Obviously not. Our revered host has clearly got a little overexcited because Rishi has had a good news day. Understandable given their rarity.
The butthurt emanating from you is glorious.
This is funny.
I've read you (as our host, but beneath the line) describe Sunak as a "nob", and criticise me for being too Leavey, and I've had @Luckyguy1983 lose his shit and critique me for being "wet" as I wasn't willing to stay part of the Trussite praetorian guard. And now you fire missiles at each other. Despite the fact we're all aligned to the same party and probably have more in common than any in the opposition parties.
Conservatives are never happier than when attacking one another.
It's the reason we're in the state we're in.
I had lunch with JohnO last week, we both observed we probably have more contempt for a lot of Tory MPs than we do for Starmer and most of the shadow cabinet.
Whilst some might doubt my PB Tory status but nobody can question JohnO's loyalty and dedication to the party.
I am planning to have lunch with him soon myself.
What JohnO doesn't do is attack other Conservatives, of course he'll have his own views in private and I've found them to be remarkably fair and nuanced.
Greatly looking forward to getting together. And such generous sentiments about someone nasty, brutish and very VERY short.
@KennyFarq SNP pal earlier today: "We've got one candidate standing to be leader of the SNP, one standing to be leader of Alba, and one standing to be leader of the DUP."
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
Not sure we can rule out a Johnson HIGNFY comeback, to be fair.
I suspect we can, given the obvious hatred and contempt Hislop has for him. Some other show, perhaps. But not that one.
(Has there been a telly show where the host is generally disliked and the fun is watching different guests abuse him each week? Sort of the I'm A Celeb dynamic, but studio bound and with no redemption arc?)
It was like that in the Angus Deayton post-prozzie era. It wasn't comfortable viewing, and he soon had to go.
IIRC he only lasted the one episode after that?
Though it was pretty obvious Merton disliked Deayton anyway (I used to watch a lot of old episodes when there loads on Youtube), and was often derisive of him in a way quite different to his banter with Hislop.
I remember watching an interview with Merton and his disdain for Deayton was very apparent. Really quite a cold dislike of him and what he brought to the show.
There was certainly resentment for the plaudits Deayton got when his gags and quips were mostly read from an autocue.
There has to be a more than zero chance that Sunak's dismal decline schtick gets too much for the Tory Party. Hunt's budget will be risky - I think Sunak will quite like his newfound semi-popularity, so there may be some tax cuts in there, but if Hunt goes full 'crush the nation and decimate the PCP' mode, that will be bad news. Then there's the locals. Sunak's departure is unlikely, but not impossible.
In that instance, Boris is 'l'inevitable'. Clearly it cannot be Truss. It won't be a 'boring but safe caretaker' like May, because Sunak is meant to be the boring but safe caretaker, so his failure would represent the failure of that approach. I don't think it will be third time lucky Penny. It's still too soon for Kemi. That leaves Boris and his mandate as really the only possible front man for whatever coalition removes Sunak.
Give it up Lucky. Rishi is there until Election 24 and then the Tories will move on in Opposition (probably to Kemi but that's to be seen)
@KennyFarq SNP pal earlier today: "We've got one candidate standing to be leader of the SNP, one standing to be leader of Alba, and one standing to be leader of the DUP."
@KennyFarq SNP pal earlier today: "We've got one candidate standing to be leader of the SNP, one standing to be leader of Alba, and one standing to be leader of the DUP."
LOL.
BTW, an interesting article from a pro-Indy commentator.
"The bottom line is this: the SNP lied about what it really is; it showed one face to the people – a smiling, happy, cuddly, progressive face – when in reality, behind closed doors it was like an American family at Thanksgiving, with the lefty-liberals barely able to sit beside their Trump-supporting relatives."
There has to be a more than zero chance that Sunak's dismal decline schtick gets too much for the Tory Party. Hunt's budget will be risky - I think Sunak will quite like his newfound semi-popularity, so there may be some tax cuts in there, but if Hunt goes full 'crush the nation and decimate the PCP' mode, that will be bad news. Then there's the locals. Sunak's departure is unlikely, but not impossible.
In that instance, Boris is 'l'inevitable'. Clearly it cannot be Truss. It won't be a 'boring but safe caretaker' like May, because Sunak is meant to be the boring but safe caretaker, so his failure would represent the failure of that approach. I don't think it will be third time lucky Penny. It's still too soon for Kemi. That leaves Boris and his mandate as really the only possible front man for whatever coalition removes Sunak.
The only coalition that will remove Sunak is the electorate at the next GE
He is the grown up that may mitigate the losses in 24
You are simply not living in the real world if you think Johnson is to return in any capacity now or in the future
There has to be a more than zero chance that Sunak's dismal decline schtick gets too much for the Tory Party. Hunt's budget will be risky - I think Sunak will quite like his newfound semi-popularity, so there may be some tax cuts in there, but if Hunt goes full 'crush the nation and decimate the PCP' mode, that will be bad news. Then there's the locals. Sunak's departure is unlikely, but not impossible.
In that instance, Boris is 'l'inevitable'. Clearly it cannot be Truss. It won't be a 'boring but safe caretaker' like May, because Sunak is meant to be the boring but safe caretaker, so his failure would represent the failure of that approach. I don't think it will be third time lucky Penny. It's still too soon for Kemi. That leaves Boris and his mandate as really the only possible front man for whatever coalition removes Sunak.
Give it up Lucky. Rishi is there until Election 24 and then the Tories will move on in Opposition (probably to Kemi but that's to be seen)
It's over for Boris, soz.
You mistake me as a Boris-ramper. My favourability toward him goes up and down a lot, but I agree with virtually everything negative anyone here says about him. He's certainly not who I want to be PM, and I was pretty glad when he copped it.
That said, I do think if Rishi goes before the next election, he's the only plausible alternative, and the closer to the election that is, the more that becomes the case. Since (hopefully?) even the most smitten Sunak groupie doesn’t think he has a 100% chance of surviving until the election, that means whatever there is out of that hundred is largely Boris's.
Not sure we can rule out a Johnson HIGNFY comeback, to be fair.
I suspect we can, given the obvious hatred and contempt Hislop has for him. Some other show, perhaps. But not that one.
(Has there been a telly show where the host is generally disliked and the fun is watching different guests abuse him each week? Sort of the I'm A Celeb dynamic, but studio bound and with no redemption arc?)
It was like that in the Angus Deayton post-prozzie era. It wasn't comfortable viewing, and he soon had to go.
IIRC he only lasted the one episode after that?
Though it was pretty obvious Merton disliked Deayton anyway (I used to watch a lot of old episodes when there loads on Youtube), and was often derisive of him in a way quite different to his banter with Hislop.
I remember watching an interview with Merton and his disdain for Deayton was very apparent. Really quite a cold dislike of him and what he brought to the show.
There was certainly resentment for the plaudits Deayton got when his gags and quips were mostly read from an autocue.
I never got the feeling that Merton liked anyone very much.
Obviously not. Our revered host has clearly got a little overexcited because Rishi has had a good news day. Understandable given their rarity.
The butthurt emanating from you is glorious.
This is funny.
I've read you (as our host, but beneath the line) describe Sunak as a "nob", and criticise me for being too Leavey, and I've had @Luckyguy1983 lose his shit and critique me for being "wet" as I wasn't willing to stay part of the Trussite praetorian guard. And now you fire missiles at each other. Despite the fact we're all aligned to the same party and probably have more in common than any in the opposition parties.
Conservatives are never happier than when attacking one another.
That's not to count him out forever, but he's buggered up his response on this, and I think the Parliamentary party at least are now sold on competence rather than charisma as their best hope.
If Sunak loses badly next year, which remains likely, and Johnson keeps his seat, he's back in the game. But not before then.
Sectarian violence (and the threat of its return) works!
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
That has always been FUDHY’s argument: NI gets special treatment because they use weapons and Scotland is treated with contempt because we are peaceful.
There has to be a more than zero chance that Sunak's dismal decline schtick gets too much for the Tory Party. Hunt's budget will be risky - I think Sunak will quite like his newfound semi-popularity, so there may be some tax cuts in there, but if Hunt goes full 'crush the nation and decimate the PCP' mode, that will be bad news. Then there's the locals. Sunak's departure is unlikely, but not impossible.
In that instance, Boris is 'l'inevitable'. Clearly it cannot be Truss. It won't be a 'boring but safe caretaker' like May, because Sunak is meant to be the boring but safe caretaker, so his failure would represent the failure of that approach. I don't think it will be third time lucky Penny. It's still too soon for Kemi. That leaves Boris and his mandate as really the only possible front man for whatever coalition removes Sunak.
Give it up Lucky. Rishi is there until Election 24 and then the Tories will move on in Opposition (probably to Kemi but that's to be seen)
It's over for Boris, soz.
You mistake me as a Boris-ramper. My favourability toward him goes up and down a lot, but I agree with virtually everything negative anyone here says about him. He's certainly not who I want to be PM, and I was pretty glad when he copped it.
That said, I do think if Rishi goes before the next election, he's the only plausible alternative, and the closer to the election that is, the more that becomes the case. Since (hopefully?) even the most smitten Sunak groupie doesn’t think he has a 100% chance of surviving until the election, that means whatever there is out of that hundred is largely Boris's.
I am not a Sunak groupie, as you so disparaging say, but he is 100% certain to lead into GE 24 following yesterday's success
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
That's not to count him out forever, but he's buggered up his response on this, and I think the Parliamentary party at least are now sold on competence rather than charisma as their best hope.
If Sunak loses badly next year, which remains likely, and Johnson keeps his seat, he's back in the game. But not before then.
I think if that happens he'll have the feel of yesterday's man about him, and Kemi is far likelier.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Sectarian violence (and the threat of its return) works!
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
That has always been FUDHY’s argument: NI gets special treatment because they use weapons and Scotland is treated with contempt because we are peaceful.
I do not understand why you have this silly habit of referring to @HYUFD as FUDHY
I have many disagreements with him but he deserves the respect of being addressed as HYUFD
Sectarian violence (and the threat of its return) works!
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
Having a huge proportion of your trade with an EU member state works, and it's the practical issue of trade with Ireland that made it essential to come to a deal.
The fact is (and I'm genuinely sympathetic with Remain-voting Scots on this) that they are not in the same position as a vast amount of cross-border activity is with England.
Not sure we can rule out a Johnson HIGNFY comeback, to be fair.
I suspect we can, given the obvious hatred and contempt Hislop has for him. Some other show, perhaps. But not that one.
(Has there been a telly show where the host is generally disliked and the fun is watching different guests abuse him each week? Sort of the I'm A Celeb dynamic, but studio bound and with no redemption arc?)
It was like that in the Angus Deayton post-prozzie era. It wasn't comfortable viewing, and he soon had to go.
IIRC he only lasted the one episode after that?
Though it was pretty obvious Merton disliked Deayton anyway (I used to watch a lot of old episodes when there loads on Youtube), and was often derisive of him in a way quite different to his banter with Hislop.
I remember watching an interview with Merton and his disdain for Deayton was very apparent. Really quite a cold dislike of him and what he brought to the show.
There was certainly resentment for the plaudits Deayton got when his gags and quips were mostly read from an autocue.
I never got the feeling that Merton liked anyone very much.
Possibly, but there is a difference between not liking anyone very much, and actively disliking some people.
That's not to count him out forever, but he's buggered up his response on this, and I think the Parliamentary party at least are now sold on competence rather than charisma as their best hope.
If Sunak loses badly next year, which remains likely, and Johnson keeps his seat, he's back in the game. But not before then.
I think if that happens he'll have the feel of yesterday's man about him, and Kemi is far likelier.
Already happened to a large extent.
Not running in October 2022 was prudent and pragmatic but not pugnatious.
And now... has he said anything about the deal? You can make a case for supporting it, or for slamming it. But staying silent isn't the act of someone who is still in the game.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Sectarian violence (and the threat of its return) works!
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
That has always been FUDHY’s argument: NI gets special treatment because they use weapons and Scotland is treated with contempt because we are peaceful.
I do not understand why you have this silly habit of referring to @HYUFD as FUDHY
I have many disagreements with him but he deserves the respect of being addressed as HYUFD
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
They sent me a few sheets of SNP themed sticky address labels (my own details) which I thought might be useful but have in fact never used, and a bog standard yellow SNP ballpoint which has lasted ages so I can’t really complain. Apart from the odd letter and email they’re not bad on the old guilt trip thing.
That's not to count him out forever, but he's buggered up his response on this, and I think the Parliamentary party at least are now sold on competence rather than charisma as their best hope.
If Sunak loses badly next year, which remains likely, and Johnson keeps his seat, he's back in the game. But not before then.
I think if that happens he'll have the feel of yesterday's man about him, and Kemi is far likelier.
Already happened to a large extent.
Not running in October 2022 was prudent and pragmatic but not pugnatious.
And now... has he said anything about the deal? You can make a case for supporting it, or for slamming it. But staying silent isn't the act of someone who is still in the game.
Sectarian violence (and the threat of its return) works!
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
That has always been FUDHY’s argument: NI gets special treatment because they use weapons and Scotland is treated with contempt because we are peaceful.
I do not understand why you have this silly habit of referring to @HYUFD as FUDHY
I have many disagreements with him but he deserves the respect of being addressed as HYUFD
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
Well, granted. I suppose the Sturgeon Christmas card thing might look a bit different this year.
I was rather thinking at least there used to be the thin veneer of illusion that the members could take part in and genuinely influence policy; that they could vote for whom they wanted for e.g. the NEC without seeing the rules changed to essentially allow all the people who the members had voted out back in just because; even fairly basic stuff like sending you party-wide emails (rather than local branch ones) vaguely sounding like the party knew what it was doing and what it was trying to achieve, that sort of thing. But yes, point taken.
If Northern Ireland is entirely within the UK single market why the concerns of the DUP? Why is Rishi trying SO HARD to sell the deal as great for Northern Ireland? That won't win him (m)any votes at the next election.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
They sent me a few sheets of SNP themed sticky address labels (my own details) which I thought might be useful but have in fact never used, and a bog standard yellow SNP ballpoint which has lasted ages so I can’t really complain. Apart from the odd letter and email they’re not bad on the old guilt trip thing.
Me too. I also once got a bright yellow recycled fabric bottle carrier with the SNP logo for shopping trips. But I never used it as an English friend was overjoyed when he saw it and carried it off for his shopping in Waitrose in Slough or wherever he gets his nosh from, to mess with the locals' heads. Mind, when he was a lad and came to stay with us, he used to change his banknotes carefully the day before he went home, so all his money was Scots. He loved the expressions on London taxi drivers' faces and the like ...
Sectarian violence (and the threat of its return) works!
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
That has always been FUDHY’s argument: NI gets special treatment because they use weapons and Scotland is treated with contempt because we are peaceful.
I do not understand why you have this silly habit of referring to @HYUFD as FUDHY
I have many disagreements with him but he deserves the respect of being addressed as HYUFD
Respect a Francoist?
Fuck off.
I think that says more about you than me
That you request “respect” for a fascist says an awful lot about you.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
They sent me a few sheets of SNP themed sticky address labels (my own details) which I thought might be useful but have in fact never used, and a bog standard yellow SNP ballpoint which has lasted ages so I can’t really complain. Apart from the odd letter and email they’re not bad on the old guilt trip thing.
I would have thought that a yellow SNP emblazoned cardboard box in which to deposit sleepy newborns would be the least they could do.
Sectarian violence (and the threat of its return) works!
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
That has always been FUDHY’s argument: NI gets special treatment because they use weapons and Scotland is treated with contempt because we are peaceful.
I do not understand why you have this silly habit of referring to @HYUFD as FUDHY
I have many disagreements with him but he deserves the respect of being addressed as HYUFD
If Northern Ireland is entirely within the UK single market why the concerns of the DUP? Why is Rishi trying SO HARD to sell the deal as great for Northern Ireland? That won't win him (m)any votes at the next election.
So son asks if NI can have access to the EU single market and the U.K market, why can’t the rest of the country.
It’s a hard one.
The rest of the country needs to start shooting and bombing Leavers.
It's the only way.
Obviously that is the reason why the EU has bent the rules, but it does demonstrate that in practice the Four Freedoms are divisible. The question that we now need answered is can they be divided peacefully? The EU in the recent past has been adamant that the answer is no, but it is probably worth asking again if only to see if there has been any change of mood.
Off topic, but I think of interest to many on here. The excellent Storyville documentary, Truffle Hunters (about the the old boys and their dogs prowling the Piedmontese countryside for the precious fungi) disappears from iPlayer tomorrow. A beautiful, gentle film well worth and hour and a quarter of anyone’s time.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Scotland should have taken the opportunity to have self-determination in 2014.
Since they rejected it, the fact that they voted to Remain in the EU is of no more significance than the fact that Liverpool did.
Scots did vote for self-determination in 2014. Just as the Welsh did vote for remain in 2016.
Are we going the full Trump here?
I think Stuart is implying that it woz the migrant English wot won it for Leave.
Then he's an even bigger fool than I took him for. The key areas voting leave were the western Valleys and Wrexham, and there are very few English incomers there. No jobs to lure them.
In fact, the areas with the largest numbers of English incomers are the ones that went remain.
That's not to count him out forever, but he's buggered up his response on this, and I think the Parliamentary party at least are now sold on competence rather than charisma as their best hope.
If Sunak loses badly next year, which remains likely, and Johnson keeps his seat, he's back in the game. But not before then.
I think if that happens he'll have the feel of yesterday's man about him, and Kemi is far likelier.
Maybe. But she has nothing like his charisma. Can't stand the man, but a blustering arseholes go, he's the heavyweight champion of blustering arseholery.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
It does occur to me that if Putin does something very stupid that puts the wind up the EU that a whole load of "it can never happen" sort of issues might rapidly become solvable.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
The opportunity to propose a motion for Conference via your branch, have it accepted and debated. The opportunity to stand for National Executive even if you weren’t disabled, black or gay.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
I enjoyed it. If even one person laughed the comedians job is done.
Went to a Sara Pascoe gig on Saturday.
She mentioned that she met Nigel Farage once and introduced herself: "Hi, I'm Sara Pascoe, I'm a comedian" to which Farage apparently replied "I don't find comedy funny".
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
So son asks if NI can have access to the EU single market and the U.K market, why can’t the rest of the country.
It’s a hard one.
The Leaver argument was that choosing better access to global markets - the Australia trade deal, the trans-Pacific one, etc - was better than having access to the Single Market. Consequently, paying the price of leaving the Single market would still pay off net, because of the global market access.
Let's put to one side for the moment whether this is true or not, because that argument has been done to death, but if for the sake of argument we assume it is true, then the reason NI is in such a great position is that it doesn't have to pay the price of losing Single Market access to gain Global Market access (via the UK market) - it can get both at once - but if the whole UK joined the Single Market it would have to give up the Global Market access.
I might disagree with the Leaver argument on a couple of points - I don't think the trade will result in a net benefit to the UK, and I think there was potential to get the EU to strike similar trade deals to get access to both markets from within the EU - but to a certain extent that's a matter of judgement that involves making predictions about the future. It's not a matter of fact that can be settled one way or the other. So I can certainly see a logical basis for the Leaver argument.
The smart-alec response of, "Why can't we all enjoy the benefits of Single Market access like NI?" just don't do it for me.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
I enjoyed it. If even one person laughed the comedians job is done.
Went to a Sara Pascoe gig on Saturday. She mentioned that she met Nigel Farage once and introduced herself: "Hi, I'm Sara Pascoe, I'm a comedian" to which Farage apparently replied "I don't find comedy funny".
"Humour - it is a difficult concept!" - Lt. Saavik.
It does occur to me that if Putin does something very stupid that puts the wind up the EU that a whole load of "it can never happen" sort of issues might rapidly become solvable.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
I enjoyed it. If even one person laughed the comedians job is done.
Went to a Sara Pascoe gig on Saturday.
She mentioned that she met Nigel Farage once and introduced herself: "Hi, I'm Sara Pascoe, I'm a comedian" to which Farage apparently replied "I don't find comedy funny".
Bodes badly for his upcoming one-man stand-up Edinburgh Fringe show.
So son asks if NI can have access to the EU single market and the U.K market, why can’t the rest of the country.
It’s a hard one.
The Leaver argument was that choosing better access to global markets - the Australia trade deal, the trans-Pacific one, etc - was better than having access to the Single Market. Consequently, paying the price of leaving the Single market would still pay off net, because of the global market access.
Let's put to one side for the moment whether this is true or not, because that argument has been done to death, but if for the sake of argument we assume it is true, then the reason NI is in such a great position is that it doesn't have to pay the price of losing Single Market access to gain Global Market access (via the UK market) - it can get both at once - but if the whole UK joined the Single Market it would have to give up the Global Market access.
I might disagree with the Leaver argument on a couple of points - I don't think the trade will result in a net benefit to the UK, and I think there was potential to get the EU to strike similar trade deals to get access to both markets from within the EU - but to a certain extent that's a matter of judgement that involves making predictions about the future. It's not a matter of fact that can be settled one way or the other. So I can certainly see a logical basis for the Leaver argument.
The smart-alec response of, "Why can't we all enjoy the benefits of Single Market access like NI?" just don't do it for me.
TLDR: The Leaver argument was lose access to the EU single market in the hope of gaining access to a global market that the EU could just as easily gain access to anyway?
Bollocks was it. The Leaver argument was 'we don't like the EU because it's the source of all our ills'.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
So son asks if NI can have access to the EU single market and the U.K market, why can’t the rest of the country.
It’s a hard one.
Its piss easy, NI is treated as if it is in the UK (which it is) and in Ireland (which is in the EU) so it gets both.
It is the same reason someone born in Belfast can have British citizenship and Irish citizenship, but someone born in Bristol can't.
What part of that is confusing.
That makes no sense whatsoever if we are all citizens of a united kingdom.
It must be my age.
Quantum mechanics is hard to understand and NI is almost as tricky.
We are citizens of a United Kingdom so are all equally a part of the UK market. NI citizens are citizens of Ireland as well as the United Kingdom not instead of it. So they get access to the Irish market and the UK market simultaneously.
The fact that NI is part of the Irish market as well as the UK market simultaneously doesn't make the UK any less UK, it just makes NI special as far as Ireland is concerned. If you're from Derby not Derry and want to be Irish then you can move to Dublin.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
I enjoyed it. If even one person laughed the comedians job is done.
Went to a Sara Pascoe gig on Saturday.
She mentioned that she met Nigel Farage once and introduced herself: "Hi, I'm Sara Pascoe, I'm a comedian" to which Farage apparently replied "I don't find comedy funny".
Bodes badly for his upcoming one-man stand-up Edinburgh Fringe show.
Probably.
I remember when he came up to Edinburgh in indyref1 or Brexitref and he was challenged by a crowd led by a Labour activist and a leftie student.
The SNP got the blame in the London meida for the sheer cruelty of making Mr Farage hide in a pub for half an hour.
London voted Remain and has more people than Scotland and also left the EU and single market with the rest of GB, so what? What next? Special Deals for Remain voting Cheltenham, Oxford, Cambridge, Maidenhead and Tunbridge Wells and Godalming too?
Northern Ireland also has a border with an EU nation and the GFA to uphold, neither scenario applies to Scotland
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
I enjoyed it. If even one person laughed the comedians job is done.
Went to a Sara Pascoe gig on Saturday.
She mentioned that she met Nigel Farage once and introduced herself: "Hi, I'm Sara Pascoe, I'm a comedian" to which Farage apparently replied "I don't find comedy funny".
He doesn't find comedy funny?
Like, none of it?
I'm feeling a strange rush of emotions. First bewilderment, confusion. Then a touch of disbelief, perhaps even anger. And then pity. Pity for Nigel Farage! What an empty, dull, life not to find comedy funny.
London has more people than Scotland and also left the EU and single market with the rest of GB, so what? What next? Special Deals for Remain voting Cheltenham, Maidenhead and Tunbridge Wells and Godalming too?
Northern Ireland also has a border with an EU nation and the GFA to uphold, neither scenario applies to Scotland
It does occur to me that if Putin does something very stupid that puts the wind up the EU that a whole load of "it can never happen" sort of issues might rapidly become solvable.
E.g. ?
So far Russia has mainly issued threats towards EU states, but what if they started following through? Not necessarily Article 5 time with Russian boots in a NATO member state, but hostages, cutting cables, shoot down a stray airliner, weapons factories catching fire, poison some dissidents etc. The EU might decide that closer relations with the UK, because like France we also have the bomb, are worth a bit more flexibility
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
So son asks if NI can have access to the EU single market and the U.K market, why can’t the rest of the country.
It’s a hard one.
Its piss easy, NI is treated as if it is in the UK (which it is) and in Ireland (which is in the EU) so it gets both.
It is the same reason someone born in Belfast can have British citizenship and Irish citizenship, but someone born in Bristol can't.
What part of that is confusing.
That makes no sense whatsoever if we are all citizens of a united kingdom.
It must be my age.
Quantum mechanics is hard to understand and NI is almost as tricky.
We are citizens of a United Kingdom so are all equally a part of the UK market. NI citizens are citizens of Ireland as well as the United Kingdom not instead of it. So they get access to the Irish market and the UK market simultaneously.
The fact that NI is part of the Irish market as well as the UK market simultaneously doesn't make the UK any less UK, it just makes NI special as far as Ireland is concerned. If you're from Derby not Derry and want to be Irish then you can move to Dublin.
Only if you have deep pockets. Have you seen rents in Dublin recently?
Unless the Tories suffer heavy loss of council seats and councis in May I can't see Boris pushing for a VONC in Rishi. Even then I expect most Tory MPs would stick with Sunak
So son asks if NI can have access to the EU single market and the U.K market, why can’t the rest of the country.
It’s a hard one.
Its piss easy, NI is treated as if it is in the UK (which it is) and in Ireland (which is in the EU) so it gets both.
It is the same reason someone born in Belfast can have British citizenship and Irish citizenship, but someone born in Bristol can't.
What part of that is confusing.
That makes no sense whatsoever if we are all citizens of a united kingdom.
It must be my age.
Quantum mechanics is hard to understand and NI is almost as tricky.
We are citizens of a United Kingdom so are all equally a part of the UK market. NI citizens are citizens of Ireland as well as the United Kingdom not instead of it. So they get access to the Irish market and the UK market simultaneously.
The fact that NI is part of the Irish market as well as the UK market simultaneously doesn't make the UK any less UK, it just makes NI special as far as Ireland is concerned. If you're from Derby not Derry and want to be Irish then you can move to Dublin.
You're allowed to know the speed of Northern Ireland with perfect precision but at the expense of the position, and vice-versa.
There has to be a more than zero chance that Sunak's dismal decline schtick gets too much for the Tory Party. Hunt's budget will be risky - I think Sunak will quite like his newfound semi-popularity, so there may be some tax cuts in there, but if Hunt goes full 'crush the nation and decimate the PCP' mode, that will be bad news. Then there's the locals. Sunak's departure is unlikely, but not impossible.
In that instance, Boris is 'l'inevitable'. Clearly it cannot be Truss. It won't be a 'boring but safe caretaker' like May, because Sunak is meant to be the boring but safe caretaker, so his failure would represent the failure of that approach. I don't think it will be third time lucky Penny. It's still too soon for Kemi. That leaves Boris and his mandate as really the only possible front man for whatever coalition removes Sunak.
Give it up Lucky. Rishi is there until Election 24 and then the Tories will move on in Opposition (probably to Kemi but that's to be seen)
Sectarian violence (and the threat of its return) works!
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
That has always been FUDHY’s argument: NI gets special treatment because they use weapons and Scotland is treated with contempt because we are peaceful.
I do not understand why you have this silly habit of referring to @HYUFD as FUDHY
So son asks if NI can have access to the EU single market and the U.K market, why can’t the rest of the country.
It’s a hard one.
The Leaver argument was that choosing better access to global markets - the Australia trade deal, the trans-Pacific one, etc - was better than having access to the Single Market. Consequently, paying the price of leaving the Single market would still pay off net, because of the global market access.
Let's put to one side for the moment whether this is true or not, because that argument has been done to death, but if for the sake of argument we assume it is true, then the reason NI is in such a great position is that it doesn't have to pay the price of losing Single Market access to gain Global Market access (via the UK market) - it can get both at once - but if the whole UK joined the Single Market it would have to give up the Global Market access.
I might disagree with the Leaver argument on a couple of points - I don't think the trade will result in a net benefit to the UK, and I think there was potential to get the EU to strike similar trade deals to get access to both markets from within the EU - but to a certain extent that's a matter of judgement that involves making predictions about the future. It's not a matter of fact that can be settled one way or the other. So I can certainly see a logical basis for the Leaver argument.
The smart-alec response of, "Why can't we all enjoy the benefits of Single Market access like NI?" just don't do it for me.
TLDR: The Leaver argument was lose access to the EU single market in the hope of gaining access to a global market that the EU could just as easily gain access to anyway?
Bollocks was it. The Leaver argument was 'we don't like the EU because it's the source of all our ills'.
We will negotiate a new UK-EU deal based on free trade and friendly cooperation. We will carry on trading with Europe but we will also be able to negotiate trade agreements with other countries. This will help our economy grow and create more jobs.
You may want to dumb down the opposite side of a debate because it makes you feel superior, but it just shows ignorance if you can't understand what others are actually saying.
Not a single minister at Holyrood has, so far, backed Forbes. Yousaf has three cabinet secretaries and a number of junior ministers supporting him.
Notably, Ian Blackford, who represents the same patch of the Highlands as Kate, has declared for Humza.
I wonder if this will influence SNP members?
As we have repeatedly seen, and very recently too, leaders who lack the support of their parliamentary colleagues invariably come to grief sooner or later.
The sooner parties realise there's no real benefit to having the leader chosen by Members the better. Yes, Corbyn's surge saw Labour massively boost numbers, but it didn't help win an election, and the Tories haven't seen a surge since they started having members choose.
Cut them out, and if the only reason they were a party member was to have a vote for Leader are they that much of an asset? Members didn't used to care about it.
Unfortunately the SNP (read: Sturgeon and Murrell and their helpers) have subverted internal party democracy so badly that a vote on the leader is one of the few meaningful perks remaining of being a member now.
What were the other meaningful perks previously?
Asking as a fairly long term member.
We certainly didn't get a discount on Tunnock's wafers.
I enjoyed it. If even one person laughed the comedians job is done.
Went to a Sara Pascoe gig on Saturday.
She mentioned that she met Nigel Farage once and introduced herself: "Hi, I'm Sara Pascoe, I'm a comedian" to which Farage apparently replied "I don't find comedy funny".
He doesn't find comedy funny?
Like, none of it?
I'm feeling a strange rush of emotions. First bewilderment, confusion. Then a touch of disbelief, perhaps even anger. And then pity. Pity for Nigel Farage! What an empty, dull, life not to find comedy funny.
Pretty much Sara Pascoe's point really. As she said, if he'd qualified it "I don't find female/modern/stand-up/political/slap-stick comedy funny" that would make sense. As it is it's a bit like saying I don't find pleasure enjoyable, or I don't find heat warm.
London voted Remain and has more people than Scotland and also left the EU and single market with the rest of GB, so what? What next? Special Deals for Remain voting Cheltenham, Oxford, Cambridge, Maidenhead and Tunbridge Wells and Godalming too?
Northern Ireland also has a border with an EU nation and the GFA to uphold, neither scenario applies to Scotland
So son asks if NI can have access to the EU single market and the U.K market, why can’t the rest of the country.
It’s a hard one.
The Leaver argument was that choosing better access to global markets - the Australia trade deal, the trans-Pacific one, etc - was better than having access to the Single Market. Consequently, paying the price of leaving the Single market would still pay off net, because of the global market access.
Let's put to one side for the moment whether this is true or not, because that argument has been done to death, but if for the sake of argument we assume it is true, then the reason NI is in such a great position is that it doesn't have to pay the price of losing Single Market access to gain Global Market access (via the UK market) - it can get both at once - but if the whole UK joined the Single Market it would have to give up the Global Market access.
I might disagree with the Leaver argument on a couple of points - I don't think the trade will result in a net benefit to the UK, and I think there was potential to get the EU to strike similar trade deals to get access to both markets from within the EU - but to a certain extent that's a matter of judgement that involves making predictions about the future. It's not a matter of fact that can be settled one way or the other. So I can certainly see a logical basis for the Leaver argument.
The smart-alec response of, "Why can't we all enjoy the benefits of Single Market access like NI?" just don't do it for me.
TLDR: The Leaver argument was lose access to the EU single market in the hope of gaining access to a global market that the EU could just as easily gain access to anyway?
Bollocks was it. The Leaver argument was 'we don't like the EU because it's the source of all our ills'.
Partly true, but also not wanting to be part of the EU political ambitions. It was never simple, and it’s unhelpful on all sides to make it so.
London voted Remain and has more people than Scotland and also left the EU and single market with the rest of GB, so what? What next? Special Deals for Remain voting Cheltenham, Oxford, Cambridge, Maidenhead and Tunbridge Wells and Godalming too?
Northern Ireland also has a border with an EU nation and the GFA to uphold, neither scenario applies to Scotland
London voted Remain and has more people than Scotland and also left the EU and single market with the rest of GB, so what? What next? Special Deals for Remain voting Cheltenham, Oxford, Cambridge, Maidenhead and Tunbridge Wells and Godalming too?
Northern Ireland also has a border with an EU nation and the GFA to uphold, neither scenario applies to Scotland
Scotland has a border with several EU nations. It's called the North Sea.
Political discourse has been all about the Irish Sea Border for years - including you most recently, this very day.
London voted Remain and has more people than Scotland and also left the EU and single market with the rest of GB, so what? What next? Special Deals for Remain voting Cheltenham, Oxford, Cambridge, Maidenhead and Tunbridge Wells and Godalming too?
Northern Ireland also has a border with an EU nation and the GFA to uphold, neither scenario applies to Scotland
When did London join the Union of equals?
When did Scotland?
Scotland confirmed it wanted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum
Comments
SNP pal earlier today: "We've got one candidate standing to be leader of the SNP, one standing to be leader of Alba, and one standing to be leader of the DUP."
It's over for Boris, soz.
BTW, an interesting article from a pro-Indy commentator.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/viewpoint/23349750.snp-pushing-progressive-voters-arms-labour/
"The bottom line is this: the SNP lied about what it really is; it showed one face to the people – a smiling, happy, cuddly, progressive face – when in reality, behind closed doors it was like an American family at Thanksgiving, with the lefty-liberals barely able to sit beside their Trump-supporting relatives."
He is the grown up that may mitigate the losses in 24
You are simply not living in the real world if you think Johnson is to return in any capacity now or in the future
Maybe Libya could send you some....
…
At least the graphic is accurate about Wales voting to leave, people often omit that.
That said, I do think if Rishi goes before the next election, he's the only plausible alternative, and the closer to the election that is, the more that becomes the case. Since (hopefully?) even the most smitten Sunak groupie doesn’t think he has a 100% chance of surviving until the election, that means whatever there is out of that hundred is largely Boris's.
There’s perhaps a it more to it than that.
That's not to count him out forever, but he's buggered up his response on this, and I think the Parliamentary party at least are now sold on competence rather than charisma as their best hope.
If Sunak loses badly next year, which remains likely, and Johnson keeps his seat, he's back in the game. But not before then.
Asking as a fairly long term member.
I have many disagreements with him but he deserves the respect of being addressed as HYUFD
That means he must be very confident he's got the numbers and his position is secure.
The fact is (and I'm genuinely sympathetic with Remain-voting Scots on this) that they are not in the same position as a vast amount of cross-border activity is with England.
Since they rejected it, the fact that they voted to Remain in the EU is of no more significance than the fact that Liverpool did.
Not running in October 2022 was prudent and pragmatic but not pugnatious.
And now... has he said anything about the deal? You can make a case for supporting it, or for slamming it. But staying silent isn't the act of someone who is still in the game.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/04/storm-in-a-teacake-scottish-nationalists-call-for-boycott-of-tunnocks
Theresa May went in pretty aggressively on her deal, saying no more negotiations and its what's on the table too.
Fuck off.
If NI had voted 55% to Leave it would still have had to have a special deal to avoid a border on the island of Ireland.
Just as the Welsh did vote for remain in 2016.
I was rather thinking at least there used to be the thin veneer of illusion that the members could take part in and genuinely influence policy; that they could vote for whom they wanted for e.g. the NEC without seeing the rules changed to essentially allow all the people who the members had voted out back in just because; even fairly basic stuff like sending you party-wide emails (rather than local branch ones) vaguely sounding like the party knew what it was doing and what it was trying to achieve, that sort of thing. But yes, point taken.
It must be my age.
Given the survey dates, I'm not really convinced the Deltapoll is the first sign of this rather than merely a pre-bounce outlet.
In fact, the areas with the largest numbers of English incomers are the ones that went remain.
She mentioned that she met Nigel Farage once and introduced herself: "Hi, I'm Sara Pascoe, I'm a comedian" to which Farage apparently replied "I don't find comedy funny".
Let's put to one side for the moment whether this is true or not, because that argument has been done to death, but if for the sake of argument we assume it is true, then the reason NI is in such a great position is that it doesn't have to pay the price of losing Single Market access to gain Global Market access (via the UK market) - it can get both at once - but if the whole UK joined the Single Market it would have to give up the Global Market access.
I might disagree with the Leaver argument on a couple of points - I don't think the trade will result in a net benefit to the UK, and I think there was potential to get the EU to strike similar trade deals to get access to both markets from within the EU - but to a certain extent that's a matter of judgement that involves making predictions about the future. It's not a matter of fact that can be settled one way or the other. So I can certainly see a logical basis for the Leaver argument.
The smart-alec response of, "Why can't we all enjoy the benefits of Single Market access like NI?" just don't do it for me.
Probably.
Bollocks was it. The Leaver argument was 'we don't like the EU because it's the source of all our ills'.
We are citizens of a United Kingdom so are all equally a part of the UK market. NI citizens are citizens of Ireland as well as the United Kingdom not instead of it. So they get access to the Irish market and the UK market simultaneously.
The fact that NI is part of the Irish market as well as the UK market simultaneously doesn't make the UK any less UK, it just makes NI special as far as Ireland is concerned. If you're from Derby not Derry and want to be Irish then you can move to Dublin.
The SNP got the blame in the London meida for the sheer cruelty of making Mr Farage hide in a pub for half an hour.
Northern Ireland also has a border with an EU nation and the GFA to uphold, neither scenario applies to Scotland
Like, none of it?
I'm feeling a strange rush of emotions. First bewilderment, confusion. Then a touch of disbelief, perhaps even anger. And then pity. Pity for Nigel Farage! What an empty, dull, life not to find comedy funny.
You
Used
Funny
Drugs?
We will negotiate a new UK-EU deal based on free trade and friendly cooperation. We will carry on trading with Europe but we will also be able to negotiate trade agreements with other countries. This will help our economy grow and create more jobs.
You may want to dumb down the opposite side of a debate because it makes you feel superior, but it just shows ignorance if you can't understand what others are actually saying.
Political discourse has been all about the Irish Sea Border for years - including you most recently, this very day.
Same logic applies ...