Interesting piece from the BBC. It turns out there are more young black men at top universities than in prison.
Seems to be fairly close, which is a pretty sorry state of affairs. I note the BBC didn't compare the number of young white men in prison, to the number in Russel Group universities.
It is the fact that so many on the Tory side have convinced us that the EU is ther top priority that has fostered the sense that they are a party of oddballs badly out of touch. Hague ironically was the worst offender. A pity if it's only now that the truth has dawned on him and them
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Mr. Royale, some say he has a comprehensive understanding of the long-term problems of EU integration, and when he heard Merkel's migration policy he said things that were unbroadcastable.
I find so much more wisdom and taste in the rest of Europe-or at least those parts that make up it's backbone-that if shared sovereignty's as bad as it gets then I'm all for it. Twenty seven heads are better than one and I've never voted for that 'one' anyway.
Which parts of Europe do you consider form the backbone?
Perhaps the downside is the obvious, that he doesn't actually support Leave?
Precisely.
The puzzlement and anger of the Leave side at the fact that a whole raft of Eurosceptics - including Hague, Theresa May, Hammond, Boris, etc etc - are not supporting Leave is very revealing. For some reason, they find it hard to draw the obvious and clearly correct conclusion, namely that those politicians have decided that, on balance, the case for leaving is weak when you actually look at the alternatives.
The BOOers haven't made the case. It's as simple as that. No conspiracy, treachery, or talk of putting career over principle makes sense. After all, if it were really the case, as the BOOers claim, that the Conservative Party is overwhelming in favour of leaving (I'm sceptical about this, but others seem to think it's a fact), then the ambitious Tory politicians would be motivated to lead the Leave side.
No they have decided that they have more chance of staying in or winning high office by sticking with Cameron than by being seen to be disloyal. Obviously I hope this comes back to bite them.
So all of them ditch their principles in favour of the chance of eventually getting high office? Not even one of them believes sufficiently in 'Leave' to take the risk, which of course could be their way of making their name and leapfrogging others. Isn't it more likely that they have decided that Leave will lose and they don't want to be associated with failure?
Politicians compromise on lots of things that they don't believe too strongly in. It's remarkable how the Leavers to a man assume - in defiance of all opinion poll evidence that the EU ranks low on most respondents' priority list - that everyone else should consider membership of the EU as a particularly important subject on which it is inconceivable to be ready to compromise.
TBH I find it a bit odd that it is put as a separate subject given that EU laws affect all aspects of governance in Britain and thus many of the other topics. The EU is not really foreign affairs. It's a domestic issue. It would be like a list which had, in addition to all the usual topics, the Government.
Anyway, my predictions are that Remain will probably win and that we will still be debating the merits or not of Inners, Outers and the EU for years to come.......
I think it's a big myth to think that if 50% of the Tory party supports "out" then 50% of the Tory party will support a candidate for leadership who supports "out".
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Boris, at least, is differentiated from Osborne by being vastly more popular. He's going to be able to point to polling showing a much healthier Tory position with him as leader than Osborne.
Perhaps the downside is the obvious, that he doesn't actually support Leave?
Precisely.
The puzzlement and anger of the Leave side at the fact that a whole raft of Eurosceptics - including Hague, Theresa May, Hammond, Boris, etc etc - are not supporting Leave is very revealing. For some reason, they find it hard to draw the obvious and clearly correct conclusion, namely that those politicians have decided that, on balance, the case for leaving is weak when you actually look at the alternatives.
The BOOers haven't made the case. It's as simple as that. No conspiracy, treachery, or talk of putting career over principle makes sense. After all, if it were really the case, as the BOOers claim, that the Conservative Party is overwhelming in favour of leaving (I'm sceptical about this, but others seem to think it's a fact), then the ambitious Tory politicians would be motivated to lead the Leave side.
Or perhaps the annoyance is down to the realisation that euroscepticism is something the Conservaives do in Opposition, not in Government.
As Mr Nabavi says the conservatives have never espoused leaving the EU.
In government you have to take responsibility for your words and how you turn them into actions. Anyone who wants to leave the EU completely like some do have to unpick it all and deal with the consequences. To pretend that there would not be all kinds of socio-politco-economic consequences is a bit naive. What we have now is a renegotiation which if not accepted by the EU countries will indeed put everyone on the spot. The govt even now may say OK we will leave. This seems unlikely from the point of view of both sides, the govt and EU. However it still might happen. The trouble is leavers and remainers have not and will not readily or openly embrace the practical alternative of moving to the EEA/EFTA route. I think to the embarrassment of both sides it shows how in practice there is little difference between being in the EU and out of it. These negotiations seem to put us in a half way house, for some the continuation of political involvement in the EU will be good, for others, to some extent like me, the absence of it in the EEA would be the benefit.
I think the way the Eurozone behaves in the years ahead will dictate what happens for us. Always assuming Remain wins the referendum. It does seem rather a shame that most people are fulminating away but quite forgetting that in the end they do have a clear vote to cast. Will there be any sense of responsibility in casting it?
I find so much more wisdom and taste in the rest of Europe-or at least those parts that make up it's backbone-that if shared sovereignty's as bad as it gets then I'm all for it. Twenty seven heads are better than one and I've never voted for that 'one' anyway.
Which parts of Europe do you consider form the backbone?
France Italy Germany and Holland but many of the rest contribute culturally even if not forming the backbone
So in the end Cameron just gave up and decided not even to try.
No, he's tried extremely hard. Given the difficulty of getting 27 other countries to agree to unpicking the Lisbon Treaty, he's done as much as could be done (except, as I've said, on Benefits - I think he could have got more, but then I wasn't in the negotiations).
Perhaps the downside is the obvious, that he doesn't actually support Leave?
Precisely.
The puzzlement and anger of the Leave side at the fact that a whole raft of Eurosceptics - including Hague, Theresa May, Hammond, Boris, etc etc - are not supporting Leave is very revealing. For some reason, they find it hard to draw the obvious and clearly correct conclusion, namely that those politicians have decided that, on balance, the case for leaving is weak when you actually look at the alternatives.
The BOOers haven't made the case. It's as simple as that. No conspiracy, treachery, or talk of putting career over principle makes sense. After all, if it were really the case, as the BOOers claim, that the Conservative Party is overwhelming in favour of leaving (I'm sceptical about this, but others seem to think it's a fact), then the ambitious Tory politicians would be motivated to lead the Leave side.
No they have decided that they have more chance of staying in or winning high office by sticking with Cameron than by being seen to be disloyal. Obviously I hope this comes back to bite them.
So all of them ditch their principles in favour of the chance of eventually getting high office? Not even one of them believes sufficiently in 'Leave' to take the risk, which of course could be their way of making their name and leapfrogging others. Isn't it more likely that they have decided that Leave will lose and they don't want to be associated with failure?
Politicians compromise on lots of things that they don't believe too strongly in. It's remarkable how the Leavers to a man assume - in defiance of all opinion poll evidence that the EU ranks low on most respondents' priority list - that everyone else should consider membership of the EU as a particularly important subject on which it is inconceivable to be ready to compromise.
TBH I find it a bit odd that it is put as a separate subject given that EU laws affect all aspects of governance in Britain and thus many of the other topics. The EU is not really foreign affairs. It's a domestic issue. It would be like a list which had, in addition to all the usual topics, the Government.
Anyway, my predictions are that Remain will probably win and that we will still be debating the merits or not of Inners, Outers and the EU for years to come.......
Well "the Government" (where it should be, whether it is legitimate) is a huge issue in one part of the UK but we call it "independence". I think the EU is a distinct issue in the same way.
Oldies, with their final salary pensions plus guaranteed inflation busting rise in the state pension, having paid off their £50k mortgages on their half million pound houses, can now watch free TV and if they get bored, catch the free bus somewhere. grrr
I wish you the best of health and a life that takes you to at least 75, then and only then would you get free TV, kindly paid these days by the BBC itself.
I think it's a big myth to think that if 50% of the Tory party supports "out" then 50% of the Tory party will support a candidate for leadership who supports "out".
Yes, I think that is right, especially after the referendum result is in (assuming it's Remain).
However, if the result is Leave, then I think we're in a very different situation. In that case we'd surely want someone who actually wanted us to leave to lead the exit negotiations. I certainly would.
I think it's a big myth to think that if 50% of the Tory party supports "out" then 50% of the Tory party will support a candidate for leadership who supports "out".
Correct. Not least because they (or enough of them) will be acutely aware that they will be foisting a PM on the country. In such circumstances I can't see a left-field choice from either the MPs or, if I'm wrong about that, the members.
I find so much more wisdom and taste in the rest of Europe-or at least those parts that make up it's backbone-that if shared sovereignty's as bad as it gets then I'm all for it. Twenty seven heads are better than one and I've never voted for that 'one' anyway.
Which parts of Europe do you consider form the backbone?
France Italy Germany and Holland but many of the rest contribute culturally even if not forming the backbone
Italy contributes culturally but politically it has always punched well below its weight. Its strategic importance has been because of its geography not as a result of anything its political culture or politicians have contributed.
The EU exists to tether Germany and to give countries around it - both to the East and West - some confidence that there will not be a central European power so powerful that it will destabilise the Continent, as has happened throughout most of European history. The EU is only the latest way of achieving that - and may well not be the last.
I find so much more wisdom and taste in the rest of Europe-or at least those parts that make up it's backbone-that if shared sovereignty's as bad as it gets then I'm all for it. Twenty seven heads are better than one and I've never voted for that 'one' anyway.
Which parts of Europe do you consider form the backbone?
France Italy Germany and Holland but many of the rest contribute culturally even if not forming the backbone
I have a very strong identification with European culture and I think that, subconsciously, that inclines me to the pro-EU side. However I wouldn't say that those backbone countries, with the exception of the Netherlands, have run their political affairs better than us. That's to say, I wouldn't swap our experience of the last two or three centuries with theirs and I think our archetypical outlook has quite a lot to recommend it.
I suspect (though cannot confirm) for most PBers it's the same. We don't generally and frequently expose ourselves to views we don't support and prefer to like what we hear rather than have to argue every other sentence (tiring if nothing else). As one gets older, I suspect the appetite and desire for argument and debate wanes to some extent - with people we know we want to feel comfortable and relaxed so we move to people who make us feel that way.
That's right, with the qualification that most of us have friends who we simply don't talk politics with, because we'd disagree or because they don't give a toss. I value my weekly poker game partly because they never talk politics and didn't even when I was an MP
But even with that qualification, it does mean we're less subject to peer pressure, so will tend to retain previous views, rather than mould in with a traditional oldies view. So perhaps the future is for a more leftie older generation, as we 60s/70s types move into that bracket? Will the next generation of young people grumble about all the high taxation and luxury state services that pensioners are inflicting on them? :-)
I'm usually certain to vote, but I'm old enough to suspect that I'll have, at best, one more General Election.
Reading PB, I see incontrovertible critiques of every possible party, expressed with considerable force. And I'd have to say that virtually all of these critiques have some substance.
It's hard to see me ever again finding someone suitable to vote for.
Understand where you're coming from. I end up voting for the least bad option.
This is what most 'undecideds' or 'neutrals' do isn't it? I vote Tory because I am broadly a conservative. The tory party is a coalition of distinct strands which I am happy to live with. The Labour party has exposed itself however with the explosion of corbynism. No matter how plausible the parliamentary leadership may be in the end, the party membership have shown themselves to be unredeemably far left. They are always going to be the worst option and nothing can camouflage that now.
However, if the result is Leave, then I think we're in a very different situation. In that case we'd surely want someone who actually wanted us to leave to lead the exit negotiations. I certainly would.
Yes. In which case it's quite a pressing issue to discover who that might be.
Dilemma: as a Remainist I am happy for Leave to be incompetently led but if it wins I would like a statesmanlike Leaver to negotiate the actual exit.
Let's wait for the full facts to emerge, but on the surface it certainly looks to be a disgrace. There may be mitigating circumstances but I'm struggling to think what those might be.
I suspect (though cannot confirm) for most PBers it's the same. We don't generally and frequently expose ourselves to views we don't support and prefer to like what we hear rather than have to argue every other sentence (tiring if nothing else). As one gets older, I suspect the appetite and desire for argument and debate wanes to some extent - with people we know we want to feel comfortable and relaxed so we move to people who make us feel that way.
That's right, with the qualification that most of us have friends who we simply don't talk politics with, because we'd disagree or because they don't give a toss. I value my weekly poker game partly because they never talk politics and didn't even when I was an MP
But even with that qualification, it does mean we're less subject to peer pressure, so will tend to retain previous views, rather than mould in with a traditional oldies view. So perhaps the future is for a more leftie older generation, as we 60s/70s types move into that bracket? Will the next generation of young people grumble about all the high taxation and luxury state services that pensioners are inflicting on them? :-)
Quite possibly so. Not while they're in the 18-24 age bracket (see Corbyn's approval ratings) but once they're firmly in the job- and housing-markets then yes.
But one point to bear in mind is that the centre of politics moves too. The social values of today's Conservatives are way to the left of where Labour was when today's pensioners were twenty-somethings, for example.
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Boris, at least, is differentiated from Osborne by being vastly more popular. He's going to be able to point to polling showing a much healthier Tory position with him as leader than Osborne.
Serious question (i.e. I don't know the answer): if the choice were between a pro-EU figure (say Osborne) and Boris, say, would Eurosceptic Tories here feel more warmly towards Boris because he's not been strongly pro-EU, or do they feel he's unprincipled so it doesn't make a difference?
I find so much more wisdom and taste in the rest of Europe-or at least those parts that make up it's backbone-that if shared sovereignty's as bad as it gets then I'm all for it. Twenty seven heads are better than one and I've never voted for that 'one' anyway.
Posting in the style of sniffy old Tyson. Funny how you sneer at the UK, yet still choose to spend so much time here. Why not simply relocate elsewhere permanently if it's so awful?
As for wisdom and taste - not any more. Have you not noticed what the Germans have done to trash their neighbourhood?
I have not read the Sun report but read other reports about it. You are correct if the headlines are true. However reading between the lines it may be a bit different if it revolves around the issue of ever changing tariffs. I should add I am always suspicious of modern charities and the cosy life they give themselves and AgeUK is no different. But equally whilst I did not support the witch-hunt against Murdoch's News International I am also suspicious about screaming headlines and tabloid smears.
Miss Plato, it's probably also due to Northern Powerhouse being a stupid name. Self-identification varies a lot. Liverpool seems to be all about the city, and I'd guess the same is true of Newcastle/Manchester. Yorkshire has a much stronger county-wide identity.
@Cyclefree If you read their opining pieces in the Torygraph you would surely conclude they are eurosceptics.
I think that too much of the sceptic case is based what I don't like about the EU - of which there is much. But there is too little about why I don't like it and why this (insert proposal etc) would be better. And there is too little unwillingness actually to go out and argue for it within Europe itself and build alliances etc etc.
So it all ends up defaulting to a generalised grumble - which could probably be shared by many within other European nations - coupled sometimes by a "God, aren't foreigners ghastly!" moan.
An intelligent sceptical case would be more about an alternative, an alternative which would or could be attractive to others.
It's part of the reason why some instinctive sceptics are reluctant to sign up with Leave, since the only prominent person they're associating with is Nigel Farage, who epitomises the approach you describe. If I rather liked UKIP's position on something, I'd be hesitant to embrace it if they were the only ones saying it, not because they're evil but because they don't feel natural bedfellows.
Conversely I think that the Remain consensus among people close to power is simply because they see the EU as quite unsatisfactory but literally the only game in town for a major European country. They don't think that an attractive alternative exists.
People like me who actually rather like the EU just as it is are, of course, a minority.
Yes. In which case it's quite a pressing issue to discover who that might be.
Dilemma: as a Remainist I am happy for Leave to be incompetently led but if it wins I would like a statesmanlike Leaver to negotiate the actual exit.
Possibly Owen Paterson. I've been impressed by his speeches and articles arguing for Leave, and he has the necessary cabinet-level experience. (I've also bet on him at long odds, so I might be talking my book, however.)
Yes. In which case it's quite a pressing issue to discover who that might be.
Dilemma: as a Remainist I am happy for Leave to be incompetently led but if it wins I would like a statesmanlike Leaver to negotiate the actual exit.
Possibly Owen Paterson. I've been impressed by his speeches and articles arguing for Leave. (I've also bet on him at long odds, so I might be talking my book!)
Not Liam Fox, that's for sure!
I bet on Paterson after you recommended me to. He would be very profitable.
Still spinning tirelessly away, eh Richard? No-one believes this. Least of all our European neighbours who were very surprised at the very limited nature of the PM's demands.
And I see there is a new excuse to add to my list from yesterday - now we also have 'given the terrible circumstances it's the best we could get'
So the full list is
1. Mock the Leave campaign(s) 2. Claim nothing would be different outside the EU 3. Blame Labour 4. Claim the deal is 'the best we could do given the difficult circumstances' 5. Revert
There is plenty of policy: city mayors, transport for the north, devo manc, these processes just take a while to get noticed by people who normally have no interest in what politicians say.
Yes. In which case it's quite a pressing issue to discover who that might be.
Dilemma: as a Remainist I am happy for Leave to be incompetently led but if it wins I would like a statesmanlike Leaver to negotiate the actual exit.
Possibly Owen Paterson. I've been impressed by his speeches and articles arguing for Leave. (I've also bet on him at long odds, so I might be talking my book!)
Not Liam Fox, that's for sure!
I bet on Paterson after you recommended me to. He would be very profitable.
Isn’t he the bloke who attributed strategic thinking to badgers?
Miss Plato, it's probably also due to Northern Powerhouse being a stupid name. Self-identification varies a lot. Liverpool seems to be all about the city, and I'd guess the same is true of Newcastle/Manchester. Yorkshire has a much stronger county-wide identity.
Here is the north being taken notice of. I am pleased no matter what its called. And its getting used all the time https://www.gov.uk/government/news/20-million-leeds-station-entrance-opens-up-access-to-citys-development ''The stunning entrance will make journeys quicker and more convenient for thousands of passengers every day. This is a further example of the Northern Powerhouse in action'' ''The distinctive new southern entrance, will save 1 in 5 of them up to 50 minutes on their weekly commute''
(and there are some who say there is no investment)
Got the DP on. They are looking at the refugee issue. It really does look like the government are proposing Rob's solution of making city states in the Middle East using western aid money with the support of Jordan and Lebanon. It's an interesting idea, not sure what the international appetite for it will be though.
It might just about have been acceptable if Age UK had advised the lowest EON tariff. As it stands, it smells quite whiffy.
Surely the logic is simple. if they are taking a commission off the contract its not as cheap as it could be....
They're getting revenue which otherwise might go to NPower etc. Now noone expects EON to act in consumer's best interests, but people do expect Age UK to.
Mr. Nabavi, if this is the maximum achievable then the game isn't worth the candle.
I disagree, because I think he's done rather better than expected in the Eurozone protections.
People were talking about a mechanism for the UK to be able to block stuff on the City. Or for non-Euro majority to also be needed. We don't have anything close to that. The ability to ask them to think about it again - but without even a set period of delay - is incredibly meagre and you know it.
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Boris, at least, is differentiated from Osborne by being vastly more popular. He's going to be able to point to polling showing a much healthier Tory position with him as leader than Osborne.
Serious question (i.e. I don't know the answer): if the choice were between a pro-EU figure (say Osborne) and Boris, say, would Eurosceptic Tories here feel more warmly towards Boris because he's not been strongly pro-EU, or do they feel he's unprincipled so it doesn't make a difference?
I'm not Eurosceptic but know the party reasonably well so hope I can answer anyway.
Generally, what matters most is the ability to win but this can be trumped if it's believed that what would be done with that win goes too much against the grain - hence Clarke not getting the leadership when Euro entry was a serious possibility despite otherwise being the natural choice in 1997 and, to a lesser extent, 2001.
I don't think Boris's prevarications on the EU have done him any favours and he'll be seen at the moment with as much scepticism by Leavers as someone like Osborne. Boris is 'less serious' but Osborne is too tactically Brownite; neither is One Of Us. Boris might be able to recover that a good deal if he does come out for Leave and campaigns well on it but he'll never be properly trusted.
If the vote goes for Leave, it'll be a dead issue anyway. It's only if it's a Remain (and particularly, a narrow Remain followed by or accompanied by a UKIP surge), that the referendum stance will assume critical - and probably primary - importance in the leadership election.
Yes. In which case it's quite a pressing issue to discover who that might be.
Dilemma: as a Remainist I am happy for Leave to be incompetently led but if it wins I would like a statesmanlike Leaver to negotiate the actual exit.
Possibly Owen Paterson. I've been impressed by his speeches and articles arguing for Leave. (I've also bet on him at long odds, so I might be talking my book!)
Not Liam Fox, that's for sure!
I bet on Paterson after you recommended me to. He would be very profitable.
Isn’t he the bloke who attributed strategic thinking to badgers?
Well, if you substitute "Germans" for "badgers" that soundbite will do fine in his new role.
I think it's a big myth to think that if 50% of the Tory party supports "out" then 50% of the Tory party will support a candidate for leadership who supports "out".
Yes, I think that is right, especially after the referendum result is in (assuming it's Remain).
However, if the result is Leave, then I think we're in a very different situation. In that case we'd surely want someone who actually wanted us to leave to lead the exit negotiations. I certainly would.
I dunno. I think could be helpful to have someone negotiating who can say "look I didn't want this but I have to respect the public. How can we best make sure we maintain close relations after it?"
On flip side, if we stay in think it would be good to have a leaver so EU knows its on watch.
Away from the eu-froth, the big news is the PB Fantasy league table is tightening in the middle with a few breaking away from the peloton. Can we reel em back in...
TSE, like Liverpool, no shame in being 7th. Naturally I'm in the traditional spurs position.
Shamefully I'm 10th. But I'm going to Wembley.
I abandoned the cup at the earliest opportunity to focus on winning the league. I had a good week but this so called James Burt character had a better one. Still I have the scoring wildcards in hand so I'm feeling calm.
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Boris, at least, is differentiated from Osborne by being vastly more popular. He's going to be able to point to polling showing a much healthier Tory position with him as leader than Osborne.
Serious question (i.e. I don't know the answer): if the choice were between a pro-EU figure (say Osborne) and Boris, say, would Eurosceptic Tories here feel more warmly towards Boris because he's not been strongly pro-EU, or do they feel he's unprincipled so it doesn't make a difference?
I think plenty of members would feel warmly enough towards Boris but wouldn't actually vote for him. An eye-catching performance at a ministry might change things, though.
It's pretty easy to see many Eurosceptic Tories voting both Leave (especially if it looks like it's going to lose!) & Osborne.
Miss Plato, it's probably also due to Northern Powerhouse being a stupid name. Self-identification varies a lot. Liverpool seems to be all about the city, and I'd guess the same is true of Newcastle/Manchester. Yorkshire has a much stronger county-wide identity.
It seems a decent name to me. I think it's not a bad result if half the population have heard of it.
I sometimes wish that "identities" cost money. Then maybe people wouldn't binge on them so much.
Many British voters are instinctively Eurosceptic like me. But we may as well face reality. We are going to lose. The PM is a man with a plan. He is an accomplished class act and he is trusted. We have no leader, no campaign and no clear attractive picture of what the UK looks like after Brexit. We are a shambles. The Labour party has ceased to exist. Mr Farage is an acquired taste and many dislike him. Some Tory Eurosceptics sound like cranks and pub bores. The frustration of the press is palpable. They think the PM is a crisis essayist who needs to be pressured at all times. They can rage all they like.They know what will happen.When the decision comes to be made the public will play safe. With the PM and the EU. We will have the consolation of revelling in every EU mess to come. In my view the outcome is obvious. The public verdict will be- case for change not made out. Remain.
Yes. In which case it's quite a pressing issue to discover who that might be.
Dilemma: as a Remainist I am happy for Leave to be incompetently led but if it wins I would like a statesmanlike Leaver to negotiate the actual exit.
Possibly Owen Paterson. I've been impressed by his speeches and articles arguing for Leave. (I've also bet on him at long odds, so I might be talking my book!)
Not Liam Fox, that's for sure!
I bet on Paterson after you recommended me to. He would be very profitable.
If you're interested in Paterson, someone is willing to lay him at 100/1 on Betfair for next PM, which is much better than the 40/1 for next Tory leader from Skybet
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Boris, at least, is differentiated from Osborne by being vastly more popular. He's going to be able to point to polling showing a much healthier Tory position with him as leader than Osborne.
Serious question (i.e. I don't know the answer): if the choice were between a pro-EU figure (say Osborne) and Boris, say, would Eurosceptic Tories here feel more warmly towards Boris because he's not been strongly pro-EU, or do they feel he's unprincipled so it doesn't make a difference?
I think plenty of members would feel warmly enough towards Boris but wouldn't actually vote for him. An eye-catching performance at a ministry might change things, though.
It's pretty easy to see many Eurosceptic Tories voting both Leave (especially if it looks like it's going to lose!) & Osborne.
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Boris, at least, is differentiated from Osborne by being vastly more popular. He's going to be able to point to polling showing a much healthier Tory position with him as leader than Osborne.
Serious question (i.e. I don't know the answer): if the choice were between a pro-EU figure (say Osborne) and Boris, say, would Eurosceptic Tories here feel more warmly towards Boris because he's not been strongly pro-EU, or do they feel he's unprincipled so it doesn't make a difference?
I think plenty of members would feel warmly enough towards Boris but wouldn't actually vote for him. An eye-catching performance at a ministry might change things, though.
It's pretty easy to see many Eurosceptic Tories voting both Leave (especially if it looks like it's going to lose!) & Osborne.
No it isn't.
Indeed. I was out campaigning for Zac last weekend, not many takers for Osborne as leader and this is in London of all places.
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Boris, at least, is differentiated from Osborne by being vastly more popular. He's going to be able to point to polling showing a much healthier Tory position with him as leader than Osborne.
Serious question (i.e. I don't know the answer): if the choice were between a pro-EU figure (say Osborne) and Boris, say, would Eurosceptic Tories here feel more warmly towards Boris because he's not been strongly pro-EU, or do they feel he's unprincipled so it doesn't make a difference?
I'm not Eurosceptic but know the party reasonably well so hope I can answer anyway.
Generally, what matters most is the ability to win but this can be trumped if it's believed that what would be done with that win goes too much against the grain - hence Clarke not getting the leadership when Euro entry was a serious possibility despite otherwise being the natural choice in 1997 and, to a lesser extent, 2001.
I don't think Boris's prevarications on the EU have done him any favours and he'll be seen at the moment with as much scepticism by Leavers as someone like Osborne. Boris is 'less serious' but Osborne is too tactically Brownite; neither is One Of Us. Boris might be able to recover that a good deal if he does come out for Leave and campaigns well on it but he'll never be properly trusted.
If the vote goes for Leave, it'll be a dead issue anyway. It's only if it's a Remain (and particularly, a narrow Remain followed by or accompanied by a UKIP surge), that the referendum stance will assume critical - and probably primary - importance in the leadership election.
I have not read the Sun report but read other reports about it. You are correct if the headlines are true. However reading between the lines it may be a bit different if it revolves around the issue of ever changing tariffs. I should add I am always suspicious of modern charities and the cosy life they give themselves and AgeUK is no different. But equally whilst I did not support the witch-hunt against Murdoch's News International I am also suspicious about screaming headlines and tabloid smears.
Nice little earner running a charity. £180K salary for the Chief Exec of Age UK. And the position clearly opens other doors too.
'Last week it was announced he would join the Financial Conduct Authority as a non-executive director, where he will help regulate companies and protect consumers.'
And,
'Two weeks ago its CEO Tom Wright was appointed to head the Government’s fuel poverty commission.'
Yes. In which case it's quite a pressing issue to discover who that might be.
Dilemma: as a Remainist I am happy for Leave to be incompetently led but if it wins I would like a statesmanlike Leaver to negotiate the actual exit.
Possibly Owen Paterson. I've been impressed by his speeches and articles arguing for Leave. (I've also bet on him at long odds, so I might be talking my book!)
Not Liam Fox, that's for sure!
I bet on Paterson after you recommended me to. He would be very profitable.
If you're interested in Paterson, someone is willing to lay him at 100/1 on Betfair for next PM, which is much better than the 40/1 for next Tory leader from Skybet
It's the next PM that I took.
In general I look at that market first. I am happy to discount the possibility that the next PM is not the next Tory leader (obviously there's some risk in that).
Many British voters are instinctively Eurosceptic like me. But we may as well face reality. We are going to lose. The PM is a man with a plan. He is an accomplished class act and he is trusted. We have no leader, no campaign and no clear attractive picture of what the UK looks like after Brexit. We are a shambles. The Labour party has ceased to exist. Mr Farage is an acquired taste and many dislike him. Some Tory Eurosceptics sound like cranks and pub bores. The frustration of the press is palpable. They think the PM is a crisis essayist who needs to be pressured at all times. They can rage all they like.They know what will happen.When the decision comes to be made the public will play safe. With the PM and the EU. We will have the consolation of revelling in every EU mess to come. In my view the outcome is obvious. The public verdict will be- case for change not made out. Remain.
Sadly I do think you are right, however we all know what will happen after we stay in, and a second referendum in about five years would result in a definite Out vote. That's presuming the whole corrupt monolith lasts another five years.
I have not read the Sun report but read other reports about it. You are correct if the headlines are true. However reading between the lines it may be a bit different if it revolves around the issue of ever changing tariffs. I should add I am always suspicious of modern charities and the cosy life they give themselves and AgeUK is no different. But equally whilst I did not support the witch-hunt against Murdoch's News International I am also suspicious about screaming headlines and tabloid smears.
Nice little earner running a charity. £180K salary for the Chief Exec of Age UK. And the position clearly opens other doors too.
'Last week it was announced he would join the Financial Conduct Authority as a non-executive director, where he will help regulate companies and protect consumers.'
And,
'Two weeks ago its CEO Tom Wright was appointed to head the Government’s fuel poverty commission.'
Oops.
I think most of the major charities have now ceased to be about altruistically helping for those in need and much more corporatist: about the self-interest, and vested interests, political obsessions and career paths of those involved within them.
Quite a few of the most prominent values-signallers in them are also some of the biggest narcissists with the biggest senses of entitlement.
Many British voters are instinctively Eurosceptic like me. But we may as well face reality. We are going to lose. The PM is a man with a plan. He is an accomplished class act and he is trusted. We have no leader, no campaign and no clear attractive picture of what the UK looks like after Brexit. We are a shambles. The Labour party has ceased to exist. Mr Farage is an acquired taste and many dislike him. Some Tory Eurosceptics sound like cranks and pub bores. The frustration of the press is palpable. They think the PM is a crisis essayist who needs to be pressured at all times. They can rage all they like.They know what will happen.When the decision comes to be made the public will play safe. With the PM and the EU. We will have the consolation of revelling in every EU mess to come. In my view the outcome is obvious. The public verdict will be- case for change not made out. Remain.
Sadly I do think you are right, however we all know what will happen after we stay in, and a second referendum in about five years would result in a definite Out vote. That's presuming the whole corrupt monolith lasts another five years.
I think the Conservative Party will still be around in five years...
Miss Plato, it's probably also due to Northern Powerhouse being a stupid name. Self-identification varies a lot. Liverpool seems to be all about the city, and I'd guess the same is true of Newcastle/Manchester. Yorkshire has a much stronger county-wide identity.
As a Mancunian raised, Yorkshire dweller, sat slap bang in the middle of Leeds, Sheffield and Manchester and equally happy commuting to any of the three, I am possibly one of that small band of people to whom the economic joining up of this triangle makes natural sense. TSE whose life seems to have made somewhat of a mirror image journey, I imagine is another, and I suppose anyone who has to endure Sheffield-Manchester as part of their business on any kind of regular basis would know the score too. Shame it looks like any of those lovely fast train lines are going to by-pass me though. I think even if achieved, and even with HS2/""HS3"" its effect is liable to be dissipated somewhat by Liverpool and Newcastle.
I have not read the Sun report but read other reports about it. You are correct if the headlines are true. However reading between the lines it may be a bit different if it revolves around the issue of ever changing tariffs. I should add I am always suspicious of modern charities and the cosy life they give themselves and AgeUK is no different. But equally whilst I did not support the witch-hunt against Murdoch's News International I am also suspicious about screaming headlines and tabloid smears.
Nice little earner running a charity. £180K salary for the Chief Exec of Age UK. And the position clearly opens other doors too.
'Last week it was announced he would join the Financial Conduct Authority as a non-executive director, where he will help regulate companies and protect consumers.'
And,
'Two weeks ago its CEO Tom Wright was appointed to head the Government’s fuel poverty commission.'
Oops.
I think most of the major charities have now ceased to be about altruistically helping for those in need and much more corporatist: about the self-interest, and vested interests, political obsessions and career paths of those involved within them.
Quite a few of the most prominent values-signallers in them are also some of the biggest narcissists with the biggest senses of entitlement.
Large charities are often quite unpleasant employers, too.
But one point to bear in mind is that the centre of politics moves too. The social values of today's Conservatives are way to the left of where Labour was when today's pensioners were twenty-somethings, for example.
That's a good point. But I think that leftism and rightism (to use lazy labels) are attitudes of mind rather than specific policies. and they move with the spectrum, always a bit left or right of the current consensus. For instance, when gay couples had no legal standing I used to think that civil partnerships were clearly desirable while gay marriage would probably be a provocation too far. 10 years later civil partnerships were in place, I'd moved on to feel that obviously we should allow gay marriage. Right-wingers, conversely, often resisted civil partnerships, but in due course decided they were fine, it was gay marriage that was bad.
The big winner from all of this is George Osborne. With May and Boris not bothering to differentiate themselves on the issue, that's good news for him.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
Boris, at least, is differentiated from Osborne by being vastly more popular. He's going to be able to point to polling showing a much healthier Tory position with him as leader than Osborne.
Serious question (i.e. I don't know the answer): if the choice were between a pro-EU figure (say Osborne) and Boris, say, would Eurosceptic Tories here feel more warmly towards Boris because he's not been strongly pro-EU, or do they feel he's unprincipled so it doesn't make a difference?
I think plenty of members would feel warmly enough towards Boris but wouldn't actually vote for him. An eye-catching performance at a ministry might change things, though.
It's pretty easy to see many Eurosceptic Tories voting both Leave (especially if it looks like it's going to lose!) & Osborne.
It is possible that Boris will be seen in a different (possibly worse!) light when he has had a Cabinet job for a few months.
Worth noting these great polling numbers for the SNP come the day after they stood "shoulder to shoulder" with the Tories to defeat Labour's tax rise...
I've said before that Nigel should have stepped down in May but I'm not sure he's as toxic as some would like to think. Assuming there'll be tv debates ahead of the referendum I can't think who from Remain will be prepared to take him on, he destroyed Clegg pre the Euro elections.
Perhaps pbers would like to suggest somebody who would take him on, his knowledge of the EU is second to none.
I have not read the Sun report but read other reports about it. You are correct if the headlines are true. However reading between the lines it may be a bit different if it revolves around the issue of ever changing tariffs. I should add I am always suspicious of modern charities and the cosy life they give themselves and AgeUK is no different. But equally whilst I did not support the witch-hunt against Murdoch's News International I am also suspicious about screaming headlines and tabloid smears.
Nice little earner running a charity. £180K salary for the Chief Exec of Age UK. And the position clearly opens other doors too. 'Last week it was announced he would join the Financial Conduct Authority as a non-executive director, where he will help regulate companies and protect consumers.' And, 'Two weeks ago its CEO Tom Wright was appointed to head the Government’s fuel poverty commission.' Oops.
I take all that on board. Plus there are non-executives who are meant to have oversight. Like Yentob...
On reflection I am probably being too hard on a number of decent people, but you make a good point. I am still a bit suspicious of the Sun story though.
Comments
The new Top Gear line-up reminds me of the Leave campaign.
Outsiders need to take risks and differentiate, and whilst Owen Patterson and Jesse Norman are, they are of the sub 2% probability variety rather than 2nd and 3rd favourites for the crown.
All we know is, he's called the Stig.
Anyway, my predictions are that Remain will probably win and that we will still be debating the merits or not of Inners, Outers and the EU for years to come.......
In government you have to take responsibility for your words and how you turn them into actions. Anyone who wants to leave the EU completely like some do have to unpick it all and deal with the consequences. To pretend that there would not be all kinds of socio-politco-economic consequences is a bit naive.
What we have now is a renegotiation which if not accepted by the EU countries will indeed put everyone on the spot. The govt even now may say OK we will leave. This seems unlikely from the point of view of both sides, the govt and EU. However it still might happen.
The trouble is leavers and remainers have not and will not readily or openly embrace the practical alternative of moving to the EEA/EFTA route. I think to the embarrassment of both sides it shows how in practice there is little difference between being in the EU and out of it. These negotiations seem to put us in a half way house, for some the continuation of political involvement in the EU will be good, for others, to some extent like me, the absence of it in the EEA would be the benefit.
I think the way the Eurozone behaves in the years ahead will dictate what happens for us. Always assuming Remain wins the referendum. It does seem rather a shame that most people are fulminating away but quite forgetting that in the end they do have a clear vote to cast. Will there be any sense of responsibility in casting it?
ComRes poll on refugees
However, if the result is Leave, then I think we're in a very different situation. In that case we'd surely want someone who actually wanted us to leave to lead the exit negotiations. I certainly would.
It could be good in a trainwreck sort of way
It's remarkable how the Leavers to a man assume - in defiance of all opinion poll evidence that the EU ranks low on most respondents' priority list'
That's because voters no 1 concern - immigration- is already covered by a separate question / category on respondents' priority list.
The EU exists to tether Germany and to give countries around it - both to the East and West - some confidence that there will not be a central European power so powerful that it will destabilise the Continent, as has happened throughout most of European history. The EU is only the latest way of achieving that - and may well not be the last.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6907524/Sun-investigation-reveals-Age-UK-recommends-dearer-power-to-pensioners.html
But even with that qualification, it does mean we're less subject to peer pressure, so will tend to retain previous views, rather than mould in with a traditional oldies view. So perhaps the future is for a more leftie older generation, as we 60s/70s types move into that bracket? Will the next generation of young people grumble about all the high taxation and luxury state services that pensioners are inflicting on them? :-)
Ipsos MORI
Around half of northerners have heard of the #NorthernPowerhouse: New poll for @UKNorthernPower https://t.co/a734Qa9LYl
Paying £245 more is taking the piss.
I vote Tory because I am broadly a conservative. The tory party is a coalition of distinct strands which I am happy to live with.
The Labour party has exposed itself however with the explosion of corbynism. No matter how plausible the parliamentary leadership may be in the end, the party membership have shown themselves to be unredeemably far left.
They are always going to be the worst option and nothing can camouflage that now.
Dilemma: as a Remainist I am happy for Leave to be incompetently led but if it wins I would like a statesmanlike Leaver to negotiate the actual exit.
But one point to bear in mind is that the centre of politics moves too. The social values of today's Conservatives are way to the left of where Labour was when today's pensioners were twenty-somethings, for example.
Here's the full line-up for Thursday's #bbcqt. We'll be on BBC ONE at 10.45pm https://t.co/xupsbIg2pf
As for wisdom and taste - not any more. Have you not noticed what the Germans have done to trash their neighbourhood?
You are correct if the headlines are true. However reading between the lines it may be a bit different if it revolves around the issue of ever changing tariffs.
I should add I am always suspicious of modern charities and the cosy life they give themselves and AgeUK is no different. But equally whilst I did not support the witch-hunt against Murdoch's News International I am also suspicious about screaming headlines and tabloid smears.
Conversely I think that the Remain consensus among people close to power is simply because they see the EU as quite unsatisfactory but literally the only game in town for a major European country. They don't think that an attractive alternative exists.
People like me who actually rather like the EU just as it is are, of course, a minority.
Not Liam Fox, that's for sure!
Still spinning tirelessly away, eh Richard? No-one believes this. Least of all our European neighbours who were very surprised at the very limited nature of the PM's demands.
And I see there is a new excuse to add to my list from yesterday - now we also have 'given the terrible circumstances it's the best we could get'
So the full list is
1. Mock the Leave campaign(s)
2. Claim nothing would be different outside the EU
3. Blame Labour
4. Claim the deal is 'the best we could do given the difficult circumstances'
5. Revert
There is plenty of policy: city mayors, transport for the north, devo manc, these processes just take a while to get noticed by people who normally have no interest in what politicians say.
I expect I'll have a very long wait.
It covers Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield and Newcastle.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/427339/the-northern-powerhouse-tagged.pdf
Here is the north being taken notice of. I am pleased no matter what its called.
And its getting used all the time
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/20-million-leeds-station-entrance-opens-up-access-to-citys-development
''The stunning entrance will make journeys quicker and more convenient for thousands of passengers every day. This is a further example of the Northern Powerhouse in action''
''The distinctive new southern entrance, will save 1 in 5 of them up to 50 minutes on their weekly commute''
(and there are some who say there is no investment)
Generally, what matters most is the ability to win but this can be trumped if it's believed that what would be done with that win goes too much against the grain - hence Clarke not getting the leadership when Euro entry was a serious possibility despite otherwise being the natural choice in 1997 and, to a lesser extent, 2001.
I don't think Boris's prevarications on the EU have done him any favours and he'll be seen at the moment with as much scepticism by Leavers as someone like Osborne. Boris is 'less serious' but Osborne is too tactically Brownite; neither is One Of Us. Boris might be able to recover that a good deal if he does come out for Leave and campaigns well on it but he'll never be properly trusted.
If the vote goes for Leave, it'll be a dead issue anyway. It's only if it's a Remain (and particularly, a narrow Remain followed by or accompanied by a UKIP surge), that the referendum stance will assume critical - and probably primary - importance in the leadership election.
But after Kids Company then an AgeUK scandal would but charities well in the spotlight.
On flip side, if we stay in think it would be good to have a leaver so EU knows its on watch.
It's pretty easy to see many Eurosceptic Tories voting both Leave (especially if it looks like it's going to lose!) & Osborne.
I sometimes wish that "identities" cost money. Then maybe people wouldn't binge on them so much.
The frustration of the press is palpable. They think the PM is a crisis essayist who needs to be pressured at all times. They can rage all they like.They know what will happen.When the decision comes to be made the public will play safe. With the PM and the EU. We will have the consolation of revelling in every EU mess to come. In my view the outcome is obvious. The public verdict will be- case for change not made out. Remain.
'Last week it was announced he would join the Financial Conduct Authority as a non-executive director, where he will help regulate companies and protect consumers.'
And,
'Two weeks ago its CEO Tom Wright was appointed to head the Government’s fuel poverty commission.'
Oops.
In general I look at that market first. I am happy to discount the possibility that the next PM is not the next Tory leader (obviously there's some risk in that).
Quite a few of the most prominent values-signallers in them are also some of the biggest narcissists with the biggest senses of entitlement.
https://twitter.com/AlanRoden/status/695220017550467072
Broken Sleazy SNP on the slide
It's a Tartan Tory surge!
Perhaps pbers would like to suggest somebody who would take him on, his knowledge of the EU is second to none.
On reflection I am probably being too hard on a number of decent people, but you make a good point.
I am still a bit suspicious of the Sun story though.
'New Thread New Thread