Sunak should put it to a vote and let the headbangers lose. They need to face up to the reality that no one outside of their bubble cares about their concerns. On my estimation they have about 7 more years to make Brexit work and improve their levels of support amongst the working age population otherwise rejoin will come back on to the political agenda in a big way. As every year goes by, Leave/ERG lose a large tranche of their impassioned supporters because they are overwhelmingly old.
The issue is that the vast majority of the potential benefits are not being taken, and the constant prioritisation of the NI stuff doesn’t help. Where’s the serious deregulation, the free zones, the incentives for businesses and startups to locate in the UK? Every damn government department should have a massive Bill up for debate this year, and there should be a minister on the news every morning with a positive vision for the future. Yet nothing.
But Treasury authodoxy, and managed declinism, are still ruling the roost in No.10. If the government want to see a 1997 result, rather than a 1992 result, they’re going exactly the right way about it.
Can anyone tell me why our nuclear generation is down by 50% on six weeks ago? It isn't exactly helping with our gas reserves.
This page is a pretty good overview. Mostly seems to be routine refuelling, though reactor 8 at Heysham 2 has a turbine vibration issue which is delaying its return to generation.
Really clever management to shut down 50% of your reactors for refuelling at a time when demand is likely to be at its highest. But I imagine it's not something you can put off.
Two more nuclear power stations were shut down permanently in 2022, so I guess the maintenance on each individual remaining reactor becomes that much more noticeable as a share of the whole.
Apparently EDF have recently announced another 15-month delay for Hinkley Point C - now due to start generating in September 2028.
They really do need to get a handful of these Rolls-Royce SMRs running as soon as possible. It’s possibly the best value for money of any energy at the moment, alongside investment in various storage options.
The SMR market is getting very crowded, but the GE/Hitachi consortium are probably ahead of the pack at the moment. RR tried to hedge its bets, and has ended up mid table without a good consortium, special design or captive market. OTOH, if the UK government pushed to back RR with stations at Trawsfynydd, Wylfa and Bradwell, and got them built before 2027-30, then the UK could be a major player in the SMR market going forward. Since it does not need to open the tender to EU competition this is actually a Brexit benefit that could happen. Given the incompetence in every other field, I would not hold my breath though, and GE/Hitachi will therefore still clean up in the EU and the plucky Brit will most likely fail.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
Sunak knows that he could be toppled by this, but that after the last 12 months that would be the death knell of the Tory party and MPs might be reluctant to blow their last chance of normality.
Credit for using political capital on this normalisation. It doesn't even necessarily need to get the DUP on board immediately, if the practical positive effects seen by traders in NI mean they warm to it, then the DUP might bear some of the political risk once a new assembly poll is held.
The gain is mainly from Independents, and given that a lot of the independent vote in the election was for the independent Unionist MLA in North Down, then it is unlikely those extra votes for the DUP will materialise at the actual election. That said, last time the DUP did better at the election then they'd done in the pre-election opinion polls, and the UUP notably underperformed, so those two effects might cancel out.
To have a chance of amending the GFA to allow the UUP and Alliance to replace the DUP and join SF in the Stormont Executive, London and Dublin really need the DUP to be falling back in the polls and the UUP to be increasing its voteshare.
That doesn't seem to be happening however
There is no desire to amend the GFA. To say that would be opening a can of worms is an understatement.
There are two ways of resolving the impasse:
1. Convince the DUP to participate in power-sharing - which itself can be achieved in a number of ways.
2. Have the voters decide to bypass the DUP by voting for the UUP or Alliance in sufficient numbers
And neither of those 2 seem to be happening at present.
Indeed on the last 2 NI polls the DUP voteshare is at least equal to or more than that for the UUP and Alliance combined
Indeed. So although a new deal on the Northern Ireland protocol will be welcome for a number of reasons, it then presents a problem for HMG. Up until now it has been possible for HMG to say that it will deal with the collapse of power-sharing in NI by renegotiating the Northern Ireland protocol. However, if it has renegotiated the NI protocol, and power-sharing does not return, then they need a new policy.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
If the number of nutters can be reduced into the 20-30 range, it is surely in Sunak's interest to have a vote and see them defeated?
Sunak knows that he could be toppled by this, but that after the last 12 months that would be the death knell of the Tory party and MPs might be reluctant to blow their last chance of normality.
Credit for using political capital on this normalisation. It doesn't even necessarily need to get the DUP on board immediately, if the practical positive effects seen by traders in NI mean they warm to it, then the DUP might bear some of the political risk once a new assembly poll is held.
The gain is mainly from Independents, and given that a lot of the independent vote in the election was for the independent Unionist MLA in North Down, then it is unlikely those extra votes for the DUP will materialise at the actual election. That said, last time the DUP did better at the election then they'd done in the pre-election opinion polls, and the UUP notably underperformed, so those two effects might cancel out.
It's natural for the DUP to strengthen a bit when they're the party most discussed in the news and appear to be the standard-bearer for strict unionism. I wondser if that will change if they agreee today? But if they do, maybe it shows they're not as bonkers as many of us thought?
Sunak needs to do this. Strangely the potential Tory wipeout strengthens his hand. Either he does something useful in his time remaining or he manages to win another term and is hailed as a miracle worker. He doesn't have anything to lose.
I hope Humza will reflect that merely to say this is to be “transphobic” in terms of the (unlawful) definition of “transphobia” adopted by the NEC & would potentially open him up to a charge of hate speech under his own, as yet not in force, #HateCrimeBill 🤷♀️
Such a pity that Sturgeon managed to keep Cherry in the Commons when she wanted to come to Edinburgh. She would have been a formidable candidate if she was in the right Parliament.
All done so Angus Robertson could be assured of an easy entry to Holyrood - and he’s not standing!
So much for succession planning….
The lack of succession planning from Sturgeon is quite spectacular, looking on from afar. It does appear that the more senior people in the party were kept away from the key positions at Holyrood, and that little effort was put into grooming any successors. I like Cherry and Forbes, but can’t help thinking the latter is a decade too young for the top job.
Cough..Cameron>May>Johnson>Truss>Sunak
I can be 100% certain that if some anointed heir to Sturgeon was in place the screeching about an undemocratic stitch up would be deafening.
I’m intrigued by this semi mythical succession planning, are there many examples of it existing let alone resulting in a successful replacement?
Sunak knows that he could be toppled by this, but that after the last 12 months that would be the death knell of the Tory party and MPs might be reluctant to blow their last chance of normality.
Credit for using political capital on this normalisation. It doesn't even necessarily need to get the DUP on board immediately, if the practical positive effects seen by traders in NI mean they warm to it, then the DUP might bear some of the political risk once a new assembly poll is held.
The gain is mainly from Independents, and given that a lot of the independent vote in the election was for the independent Unionist MLA in North Down, then it is unlikely those extra votes for the DUP will materialise at the actual election. That said, last time the DUP did better at the election then they'd done in the pre-election opinion polls, and the UUP notably underperformed, so those two effects might cancel out.
It's natural for the DUP to strengthen a bit when they're the party most discussed in the news and appear to be the standard-bearer for strict unionism. I wondser if that will change if they agreee today? But if they do, maybe it shows they're not as bonkers as many of us thought?
Given their USP is to be relentlessly bonkers, it's an interesting dilemma for them.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
No vote, but being pedantic is not an uncontested election still referred to as an election, and the winner to be elected?
If no one else wants the job then it’s a bit of a stretch to criticise lack of a vote.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
What a farce. Only 48 hours until deadline for producers @lornaslater has just said on BBC that giving small producers a one year delay “is absolutely something we are actively considering”. Total shambles. We deserve better than this incompetence.
I hope Humza will reflect that merely to say this is to be “transphobic” in terms of the (unlawful) definition of “transphobia” adopted by the NEC & would potentially open him up to a charge of hate speech under his own, as yet not in force, #HateCrimeBill 🤷♀️
Such a pity that Sturgeon managed to keep Cherry in the Commons when she wanted to come to Edinburgh. She would have been a formidable candidate if she was in the right Parliament.
All done so Angus Robertson could be assured of an easy entry to Holyrood - and he’s not standing!
So much for succession planning….
The lack of succession planning from Sturgeon is quite spectacular, looking on from afar. It does appear that the more senior people in the party were kept away from the key positions at Holyrood, and that little effort was put into grooming any successors. I like Cherry and Forbes, but can’t help thinking the latter is a decade too young for the top job.
Cough..Cameron>May>Johnson>Truss>Sunak
I can be 100% certain that if some anointed heir to Sturgeon was in place the screeching about an undemocratic stitch up would be deafening.
I’m intrigued by this semi mythical succession planning, are there many examples of it existing let alone resulting in a successful replacement?
Also - MSPs *have* to vote positively for a new FM, quite independently of any party voting for its leader. So in that respect, even if Ms S had an anointed heir nem con, there would still be that democratic filter.
It's odd that so many here on a political betting site describe the DUP and ERG as bonkers. They are far from that, being quite rational, calculating and disciplined in their political positioning. Where they differ from those calling them bonkers is in their values and aspirations for NI.
Sunak should put it to a vote and let the headbangers lose. They need to face up to the reality that no one outside of their bubble cares about their concerns. On my estimation they have about 7 more years to make Brexit work and improve their levels of support amongst the working age population otherwise rejoin will come back on to the political agenda in a big way. As every year goes by, Leave/ERG lose a large tranche of their impassioned supporters because they are overwhelmingly old.
The issue is that the vast majority of the potential benefits are not being taken, and the constant prioritisation of the NI stuff doesn’t help. Where’s the serious deregulation, the free zones, the incentives for businesses and startups to locate in the UK? Every damn government department should have a massive Bill up for debate this year, and there should be a minister on the news every morning with a positive vision for the future. Yet nothing.
But Treasury authodoxy, and managed declinism, are still ruling the roost in No.10. If the government want to see a 1997 result, rather than a 1992 result, they’re going exactly the right way about it.
Easy. It's the same reason that Lexiteers haven't got the Socialist Republic of Britain that they voted Leave to secure.
EU regulations weren't the only thing stopping the UK deregulating massively, or swinging hard to the left. They were the visible roadblock, but they weren't the only factor. Massive deregulation hasn't got a mandate from the British public and probably wouldn't be all that popular. Consider the way that the government can't loosen up planning restrictions, even thoughs have never had anything to do with Europe.
The bulk of the Brexit vote, the bulk of the VL campaign was a mandate to divert EU subs to the NHS, mostly a vote by pensioners for pensioners. Oh, and less Eastern Europeans on the streets too.
So to those who voted leave to get more dramatic change, sorry. You have to dance with the one who brung ya.
I don't know anyone who gives a monkeys about Northern Ireland. Sunak just needs to get something or other through so he can focus on the salient issues of CoL, immigration, housing etc.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
How do you know there will not be a vote
Has that been announced?
I heard it on the radio. I hope it’s wrong. It would be a mistake.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
If the number of nutters can be reduced into the 20-30 range, it is surely in Sunak's interest to have a vote and see them defeated?
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Can anyone tell me why our nuclear generation is down by 50% on six weeks ago? It isn't exactly helping with our gas reserves.
This page is a pretty good overview. Mostly seems to be routine refuelling, though reactor 8 at Heysham 2 has a turbine vibration issue which is delaying its return to generation.
Really clever management to shut down 50% of your reactors for refuelling at a time when demand is likely to be at its highest. But I imagine it's not something you can put off.
Two more nuclear power stations were shut down permanently in 2022, so I guess the maintenance on each individual remaining reactor becomes that much more noticeable as a share of the whole.
Apparently EDF have recently announced another 15-month delay for Hinkley Point C - now due to start generating in September 2028.
They really do need to get a handful of these Rolls-Royce SMRs running as soon as possible. It’s possibly the best value for money of any energy at the moment, alongside investment in various storage options.
The SMR market is getting very crowded, but the GE/Hitachi consortium are probably ahead of the pack at the moment. RR tried to hedge its bets, and has ended up mid table without a good consortium, special design or captive market. OTOH, if the UK government pushed to back RR with stations at Trawsfynydd, Wylfa and Bradwell, and got them built before 2027-30, then the UK could be a major player in the SMR market going forward. Since it does not need to open the tender to EU competition this is actually a Brexit benefit that could happen. Given the incompetence in every other field, I would not hold my breath though, and GE/Hitachi will therefore still clean up in the EU and the plucky Brit will most likely fail.
Nuclear energy is a financially high risk business, which needs big pockets to support. Up to now those pockets have been government customers. The effect of SMR is to transfer the risk from the customer to the manufacturer. Scale will be everything I think.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
How do you know there will not be a vote
Has that been announced?
I heard it on the radio. I hope it’s wrong. It would be a mistake.
You hardly needed to read between the lines of Kuenssberg's interview with Raab yesterday to see that the govt is not planning a vote when it is presented to parliament
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
How do you know there will not be a vote
Has that been announced?
I heard it on the radio. I hope it’s wrong. It would be a mistake.
Robert Buckland has just said on Sky there will be a debate and some sort of a vote on the deal
Can anyone tell me why our nuclear generation is down by 50% on six weeks ago? It isn't exactly helping with our gas reserves.
This page is a pretty good overview. Mostly seems to be routine refuelling, though reactor 8 at Heysham 2 has a turbine vibration issue which is delaying its return to generation.
Really clever management to shut down 50% of your reactors for refuelling at a time when demand is likely to be at its highest. But I imagine it's not something you can put off.
Two more nuclear power stations were shut down permanently in 2022, so I guess the maintenance on each individual remaining reactor becomes that much more noticeable as a share of the whole.
Apparently EDF have recently announced another 15-month delay for Hinkley Point C - now due to start generating in September 2028.
They really do need to get a handful of these Rolls-Royce SMRs running as soon as possible. It’s possibly the best value for money of any energy at the moment, alongside investment in various storage options.
The SMR market is getting very crowded, but the GE/Hitachi consortium are probably ahead of the pack at the moment. RR tried to hedge its bets, and has ended up mid table without a good consortium, special design or captive market. OTOH, if the UK government pushed to back RR with stations at Trawsfynydd, Wylfa and Bradwell, and got them built before 2027-30, then the UK could be a major player in the SMR market going forward. Since it does not need to open the tender to EU competition this is actually a Brexit benefit that could happen. Given the incompetence in every other field, I would not hold my breath though, and GE/Hitachi will therefore still clean up in the EU and the plucky Brit will most likely fail.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
How do you know there will not be a vote
Has that been announced?
I heard it on the radio. I hope it’s wrong. It would be a mistake.
Robert Buckland has just said on Sky there will be a debate and some sort of a vote on the deal
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Queen Alexandra, Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother all were called Queen after the coronations of their husbands King Edward VII, King George V and King George VI respectively.
Just Queen Camilla will still formally be Queen Consort not Queen Sovereign like Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Queen Alexandra, Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother all were called Queen after the coronations of their husbands King Edward VII, King George V and King George VI respectively.
Just Queen Camilla will still formally be Queen Consort not Queen Sovereign like Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II
I hope Humza will reflect that merely to say this is to be “transphobic” in terms of the (unlawful) definition of “transphobia” adopted by the NEC & would potentially open him up to a charge of hate speech under his own, as yet not in force, #HateCrimeBill 🤷♀️
Such a pity that Sturgeon managed to keep Cherry in the Commons when she wanted to come to Edinburgh. She would have been a formidable candidate if she was in the right Parliament.
All done so Angus Robertson could be assured of an easy entry to Holyrood - and he’s not standing!
So much for succession planning….
The lack of succession planning from Sturgeon is quite spectacular, looking on from afar. It does appear that the more senior people in the party were kept away from the key positions at Holyrood, and that little effort was put into grooming any successors. I like Cherry and Forbes, but can’t help thinking the latter is a decade too young for the top job.
Cough..Cameron>May>Johnson>Truss>Sunak
I can be 100% certain that if some anointed heir to Sturgeon was in place the screeching about an undemocratic stitch up would be deafening.
I’m intrigued by this semi mythical succession planning, are there many examples of it existing let alone resulting in a successful replacement?
What a farce. Only 48 hours until deadline for producers @lornaslater has just said on BBC that giving small producers a one year delay “is absolutely something we are actively considering”. Total shambles. We deserve better than this incompetence.
It's odd that so many here on a political betting site describe the DUP and ERG as bonkers. They are far from that, being quite rational, calculating and disciplined in their political positioning. Where they differ from those calling them bonkers is in their values and aspirations for NI.
When people call someone "bonkers" in politics, it usually means they have principles they disagree with and stick to them.
Just as a "populist" is generally someone you disagree with that is more popular than you are.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
It seems Maros Sefcovic is to speak to all EU Ambassadors immediately after the announcement this afternoon with the details of the deal as nobody has had any inside information on the deal
The secrecy around these negotiations is extraordinary
I hope Humza will reflect that merely to say this is to be “transphobic” in terms of the (unlawful) definition of “transphobia” adopted by the NEC & would potentially open him up to a charge of hate speech under his own, as yet not in force, #HateCrimeBill 🤷♀️
Such a pity that Sturgeon managed to keep Cherry in the Commons when she wanted to come to Edinburgh. She would have been a formidable candidate if she was in the right Parliament.
All done so Angus Robertson could be assured of an easy entry to Holyrood - and he’s not standing!
So much for succession planning….
The lack of succession planning from Sturgeon is quite spectacular, looking on from afar. It does appear that the more senior people in the party were kept away from the key positions at Holyrood, and that little effort was put into grooming any successors. I like Cherry and Forbes, but can’t help thinking the latter is a decade too young for the top job.
Cough..Cameron>May>Johnson>Truss>Sunak
I can be 100% certain that if some anointed heir to Sturgeon was in place the screeching about an undemocratic stitch up would be deafening.
I’m intrigued by this semi mythical succession planning, are there many examples of it existing let alone resulting in a successful replacement?
Also - MSPs *have* to vote positively for a new FM, quite independently of any party voting for its leader. So in that respect, even if Ms S had an anointed heir nem con, there would still be that democratic filter.
So if Kate Forbes wins the SNP membership vote will most MSPs back her as FM? Ironically Forbes is probably more popular with Scottish Conservative MSPs now than she is with most SNP and Green MSPs!
I hope Humza will reflect that merely to say this is to be “transphobic” in terms of the (unlawful) definition of “transphobia” adopted by the NEC & would potentially open him up to a charge of hate speech under his own, as yet not in force, #HateCrimeBill 🤷♀️
Such a pity that Sturgeon managed to keep Cherry in the Commons when she wanted to come to Edinburgh. She would have been a formidable candidate if she was in the right Parliament.
All done so Angus Robertson could be assured of an easy entry to Holyrood - and he’s not standing!
So much for succession planning….
The lack of succession planning from Sturgeon is quite spectacular, looking on from afar. It does appear that the more senior people in the party were kept away from the key positions at Holyrood, and that little effort was put into grooming any successors. I like Cherry and Forbes, but can’t help thinking the latter is a decade too young for the top job.
Cough..Cameron>May>Johnson>Truss>Sunak
I can be 100% certain that if some anointed heir to Sturgeon was in place the screeching about an undemocratic stitch up would be deafening.
I’m intrigued by this semi mythical succession planning, are there many examples of it existing let alone resulting in a successful replacement?
How’s about Salmond > Sturgeon?
Pretty sure Salmond doesn’t think it wasn’t a success.
You prove my other point, there was a ton of screeching after Sturgeon succeeded Salmond unopposed because everyone in the SNP recognised she was the strongest candidate.
It's odd that so many here on a political betting site describe the DUP and ERG as bonkers. They are far from that, being quite rational, calculating and disciplined in their political positioning. Where they differ from those calling them bonkers is in their values and aspirations for NI.
When people call someone "bonkers" in politics, it usually means they have principles they disagree with and stick to them.
Just as a "populist" is generally someone you disagree with that is more popular than you are.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Labour are also undefeated - it was Brown, Miliband and Corbyn that lost it, not them.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Queen Alexandra, Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother all were called Queen after the coronations of their husbands King Edward VII, King George V and King George VI respectively.
Just Queen Camilla will still formally be Queen Consort not Queen Sovereign like Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Queen Alexandra, Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother all were called Queen after the coronations of their husbands King Edward VII, King George V and King George VI respectively.
Just Queen Camilla will still formally be Queen Consort not Queen Sovereign like Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II
Queen Mistress!
I couldn't possibly comment 🤣
Though Camilla has done her dues and makes the King happy, let her be.
The heir to the throne is still Diana's son not Camilla's
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Labour are also undefeated - it was Brown, Miliband and Corbyn that lost it, not them.
It took Corbyn's heavy general election defeat in 2019 though for Labour to move on from Momentum and get to the more centrist Starmer
I hope Humza will reflect that merely to say this is to be “transphobic” in terms of the (unlawful) definition of “transphobia” adopted by the NEC & would potentially open him up to a charge of hate speech under his own, as yet not in force, #HateCrimeBill 🤷♀️
Such a pity that Sturgeon managed to keep Cherry in the Commons when she wanted to come to Edinburgh. She would have been a formidable candidate if she was in the right Parliament.
All done so Angus Robertson could be assured of an easy entry to Holyrood - and he’s not standing!
So much for succession planning….
The lack of succession planning from Sturgeon is quite spectacular, looking on from afar. It does appear that the more senior people in the party were kept away from the key positions at Holyrood, and that little effort was put into grooming any successors. I like Cherry and Forbes, but can’t help thinking the latter is a decade too young for the top job.
Cough..Cameron>May>Johnson>Truss>Sunak
I can be 100% certain that if some anointed heir to Sturgeon was in place the screeching about an undemocratic stitch up would be deafening.
I’m intrigued by this semi mythical succession planning, are there many examples of it existing let alone resulting in a successful replacement?
Also - MSPs *have* to vote positively for a new FM, quite independently of any party voting for its leader. So in that respect, even if Ms S had an anointed heir nem con, there would still be that democratic filter.
So if Kate Forbes wins the SNP membership vote will most MSPs back her as FM? Ironically Forbes is probably more popular with Scottish Conservative MSPs now than she is with most SNP and Green MSPs!
You think so? I'm astounded, more so than ever, at your comprehension of Caledonian politics.
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
The national interest requires a deal. If Sunak delivers one, with or without a Commons vote, he will go up in my estimation. What’s more, if he can take Brexit off the political menu I suspect that will do the Tories a lot of good electorally. But that will involve forcing the ERG into humiliating irrelevance. Is he strong enough to do that?
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
I hope Humza will reflect that merely to say this is to be “transphobic” in terms of the (unlawful) definition of “transphobia” adopted by the NEC & would potentially open him up to a charge of hate speech under his own, as yet not in force, #HateCrimeBill 🤷♀️
Such a pity that Sturgeon managed to keep Cherry in the Commons when she wanted to come to Edinburgh. She would have been a formidable candidate if she was in the right Parliament.
All done so Angus Robertson could be assured of an easy entry to Holyrood - and he’s not standing!
So much for succession planning….
The lack of succession planning from Sturgeon is quite spectacular, looking on from afar. It does appear that the more senior people in the party were kept away from the key positions at Holyrood, and that little effort was put into grooming any successors. I like Cherry and Forbes, but can’t help thinking the latter is a decade too young for the top job.
Cough..Cameron>May>Johnson>Truss>Sunak
I can be 100% certain that if some anointed heir to Sturgeon was in place the screeching about an undemocratic stitch up would be deafening.
I’m intrigued by this semi mythical succession planning, are there many examples of it existing let alone resulting in a successful replacement?
Also - MSPs *have* to vote positively for a new FM, quite independently of any party voting for its leader. So in that respect, even if Ms S had an anointed heir nem con, there would still be that democratic filter.
So if Kate Forbes wins the SNP membership vote will most MSPs back her as FM? Ironically Forbes is probably more popular with Scottish Conservative MSPs now than she is with most SNP and Green MSPs!
I can see Tory MSPs (and maybe those of other parties) abstaining again - it's surely not in their interests to have an early election?
Can anyone tell me why our nuclear generation is down by 50% on six weeks ago? It isn't exactly helping with our gas reserves.
This page is a pretty good overview. Mostly seems to be routine refuelling, though reactor 8 at Heysham 2 has a turbine vibration issue which is delaying its return to generation.
Really clever management to shut down 50% of your reactors for refuelling at a time when demand is likely to be at its highest. But I imagine it's not something you can put off.
Two more nuclear power stations were shut down permanently in 2022, so I guess the maintenance on each individual remaining reactor becomes that much more noticeable as a share of the whole.
Apparently EDF have recently announced another 15-month delay for Hinkley Point C - now due to start generating in September 2028.
They really do need to get a handful of these Rolls-Royce SMRs running as soon as possible. It’s possibly the best value for money of any energy at the moment, alongside investment in various storage options.
The SMR market is getting very crowded, but the GE/Hitachi consortium are probably ahead of the pack at the moment. RR tried to hedge its bets, and has ended up mid table without a good consortium, special design or captive market. OTOH, if the UK government pushed to back RR with stations at Trawsfynydd, Wylfa and Bradwell, and got them built before 2027-30, then the UK could be a major player in the SMR market going forward. Since it does not need to open the tender to EU competition this is actually a Brexit benefit that could happen. Given the incompetence in every other field, I would not hold my breath though, and GE/Hitachi will therefore still clean up in the EU and the plucky Brit will most likely fail.
Sunak should put it to a vote and let the headbangers lose. They need to face up to the reality that no one outside of their bubble cares about their concerns. On my estimation they have about 7 more years to make Brexit work and improve their levels of support amongst the working age population otherwise rejoin will come back on to the political agenda in a big way. As every year goes by, Leave/ERG lose a large tranche of their impassioned supporters because they are overwhelmingly old.
The issue is that the vast majority of the potential benefits are not being taken, and the constant prioritisation of the NI stuff doesn’t help. Where’s the serious deregulation, the free zones, the incentives for businesses and startups to locate in the UK? Every damn government department should have a massive Bill up for debate this year, and there should be a minister on the news every morning with a positive vision for the future. Yet nothing.
But Treasury authodoxy, and managed declinism, are still ruling the roost in No.10. If the government want to see a 1997 result, rather than a 1992 result, they’re going exactly the right way about it.
Easy. It's the same reason that Lexiteers haven't got the Socialist Republic of Britain that they voted Leave to secure.
EU regulations weren't the only thing stopping the UK deregulating massively, or swinging hard to the left. They were the visible roadblock, but they weren't the only factor. Massive deregulation hasn't got a mandate from the British public and probably wouldn't be all that popular. Consider the way that the government can't loosen up planning restrictions, even thoughs have never had anything to do with Europe.
The bulk of the Brexit vote, the bulk of the VL campaign was a mandate to divert EU subs to the NHS, mostly a vote by pensioners for pensioners. Oh, and less Eastern Europeans on the streets too.
So to those who voted leave to get more dramatic change, sorry. You have to dance with the one who brung ya.
For those who want more dramatic change, they now need to win a General Election.
Boris Johnson may be the one who led the Leave campaign and got us over the line for Brexit, but he won't be PM forever. *checks notes* Actually he's already not PM, so the 'one who brung ya' has already disappeared into the sunset.
That's the whole point of 'taking back control'. We decide, democratically, who we want in Parliament at the elections. And if our Parliamentarians do a bad job, we can change them at the next election, as is likely as it stands in many seats next time.
That's democracy, and that's why Brexit was a good idea. Sacrificing democracy is not worthwhile.
It's odd that so many here on a political betting site describe the DUP and ERG as bonkers. They are far from that, being quite rational, calculating and disciplined in their political positioning. Where they differ from those calling them bonkers is in their values and aspirations for NI.
When people call someone "bonkers" in politics, it usually means they have principles they disagree with and stick to them.
Just as a "populist" is generally someone you disagree with that is more popular than you are.
It seems to me that the useful meaning of 'populist' is the apparently serious promotion of simple solutions to complex problems.
The DUP and ERG are super-populist in the sense that they are, in addition, much clearer about what they don't want than what they do want, and also take no political responsibility for actually achieving whatever unicorns it is they want. but expect the grown ups to do it for them.
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
So Johnson's October 2019 'deal' wasn't a deal then?
For GB it was a really great deal, far better than Theresa May's. For Northern Ireland, no it didn't have the DUP on board and hence why we are still needing negotiations today.
For the UK as a whole it makes sense to concentrate far more on the UK, than on a tiny corner of it, and kick NI into the long grass as happened in 2019. Which is why Theresa May failed so badly she put the cart before the horse and tried to resolve Northern Ireland first, rather than the UK first.
We're in the long grass stage now though and we'll see what happens now, but the benchmark I have set is that an NI-specific deal needs to have both Sinn Fein and the DUP on board. If it does, it makes sense as an NI-specific deal. If it doesn't, then what purpose does it serve? We already have a deal that works for GB.
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
The Supreme Court has ruled the Protocol does not breach UK law. The Good Friday agreement is enshrined in UK law. It therefore follows that changes to the Protocol agreed by the UK government do not breach UK law.
Can anyone tell me why our nuclear generation is down by 50% on six weeks ago? It isn't exactly helping with our gas reserves.
This page is a pretty good overview. Mostly seems to be routine refuelling, though reactor 8 at Heysham 2 has a turbine vibration issue which is delaying its return to generation.
Really clever management to shut down 50% of your reactors for refuelling at a time when demand is likely to be at its highest. But I imagine it's not something you can put off.
Two more nuclear power stations were shut down permanently in 2022, so I guess the maintenance on each individual remaining reactor becomes that much more noticeable as a share of the whole.
Apparently EDF have recently announced another 15-month delay for Hinkley Point C - now due to start generating in September 2028.
They really do need to get a handful of these Rolls-Royce SMRs running as soon as possible. It’s possibly the best value for money of any energy at the moment, alongside investment in various storage options.
A handful isn't the point. The idea is to take a proven design and build a production line to bring unit costs way down - rather than the current essentially bespoke manner if building them. (A very loose analogy would be what Musk has done with rocket motors.)
They'd need a commitment for dozens to justify the expense of building the production line.
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Since when has the King’s wife, ever been called anything else?
Anyway, in Royal protocol terms, calling the wife of the King the Queen is really at the boring end of the spectrum. What I want to know the answers to are:
1. When Britain next has a female Monarch, will the husband of that Queen now be known as the King, or will there be a sexist double-standard persisting, despite male primogeniture now being abolished?
2. Furthermore, should that female Monarch decide to marry a woman, would the wife of a future reigning Queen also be known as the Queen?
3. Similarly, should a future reigning King marry a man, would their husband also be known as the King?
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
The Supreme Court has ruled the Protocol does not breach UK law. The Good Friday agreement is enshrined in UK law. It therefore follows that changes to the Protocol agreed by the UK government do not breach UK law.
That misses the point. The Good Friday Agreement means that either of the two large parties can shut down Stormont, if they are deeply unhappy about something.
Sinn Fein as second party did that for many years, a few years ago. The DUP are doing that today.
Whether something is legal, and whether something is a deal, are two completely different things.
Any changes to the Protocol may be legal, but if either the DUP or Sinn Fein find them completely unacceptable then they have the democratic prerogative within the Good Friday Agreement to shut down Stormont.
So any deal needs to be more than just legal, it needs at the minimum to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
So Johnson's October 2019 'deal' wasn't a deal then?
The Supreme Court has ruled it was.
No, they ruled it was a legal. That's a completely different subject, they didn't rule on whether it was a deal since that is political not judiciable. 🤦♂️
Any deal needs both Sinn Fein and the DUP on board, in order to get Stormont to reopen. Failure to achieve that can't be circumvented by court cases. The solution lies in politics, not laws, and that is the job of negotiations and the entire frigging point of the Good Friday Agreement the Protocol was supposedly designed to protect.
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
So Johnson's October 2019 'deal' wasn't a deal then?
For GB it was a really great deal, far better than Theresa May's. For Northern Ireland, no it didn't have the DUP on board and hence why we are still needing negotiations today.
For the UK as a whole it makes sense to concentrate far more on the UK, than on a tiny corner of it, and kick NI into the long grass as happened in 2019. Which is why Theresa May failed so badly she put the cart before the horse and tried to resolve Northern Ireland first, rather than the UK first.
We're in the long grass stage now though and we'll see what happens now, but the benchmark I have set is that an NI-specific deal needs to have both Sinn Fein and the DUP on board. If it does, it makes sense as an NI-specific deal. If it doesn't, then what purpose does it serve? We already have a deal that works for GB.
A deal could reduce the costs borne by companies trading across the GB-NI border, and therefore have a value independent of whether it resolved the current political impasse in Northern Ireland.
It's just that all the talk about facing down the DUP is absurd posturing. Only the voters can force the DUP to back down, otherwise they need to be persuaded.
Can anyone tell me why our nuclear generation is down by 50% on six weeks ago? It isn't exactly helping with our gas reserves.
This page is a pretty good overview. Mostly seems to be routine refuelling, though reactor 8 at Heysham 2 has a turbine vibration issue which is delaying its return to generation.
Really clever management to shut down 50% of your reactors for refuelling at a time when demand is likely to be at its highest. But I imagine it's not something you can put off.
Two more nuclear power stations were shut down permanently in 2022, so I guess the maintenance on each individual remaining reactor becomes that much more noticeable as a share of the whole.
Apparently EDF have recently announced another 15-month delay for Hinkley Point C - now due to start generating in September 2028.
They really do need to get a handful of these Rolls-Royce SMRs running as soon as possible. It’s possibly the best value for money of any energy at the moment, alongside investment in various storage options.
The SMR market is getting very crowded, but the GE/Hitachi consortium are probably ahead of the pack at the moment. RR tried to hedge its bets, and has ended up mid table without a good consortium, special design or captive market. OTOH, if the UK government pushed to back RR with stations at Trawsfynydd, Wylfa and Bradwell, and got them built before 2027-30, then the UK could be a major player in the SMR market going forward. Since it does not need to open the tender to EU competition this is actually a Brexit benefit that could happen. Given the incompetence in every other field, I would not hold my breath though, and GE/Hitachi will therefore still clean up in the EU and the plucky Brit will most likely fail.
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
So Johnson's October 2019 'deal' wasn't a deal then?
For GB it was a really great deal, far better than Theresa May's. For Northern Ireland, no it didn't have the DUP on board and hence why we are still needing negotiations today.
For the UK as a whole it makes sense to concentrate far more on the UK, than on a tiny corner of it, and kick NI into the long grass as happened in 2019. Which is why Theresa May failed so badly she put the cart before the horse and tried to resolve Northern Ireland first, rather than the UK first.
We're in the long grass stage now though and we'll see what happens now, but the benchmark I have set is that an NI-specific deal needs to have both Sinn Fein and the DUP on board. If it does, it makes sense as an NI-specific deal. If it doesn't, then what purpose does it serve? We already have a deal that works for GB.
A deal could reduce the costs borne by companies trading across the GB-NI border, and therefore have a value independent of whether it resolved the current political impasse in Northern Ireland.
It's just that all the talk about facing down the DUP is absurd posturing. Only the voters can force the DUP to back down, otherwise they need to be persuaded.
Fair point on the first, and you're completely right on the second.
But what some miss here is that thanks to the Good Friday Agreement it is only Unionist voters that can force the DUP to back down if they're not persuaded. There's absolutely no sign of that happening, in fact until now the pressure of other parties on the Unionist side was to be more confrontational, not less, over the Protocol.
Poor Greg Hands. He's just a super bland centrist finance guy, this kind of hyper-partisan shouting isn't his thing at all. He should leave the RANDOM capitalisATION to people like Leon, for whom it comes so naturally.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Labour are also undefeated - it was Brown, Miliband and Corbyn that lost it, not them.
It took Corbyn's heavy general election defeat in 2019 though for Labour to move on from Momentum and get to the more centrist Starmer
But wasn't that exactly Jonathan's point (that you argued against)? '...until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party.'
The national interest requires a deal. If Sunak delivers one, with or without a Commons vote, he will go up in my estimation. What’s more, if he can take Brexit off the political menu I suspect that will do the Tories a lot of good electorally. But that will involve forcing the ERG into humiliating irrelevance. Is he strong enough to do that?
The problem is that if "Windsor" is forced through via technic means it will fuel the mythos of the right in the same way as Maastricht and Lisbon did before. The ERG need to be on the wrong side of the democratic argument.
Sunak should put it to a vote and let the headbangers lose. They need to face up to the reality that no one outside of their bubble cares about their concerns. On my estimation they have about 7 more years to make Brexit work and improve their levels of support amongst the working age population otherwise rejoin will come back on to the political agenda in a big way. As every year goes by, Leave/ERG lose a large tranche of their impassioned supporters because they are overwhelmingly old.
The issue is that the vast majority of the potential benefits are not being taken, and the constant prioritisation of the NI stuff doesn’t help. Where’s the serious deregulation, the free zones, the incentives for businesses and startups to locate in the UK? Every damn government department should have a massive Bill up for debate this year, and there should be a minister on the news every morning with a positive vision for the future. Yet nothing.
But Treasury authodoxy, and managed declinism, are still ruling the roost in No.10. If the government want to see a 1997 result, rather than a 1992 result, they’re going exactly the right way about it.
Easy. It's the same reason that Lexiteers haven't got the Socialist Republic of Britain that they voted Leave to secure.
EU regulations weren't the only thing stopping the UK deregulating massively, or swinging hard to the left. They were the visible roadblock, but they weren't the only factor. Massive deregulation hasn't got a mandate from the British public and probably wouldn't be all that popular. Consider the way that the government can't loosen up planning restrictions, even thoughs have never had anything to do with Europe.
The bulk of the Brexit vote, the bulk of the VL campaign was a mandate to divert EU subs to the NHS, mostly a vote by pensioners for pensioners. Oh, and less Eastern Europeans on the streets too.
So to those who voted leave to get more dramatic change, sorry. You have to dance with the one who brung ya.
For those who want more dramatic change, they now need to win a General Election.
Boris Johnson may be the one who led the Leave campaign and got us over the line for Brexit, but he won't be PM forever. *checks notes* Actually he's already not PM, so the 'one who brung ya' has already disappeared into the sunset.
That's the whole point of 'taking back control'. We decide, democratically, who we want in Parliament at the elections. And if our Parliamentarians do a bad job, we can change them at the next election, as is likely as it stands in many seats next time.
That's democracy, and that's why Brexit was a good idea. Sacrificing democracy is not worthwhile.
Some truth in that, but I was really responding to the "why hasn't the government radically deregulated" question. And as you say, there's no mandate so far for that. But it does leave two questions.
First one goes like this. A lot of the Brexit vote came from retired homeowners, who I think you and I would agree are doing a reasonable job of running the country into the ground because they're not interested in anything beyond their lifespan. From their point of view, Parliamentarians can be doing an excellent job, as long as they turn the national seedcorn into cake for tomorrow. When Brexit backers allied themselves with a bunch of selfish shortighted fools to get the vote over the line, what did they think was going to happen?
Second, suppose that what the UK actually wants is a somewhat different flavour of Butskellism to our near neighbours, and that our input into the democratic processes of Europe aren't enough to secure that. (After all, you can say that the democracy of the EU is incomplete or fuzzy, but it's a stretch to say that it's not democratic. And if the UK doesn't always get its way... well, that's democracy.) At what does separation become more hassle than it's worth?
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
The Supreme Court has ruled the Protocol does not breach UK law. The Good Friday agreement is enshrined in UK law. It therefore follows that changes to the Protocol agreed by the UK government do not breach UK law.
That misses the point. The Good Friday Agreement means that either of the two large parties can shut down Stormont, if they are deeply unhappy about something.
Sinn Fein as second party did that for many years, a few years ago. The DUP are doing that today.
Whether something is legal, and whether something is a deal, are two completely different things.
Any changes to the Protocol may be legal, but if either the DUP or Sinn Fein find them completely unacceptable then they have the democratic prerogative within the Good Friday Agreement to shut down Stormont.
So any deal needs to be more than just legal, it needs at the minimum to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
That’s politics, not law.
The UK government’s job is to act in the national interest. If its job was to prioritise the wishes of Northern Ireland over the wishes of the rest of the UK we would not have Brexited.
quick turn around only available with @nanopore shows us the bird to human transmission was a strain that’s endemic to Cambodia and hasn’t shown H2H transmission since it arose. As there were infected birds in house the daughter and father infected independently https://mobile.twitter.com/CallumJCParr/status/1629850216735166467
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Labour are also undefeated - it was Brown, Miliband and Corbyn that lost it, not them.
It took Corbyn's heavy general election defeat in 2019 though for Labour to move on from Momentum and get to the more centrist Starmer
But wasn't that exactly Jonathan's point (that you argued against)? '...until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party.'
It would take a Conservative leader from the ERG wing of the party losing a general election heavily for the Tories to be able to move on from the ERG.
Not Sunak passing a Commons vote with Labour backing
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
The Supreme Court has ruled the Protocol does not breach UK law. The Good Friday agreement is enshrined in UK law. It therefore follows that changes to the Protocol agreed by the UK government do not breach UK law.
That misses the point. The Good Friday Agreement means that either of the two large parties can shut down Stormont, if they are deeply unhappy about something.
Sinn Fein as second party did that for many years, a few years ago. The DUP are doing that today.
Whether something is legal, and whether something is a deal, are two completely different things.
Any changes to the Protocol may be legal, but if either the DUP or Sinn Fein find them completely unacceptable then they have the democratic prerogative within the Good Friday Agreement to shut down Stormont.
So any deal needs to be more than just legal, it needs at the minimum to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
That’s politics, not law.
The UK government’s job is to act in the national interest. If its job was to prioritise Northern Ireland over the rest if the UK we would not have Brexited.
I frigging said it was politics, not law. 🤦♂️
The national interest was served in the 2019 deal, yes, getting a good deal for GB rather than putting the NI cart before the GB horse like Theresa May's backstop did.
This deal is supposedly an NI-specific deal. If it is, it needs to serve the interests of both the DUP and Sinn Fein politically. If it does not, what exactly is it supposed to be dealing with? We already have a deal working for Britain, this is whether it works for Northern Ireland or not and the DUP and Sinn Fein represent Northern Ireland.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Labour are also undefeated - it was Brown, Miliband and Corbyn that lost it, not them.
It took Corbyn's heavy general election defeat in 2019 though for Labour to move on from Momentum and get to the more centrist Starmer
But wasn't that exactly Jonathan's point (that you argued against)? '...until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party.'
The words 'a thorn' shouldn't be included in that.
The national interest requires a deal. If Sunak delivers one, with or without a Commons vote, he will go up in my estimation. What’s more, if he can take Brexit off the political menu I suspect that will do the Tories a lot of good electorally. But that will involve forcing the ERG into humiliating irrelevance. Is he strong enough to do that?
The problem is that if "Windsor" is forced through via technic means it will fuel the mythos of the right in the same way as Maastricht and Lisbon did before. The ERG need to be on the wrong side of the democratic argument.
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Since when has the King’s wife, ever been called anything else?
Anyway, in Royal protocol terms, calling the wife of the King the Queen is really at the boring end of the spectrum. What I want to know the answers to are:
1. When Britain next has a female Monarch, will the husband of that Queen now be known as the King, or will there be a sexist double-standard persisting, despite male primogeniture now being abolished?
2. Furthermore, should that female Monarch decide to marry a woman, would the wife of a future reigning Queen also be known as the Queen?
3. Similarly, should a future reigning King marry a man, would their husband also be known as the King?
HYUFD will be along any minute to explain why scenarios 2. and 3. cannot happen.
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
Exactly so. The real negotiations that need to happen are between Sinn Fein and the DUP.
The perfect scenario, would have been for the EU to have delegated their role over agreements on NI to the Irish government - with the Irish government, British government, and the various NI parties, sitting down to work out a deal acceptable to everyone.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Labour are also undefeated - it was Brown, Miliband and Corbyn that lost it, not them.
It took Corbyn's heavy general election defeat in 2019 though for Labour to move on from Momentum and get to the more centrist Starmer
But wasn't that exactly Jonathan's point (that you argued against)? '...until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party.'
It would take a Conservative leader from the ERG wing of the party losing a general election heavily for the Tories to be able to move on from the ERG.
Not Sunak passing a Commons vote with Labour backing
I hope Humza will reflect that merely to say this is to be “transphobic” in terms of the (unlawful) definition of “transphobia” adopted by the NEC & would potentially open him up to a charge of hate speech under his own, as yet not in force, #HateCrimeBill 🤷♀️
Such a pity that Sturgeon managed to keep Cherry in the Commons when she wanted to come to Edinburgh. She would have been a formidable candidate if she was in the right Parliament.
Still, she’s backing the formidable Regan..
And yet despite this, the ever decreasing but unquestioning SNP cult of personality that follows Nicola Sturgeon continues to ignore her well aimed attack lines..
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Since when has the King’s wife, ever been called anything else?
Anyway, in Royal protocol terms, calling the wife of the King the Queen is really at the boring end of the spectrum. What I want to know the answers to are:
1. When Britain next has a female Monarch, will the husband of that Queen now be known as the King, or will there be a sexist double-standard persisting, despite male primogeniture now being abolished?
2. Furthermore, should that female Monarch decide to marry a woman, would the wife of a future reigning Queen also be known as the Queen?
3. Similarly, should a future reigning King marry a man, would their husband also be known as the King?
The great thing about our unwritten constitution is that if any of the above happens, it will get sorted and muddled through at the time, and withing a few months what seemed to be a massive issue will be the new normal.
Sunak deserves a lot of praise for this deal and to be honest it is not really about popularity but doing the right thing for the country and especially NI
The dinosaurs in the ERG need to be marginalised anyway
It is good to have a PM who does detail after the chaos of Johnson and Truss
It would be a serious mistake for him to run away from a vote again. He looks like an Italian technocrat.
The reason Sunak sensibly wants to avoid an actual vote is Labour will vote for it but up to 100 ERG and Eurosceptic Conservative MPs and the DUP would likely vote against
If it is 100 Conservative MPs against the plan, Sunak's in trouble anyway. It's possible, but is it likely?
And whilst the DUP opposition is a problem for getting the Assembly up and running again, there's a moderate chance that they just don't want to be second fiddle and will say No anyway.
It's nonsense. If there were that many the deal wouldn't be announced.
My sense is that rebels will be in the 20s and low 30s at most.
How does Sunak know? He doesn't seem to have even informed the likes of Francois and Baker, Rees Mogg and Bill Cash and Jenkin and Redwood and Patel about what is in the Deal
Whips.
Not defeating the ERG in a vote is a bear trap. The meme of the unelected PM bypassing democratic votes will not be good for Sunak.
Sunak was elected by Tory MPs, just never by Conservative members and on current polling likely never by the general public either.
As long as most Tory MPs back the Deal, even if 100 voted against it they would mainly be Boris loyalists and former Truss supporters and ERG backers who have always hated Rishi anyway
There was no mp vote. It was uncontested.
192 Tory MPs nominated Sunak, over 50% of Conservative MPs
So no vote. It was uncontested. Technocratic.
As I said 55% of Tory MPs nominated Sunak, so he already had won the required majority of Tory MPs from endorsements alone
So no election, it was uncontested. The only leadership election Sunak entered, he lost to Truss. He’s now running away from a vote he would actually win.
Sunak beat Truss with Tory MPs, just Truss beat him with Tory members.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
The reason you’re wrong and why it matters is that until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party. Right now Sunak is adding to their mythology.
Even if Starmer wins the next general election the ERG will say they were undefeated saying it was Sunak and Hunt that lost it not them and Boris
Labour are also undefeated - it was Brown, Miliband and Corbyn that lost it, not them.
Kent is undefeated, but the Normans still took over (except possibly in Thanet)
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
So Johnson's October 2019 'deal' wasn't a deal then?
The Supreme Court has ruled it was.
I'm not arguing it wasn't; Barty's saying it doesn't meet his criteria.
Is that a new constitutional test ?
Barty, the Norman St John-Stevas de nos jours.
Indeed so. No matter that Sunak might sign his so-called 'deal', no matter that he might get said 'deal' through a Commons vote, if the DUP and SF don't agree to it, it's not a proper Barty deal.
(News for Barty: the DUP and SF will never agree on any deal.)
I can't comment on the deal, not knowing about it, but any deal needs to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
Exactly so. The real negotiations that need to happen are between Sinn Fein and the DUP.
The perfect scenario, would have been for the EU to have delegated their role over agreements on NI to the Irish government - with the Irish government, British government, and the various NI parties, sitting down to work out a deal acceptable to everyone.
The Irish government has done a lot of heavy lifting on getting the rest of the EU to agree concessions. The deal is a big win for hem, as well as for Sunak. That may be another reason why the DUP won’t like it, of course.
Sunak should put it to a vote and let the headbangers lose. They need to face up to the reality that no one outside of their bubble cares about their concerns. On my estimation they have about 7 more years to make Brexit work and improve their levels of support amongst the working age population otherwise rejoin will come back on to the political agenda in a big way. As every year goes by, Leave/ERG lose a large tranche of their impassioned supporters because they are overwhelmingly old.
The issue is that the vast majority of the potential benefits are not being taken, and the constant prioritisation of the NI stuff doesn’t help. Where’s the serious deregulation, the free zones, the incentives for businesses and startups to locate in the UK? Every damn government department should have a massive Bill up for debate this year, and there should be a minister on the news every morning with a positive vision for the future. Yet nothing.
But Treasury authodoxy, and managed declinism, are still ruling the roost in No.10. If the government want to see a 1997 result, rather than a 1992 result, they’re going exactly the right way about it.
Easy. It's the same reason that Lexiteers haven't got the Socialist Republic of Britain that they voted Leave to secure.
EU regulations weren't the only thing stopping the UK deregulating massively, or swinging hard to the left. They were the visible roadblock, but they weren't the only factor. Massive deregulation hasn't got a mandate from the British public and probably wouldn't be all that popular. Consider the way that the government can't loosen up planning restrictions, even thoughs have never had anything to do with Europe.
The bulk of the Brexit vote, the bulk of the VL campaign was a mandate to divert EU subs to the NHS, mostly a vote by pensioners for pensioners. Oh, and less Eastern Europeans on the streets too.
So to those who voted leave to get more dramatic change, sorry. You have to dance with the one who brung ya.
For those who want more dramatic change, they now need to win a General Election.
Boris Johnson may be the one who led the Leave campaign and got us over the line for Brexit, but he won't be PM forever. *checks notes* Actually he's already not PM, so the 'one who brung ya' has already disappeared into the sunset.
That's the whole point of 'taking back control'. We decide, democratically, who we want in Parliament at the elections. And if our Parliamentarians do a bad job, we can change them at the next election, as is likely as it stands in many seats next time.
That's democracy, and that's why Brexit was a good idea. Sacrificing democracy is not worthwhile.
Some truth in that, but I was really responding to the "why hasn't the government radically deregulated" question. And as you say, there's no mandate so far for that. But it does leave two questions.
First one goes like this. A lot of the Brexit vote came from retired homeowners, who I think you and I would agree are doing a reasonable job of running the country into the ground because they're not interested in anything beyond their lifespan. From their point of view, Parliamentarians can be doing an excellent job, as long as they turn the national seedcorn into cake for tomorrow. When Brexit backers allied themselves with a bunch of selfish shortighted fools to get the vote over the line, what did they think was going to happen?
Second, suppose that what the UK actually wants is a somewhat different flavour of Butskellism to our near neighbours, and that our input into the democratic processes of Europe aren't enough to secure that. (After all, you can say that the democracy of the EU is incomplete or fuzzy, but it's a stretch to say that it's not democratic. And if the UK doesn't always get its way... well, that's democracy.) At what does separation become more hassle than it's worth?
The question has always been how much poorer are you willing to be because of Brexit? You can tell that the Brexiteers know that the answer for many Leave voters is "not very" from the fact that their entire campaign was based on the lie that there would be zero economic cost.
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
Since when has the King’s wife, ever been called anything else?
Anyway, in Royal protocol terms, calling the wife of the King the Queen is really at the boring end of the spectrum. What I want to know the answers to are:
1. When Britain next has a female Monarch, will the husband of that Queen now be known as the King, or will there be a sexist double-standard persisting, despite male primogeniture now being abolished?
2. Furthermore, should that female Monarch decide to marry a woman, would the wife of a future reigning Queen also be known as the Queen?
3. Similarly, should a future reigning King marry a man, would their husband also be known as the King?
HYUFD will be along any minute to explain why scenarios 2. and 3. cannot happen.
If Prince George married a man I expect he would end up being titled King Consort.
They could also of course now still produce an heir via IVF using a test tube sample from Prince George
While we’re busy not commenting on a deal none of us have read:
Police interviewed senior SNP members over fraud allegations days before Nicola Sturgeon’s shock resignation.
Former treasurer Douglas Chapman spoke to detectives and other key figures were contacted in connection with the probe into claims of £600,000 of missing ring-fenced referendum cash – codenamed Operation Branchform.
The problem is not that the money is "missing". The problem is that it has been very largely spent to keep the SNP solvent. We have known this for the best part of a year. I am completely lost to work out what the police are still "investigating". Either there has been a breach of trust here that amounts to a fraud or there hasn't been. The modern tendency for "investigations" to go on and on (parties in Downing Street come to mind) pointlessly is beyond irritating.
David , has been a slow struggle to get anything done due to perpetrators having lots of chums in the right places, changes there due to UK having milked Sturgeon and hey presto it starts to fall apart. I expect more retirements soon as well, hopefully the whole house of crads falls and we get the truth on the stitch up attempts. Be some nervous liars about at present.
Peter Murrell's position, at least, must be highly precarious. And that may well prove a breaking of the logjam. The whole thing of him lending a six figure sum to the SNP and, of course, refusing to provide the accounts to the previous Treasurer, is distinctly odd. We may well find that that £600k is not the only problem with the accounts.
Yes and him and a few chums have eye watering salaries to boot
Comments
But Treasury authodoxy, and managed declinism, are still ruling the roost in No.10. If the government want to see a 1997 result, rather than a 1992 result, they’re going exactly the right way about it.
Until he resigns the Tory leadership after a general election defeat or loses a VONC, the views of Conservative members are now not relevant, only those of most Tory MPs
I can be 100% certain that if some anointed heir to Sturgeon was in place the screeching about an undemocratic stitch up would be deafening.
I’m intrigued by this semi mythical succession planning, are there many examples of it existing let alone resulting in a successful replacement?
Let's have a vote in Parliament and get it passed.
Let's move on 👍.
Has that been announced?
Only 48 hours until deadline for producers @lornaslater has just said on BBC that giving small producers a one year delay “is absolutely something we are actively considering”. Total shambles. We deserve better than this incompetence.
https://twitter.com/mrblairbowman/status/1629799143227916289
Some think this is a great idea. Business thinks it’s awful.
Tie breaker: how can we have a system where the responsible Minister says, *48 hours* before the deadline, “we need to have a chat”…?
https://twitter.com/roddyqc/status/1629991459691679744
EU regulations weren't the only thing stopping the UK deregulating massively, or swinging hard to the left. They were the visible roadblock, but they weren't the only factor. Massive deregulation hasn't got a mandate from the British public and probably wouldn't be all that popular. Consider the way that the government can't loosen up planning restrictions, even thoughs have never had anything to do with Europe.
The bulk of the Brexit vote, the bulk of the VL campaign was a mandate to divert EU subs to the NHS, mostly a vote by pensioners for pensioners. Oh, and less Eastern Europeans on the streets too.
So to those who voted leave to get more dramatic change, sorry. You have to dance with the one who brung ya.
Sunak just needs to get something or other through so he can focus on the salient issues of CoL, immigration, housing etc.
Buckingham Palace is considering officially describing Camilla as Queen rather than Queen Consort after the coronation in May.
The change could be reflected on the Court Circular, the official register of royal engagements, and would take effect after the King is crowned as monarch.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/camilla-expected-to-take-queen-as-formal-title-lvt6scp06
https://twitter.com/mattchorley/status/1630117289709256705
“Can SOMEONE check if GREG HaNdS is oK?”
Long live The Times.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/first-u-s-small-nuclear-reactor-design-is-approved/
There’s a huge first mover advantage here, whoever can get these on the ground generating power is going to get a lot of orders.
Have a good morning.
Just Queen Camilla will still formally be Queen Consort not Queen Sovereign like Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II
Just as a "populist" is generally someone you disagree with that is more popular than you are.
The secrecy around these negotiations is extraordinary
You prove my other point, there was a ton of screeching after Sturgeon succeeded Salmond unopposed because everyone in the SNP recognised she was the strongest candidate.
If they are, he's got a deal.
If they're not, its not a deal.
That's the Good Friday Agreement. Majoritarianism doesn't apply to Northern Ireland unless you wish to abolish the Good Friday Agreement.
Though Camilla has done her dues and makes the King happy, let her be.
The heir to the throne is still Diana's son not Camilla's
56% REMAIN
44% LEAVE
#justsayin'
#justsayin'
1. We shouldn't comment on the deal until it's been released and we've read it, obviously.
2. It's quite a coup for Sunak to see off his opponents with such a brilliant deal that contains something for everybody.
Boris Johnson may be the one who led the Leave campaign and got us over the line for Brexit, but he won't be PM forever. *checks notes* Actually he's already not PM, so the 'one who brung ya' has already disappeared into the sunset.
That's the whole point of 'taking back control'. We decide, democratically, who we want in Parliament at the elections. And if our Parliamentarians do a bad job, we can change them at the next election, as is likely as it stands in many seats next time.
That's democracy, and that's why Brexit was a good idea. Sacrificing democracy is not worthwhile.
The DUP and ERG are super-populist in the sense that they are, in addition, much clearer about what they don't want than what they do want, and also take no political responsibility for actually achieving whatever unicorns it is they want. but expect the grown ups to do it for them.
Only 21%! (less than half of the Leave vote in 2016!)
#justsayin'
For the UK as a whole it makes sense to concentrate far more on the UK, than on a tiny corner of it, and kick NI into the long grass as happened in 2019. Which is why Theresa May failed so badly she put the cart before the horse and tried to resolve Northern Ireland first, rather than the UK first.
We're in the long grass stage now though and we'll see what happens now, but the benchmark I have set is that an NI-specific deal needs to have both Sinn Fein and the DUP on board. If it does, it makes sense as an NI-specific deal. If it doesn't, then what purpose does it serve? We already have a deal that works for GB.
The idea is to take a proven design and build a production line to bring unit costs way down - rather than the current essentially bespoke manner if building them.
(A very loose analogy would be what Musk has done with rocket motors.)
They'd need a commitment for dozens to justify the expense of building the production line.
1. When Britain next has a female Monarch, will the husband of that Queen now be known as the King, or will there be a sexist double-standard persisting, despite male primogeniture now being abolished?
2. Furthermore, should that female Monarch decide to marry a woman, would the wife of a future reigning Queen also be known as the Queen?
3. Similarly, should a future reigning King marry a man, would their husband also be known as the King?
Sinn Fein as second party did that for many years, a few years ago. The DUP are doing that today.
Whether something is legal, and whether something is a deal, are two completely different things.
Any changes to the Protocol may be legal, but if either the DUP or Sinn Fein find them completely unacceptable then they have the democratic prerogative within the Good Friday Agreement to shut down Stormont.
So any deal needs to be more than just legal, it needs at the minimum to have both the DUP and Sinn Fein on board.
Any deal needs both Sinn Fein and the DUP on board, in order to get Stormont to reopen. Failure to achieve that can't be circumvented by court cases. The solution lies in politics, not laws, and that is the job of negotiations and the entire frigging point of the Good Friday Agreement the Protocol was supposedly designed to protect.
It's just that all the talk about facing down the DUP is absurd posturing. Only the voters can force the DUP to back down, otherwise they need to be persuaded.
RR don't have the resources to do it on their own. If government wee serious about the idea they'd already have funded it.
It's not high technical risk, but it is high market risk, and the UK doesn't have manufacturers with the financial clout to go it alone.
But what some miss here is that thanks to the Good Friday Agreement it is only Unionist voters that can force the DUP to back down if they're not persuaded. There's absolutely no sign of that happening, in fact until now the pressure of other parties on the Unionist side was to be more confrontational, not less, over the Protocol.
'...until the ERG and right are defeated and seen to be defeated they will carry on being a thorn in the Tory party.'
I'm not arguing it wasn't; Barty's saying it doesn't meet his criteria.
First one goes like this. A lot of the Brexit vote came from retired homeowners, who I think you and I would agree are doing a reasonable job of running the country into the ground because they're not interested in anything beyond their lifespan. From their point of view, Parliamentarians can be doing an excellent job, as long as they turn the national seedcorn into cake for tomorrow. When Brexit backers allied themselves with a bunch of selfish shortighted fools to get the vote over the line, what did they think was going to happen?
Second, suppose that what the UK actually wants is a somewhat different flavour of Butskellism to our near neighbours, and that our input into the democratic processes of Europe aren't enough to secure that. (After all, you can say that the democracy of the EU is incomplete or fuzzy, but it's a stretch to say that it's not democratic. And if the UK doesn't always get its way... well, that's democracy.) At what does separation become more hassle than it's worth?
The UK government’s job is to act in the national interest. If its job was to prioritise the wishes of Northern Ireland over the wishes of the rest of the UK we would not have Brexited.
quick turn around only available with
@nanopore
shows us the bird to human transmission was a strain that’s endemic to Cambodia and hasn’t shown H2H transmission since it arose. As there were infected birds in house the daughter and father infected independently
https://mobile.twitter.com/CallumJCParr/status/1629850216735166467
Not Sunak passing a Commons vote with Labour backing
The national interest was served in the 2019 deal, yes, getting a good deal for GB rather than putting the NI cart before the GB horse like Theresa May's backstop did.
This deal is supposedly an NI-specific deal. If it is, it needs to serve the interests of both the DUP and Sinn Fein politically. If it does not, what exactly is it supposed to be dealing with? We already have a deal working for Britain, this is whether it works for Northern Ireland or not and the DUP and Sinn Fein represent Northern Ireland.
Barty, the Norman St John-Stevas de nos jours.
What I am articulating has been a part of our constitution since 1998.
(News for Barty: the DUP and SF will never agree on any deal.)
They could also of course now still produce an heir via IVF using a test tube sample from Prince George