incompetent and letting all and sundry in, including serious animal and plant diseases?
Looser immigration in recent decades has (I believe) let tuberculosis back into the country after eliminating it - I must have missed your strongly worded protests about that, or is it just when Brexit is implicated that you go all Daddy bear on us?
When I was concerned with such things I don't think we thought unpleasant diseases were brought in by other Europeans.
*Edited for rudeness!*
Perhaps they were not; that was not the implication of my comparison.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
So do you agree that the Brexit Deal as negotiated is "an act of immense self harm" or is JRM as wrong as he usually is?
As far as I understand under the terms of the Brexit deal as negotiated we are entitled to do checks, but we aren't obliged to do them.
Choosing not to do checks, is simply a choice. Choosing to do them is also a choice. The deal is neither here nor there, unless the deal obligates us to do them but AFAIK it doesn't.
That was the whole point of Brexit - allowing us to make our own choices in the future and not be bound to choices made in the past or by others.
Our choice to be ****ing incompetent and letting all and sundry in, including serious animal and plant diseases?
Looser immigration in recent decades has (I believe) let tuberculosis back into the country after eliminating it - I must have missed your strongly worded protests about that, or is it just when Brexit is implicated that you go all Daddy bear on us?
I am talking about goods and trade.
As far as humans are concerned, mcuh of the problem is the cuts to public health (partly in local government and national as well as NHS). There were and are in any case serious concerns about elements of the population which don't fit your model. Alcoholics, homeless, underfed poor, AIDS. From memory the problem started rising in the 1990s.
Edit: and as Ydoethur has pointed out, TB has always been present. I can remember the TB X-ray vans parked near my parents' house, and the huge needle used for the tuberculin test on schoolchildren.
I see Sunak has missed his pledge for his £150 council tax rebate wheeze to happen in April.
Why oh why not just subtract it from the bill? This Tory government just adores complex red tape.
Bewcause it has to be in a gift-wrapped package saying "Present from Mr Sunak" on it.
It is, of course, your money anyway ...
Bit odd for a Brexiter, given that his ilk was always complaining the EU regional development funding was "really" our own money in mthe context of seeing placards for such things as the Mallaig road doubling scheme.
Just says "District Council payment +£150" on my statement.Admittedly I've only looked on my phone.
No sign of my money. I gather some councils are saying they can't process it until the autumn.
OT the punter who sued Paddy Power has lost. The case was over whether the bet was for £1,300 each-way or ten times that.
The punter asked for £1,300 e/w but PP laid £13,000 e/w. The horse won and PP paid out, but later changed their minds and decided they'd meant to lay £1,300 as originally requested.
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
Isn't the point that we can't really 'choose' otherwise, since to do so would be an "act of self harm".
Hobson's choice is the definition of no choice.
Well we accepted those standards as safe for almost 50 years because we were members of the EEC/EU. I would agree that in the wider picture that was indeed an act of gross self harm but not, I suspect, in the way you are trying to convey.
We influenced and accepted them... is what I think you meant to say.
Actually in many instances - such as animal welfare - we failed to influence them as our standards remained much higher than those in the rest of the EU and we were unable to drag them up to our standards.
Now as it happens I disagree with JRM and BR on this and think we should be imposing the checks. Indeed I think we should be insisting on higher standards than have hitherto existed during our membership of the EU particularly in areas such as animal welfare. But the idea that we are exposing ourselves to any more harm by not imposing checks than we were exposed to when we were members - and had no checks - is simply wrong and logically incoherent.
You're, er, forgetting what happens next, if no checks are brought in. Other non-EU countries will want the same treatment (or lack of it) under WTO.
Yes, that's right, as I understand it, and if we allow imports below EU standards for that reason, then the checks on our exports to the EU will be much less of a formality.
Also, it's unfortunately not quite true that our standards are much superior to the rest of the EU. They are superior to much of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, we ban sow stalls, many EU countries don't) and inferior to some of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, Holland bans non-stun slaughter and we don't).
By and large, they are much the same, and the non-ideological pragmatic approach is just to agree to maintain the same minimum standards (with the option to go beyond), in which case there is no need for any checks either way. But effectively that does leave agriculture inside the EU, and prevents us from deciding to reduce our standards below the EU level (unlikely but not impossible, e.g. for prophylactic antibiotic use).
Tories need to be careful they don’t let something in, foot and mouth or swine flu or something we are not even thinking of. Maybe lots of instances of scrapie won’t be a good look if you’ve messed up border control and necessary red tape.
Indeed. No controls from EU = no controls from anywhere under WTO rules.
There was also a poll on whether Germany was doing too little, about right or too much to help Ukraine. Only a smallish number thought "too much" (about 15% IIRC), but there was an even split beteween "about right" and "too little".
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
Isn't the point that we can't really 'choose' otherwise, since to do so would be an "act of self harm".
Hobson's choice is the definition of no choice.
Well we accepted those standards as safe for almost 50 years because we were members of the EEC/EU. I would agree that in the wider picture that was indeed an act of gross self harm but not, I suspect, in the way you are trying to convey.
We influenced and accepted them... is what I think you meant to say.
Actually in many instances - such as animal welfare - we failed to influence them as our standards remained much higher than those in the rest of the EU and we were unable to drag them up to our standards.
Now as it happens I disagree with JRM and BR on this and think we should be imposing the checks. Indeed I think we should be insisting on higher standards than have hitherto existed during our membership of the EU particularly in areas such as animal welfare. But the idea that we are exposing ourselves to any more harm by not imposing checks than we were exposed to when we were members - and had no checks - is simply wrong and logically incoherent.
You're, er, forgetting what happens next, if no checks are brought in. Other non-EU countries will want the same treatment (or lack of it) under WTO.
Yes, that's right, as I understand it, and if we allow imports below EU standards for that reason, then the checks on our exports to the EU will be much less of a formality.
Also, it's unfortunately not quite true that our standards are much superior to the rest of the EU. They are superior to much of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, we ban sow stalls, many EU countries don't) and inferior to some of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, Holland bans non-stun slaughter and we don't).
By and large, they are much the same, and the non-ideological pragmatic approach is just to agree to maintain the same minimum standards (with the option to go beyond), in which case there is no need for any checks either way. But effectively that does leave agriculture inside the EU, and prevents us from deciding to reduce our standards below the EU level (unlikely but not impossible, e.g. for prophylactic antibiotic use).
Tories need to be careful they don’t let something in, foot and mouth or swine flu or something we are not even thinking of. Maybe lots of instances of scrapie won’t be a good look if you’ve messed up border control and necessary red tape.
Indeed. No controls from EU = no controls from anywhere under WTO rules.
The full footage (including the aftermath) of the grenade through the sunroof is on reddit. Don't watch it while you're having your Coco Pops if you're of a delicate disposition.
Those Russian chachs had no weapons, no body armour and had looted the worst car in Urkaine (Vaz 2101, DA knows). I reckon they were deserters tatting abandoned houses.
The surprise to me is Erdogan, when Turkey (despite previously fighting a proxy war with Russia) has played a relatively neutral role, not been a big weapons donor (though I think it has sold some), and held peace talks.
Turkish drones, probably, even if it is not the Turkish government supplying them.
I suspect so too, and very good they are. But the Turks are not plundering the vaults and writing blank cheques to arm the Ukrainians, or the Russians would never have partaken in the Turkish process.
It would be interesting to see Xi Jinping's rating.
Aiui these are people's ratings in an ordinary opinion poll, not government ministers', so Turkish drones can be credited to the Turkish big cheese.
He has a long and pretty poor history of 'giving other viewpoints' that always seem to favour whatever Russia says.
In the case of the MH17 shootdown it got quite funny: he would parrot whatever line the Russian government were giving out, however much it contradicted what he had been saying the previous day. He still won't answer the question on whether he believes the Dutch report into the shootdown is correct.
I don't particularly think he's a Russian plant, but he certainly is a useful idiot to them. (*)
(*) To be fair, we can all fall into the 'useful idiot' trap on various topics.
The full footage (including the aftermath) of the grenade through the sunroof is on reddit. Don't watch it while you're having your Coco Pops if you're of a delicate disposition.
Those Russian chachs had no weapons, no body armour and had looted the worst car in Urkaine (Vaz 2101, DA knows). I reckon they were deserters tatting abandoned houses.
OT the punter who sued Paddy Power has lost. The case was over whether the bet was for £1,300 each-way or ten times that.
The punter asked for £1,300 e/w but PP laid £13,000 e/w. The horse won and PP paid out, but later changed their minds and decided they'd meant to lay £1,300 as originally requested.
James argued an 'error' clause relied upon by the bookmaker was unfair. He noted that Paddy Power had been able to lay off part of the bet, recovering £17,000, and could in theory have laid off the entire sum.
"They can lay off their bets, make a profit on the deal, and then tell the bettor, 'We're keeping our winnings but you can't have yours'."
If that’s true, then the £13,000 bet should have stood.
I know these scumbag bookies have the politicians in their pockets. I didn’t realise the judiciary were in there too.
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
It's interesting how consistent the DUP vote has been at 20% across all polls for a while which is why I struggle to see them avoiding losing at least 4 seats and remaining the largest party. This is actually a worse poll for unionism than the lucidtalk one as the DUP+UUP+TUV vote is only 36% here compared with 43% for lucidtalk (and most TUV voters will transfer to DUP anyway).
I think the SDLP would be very happy with this poll if it actually materialised and they might even hang on in Lagan Valley at the expense of the UUP even at the same time as Alliance getting 2 seats and make surprise gains elsewhere like in Strangford.
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which is a joke newspaper by any standards
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
You are trolling us former Remainers this early in the morning?
Anyway, a great parody post.
Bart always provides a chuckle, always makes me think of someone sitting in the corner with a pointy hat with a big D on it. He is a real Tory.
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Naughty and no, I consider the Express as a joke paper
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which it is joke newspaper by any standards
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
Isn't the point that we can't really 'choose' otherwise, since to do so would be an "act of self harm".
Hobson's choice is the definition of no choice.
Well we accepted those standards as safe for almost 50 years because we were members of the EEC/EU. I would agree that in the wider picture that was indeed an act of gross self harm but not, I suspect, in the way you are trying to convey.
We influenced and accepted them... is what I think you meant to say.
Actually in many instances - such as animal welfare - we failed to influence them as our standards remained much higher than those in the rest of the EU and we were unable to drag them up to our standards.
Now as it happens I disagree with JRM and BR on this and think we should be imposing the checks. Indeed I think we should be insisting on higher standards than have hitherto existed during our membership of the EU particularly in areas such as animal welfare. But the idea that we are exposing ourselves to any more harm by not imposing checks than we were exposed to when we were members - and had no checks - is simply wrong and logically incoherent.
You're, er, forgetting what happens next, if no checks are brought in. Other non-EU countries will want the same treatment (or lack of it) under WTO.
Yes, that's right, as I understand it, and if we allow imports below EU standards for that reason, then the checks on our exports to the EU will be much less of a formality.
Also, it's unfortunately not quite true that our standards are much superior to the rest of the EU. They are superior to much of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, we ban sow stalls, many EU countries don't) and inferior to some of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, Holland bans non-stun slaughter and we don't).
By and large, they are much the same, and the non-ideological pragmatic approach is just to agree to maintain the same minimum standards (with the option to go beyond), in which case there is no need for any checks either way. But effectively that does leave agriculture inside the EU, and prevents us from deciding to reduce our standards below the EU level (unlikely but not impossible, e.g. for prophylactic antibiotic use).
Tories need to be careful they don’t let something in, foot and mouth or swine flu or something we are not even thinking of. Maybe lots of instances of scrapie won’t be a good look if you’ve messed up border control and necessary red tape.
Indeed. No controls from EU = no controls from anywhere under WTO rules.
And some of the galaxy brains in the government would be just fine with that- it's just one of those things that can never be said explicitly.
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which it is joke newspaper by any standards
Weird way to talk about your employer
I have no connection with the Express, do not read it not least because it publishes rubbish on most every subject
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which it is joke newspaper by any standards
Weird way to talk about your employer
I have no connection with the Express, do not read it not least because it publishes rubbish on most every subject
I am sure that's what they teach you in the employee training
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which it is joke newspaper by any standards
Weird way to talk about your employer
I have no connection with the Express, do not read it not least because it publishes rubbish on most every subject
I am sure that's what they teach you in the employee training
It's interesting how consistent the DUP vote has been at 20% across all polls for a while which is why I struggle to see them avoiding losing at least 4 seats and remaining the largest party. This is actually a worse poll for unionism than the lucidtalk one as the DUP+UUP+TUV vote is only 36% here compared with 43% for lucidtalk (and most TUV voters will transfer to DUP anyway).
I think the SDLP would be very happy with this poll if it actually materialised and they might even hang on in Lagan Valley at the expense of the UUP even at the same time as Alliance getting 2 seats and make surprise gains elsewhere like in Strangford.
So if there are three unionists parties competing for votes, does the voting system allow them to gift crucial seats to the Nationalist leaning parties?
Could TUV voters end up regretting not backing DUP?
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which it is joke newspaper by any standards
Weird way to talk about your employer
I have no connection with the Express, do not read it not least because it publishes rubbish on most every subject
I am sure that's what they teach you in the employee training
You really need to grow up
Was sense of humour not invented when you were born?
…grasp the full meaning of Rees-Mogg’s admission. He and his fellow Brexiters once looked forward to these border checks, seeing them not merely as a price worth paying for leaving the EU but as a genuine benefit. Britain would at last be free to set its own food standards, superior to the EU’s. And yet now the minister admits that putting up barriers just makes food more expensive for British consumers and risks bankrupting British farmers: precisely the act of self-harm remainers always said it would be. The irony of hearing Rees-Mogg declare that “free trade is hugely advantageous to consumers” after he and his comrades pulled us out of the largest, most successful free trade bloc in the world – the European single market – would be funny if it weren’t so bitter.
Not really.
We can choose to recognise EU standards as safe if we choose to do so, without spending a billion pounds a month to join the EU's club.
Cake and eat it, if you like.
Isn't the point that we can't really 'choose' otherwise, since to do so would be an "act of self harm".
Hobson's choice is the definition of no choice.
Well we accepted those standards as safe for almost 50 years because we were members of the EEC/EU. I would agree that in the wider picture that was indeed an act of gross self harm but not, I suspect, in the way you are trying to convey.
We influenced and accepted them... is what I think you meant to say.
Actually in many instances - such as animal welfare - we failed to influence them as our standards remained much higher than those in the rest of the EU and we were unable to drag them up to our standards.
Now as it happens I disagree with JRM and BR on this and think we should be imposing the checks. Indeed I think we should be insisting on higher standards than have hitherto existed during our membership of the EU particularly in areas such as animal welfare. But the idea that we are exposing ourselves to any more harm by not imposing checks than we were exposed to when we were members - and had no checks - is simply wrong and logically incoherent.
You're, er, forgetting what happens next, if no checks are brought in. Other non-EU countries will want the same treatment (or lack of it) under WTO.
I am forgetting nothing. I have already said in the post you replied to that I think both JRM and Bartholomew are wrong. I want the checks and I want them to be tighter than they were under the EU rules. My point is that claiming we are now less safe than we were when we were in the EU is patently false.
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which it is joke newspaper by any standards
Weird way to talk about your employer
I have no connection with the Express, do not read it not least because it publishes rubbish on most every subject
I am sure that's what they teach you in the employee training
You really need to grow up
Was sense of humour not invented when you were born?
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which it is joke newspaper by any standards
Weird way to talk about your employer
I have no connection with the Express, do not read it not least because it publishes rubbish on most every subject
I am sure that's what they teach you in the employee training
You really need to grow up
Was sense of humour not invented when you were born?
OT the punter who sued Paddy Power has lost. The case was over whether the bet was for £1,300 each-way or ten times that.
The punter asked for £1,300 e/w but PP laid £13,000 e/w. The horse won and PP paid out, but later changed their minds and decided they'd meant to lay £1,300 as originally requested.
James argued an 'error' clause relied upon by the bookmaker was unfair. He noted that Paddy Power had been able to lay off part of the bet, recovering £17,000, and could in theory have laid off the entire sum.
"They can lay off their bets, make a profit on the deal, and then tell the bettor, 'We're keeping our winnings but you can't have yours'."
If that’s true, then the £13,000 bet should have stood.
I know these scumbag bookies have the politicians in their pockets. I didn’t realise the judiciary were in there too.
It is hard to understand the judge's reasoning, even if one does wonder if the punter was being a bit cute in not calling back to check precisely what had been laid.
I see Sunak has missed his pledge for his £150 council tax rebate wheeze to happen in April.
Why oh why not just subtract it from the bill? This Tory government just adores complex red tape.
Bewcause it has to be in a gift-wrapped package saying "Present from Mr Sunak" on it.
It is, of course, your money anyway ...
Bit odd for a Brexiter, given that his ilk was always complaining the EU regional development funding was "really" our own money in mthe context of seeing placards for such things as the Mallaig road doubling scheme.
Just says "District Council payment +£150" on my statement.Admittedly I've only looked on my phone.
No sign of my money. I gather some councils are saying they can't process it until the autumn.
My council paid it nearly a week ago.
It is a stupid, ridiculous, unhelpful and badly thought through policy, but criticising Sunak for some councils being unable to organise an orgy in a brothel is slightly unfair.
Why not? It's absolutely in-line with this Government's preference to govern via soundbites rather than anything tangible.
It's interesting how consistent the DUP vote has been at 20% across all polls for a while which is why I struggle to see them avoiding losing at least 4 seats and remaining the largest party. This is actually a worse poll for unionism than the lucidtalk one as the DUP+UUP+TUV vote is only 36% here compared with 43% for lucidtalk (and most TUV voters will transfer to DUP anyway).
I think the SDLP would be very happy with this poll if it actually materialised and they might even hang on in Lagan Valley at the expense of the UUP even at the same time as Alliance getting 2 seats and make surprise gains elsewhere like in Strangford.
@Gary_Burton - I've banned you until you respond to my email.
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Big G works for the Daily Express, confirmed.
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
Utter ridiculous reporting by the express which it is joke newspaper by any standards
“ Tracker poll: Labour blow as Tories close the gap - Britons turn from Starmer LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow after the latest tracker poll revealed that the Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Naughty and no, I consider the Express as a joke paper
To be honest although the headline made too much of it for sure, it is technically true and born out by other polling that shows not much movement this week. That it’s been a quieter Partygate week so Labour going nowhere won’t be a shock. This smallish lead going nowhere after Boris actually received a fine for breaking the law he made himself and urged us to keep, and labour struggle for forward momentum when it’s off the news. Labour lead seems all about Partygate, they don’t seem to get votes from other things, like cost of living? Why? 🤔
It's interesting how consistent the DUP vote has been at 20% across all polls for a while which is why I struggle to see them avoiding losing at least 4 seats and remaining the largest party. This is actually a worse poll for unionism than the lucidtalk one as the DUP+UUP+TUV vote is only 36% here compared with 43% for lucidtalk (and most TUV voters will transfer to DUP anyway).
I think the SDLP would be very happy with this poll if it actually materialised and they might even hang on in Lagan Valley at the expense of the UUP even at the same time as Alliance getting 2 seats and make surprise gains elsewhere like in Strangford.
@Gary_Burton - I've banned you until you respond to my email.
rcs1000
gmail.com
Drop me a message please.
Answer the email Gary. Your polling posts are informative and measured, and the best bit about them is they pour cold water on a lot of spin and silly predictions on here, not least my own, and I always read them.
OT the punter who sued Paddy Power has lost. The case was over whether the bet was for £1,300 each-way or ten times that.
The punter asked for £1,300 e/w but PP laid £13,000 e/w. The horse won and PP paid out, but later changed their minds and decided they'd meant to lay £1,300 as originally requested.
Historically there's always been a fair amount of bullshit around fighter aces & their scores, I suspect things haven't changed.
Two months to double Hawkeye Epstein's tally which was accrued over 40 years of service in the Israeli Air Force. Sounds completely believable.
UkrAF are yet to break their duck aren't they? We haven't had one confirmed A2A kill yet.
We do know that quite a few Russian aircraft have been distributed over the Ukrainian countryside. We don't know what caused them to spontaneously fall out of the sky.
Comments
That is my second apology today and I have hardly posted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTJvdGcb7Fs
There are plenty of real ones. Alcohol, smoking, shooting heroin. Plenty manage to hold down a job with those. However, they know when and where is appropriate, and understand there are consequences if they don't.
30 a day isn't an excuse for lighting up wherever and whenever you like.
It's something else. But addiction is just a cop out denying agency.
Delightful chap, but quite capable of doing something daft.
Has he confessed to/admitted to watching porn while Chairing a Committee, though? If he has, of course, that is not only stupid but extremely rude.
To all concerned.
This Tory government just adores complex red tape.
As to why we're spending money preparing for them... If we don't spend money preparing for them, it becomes obvious that they will never happen. And whilst some voted Leave to reduce border checks, others voted to strengthen them. JRM may well be happy if they never come in, but the NFU won't be.
There were a lot of bait and switch moves on both sides in 2016. The most obvious was the EEA types who have been royally shafted. The shakeout of those is ongoing, and it's unlikely to be pretty.
Was he trying to understand the plot?
Will the pool ever get cleaned?
Normally the only time I instinctively look up at the football screen when I hear that.
Actually just a few more weeks to go and I am released.
It is, of course, your money anyway ...
Bit odd for a Brexiter, given that his ilk was always complaining the EU regional development funding was "really" our own money in mthe context of seeing placards for such things as the Mallaig road doubling scheme.
You heard about the The Gush? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPmkILhKXi4 😟
Ah-ah- ah- urhhhhhhhhhh Yeahhhhhhhhhhr. Hrrrrrrr. Hrrr-
Also, it's unfortunately not quite true that our standards are much superior to the rest of the EU. They are superior to much of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, we ban sow stalls, many EU countries don't) and inferior to some of the EU in a few selected areas (for example, Holland bans non-stun slaughter and we don't).
By and large, they are much the same, and the non-ideological pragmatic approach is just to agree to maintain the same minimum standards (with the option to go beyond), in which case there is no need for any checks either way. But effectively that does leave agriculture inside the EU, and prevents us from deciding to reduce our standards below the EU level (unlikely but not impossible, e.g. for prophylactic antibiotic use).
It will be totally unconnected to his antics having squashed their Starmer drinky-poos story.
It would be interesting to see Xi Jinping's rating.
It is a stupid, ridiculous, unhelpful and badly thought through policy, but criticising Sunak for some councils being unable to organise an orgy in a brothel is slightly unfair.
Perhaps they were not; that was not the implication of my comparison.
As far as humans are concerned, mcuh of the problem is the cuts to public health (partly in local government and national as well as NHS). There were and are in any case serious concerns about elements of the population which don't fit your model. Alcoholics, homeless, underfed poor, AIDS. From memory the problem started rising in the 1990s.
http://www.leicestershospitals.nhs.uk/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=828
Edit: and as Ydoethur has pointed out, TB has always been present. I can remember the TB X-ray vans parked near my parents' house, and the huge needle used for the tuberculin test on schoolchildren.
The punter asked for £1,300 e/w but PP laid £13,000 e/w. The horse won and PP paid out, but later changed their minds and decided they'd meant to lay £1,300 as originally requested.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/18417101/paddy-power-punter-won-best-money-taken-back/
https://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
There was also a poll on whether Germany was doing too little, about right or too much to help Ukraine. Only a smallish number thought "too much" (about 15% IIRC), but there was an even split beteween "about right" and "too little".
Those Russian chachs had no weapons, no body armour and had looted the worst car in Urkaine (Vaz 2101, DA knows). I reckon they were deserters tatting abandoned houses.
LAB: 40% (=)
CON: 34% (=)
LDM: 11% (+2)
SNP: 4% (=)
GRN: 3% (-1)
Via @SavantaComRes, 22-24 Apr.
Changes w/ 8-10 Apr.
@bigjohnowls please explain.
That Lib Dem number is slowly creeping up
In the case of the MH17 shootdown it got quite funny: he would parrot whatever line the Russian government were giving out, however much it contradicted what he had been saying the previous day. He still won't answer the question on whether he believes the Dutch report into the shootdown is correct.
I don't particularly think he's a Russian plant, but he certainly is a useful idiot to them. (*)
(*) To be fair, we can all fall into the 'useful idiot' trap on various topics.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/18418085/russian-anti-tank-mine-seen-ukraine-first-time/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/04/29/russia-military-anti-tank-weapons-mines-deployed-ukraine/ (£££)
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1520346358217064449
James argued an 'error' clause relied upon by the bookmaker was unfair. He noted that Paddy Power had been able to lay off part of the bet, recovering £17,000, and could in theory have laid off the entire sum.
"They can lay off their bets, make a profit on the deal, and then tell the bettor, 'We're keeping our winnings but you can't have yours'."
If that’s true, then the £13,000 bet should have stood.
I know these scumbag bookies have the politicians in their pockets. I didn’t realise the judiciary were in there too.
close the gap - Britons turn from
Starmer
LABOUR leader Keir Starmer has suffered a major blow
after the latest tracker poll revealed that the
Conservatives are closing the gap despite the row over
Partygate.‘
Sounds like they merely copied a Big G PB post 🤭
Hope you are keeping well, Moon
I think the SDLP would be very happy with this poll if it actually materialised and they might even hang on in Lagan Valley at the expense of the UUP even at the same time as Alliance getting 2 seats and make surprise gains elsewhere like in Strangford.
Could TUV voters end up regretting not backing DUP?
Heard a SIGNIFICANT amount 59%
Matters a SIGNIFICANT amount 35%
25% of 2019 Conservative voters say it matters significantly to them. 56% say not at all or only slightly.
Meh just a bubble issue
rcs1000
gmail.com
Drop me a message please.
The Labour Party has focused...
Too much on party-gate 38%
The right amount on party-gate 30%
Not enough on party-gate 17%
They took his money before the race went off, and he was happy with the £13k bet they offered.
5️⃣8️⃣
6️⃣4️⃣
quordle.com
⬜⬜⬜🟩⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜
⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜🟨⬜
🟩⬜⬜🟨⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
🟩🟩⬜🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟨🟨⬜⬜
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟩⬜
🟩⬜⬜⬜🟩 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ 🟩⬜🟩🟨⬜
⬜🟨⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
⬜🟨⬜⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
UkrAF are yet to break their duck aren't they? We haven't had one confirmed A2A kill yet.
I'm five guesses in, and have only got one letter in the right place. (And I know two of the other letters, but I'm really struggling...)