'The Germans have the whole EU political consideration to balance against pissing money up the wall, so the equation is slightly more complicated.'
The Germans like the rest of the euro zone members are trapped in this ideological nightmare, around 350 bn has already been pissed up the wall,what's another 30 bn ?
@BannedInParis - I'm not sure I'd put Churchill particularly high as a peacetime PM. Attlee's government did immense harm along with some good things (and many of those were simply implementing plans made during the war), so on balance not a particularly good PM.
I agree with your bottom tier.
In the mid tier:
Macmillan was the best, and IMO is the only rival to Cameron as best post-war PM other than Maggie.
Wilson did a few good things (and kept us out of Vietnam, to his eternal credit) but was an unmitigated disaster in the most important issue of the age, namely dealing with the rising threat of the unions.
Callaghan: Ineffectual fire-fighting, presided over the decline which Wilson had allowed to take root, put in place a bunch of spectacularly stupid measures to try to mitigate the damage and ended up making things even worse
Blair: Oh dear, what a waste of opportunity and talent
Major: More ineffectual fire-fighting, perhaps not all his fault but you don't get any prizes for trying in this contest
Sometimes I think Callaghan did the best with an awful hand given to him by Wilson but then you realise that he also went and made many of the same mistakes.
wrt churchill, I know, I know, but I can't *not* put him there. it's my ball.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
Mr Perdix, how do you define "an excellent PM". Most tories I know think of him as average at best.
90% of current Tories think Cameron is doing very well or fairly well as PM.
I suspect you are letting your own views colour your judgement.
"Fairly well" would be a reasonable synonym for "Average"
I'm pretty sure he'd do very well indeed on the Nabavi Test: Best PM of the last 50 years, other than Maggie - and not just with Conservatives.
That's pretty damned good however you frame it, assuming you're grounded in reality, of course.
So, second of five?
I think Cameron has done a good job in all sorts of ways, but that 'test' doesn't do much to prove it.
2nd of seven, or eight if you throw in Douglas-Home as well. Of course Maggie was utterly exceptional, so it's a rather unusual sample anyway.
But if you want to define 'average' as 'we're lucky to get a PM as good as that every half-century or so', then, yes, he's average.
We used to get plenty of them, its just that since that war (with the exception of Maggie) this country have been in the grip of people with no ambition, that want the country to just about scrape by, that want to manage our decline with the least political inconvenience.
Dave isn't crap, he's just indistinguishable from a Orange Book Lib Dem. He doesn't want to be in the EU because its good for the country, he wants to be in because its a smoke screen of mediocrities he can use as cover for his lack of ambition.
The subtext of modern politicians of all colours seems to be "if we try really hard, if we are lucky we can be a little bit less shit"
I don't think that's fair to Cameron. On the EU, I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that access to the single market is good for business, and I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that European integration has gone too far and harms Britain in all sorts of ways. His solution to all this was to go into the EU with major demands for repatriation, win them, and then win a referendum to stay in the EU. This is a narrow shot, but still possible to pull-off. Cameron has defied expectations before, and he could well do it again.
The danger, of course, is that the EU refuses to be reasonable, and Cameron's background means he reacts to this as a PR man and politician rather than as a national strategist. i.e. he reacts to a poor proposal to the EU by signing it and pretending it's a great deal, and then wins a stacked referendum on that basis. That would be a very sad end to a talented Prime Ministerial career.
Sometimes I think Callaghan did the best with an awful hand given to him by Wilson but then you realise that he also went and made many of the same mistakes.
Wilson's third and fourth ministries can only be understood in the context of the disastrous legacy he inherited from Heath. The authoritative survey is Martin Holmes' The Failure of the Heath Government, esp. the second edition (1997), where the learned author shreds the arguments of various revisionist Heathite apologists (Campbell, Ball, Seldon etc.) who emerged from the woodwork after the publication of the first edition. Wilson's first and second ministries, by contrast, have to be regarded as some of the most successful of the postwar governments before 1979.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
She did sign the Single European Act.
The SEA created a common market for a European Community. Maggie was always pro-European Community, but anti-European Union. That was the correct position, then as now.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
TSE hates kippers, and some of the Tory BOO'er sympathisers, and wants to value signal against them. The rest is immaterial.
I've repeatedly pointed out the foolishness of trying to accentuate divisions on the EU within the Tory party to him, and he himself has expressed frustrations over lack of unity within the party in the past, yet he persists.
The truth is that the Tory party has become progressively more eurosceptic over the past 25 years. I don't think that journey is done, but respect those that disagree.
I don't think that's fair to Cameron. On the EU, I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that access to the single market is good for business, and I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that European integration has gone too far and harms Britain in all sorts of ways. His solution to all this was to go into the EU with major demands for repatriation, win them, and then win a referendum to stay in the EU. This is a narrow shot, but still possible to pull-off. Cameron has defied expectations before, and he could well do it again.
But it doesn't stand up even on its own terms. South Korea has access to the single market, so does Mexico, as to half a dozen other economies, and yet all of them can form their own trading agreements with third parties without having to convince the EU first. None of the are bound by EU product standards except to the extent they export those products to EU Countries. All of them control their own borders (or at least haven't had their border situation made any worse by the EU), none of them are bound by the moveable feast of "ever closer union", etc. etc.
The danger, of course, is that the EU refuses to be reasonable, and Cameron's background means he reacts to this as a PR man and politician rather than as a national strategist. i.e. he reacts to a poor proposal to the EU by signing it and pretending it's a great deal, and then wins a stacked referendum on that basis. That would be a very sad end to a talented Prime Ministerial career.
And for those PBers not old enough to remember just how bad things were pre-Maggie, and how hard it was to win the economic freedoms which we now take for granted, I came across this article, which shows that even as late as 1986 Labour were thinking of reintroducing exchange controls, forcing institutions to repatriate funds, and diverting funds into a National Investment Bank (!) :
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
She did sign the Single European Act.
The SEA created a common market for a European Community. Maggie was always pro-European Community, but anti-European Union. That was the correct position, then as now.
"Mr. Chairman, you have invited me to speak on the subject of Britain and Europe. Perhaps I should congratulate you on your courage. If you believe some of the things said and written about my views on Europe, it must seem rather like inviting Genghis Khan to speak on the virtues of peaceful coexistence! ...The European Community is one manifestation of that European identity, but it is not the only one. We must never forget that east of the Iron Curtain, peoples who once enjoyed a full share of European culture, freedom and identity have been cut off from their roots. We shall always look on Warsaw, Prague and Budapest as great European cities...To try to suppress nationhood and concentrate power at the centre of a European conglomerate would be highly damaging and would jeopardise the objectives we seek to achieve. Europe will be stronger precisely because it has France as France, Spain as Spain, Britain as Britain, each with its own customs, traditions and identity. It would be folly to try to fit them into some sort of identikit European personality...it is ironic that just when those countries such as the Soviet Union, which have tried to run everything from the centre, are learning that success depends on dispersing power and decisions away from the centre, there are some in the Community who seem to want to move in the opposite direction. We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them re-imposed at a European level with a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels." - M. H. Thatcher, Bruges Speech, 1988.
@BannedInParis - I'm not sure I'd put Churchill particularly high as a peacetime PM. Attlee's government did immense harm along with some good things (and many of those were simply implementing plans made during the war), so on balance not a particularly good PM.
I agree with your bottom tier.
In the mid tier:
Macmillan was the best, and IMO is the only rival to Cameron as best post-war PM other than Maggie.
Wilson did a few good things (and kept us out of Vietnam, to his eternal credit) but was an unmitigated disaster in the most important issue of the age, namely dealing with the rising threat of the unions.
Callaghan: Ineffectual fire-fighting, presided over the decline which Wilson had allowed to take root, put in place a bunch of spectacularly stupid measures to try to mitigate the damage and ended up making things even worse
Blair: Oh dear, what a waste of opportunity and talent
Major: More ineffectual fire-fighting, perhaps not all his fault but you don't get any prizes for trying in this contest
You've mentioned this a few times before. It is slightly before my time (alive by the end but not paying attention to politics) but I struggle to see why you rate MacMillan so highly. History records the night of the long knives, the Profumo affair, the fag end of a morally exhausted Tory government struggling with the enormous pressures caused by the war and the diminution of our status. He was another John Major for me, perfectly decent but nothing exceptional. I would be interested why you think otherwise.
The really sad one on the list is Blair. He had an opportunity to change this country for the better and he blew it. And he lied. And lied.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
She did sign the Single European Act.
The SEA created a common market for a European Community. Maggie was always pro-European Community, but anti-European Union. That was the correct position, then as now.
She also took us into the precursor to the single currency, the ERM.
It's a more light hearted piece/well researched piece, pointing out how Labour used to be the outers and the Tories the inners.
I've reading up on the 1975 referendum, to see the arguments and slogans used then to see if they could be used now.
The image on the left here, was an official Tory pamphlet sanctioned by Maggie during the referendum.
Mr TSE, the Sunday papers were saying that the report would be published this week and then sidelined and ignored by the govt. It is extraordinarily convenient for headline writers that they can conflate a strawberry and meringue dessert with the school that the PM went to. But after a while the joke wears off and invariably it has no meaning.
The Tory pro EU Heritage? Market town has got you there. Ted Heath? He decimated Lancashire. Your arguments have got increasingly spurious.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
TSE hates kippers, and some of the Tory BOO'er sympathisers, and wants to value signal against them. The rest is immaterial.
I am waiting with interest to see the hoop jumping and repositioning that will take place when the EU tell Cameron to piss off and he comes home with nothing and say "Ok I guess its OUT then". Oh to be a fly on the wall when TSE reads that tweet, what's a europhile Cameroon to do
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
TSE hates kippers, and some of the Tory BOO'er sympathisers, and wants to value signal against them. The rest is immaterial.
I've repeatedly pointed out the foolishness of trying to accentuate divisions on the EU within the Tory party to him, and he himself has expressed frustrations over lack of unity within the party in the past, yet he persists.
The truth is that the Tory party has become progressively more eurosceptic over the past 25 years. I don't think that journey is done, but respect those that disagree.
I don't hate anyone nor am I accentuating any splits.
I'd like to point out on the other hand, I've been called inter alia, a twat, an England hater, thick by some of the Kippers on here, I think the hatred is flows more from that side than mine,
"A family of 12 from Luton, including a baby and two grandparents, could have travelled to Syria after going missing, police have said. They have not been seen since 17 May after visiting their home country of Bangladesh. It is believed the family stopped in Turkey on their way home before entering the war-torn country."
I don't think that's fair to Cameron. On the EU, I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that access to the single market is good for business, and I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that European integration has gone too far and harms Britain in all sorts of ways. His solution to all this was to go into the EU with major demands for repatriation, win them, and then win a referendum to stay in the EU. This is a narrow shot, but still possible to pull-off. Cameron has defied expectations before, and he could well do it again.
But it doesn't stand up even on its own terms. South Korea has access to the single market, so does Mexico, as to half a dozen other economies, and yet all of them can form their own trading agreements with third parties without having to convince the EU first. None of the are bound by EU product standards except to the extent they export those products to EU Countries. All of them control their own borders (or at least haven't had their border situation made any worse by the EU), none of them are bound by the moveable feast of "ever closer union", etc. etc.
I don't think the 'ever closer union' phrasing is all that important, but it is #1 on Cameron's wish list by all accounts. Trade deals with Canada and the USA are in negotiation and should also be part of the agreement from the renegotiation. So should limits to immigration, if Cameron wants to win a referendum on fair terms, which is what would be required to put the issue to bed for the medium term. And if we achieve a substantive renegotiation, then we will get the best of both worlds: most of what Korea and Mexico have, yet also a say in the rule-making process and also more integrated access than either of them.
You've mentioned this a few times before. It is slightly before my time (alive by the end but not paying attention to politics) but I struggle to see why you rate MacMillan so highly. History records the night of the long knives, the Profumo affair, the fag end of a morally exhausted Tory government struggling with the enormous pressures caused by the war and the diminution of our status. He was another John Major for me, perfectly decent but nothing exceptional. I would be interested why you think otherwise.
You're quoting the problems of the fag-end of his administration, but before that he'd presided over the great post-war reconstruction, the building of what now seems like an extraordinary number of houses, the dismantling of the wartime restrictions and statism which had become ingrained, and perhaps above all the exceptionally difficult problem of dismantling the Empire. It's hard now to get a feel for just what a blow to British morale the inevitable loss of Empire represented: the British Empire was at the core of our national identity. Macmillan managed that transition in a masterly fashion. Above all he kept the country together in the best one-nation-Conservatism fashion so that his government worked well for the whole nation (even though he governed in a rather patrician style).
The principal aim of the SEA was to give effect to the four fundamental freedoms in the Treaty of Rome. Maastricht, which introduced common citizenship, the Common Foreign and Security Policy, and the provisions on Justice and Home Affairs inter alios, was a completely different kettle of fish.
Callaghan was that rare creature; a man who made all the wrong decisions for all the right reasons...
Although I'm definitely a lefty, watching the present appalling Tory party has made me come around to the idea that Thatcher was basically honest ( and numerate too) although I disagree in many ways with her world view's centre of mass. By contrast I advise disbelief in any utterance from DC, however convincingly delivered.
A school in Lancashire has banned naughty children. No, that’s not quite right. Ignoring several centuries of compelling evidence, Barrowford Primary says there is no such thing as a naughty child, there is only “unconditional positive regard”.
The headteacher Rachel Tomlinson says: “We don’t label children naughty at all. It’s important they see themselves as intrinsically good and build up a positive sense of self.”
Teachers at Barrowford are not allowed to raise their voices, because it is “not respectful”. Faced with a wayward mixed infant causing havoc in a lesson, they must say something like: “You are having an impact on my emotional wellbeing.”
Watching Ed Miliband’s heartbreaking speech on Friday, I couldn’t quite believe it when he mentioned Milifandom. It was bittersweet I suppose: that Ed felt Milifandom warranted a thank you but in the context of a resignation and not, as it should have been, a victory speech. It was an honour to know that Ed was thankful for the movement, and although my tears had already started flowing by then, the way that he almost smiled when he mentioned it really set me off. I have to confess that the rest of the speech was a complete blur to me.
I know to many people it may seem silly to have got emotional over Ed’s resignation, but it wasn’t anything like the reaction to Zayn Malik leaving One Direction, as some have carelessly compared it. We’d had the chance to have this amazing person as prime minister: a chance for equality, a chance for change, a chance for someone who truly cared about the people to lead them. To watch our country waste that chance and to see someone who had worked so unbelievably hard and was so deserving lose was utterly devastating. I don’t know when I’m going to get over that feeling of loss, that sick, hollow feeling in my stomach, when I think about what could have been. Ed Miliband was the best prime minister we never had.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
TSE hates kippers, and some of the Tory BOO'er sympathisers, and wants to value signal against them. The rest is immaterial.
I've repeatedly pointed out the foolishness of trying to accentuate divisions on the EU within the Tory party to him, and he himself has expressed frustrations over lack of unity within the party in the past, yet he persists.
The truth is that the Tory party has become progressively more eurosceptic over the past 25 years. I don't think that journey is done, but respect those that disagree.
I don't hate anyone nor am I accentuating any splits.
I'd like to point out on the other hand, I've been called inter alia, a twat, an England hater, thick by some of the Kippers on here, I think the hatred is flows more from that side than mine,
I don't think that's fair to Cameron. On the EU, I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that access to the single market is good for business, and I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that European integration has gone too far and harms Britain in all sorts of ways. His solution to all this was to go into the EU with major demands for repatriation, win them, and then win a referendum to stay in the EU. This is a narrow shot, but still possible to pull-off. Cameron has defied expectations before, and he could well do it again.
But it doesn't stand up even on its own terms. South Korea has access to the single market, so does Mexico, as to half a dozen other economies, and yet all of them can form their own trading agreements with third parties without having to convince the EU first. None of the are bound by EU product standards except to the extent they export those products to EU Countries. All of them control their own borders (or at least haven't had their border situation made any worse by the EU), none of them are bound by the moveable feast of "ever closer union", etc. etc.
I don't think the 'ever closer union' phrasing is all that important, but it is #1 on Cameron's wish list by all accounts. Trade deals with Canada and the USA are in negotiation and should also be part of the agreement from the renegotiation. So should limits to immigration, if Cameron wants to win a referendum on fair terms, which is what would be required to put the issue to bed for the medium term. And if we achieve a substantive renegotiation, then we will get the best of both worlds: most of what Korea and Mexico have, yet also a say in the rule-making process and also more integrated access than either of them.
He went on to criticise David Cameron’s ambition to scrap the principle of ‘ever closer union’ from the European treaties, suggesting that it would increase the likelihood of war in Europe.
Instead of best/worst Prime Ministers, how about the best Prime Ministers we never had.
Peter Mandelson.
Edit: If he had become Prime Minister in 97 instead of Blair then we could have had the kind of government people thought Blair would deliver.
Was he not PM from 2008-2010?
The only thing Brown did right was bringing Mandy back to run his government for him. In the catastrophic mess that Brown had created he didn't do a bad job at all.
Instead of best/worst Prime Ministers, how about the best Prime Ministers we never had.
I'll be different, and go for Denis Healey.
David Owen would be one. Paddy Ashdown still intrigues me.
For different reasons, both Michael Heseltine and Norman Tebbit could have got the job in parallel universes too. And, the most obvious one, what if John Smith had survived?
Above all, William Hague. Shot his bolt too young, and it broke his will.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
TSE hates kippers, and some of the Tory BOO'er sympathisers, and wants to value signal against them. The rest is immaterial.
I've repeatedly pointed out the foolishness of trying to accentuate divisions on the EU within the Tory party to him, and he himself has expressed frustrations over lack of unity within the party in the past, yet he persists.
The truth is that the Tory party has become progressively more eurosceptic over the past 25 years. I don't think that journey is done, but respect those that disagree.
I don't hate anyone nor am I accentuating any splits.
I'd like to point out on the other hand, I've been called inter alia, a twat, an England hater, thick by some of the Kippers on here, I think the hatred is flows more from that side than mine,
So don't rise to it. There are sensible BOO'ers like Carswell, Hannan, Steve Hilton and (in all probability) Hammond.
Not sure if posted earlier but key moment at PMQs:
Cameron confirmed he is sticking with the reduction to 600 MPs.
So Boundary Commissions will start work in early 2016, draw up 600 seats and the reports will have to pass votes in both Commons and Lords in 2018.
NB. Unless Cameron puts a clause (probably in the Votes for Life Act) that no votes are required in 2018 and he can lay the reports personally himself before the Queen. This is possible - it's exactly the amendment he tabled in 2012 when the LDs blocked the last review.
But if he goes this route he has to get the clause through in an Act of Parliament - which obviously must pass Commons and Lords (though technically he could use Parliament Act).
Instead of best/worst Prime Ministers, how about the best Prime Ministers we never had.
I'll be different, and go for Denis Healey.
David Owen would be one. Paddy Ashdown still intrigues me.
For different reasons, both Michael Heseltine and Norman Tebbit could have got the job in parallel universes too. And, the most obvious one, what if John Smith had survived?
Above all, William Hague. Shot his bolt too young, and it broke his will.
Obviously Enoch
The inspiration behind Thatchers monetary policy, a consistent record of voting for gay rights, an opponent of nuclear weapons, and of course had he been PM there would be almost no British people that want sharia law or flee to IS, no 7/7 and no beheading of Lee Rigby
Roy Jenkins would have been a good PM. He was an outstanding Home Secretary and really shone in a golden age for serious Labour politicians. How any Labour supporter can not reflect back to the first Wilson administration, compare that cabinet with the choices available now and not weep is beyond me.
Turning their back on him to the point he left the party was absolutely key to Maggie's dominance.
Instead of best/worst Prime Ministers, how about the best Prime Ministers we never had.
I'll be different, and go for Denis Healey.
David Owen would be one. Paddy Ashdown still intrigues me.
For different reasons, both Michael Heseltine and Norman Tebbit could have got the job in parallel universes too. And, the most obvious one, what if John Smith had survived?
Above all, William Hague. Shot his bolt too young, and it broke his will.
Obviously Enoch
The inspiration behind Thatchers monetary policy, a consistent record of voting for gay rights, an opponent of nuclear weapons, and of course had he been PM there would be almost no British people that want sharia law or flee to IS, no 7/7 and no beheading of Lee Rigby
I don't think that's fair to Cameron. On the EU, I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that access to the single market is good for business, and I think he genuinely (and correctly) believes that European integration has gone too far and harms Britain in all sorts of ways. His solution to all this was to go into the EU with major demands for repatriation, win them, and then win a referendum to stay in the EU. This is a narrow shot, but still possible to pull-off. Cameron has defied expectations before, and he could well do it again.
But it doesn't stand up even on its own terms. South Korea has access to the single market, so does Mexico, as to half a dozen other economies, and yet all of them can form their own trading agreements with third parties without having to convince the EU first. None of the are bound by EU product standards except to the extent they export those products to EU Countries. All of them control their own borders (or at least haven't had their border situation made any worse by the EU), none of them are bound by the moveable feast of "ever closer union", etc. etc.
I don't think the 'ever closer union' phrasing is all that important, but it is #1 on Cameron's wish list by all accounts. Trade deals with Canada and the USA are in negotiation and should also be part of the agreement from the renegotiation. So should limits to immigration, if Cameron wants to win a referendum on fair terms, which is what would be required to put the issue to bed for the medium term. And if we achieve a substantive renegotiation, then we will get the best of both worlds: most of what Korea and Mexico have, yet also a say in the rule-making process and also more integrated access than either of them.
He went on to criticise David Cameron’s ambition to scrap the principle of ‘ever closer union’ from the European treaties, suggesting that it would increase the likelihood of war in Europe.
People say lots of things. What matters is the final agreement between Cameron and Merkel. Once that is in place, it is very likely everyone else will fall into line.
Most of the "best Prime Ministers we never had" benefit from not actually getting the job. Anthony Eden and Gordon Brown show the dangers of finally getting the prize.
I don't see how Ken Clarke could have become Prime Minister of any party that would have been united enough to govern coherently. Dennis Healey was fun but I'm sceptical whether he would actually have been any good.
Ian Macleod would be my nominee. And if he hadn't died an untimely death, he might have got the job at some point.
@BannedInParis - I'm not sure I'd put Churchill particularly high as a peacetime PM. Attlee's government did immense harm along with some good things (and many of those were simply implementing plans made during the war), so on balance not a particularly good PM.
I agree with your bottom tier.
In the mid tier:
Macmillan was the best, and IMO is the only rival to Cameron as best post-war PM other than Maggie.
Wilson did a few good things (and kept us out of Vietnam, to his eternal credit) but was an unmitigated disaster in the most important issue of the age, namely dealing with the rising threat of the unions.
Callaghan: Ineffectual fire-fighting, presided over the decline which Wilson had allowed to take root, put in place a bunch of spectacularly stupid measures to try to mitigate the damage and ended up making things even worse
Blair: Oh dear, what a waste of opportunity and talent
Major: More ineffectual fire-fighting, perhaps not all his fault but you don't get any prizes for trying in this contest
You've mentioned this a few times before. It is slightly before my time (alive by the end but not paying attention to politics) but I struggle to see why you rate MacMillan so highly. History records the night of the long knives, the Profumo affair, the fag end of a morally exhausted Tory government struggling with the enormous pressures caused by the war and the diminution of our status. He was another John Major for me, perfectly decent but nothing exceptional. I would be interested why you think otherwise.
The really sad one on the list is Blair. He had an opportunity to change this country for the better and he blew it. And he lied. And lied.
My opinion of John Major only increases with time. His gravitas is exceptional today, and presentation of arguments - whenever he does so - are clear, well-thought through and highly lucid.
Mr. Indigo, saw a little of Wimbledon, apparently 41C was recorded.
Ouch. Its the rainy season here so we are only in the mid 30s today, but 41C would be unusual even here, mind you 38C with 90% humidy (what we usually get) feels a little different to a hot day in the UK!
Mr. Indigo, saw a little of Wimbledon, apparently 41C was recorded.
They quoted 41 yesterday on the basis of a thermometer sat directly on top of a dark green metal surface in direct sunlight - so meaningless hype rather than a real measurement.
I'm willing to bet reasonable sums of money that Jeremy Corbyn will not get close to a third of the first preferences. If I lose those reasonable sums of money I can then recoup them by betting heavily on a Conservative victory in 2020.
@BannedInParis - I'm not sure I'd put Churchill particularly high as a peacetime PM. Attlee's government did immense harm along with some good things (and many of those were simply implementing plans made during the war), so on balance not a particularly good PM.
I agree with your bottom tier.
In the mid tier:
Macmillan was the best, and IMO is the only rival to Cameron as best post-war PM other than Maggie.
Wilson did a few good things (and kept us out of Vietnam, to his eternal credit) but was an unmitigated disaster in the most important issue of the age, namely dealing with the rising threat of the unions.
Callaghan: Ineffectual fire-fighting, presided over the decline which Wilson had allowed to take root, put in place a bunch of spectacularly stupid measures to try to mitigate the damage and ended up making things even worse
Blair: Oh dear, what a waste of opportunity and talent
Major: More ineffectual fire-fighting, perhaps not all his fault but you don't get any prizes for trying in this contest
You've mentioned this a few times before. It is slightly before my time (alive by the end but not paying attention to politics) but I struggle to see why you rate MacMillan so highly. History records the night of the long knives, the Profumo affair, the fag end of a morally exhausted Tory government struggling with the enormous pressures caused by the war and the diminution of our status. He was another John Major for me, perfectly decent but nothing exceptional. I would be interested why you think otherwise.
The really sad one on the list is Blair. He had an opportunity to change this country for the better and he blew it. And he lied. And lied.
My opinion of John Major only increases with time. His gravitas is exceptional today, and presentation of arguments - whenever he does so - are clear, well-thought through and highly lucid.
It may be inverted snobbishness but I don't want old style, Old Etonian Tories of the old school to succeed me and go back to the old complacent, consensus ways. John Major is someone who has fought his way up from the bottom and is far more in tune with the skilled and ambitious and worthwhile working classes than Douglas Hurd is. - M. H. Thatcher, November 1990.
Instead of best/worst Prime Ministers, how about the best Prime Ministers we never had.
I'll be different, and go for Denis Healey.
David Owen would be one. Paddy Ashdown still intrigues me.
For different reasons, both Michael Heseltine and Norman Tebbit could have got the job in parallel universes too. And, the most obvious one, what if John Smith had survived?
Above all, William Hague. Shot his bolt too young, and it broke his will.
Obviously Enoch
The inspiration behind Thatchers monetary policy, a consistent record of voting for gay rights, an opponent of nuclear weapons, and of course had he been PM there would be almost no British people that want sharia law or flee to IS, no 7/7 and no beheading of Lee Rigby
Also no ukip!
I think he was excellent but too emotional and cerebral to be PM. Senior cabinet or DPM, certainly.
@BannedInParis - I'm not sure I'd put Churchill particularly high as a peacetime PM. Attlee's government did immense harm along with some good things (and many of those were simply implementing plans made during the war), so on balance not a particularly good PM.
I agree with your bottom tier.
In the mid tier:
Macmillan was the best, and IMO is the only rival to Cameron as best post-war PM other than Maggie.
Wilson did a few good things (and kept us out of Vietnam, to his eternal credit) but was an unmitigated disaster in the most important issue of the age, namely dealing with the rising threat of the unions.
Callaghan: Ineffectual fire-fighting, presided over the decline which Wilson had allowed to take root, put in place a bunch of spectacularly stupid measures to try to mitigate the damage and ended up making things even worse
Blair: Oh dear, what a waste of opportunity and talent
Major: More ineffectual fire-fighting, perhaps not all his fault but you don't get any prizes for trying in this contest
You've mentioned this a few times before. It is slightly before my time (alive by the end but not paying attention to politics) but I struggle to see why you rate MacMillan so highly. History records the night of the long knives, the Profumo affair, the fag end of a morally exhausted Tory government struggling with the enormous pressures caused by the war and the diminution of our status. He was another John Major for me, perfectly decent but nothing exceptional. I would be interested why you think otherwise.
The really sad one on the list is Blair. He had an opportunity to change this country for the better and he blew it. And he lied. And lied.
My opinion of John Major only increases with time. His gravitas is exceptional today, and presentation of arguments - whenever he does so - are clear, well-thought through and highly lucid.
John Major agreed the Eurozone opt-out for the UK, for which this nation should be ever thankful. Let's hope Cameron agrees opt-outs as substantial.
On the Labour side, although not to my personal taste I think Barbara Castle would have been a good PM. Indeed if Wilson hadn't bottled out of her In Place of Strife proposal, the country might not have wasted nearly two decades in industrial unrest and economic decline.
Mr. Indigo, you're not in Bongo Bongo Land, are you?
Dr. Prasannan, I am unconvinced that a warm day in summer is proof the climate's changing
Hmm. Hunting down ink refills. Got the Parker sorted, but trying to find a longer, thin, screw-in black ink refill. Doesn't help that the original has no markings on whatsoever. Hmm.
Edited extra bit: might have found the right thingummyjig. Browsing for things that don't pertain to the 3rd century BC is tricky.
Instead of best/worst Prime Ministers, how about the best Prime Ministers we never had.
I'll be different, and go for Denis Healey.
David Owen would be one. Paddy Ashdown still intrigues me.
For different reasons, both Michael Heseltine and Norman Tebbit could have got the job in parallel universes too. And, the most obvious one, what if John Smith had survived?
Above all, William Hague. Shot his bolt too young, and it broke his will.
Obviously Enoch
The inspiration behind Thatchers monetary policy, a consistent record of voting for gay rights, an opponent of nuclear weapons, and of course had he been PM there would be almost no British people that want sharia law or flee to IS, no 7/7 and no beheading of Lee Rigby
Also no ukip!
What period do you think he could have been PM?
70-79?
Pretty sure he'd have won a bigger majority than Heath in 70
Most of the "best Prime Ministers we never had" benefit from not actually getting the job. Anthony Eden and Gordon Brown show the dangers of finally getting the prize.
I don't see how Ken Clarke could have become Prime Minister of any party that would have been united enough to govern coherently. Dennis Healey was fun but I'm sceptical whether he would actually have been any good.
Ian Macleod would be my nominee. And if he hadn't died an untimely death, he might have got the job at some point.
Yes, correct about Macleod. We will never know of course but he was missed after his sad early death.
I'm willing to bet reasonable sums of money that Jeremy Corbyn will not get close to a third of the first preferences. If I lose those reasonable sums of money I can then recoup them by betting heavily on a Conservative victory in 2020.
It's a third of preferences in the second round which is critical. In the first round he just needs to beat someone, probably Liz Kendall, which is possible, verging on likely.
I have a thread coming up lauding the Tory party's strong Pro-EU heritage, and I'm going to use this pic for the article
That would be misleading, given that the European Union did not exist when that picture was taken, and Mrs Thatcher was (rightly) an implacable opponent of the Treaty on European Union, which was foolishly signed and ratified by her successor.
TSE hates kippers, and some of the Tory BOO'er sympathisers, and wants to value signal against them. The rest is immaterial.
I've repeatedly pointed out the foolishness of trying to accentuate divisions on the EU within the Tory party to him, and he himself has expressed frustrations over lack of unity within the party in the past, yet he persists.
The truth is that the Tory party has become progressively more eurosceptic over the past 25 years. I don't think that journey is done, but respect those that disagree.
I don't hate anyone nor am I accentuating any splits.
I'd like to point out on the other hand, I've been called inter alia, a twat, an England hater, thick by some of the Kippers on here, I think the hatred is flows more from that side than mine,
So don't rise to it. There are sensible BOO'ers like Carswell, Hannan, Steve Hilton and (in all probability) Hammond.
Your argument falls down at first base. Carswell has amply demonstrated why he is not sensible. Hannan has a lot to prove and has not even begun to demonstrate it yet.
On the Labour side, although not to my personal taste I think Barbara Castle would have been a good PM. Indeed if Wilson hadn't bottled out of her In Place of Strife proposal, the country might not have wasted two decades in industrial unrest and economic decline.
I heard her speak at a graduation ceremony once and - despite her age at the time - she was both witty and passionate. Somehow, she managed to hit exactly the right mix of encouragement and realism for the students. I've never seen a cohort of graduates actually listen to the visiting speaker before - or since....
I'm willing to bet reasonable sums of money that Jeremy Corbyn will not get close to a third of the first preferences. If I lose those reasonable sums of money I can then recoup them by betting heavily on a Conservative victory in 2020.
It's a third of preferences in the second round which is critical. In the first round he just needs to beat someone, probably Liz Kendall, which is possible, verging on likely.
Surely Jeremy Corbyn will pick up very few of Liz Kendall's second preferences? If he's not ahead of either Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper after round one, he surely won't make round three - and even if he is, there's a fair chance he'll be overtaken in round two.
I still expect Jeremy Corbyn to finish dead last. The twittersphere is not representative of Labour party members.
Most of the "best Prime Ministers we never had" benefit from not actually getting the job. Anthony Eden and Gordon Brown show the dangers of finally getting the prize.
I don't see how Ken Clarke could have become Prime Minister of any party that would have been united enough to govern coherently. Dennis Healey was fun but I'm sceptical whether he would actually have been any good.
Ian Macleod would be my nominee. And if he hadn't died an untimely death, he might have got the job at some point.
I'd vote for Iain as well.
Although when I am feeling mischevious, I do wonder about Edward Du Cann. Airey Neave would have been intriguing, but problematic!
Most of the "best Prime Ministers we never had" benefit from not actually getting the job. Anthony Eden and Gordon Brown show the dangers of finally getting the prize.
I don't see how Ken Clarke could have become Prime Minister of any party that would have been united enough to govern coherently. Dennis Healey was fun but I'm sceptical whether he would actually have been any good.
Ian Macleod would be my nominee. And if he hadn't died an untimely death, he might have got the job at some point.
I'd vote for Iain as well.
Although when I am feeling mischevious, I do wonder about Edward Du Cann. Airey Neave would have been intriguing, but problematic!
Surely Jeremy Corbyn will pick up very few of Liz Kendall's second preferences? If he's not ahead of either Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper after round one, he surely won't make round three - and even if he is, there's a fair chance he'll be overtaken in round two.
I still expect Jeremy Corbyn to finish dead last. The twittersphere is not representative of Labour party members.
I don't disagree, but Kellner's argument is that, if a substantial number of Burnham supporters put Jeremy Corbyn first (perhaps as a heart-before-head vote which they think will be 'harmless'), the contest could produce a perverse result.
Perhaps we could persuade TSE to run a thread on AV to help us understand the possibilities...
After living in Phoenix and see the mercury rise to 49C (120 in old money), I'm not sure what all the fuss is about
Here in SE Spain we will not see day-times below 30 and night below 20 until well into September. All of the past 2 weeks have been 34/5 and 25/4 day/nights. And we're on the coast where it's a bit cooler than inland.
Most of the "best Prime Ministers we never had" benefit from not actually getting the job. Anthony Eden and Gordon Brown show the dangers of finally getting the prize.
I don't see how Ken Clarke could have become Prime Minister of any party that would have been united enough to govern coherently. Dennis Healey was fun but I'm sceptical whether he would actually have been any good.
Ian Macleod would be my nominee. And if he hadn't died an untimely death, he might have got the job at some point.
I'd vote for Iain as well.
Although when I am feeling mischevious, I do wonder about Edward Du Cann. Airey Neave would have been intriguing, but problematic!
And, of course, we nearly got Willie Whitelaw....
"Every prime minister needs a Willie" - M. H. Thatcher
Attlee's government did immense harm along with some good things ... , so on balance not a particularly good PM.
Catching up with the thread......
And the same can be said of Margaret Thatcher, to be fair.
The Left never acknowledge her achievements and many responded with disgusting glee when she died, and the Right don't want to talk about the harm that she did.
Is it me or does Tsipras really get a 'Statement to the Nation' on Greek TV every day? Anyone know whether there are referendum rules for equal coverage for 'Yes' and 'No'?
Is it me or does Tsipras really get a 'Statement to the Nation' on Greek TV every day? Anyone know whether there are referendum rules for equal coverage for 'Yes' and 'No'?
There probably are rules governing referenda, but like every other Greek rule, ignored.
I did the survey, which took a long time (maybe 30 minutes). I did like that it was comprehensive, though, and gave the opportunity to say if ideas or the status quo was a load of rubbish.
Perhaps surprisingly, given it's been almost ruled out by teams, 60% want refuelling back.
Is it me or does Tsipras really get a 'Statement to the Nation' on Greek TV every day? Anyone know whether there are referendum rules for equal coverage for 'Yes' and 'No'?
There probably are rules governing referenda, but like every other Greek rule, ignored.
Actually I now realise my question should have been; anyone know if they're actually printing the ballot papers? Presumably it's a logistical effort to get them out to all the islands...?
Is it me or does Tsipras really get a 'Statement to the Nation' on Greek TV every day? Anyone know whether there are referendum rules for equal coverage for 'Yes' and 'No'?
There probably are rules governing referenda, but like every other Greek rule, ignored.
Actually I now realise my question should have been; anyone know if they're actually printing the ballot papers? Presumably it's a logistical effort to get them out to all the islands...?
Your question should be 'do they lock the ballot boxes'? The papers might get to the islands. How many will make it back? The issue has become mired in confusion now anyway, so as a method of concluding the issue it is a waste of time.
I'm willing to bet reasonable sums of money that Jeremy Corbyn will not get close to a third of the first preferences. If I lose those reasonable sums of money I can then recoup them by betting heavily on a Conservative victory in 2020.
For the long term good of the centre left a Corbyn victory could be the best possible outcome. Labour would split, just as it did in the early 80s, and something a little more relevant to the 2st century might emerge as a result. I am not watching the leadership election at all closely now. I have decided to wait and see what emerges come autumn/winter, but I would not feel too bad about a Corbyn victory. Of course, it would mean a huge defeat for Labour in 2020, but the unreconstructed left does need a final and total defeat before any significant progress can be made on my side of the aisle.
Is it me or does Tsipras really get a 'Statement to the Nation' on Greek TV every day? Anyone know whether there are referendum rules for equal coverage for 'Yes' and 'No'?
There probably are rules governing referenda, but like every other Greek rule, ignored.
Actually I now realise my question should have been; anyone know if they're actually printing the ballot papers? Presumably it's a logistical effort to get them out to all the islands...?
Well. Tsipras has said today in his ‘address to the Nation’ that a Referendum will take place next Sunday – A logistical nightmare at the best of times, let alone one at such short notice and with a geographical spread like Greece. – The printing of the ballot papers is probably the easiest bit, paying for them is another matter entirely.
Is it me or does Tsipras really get a 'Statement to the Nation' on Greek TV every day? Anyone know whether there are referendum rules for equal coverage for 'Yes' and 'No'?
There probably are rules governing referenda, but like every other Greek rule, ignored.
Actually I now realise my question should have been; anyone know if they're actually printing the ballot papers? Presumably it's a logistical effort to get them out to all the islands...?
Well. Tsipras has said today in his ‘address to the Nation’ that a Referendum will take place next Sunday – A logistical nightmare at the best of times, let alone one at such short notice and with a geographical spread like Greece. – The printing of the ballot papers is probably the easiest bit, paying for them is another matter entirely.
Print the ballot paper on one side and a drachma note on the other....?
I would have more sympathy for the Tarmac over West London enthusasists if there was some recognition of a world outside the M25. BA has the kit to run effective long haul services from the regions but insists on everything (or almost everything) going through LHR. British Airways my arse. London Airways perhaps.
On the best/worst PM question, Blair is some way below Brown. I expect MPs to dissemble but outright lying while cloaked in a hypocritical faith should be beyond the pale. If he really does believe, I hope that he he gets the down lift in the afterlife.
Comments
'The Germans have the whole EU political consideration to balance against pissing money up the wall, so the equation is slightly more complicated.'
The Germans like the rest of the euro zone members are trapped in this ideological nightmare, around 350 bn has already been pissed up the wall,what's another 30 bn ?
I agree with your bottom tier.
In the mid tier:
Macmillan was the best, and IMO is the only rival to Cameron as best post-war PM other than Maggie.
Wilson did a few good things (and kept us out of Vietnam, to his eternal credit) but was an unmitigated disaster in the most important issue of the age, namely dealing with the rising threat of the unions.
Callaghan: Ineffectual fire-fighting, presided over the decline which Wilson had allowed to take root, put in place a bunch of spectacularly stupid measures to try to mitigate the damage and ended up making things even worse
Blair: Oh dear, what a waste of opportunity and talent
Major: More ineffectual fire-fighting, perhaps not all his fault but you don't get any prizes for trying in this contest
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_01/thatcherMS0311_468x777.jpg
wrt churchill, I know, I know, but I can't *not* put him there. it's my ball.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html
The danger, of course, is that the EU refuses to be reasonable, and Cameron's background means he reacts to this as a PR man and politician rather than as a national strategist. i.e. he reacts to a poor proposal to the EU by signing it and pretending it's a great deal, and then wins a stacked referendum on that basis. That would be a very sad end to a talented Prime Ministerial career.
I've repeatedly pointed out the foolishness of trying to accentuate divisions on the EU within the Tory party to him, and he himself has expressed frustrations over lack of unity within the party in the past, yet he persists.
The truth is that the Tory party has become progressively more eurosceptic over the past 25 years. I don't think that journey is done, but respect those that disagree.
http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1986/12/rodgers.html
- M. H. Thatcher, Bruges Speech, 1988.
The really sad one on the list is Blair. He had an opportunity to change this country for the better and he blew it. And he lied. And lied.
It's a more light hearted piece/well researched piece, pointing out how Labour used to be the outers and the Tories the inners.
I've reading up on the 1975 referendum, to see the arguments and slogans used then to see if they could be used now.
The image on the left here, was an official Tory pamphlet sanctioned by Maggie during the referendum.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGxAPvtXIAEMrYG.jpg
It is extraordinarily convenient for headline writers that they can conflate a strawberry and meringue dessert with the school that the PM went to. But after a while the joke wears off and invariably it has no meaning.
The Tory pro EU Heritage? Market town has got you there.
Ted Heath? He decimated Lancashire. Your arguments have got increasingly spurious.
I'd like to point out on the other hand, I've been called inter alia, a twat, an England hater, thick by some of the Kippers on here, I think the hatred is flows more from that side than mine,
1. Maggie (83-87)
2. Maggie (79-83)
3. Maggie (87-90)
Callaghan was that rare creature; a man who made all the wrong decisions for all the right reasons...
"A family of 12 from Luton, including a baby and two grandparents, could have travelled to Syria after going missing, police have said.
They have not been seen since 17 May after visiting their home country of Bangladesh.
It is believed the family stopped in Turkey on their way home before entering the war-torn country."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-33347117
I'll be different, and go for Denis Healey.
Edit: If he had become Prime Minister in 97 instead of Blair then we could have had the kind of government people thought Blair would deliver.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/primaryeducation/11707847/Allison-Pearson-Sparing-the-rod-has-spoilt-these-teachers.html
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/11/milifan-prime-minister-ed-miliband
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/11710956/Nigel-Farage-is-right-too-often-about-European-Union-failings.html
The only thing Brown did right was bringing Mandy back to run his government for him. In the catastrophic mess that Brown had created he didn't do a bad job at all.
For different reasons, both Michael Heseltine and Norman Tebbit could have got the job in parallel universes too. And, the most obvious one, what if John Smith had survived?
Above all, William Hague. Shot his bolt too young, and it broke his will.
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/blogs/peter-kellner/could-jeremy-corbyn-snatch-the-labour-leadership-from-andy-burnham
It even talks about AV and the Condorcet winner.
http://www.weather.com/wx/today/?lat=52.95&lon=-1.16&locale=en_GB&temp=c
Cameron confirmed he is sticking with the reduction to 600 MPs.
So Boundary Commissions will start work in early 2016, draw up 600 seats and the reports will have to pass votes in both Commons and Lords in 2018.
NB. Unless Cameron puts a clause (probably in the Votes for Life Act) that no votes are required in 2018 and he can lay the reports personally himself before the Queen. This is possible - it's exactly the amendment he tabled in 2012 when the LDs blocked the last review.
But if he goes this route he has to get the clause through in an Act of Parliament - which obviously must pass Commons and Lords (though technically he could use Parliament Act).
The inspiration behind Thatchers monetary policy, a consistent record of voting for gay rights, an opponent of nuclear weapons, and of course had he been PM there would be almost no British people that want sharia law or flee to IS, no 7/7 and no beheading of Lee Rigby
Also no ukip!
Turning their back on him to the point he left the party was absolutely key to Maggie's dominance.
Mr. Indigo, saw a little of Wimbledon, apparently 41C was recorded.
I don't see how Ken Clarke could have become Prime Minister of any party that would have been united enough to govern coherently. Dennis Healey was fun but I'm sceptical whether he would actually have been any good.
Ian Macleod would be my nominee. And if he hadn't died an untimely death, he might have got the job at some point.
But yes: a remarkable man - and a very humble one.
- M. H. Thatcher, November 1990.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-33350880
But since he reached 106, at least we can be sure that the good don't always die young.
Dr. Prasannan, I am unconvinced that a warm day in summer is proof the climate's changing
Hmm. Hunting down ink refills. Got the Parker sorted, but trying to find a longer, thin, screw-in black ink refill. Doesn't help that the original has no markings on whatsoever. Hmm.
Edited extra bit: might have found the right thingummyjig. Browsing for things that don't pertain to the 3rd century BC is tricky.
Pretty sure he'd have won a bigger majority than Heath in 70
I still expect Jeremy Corbyn to finish dead last. The twittersphere is not representative of Labour party members.
Although when I am feeling mischevious, I do wonder about Edward Du Cann. Airey Neave would have been intriguing, but problematic!
Space Travelhot weather!Perhaps we could persuade TSE to run a thread on AV to help us understand the possibilities...
I love heat/humidity. Much prefer a crisp, cold winter's day.
Just heard of Sir Nicholas' death. There was a chap who really deserved his knighthood.
*May well put that line in at some point.
Also, giving serious thought to having a Thatcher quote ahead of a forthcoming book.
“Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't.” - Margaret Thatcher
And the same can be said of Margaret Thatcher, to be fair.
The Left never acknowledge her achievements and many responded with disgusting glee when she died, and the Right don't want to talk about the harm that she did.
In many ways, a flawed genius, like Blair.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/33351824
I did the survey, which took a long time (maybe 30 minutes). I did like that it was comprehensive, though, and gave the opportunity to say if ideas or the status quo was a load of rubbish.
Perhaps surprisingly, given it's been almost ruled out by teams, 60% want refuelling back.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-donors-spent-60000-having-5983467
The issue has become mired in confusion now anyway, so as a method of concluding the issue it is a waste of time.
On the best/worst PM question, Blair is some way below Brown. I expect MPs to dissemble but outright lying while cloaked in a hypocritical faith should be beyond the pale. If he really does believe, I hope that he he gets the down lift in the afterlife.