You surprise me, as you are obviously a big fan of it now.
I think the history of F1 is a big part of it's appeal, more than for most sports. I think it's because of the way the cars have changed, evoking a different era when you see footage of them. Also, there is the casualty rate in the old days which was truly gladiatorial and lent a kind of doomed romance to the drivers.
There's a piccie somewhere online of every single F1 car in one big poster. It's amazing to see the way they've changed since 1950, yet alone since I've been watching it.
It's also surprising how some cars are instantly recognisable (leaving aside the Tyrell six-wheeler )
Talking of Osborne there is an interesting column by David Smith in the ST today available here: http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/
The 7.5% increase in the Minimum Wage comes into force on Friday giving our lowest paid an increase of 10.8% from last October. A reminder of happier times for Osborne (with IDS clenching his fists in delight) or a new opportunity? He will certainly get a more favourable press this week than in the last fortnight.
I argued for a significant increase in the NMW before the budget as I thought it was important that more of the cost of employing the least skilled fell on the employer rather than the tax payer so I was delighted with what he did. The risk was that the marginal rate of employment of the least skilled would fall but the employment market has remained remarkably robust in the months up to the change (a point rather ignored by DS who is somewhat sceptical in tone).
If Osborne is to move on or out his greatest legacies will be the incredible improvement in employment and this step change in wages which will significantly reduce inequality in our society whilst giving a more sustainable base to the public finances.
Mr. Wanderer, if it had been going back during the Punic Wars, I'd be much more interested
In religious news, a judge appears to have banned a father taking his son to any Christian building after his Muslim mother (with whom the son lives for most of the time) objected.
'Hunt's a Stalinist with a good bedside manner': The PM’s verdict on his Health Secretary in the memoirs by former Lib Dem minister that have electrified Westminster
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
You surprise me, as you are obviously a big fan of it now.
I think the history of F1 is a big part of it's appeal, more than for most sports. I think it's because of the way the cars have changed, evoking a different era when you see footage of them. Also, there is the casualty rate in the old days which was truly gladiatorial and lent a kind of doomed romance to the drivers.
There's a piccie somewhere online of every single F1 car in one big poster. It's amazing to see the way they've changed since 1950, yet alone since I've been watching it.
It's also surprising how some cars are instantly recognisable (leaving aside the Tyrell six-wheeler )
I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated
It's not up to them, it's up to MPs.
Yes, but the associations can make their views known to the MPs. Denying Boris a place now would seem like a stitch up, wouldn't it? Unless there were two genuinely impressive alternatives
I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated
It's not up to them, it's up to MPs.
Yes, but the associations can make their views known to the MPs. Denying Boris a place now would seem like a stitch up, wouldn't it? Unless there were two genuinely impressive alternatives
It's a secret ballot, participation in the stitch-up is strictly deniable. They kept Portillo off the ballot before, they'll have no problem keeping Boris off it if MPs want somebody else.
It's not just Boris, though. For most contenders, it's easier to see their flaws than virtues. There's a lack of genuinely impressive candidates. I think highly of Gove, but don't think he'll even stand for the job.
Belgium prosecutors told the Sunday Telegraph that Mr Prospero (security guard murdered in suspicious circumstances) was not employed at a nuclear plant, but worked guarding a nuclear medical research facility in Fleurus, near Charleroi, about 30 miles from his home in Froidchapelle.
Surely leaving the EU would greatly reduce the numbers of health tourists, and allow the UK to decide from which countries to accept medical qualifications?
Bernie Sanders targets in upcoming races based off Demographics.
Wisconsin 63 Wyoming 71
I expect Bernie will vastly exceed that in Wyoming. Wisconsin will most likely be closer.
Interestingly Bernie has an efficiency advantage over Hillary now in terms of votes per delegate
HRC: 7211 Sanders: 6482
I'm guessing Wyoming is a caucus, and one of the Dakotas maybe ?
Wyoming is the last significant caucus, though Wisconsin and several others ar eopen primaries, allowing independents (a big source of Sanders votes) to come in. See my analysis of the coming weeks down this thread.
seems focused on making the sport work for the fans.
Is Indycar "the most popular sport on Earth" ?
unlike F1...
Neither. Football is the only truly global sport. F1 is unusual in being a global *competition*.
A a global sport basketball is a pretty decent rival to football - though a long, long way behind. Because it is so irrelevant here we probably don't notice how big it is elsewhere.
Aidan Kerr Sunday Post #SP16 poll of 1,000 over 60s.
SNP 43% CON 28% LAB 19%
Brutal for Labour. Absolutely brutal.
I frankly don't believe that poll at all. The SNP are too low, the Tories are way too high and Labour, well who knows about Labour? Looking at the headlines in the SP today it seemed to be suggesting that Labour support has simply collapsed in the over 60s. I can believe that up to a point but 28% Tories in Scotland? No chance.
Home Secretary Theresa May pledged a massive increase in armed officers in response to last year's terrorist atrocities in Paris. But forces are struggling to get enough officers to sign up because of the risk they will be pursued by a police watchdog...
Mark Williams, chairman of the Police Firearms Officers Association, told The Mail on Sunday that some forces 'are struggling to recruit. We are doing all we can to assist, but matters are not helped by the manner of recent IPCC investigations and the way firearms officers are being treated like suspects'.
Latest figures show there were 5,875 elite firearms officers across England and Wales in March 2014 – a drop of 15 per cent from five years earlier.
Aidan Kerr Sunday Post #SP16 poll of 1,000 over 60s.
SNP 43% CON 28% LAB 19%
Brutal for Labour. Absolutely brutal.
I frankly don't believe that poll at all. The SNP are too low, the Tories are way too high and Labour, well who knows about Labour? Looking at the headlines in the SP today it seemed to be suggesting that Labour support has simply collapsed in the over 60s. I can believe that up to a point but 28% Tories in Scotland? No chance.
For the over sixties it is quite believeable. Selective mortality in Labour voters and so on.
Mr. NorthWales, not a member, but if I were I'd find it difficult to vote for Boris. He lacks substance and I don't think he'd find it easy to command the PCP. The Conservatives have gone over a decade without regicide (unless we count the pre-emptive strike that may have ended Osborne's hopes). They'd probably burst with glee at the prospect of toppling someone.
May might get the gig because of who she isn't, rather than who she is. On the other hand, Julian the Apostate got made Caesar on the basis he was the only male relative of Constantius who hadn't been murdered, and he ended up being a very competent emperor.
I know that Afghanistan have had the stuffing knocked out of them somewhat and are probably thinking about the flight home now but this is a ruthlessly effective performance by the Windies. For me, NZ-v-the Windies is the likely and appropriate final and a very difficult one to call.
Indycar is set up to offer better racing than F1 because there is a competitive playing field. All teams are supplied with the same Dallara chassis for the same price. There are two engine suppliers - Chevrolet and Honda. Aero kids supplied either by the engine manufacturer or Dallara. Simpler tyre rules and pit stops that aren't 2 seconds in length. And for 2016? Aero rules changed to make the Honda kit more competitive. Push to pass status no longer broadcast to the teams - they can't tell their driver to PTP in response to another driver.
And an interesting mix of circuits from tracks to streets to short ovals to super speedways. Ok so the ovals look odd to European eyes but the speed they do around them is sensational. Oh, you can watch all the races as live on YouTube a couple of hours after they finish. And with little media or social media or political betting blog coverage I don't have to hide under a rock until I watch a race
Aidan Kerr Sunday Post #SP16 poll of 1,000 over 60s.
SNP 43% CON 28% LAB 19%
Brutal for Labour. Absolutely brutal.
I frankly don't believe that poll at all. The SNP are too low, the Tories are way too high and Labour, well who knows about Labour? Looking at the headlines in the SP today it seemed to be suggesting that Labour support has simply collapsed in the over 60s. I can believe that up to a point but 28% Tories in Scotland? No chance.
For the over sixties it is quite believeable. Selective mortality in Labour voters and so on.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like it to be true. It just seems very unlikely.
Aidan Kerr Sunday Post #SP16 poll of 1,000 over 60s.
SNP 43% CON 28% LAB 19%
Brutal for Labour. Absolutely brutal.
I frankly don't believe that poll at all. The SNP are too low, the Tories are way too high and Labour, well who knows about Labour? Looking at the headlines in the SP today it seemed to be suggesting that Labour support has simply collapsed in the over 60s. I can believe that up to a point but 28% Tories in Scotland? No chance.
That looks about right for over 60s. Conservatives will be lower and SNP higher in under 60s.
Hunt fits very neatly into the Cameroon cabinet. A superficial charm covering up a lack of competence and a malignant agenda.
Like other senior Tory Remainers Hunt has spent years talking about the harm EU causes. If Leave does win a big part of it will be because of the anti-EU rhetoric that they have spouted for so long.
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
I don't see it.
MPs don't just nominate. The vote by exhaustive secret ballot. It's not like the Labour process. There will be a real contest with multiple candidates from both sides of the referendum divide. I think Boris will have problems because of his faltering performances in the House and on TV and the suspicion that he is simply not up to the job. Also, going back to the depths of time, ie the end of last year before the referendum consumed Tory consciousness, it used to be said that Boris lacked a following among MPs and that he neglected to court them. I am sceptical that he can have overcome that simply by coming out for Leave.
Sanders' victories last night could also be a reflection of Democratic voters thinking that if Trump is the GOP nominee then Sanders could have a real shot at the presidency if he was Democratic nominee, so why not take the risk! Clinton is favourite but the next few races could be interesting
Indycar is set up to offer better racing than F1 because there is a competitive playing field. All teams are supplied with the same Dallara chassis for the same price. There are two engine suppliers - Chevrolet and Honda. Aero kids supplied either by the engine manufacturer or Dallara. Simpler tyre rules and pit stops that aren't 2 seconds in length. And for 2016? Aero rules changed to make the Honda kit more competitive. Push to pass status no longer broadcast to the teams - they can't tell their driver to PTP in response to another driver.
And an interesting mix of circuits from tracks to streets to short ovals to super speedways. Ok so the ovals look odd to European eyes but the speed they do around them is sensational. Oh, you can watch all the races as live on YouTube a couple of hours after they finish. And with little media or social media or political betting blog coverage I don't have to hide under a rock until I watch a race
I think IRL is more interesting than F1. The only thing I don't like is that the cars look cluttered following. I get that they don't want wheel contact that can launch a car into the air (as happened to Dan Wheldon), but I'd argue that cluttering the cars up with more body work adds risk to drivers being hit by debris as happened to Justin Wilson last season.
I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated
It's not up to them, it's up to MPs.
Yes, but the associations can make their views known to the MPs. Denying Boris a place now would seem like a stitch up, wouldn't it? Unless there were two genuinely impressive alternatives
It's a secret ballot, participation in the stitch-up is strictly deniable. They kept Portillo off the ballot before, they'll have no problem keeping Boris off it if MPs want somebody else.
Surely leaving the EU would greatly reduce the numbers of health tourists, and allow the UK to decide from which countries to accept medical qualifications?
The project fear is becoming laughable in its absurdities. And what we laugh at we do not fear.
Mr. Pioneers, spoilers can be a significant problem. I recall Sue Barker (during Wimbledon coverage) getting some stick for giving away who won the Grand Prix right ahead of the highlights programme.
Surely leaving the EU would greatly reduce the numbers of health tourists, and allow the UK to decide from which countries to accept medical qualifications?
I was in the out patients department at Barnet General last week. There was a poster behind the reception desk saying 'Health Care isn't free to all' It went on to say that if you can't prove that you're a UK citizen or resident you may be asked to pay upfront. Can't recall seeing anything like that before.
Surely leaving the EU would greatly reduce the numbers of health tourists, and allow the UK to decide from which countries to accept medical qualifications?
The project fear is becoming laughable in its absurdities. And what we laugh at we do not fear.
It will be laughable to the committed leavers but the problem for the leavers is that it may well work with the undecided of which there are many including myself
Sanders' victories last night could also be a reflection of Democratic voters thinking that if Trump is the GOP nominee then Sanders could have a real shot at the presidency if he was Democratic nominee, so why not take the risk! Clinton is favourite but the next few races could be interesting
They also have polls showing Sanders outperforming Hillary in the general. I don't think it would work out that way but I wouldn't expect Sanders's fans to share my doubts.
Many of these reports were in the public domain and widely reported in the press. The NHS was seriously mismanaged by a succession of Labour health ministers, and many of the people overseeing the mid staffs Trust remain in public employment in the NHS under the Tories. Your attempts to personalise it to Burnham risks letting the guilty parties off the hook (Alan Johnson and John Reid were in charge at the height of the Staffs mismanagement for example).
We have argued over this many times and I think unlikely to agree. I think Andy Burnham is no more responsible than a half dozen other ministers and much less so than dozens of NHS beaurocrats.
For example I think Maggies obvious Euro-enthusiasm in the seventies was in part down to her leadership ambitions and in part that the saw the EU as a way of cementing the European countries together in the Cold War.
I think there's a lot of truth in that: when defeating communism was the goal, she saw supranational European institutions as a positive. When communism was gone, the irritations of the EU became much more pressing.
For example I think Maggies obvious Euro-enthusiasm in the seventies was in part down to her leadership ambitions and in part that the saw the EU as a way of cementing the European countries together in the Cold War.
I think there's a lot of truth in that: when defeating communism was the goal, she saw supranational European institutions as a positive. When communism was gone, the irritations of the EU became much more pressing.
Forgive me, I am too young. Did people know communism was on the way out in 1988? I got the impression that predicting the fall of communism was a minority view even during Gorbachev, and that there was a big question mark right into the early 90s.
I do wonder what will happen with Osborne and, more widely, the Conservative leadership. Osborne seems busted. Boris is unlikely to get PCP support and isn't substantial enough. Gove's got the brains but lots of people dislike him. Hunt is a lightweight and his NHS moves will not endear him to people, one suspects.
I'm not a fan of May, but by virtue of not being the others she's in a strong position.
Javid's the most lightweight lightweight since Andy Burnham. Priti Patel would be super, but apparently she's rubbish at interviews and can't think on her feet.
I can't vote for Priti, alas. While I do not support the death penalty, it would not prevent me from voting for someone generally. In the case of Priti, her failure to even accept there might be miscarriages of justice was staggering. It put me right off her.
Aidan Kerr Sunday Post #SP16 poll of 1,000 over 60s.
SNP 43% CON 28% LAB 19%
Brutal for Labour. Absolutely brutal.
I frankly don't believe that poll at all. The SNP are too low, the Tories are way too high and Labour, well who knows about Labour? Looking at the headlines in the SP today it seemed to be suggesting that Labour support has simply collapsed in the over 60s. I can believe that up to a point but 28% Tories in Scotland? No chance.
It's typical of earthquake partisan realignments, though, that young people and new voters, without a history of voting for the old parties, are disproportionately represented among supporters of the breakthrough party - I'm thinking of Sinn Féin in Ireland and the FN in France, not really Ukip who aren't as popular.
For example I think Maggies obvious Euro-enthusiasm in the seventies was in part down to her leadership ambitions and in part that the saw the EU as a way of cementing the European countries together in the Cold War.
I think there's a lot of truth in that: when defeating communism was the goal, she saw supranational European institutions as a positive. When communism was gone, the irritations of the EU became much more pressing.
Forgive me, I am too young. Did people know communism was on the way out in 1988? I got the impression that predicting the fall of communism was a minority view even during Gorbachev, and that there was a big question mark right into the early 90s.
While no-one could have foreseen quite how quickly the collapse came, the signs were clearly visible from 1981 onwards (principally, the Gdansk shipyard strike and subsequent rise of Solidarity in Poland).
A convenient excuse to recommend the new series of Line of Duty. The story for this series, which started last week, concerns an investigation into a fatal shooting of an armed criminal by police.
(Stick with it past some indifferent acting in the first few minutes.)
Home Secretary Theresa May pledged a massive increase in armed officers in response to last year's terrorist atrocities in Paris. But forces are struggling to get enough officers to sign up because of the risk they will be pursued by a police watchdog...
Mark Williams, chairman of the Police Firearms Officers Association, told The Mail on Sunday that some forces 'are struggling to recruit. We are doing all we can to assist, but matters are not helped by the manner of recent IPCC investigations and the way firearms officers are being treated like suspects'.
Latest figures show there were 5,875 elite firearms officers across England and Wales in March 2014 – a drop of 15 per cent from five years earlier.
For example I think Maggies obvious Euro-enthusiasm in the seventies was in part down to her leadership ambitions and in part that the saw the EU as a way of cementing the European countries together in the Cold War.
I think there's a lot of truth in that: when defeating communism was the goal, she saw supranational European institutions as a positive. When communism was gone, the irritations of the EU became much more pressing.
Forgive me, I am too young. Did people know communism was on the way out in 1988? I got the impression that predicting the fall of communism was a minority view even during Gorbachev, and that there was a big question mark right into the early 90s.
I'm reading the Robert Service history of the cold war right now, and the economic problems of the Soviet Union were obvious, even if collapse was not forecast. The briefing papers delivered to Thatcher, Reagan and co constantly emphasised how the low price of oil was hammering the Russian economy.
A convenient excuse to recommend the new series of Line of Duty. The story for this series, which started last week, concerns an investigation into a fatal shooting of an armed criminal by police.
(Stick with it past some indifferent acting in the first few minutes.)
Home Secretary Theresa May pledged a massive increase in armed officers in response to last year's terrorist atrocities in Paris. But forces are struggling to get enough officers to sign up because of the risk they will be pursued by a police watchdog...
Mark Williams, chairman of the Police Firearms Officers Association, told The Mail on Sunday that some forces 'are struggling to recruit. We are doing all we can to assist, but matters are not helped by the manner of recent IPCC investigations and the way firearms officers are being treated like suspects'.
Latest figures show there were 5,875 elite firearms officers across England and Wales in March 2014 – a drop of 15 per cent from five years earlier.
Have the IPCC not reported on that shooting of an individual when there was the armed attempted bust out of the Turkish mafia member? That happened 4 months ago.
Many of these reports were in the public domain and widely reported in the press. The NHS was seriously mismanaged by a succession of Labour health ministers, and many of the people overseeing the mid staffs Trust remain in public employment in the NHS under the Tories. Your attempts to personalise it to Burnham risks letting the guilty parties off the hook (Alan Johnson and John Reid were in charge at the height of the Staffs mismanagement for example).
We have argued over this many times and I think unlikely to agree. I think Andy Burnham is no more responsible than a half dozen other ministers and much less so than dozens of NHS beaurocrats.
That timeline only goes up to 2009.
We won't agree if you continue to claim that Burnham ordered the full public inquiry, as you have in the past! My attempt to 'personalise' it on Burnham is simply an attempt to show how the truth was repeatedly hidden.
I would have thought the truth would have mattered to a doc ...
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
I don't see it.
MPs don't just nominate. The vote by exhaustive secret ballot. It's not like the Labour process. There will be a real contest with multiple candidates from both sides of the referendum divide. I think Boris will have problems because of his faltering performances in the House and on TV and the suspicion that he is simply not up to the job. Also, going back to the depths of time, ie the end of last year before the referendum consumed Tory consciousness, it used to be said that Boris lacked a following among MPs and that he neglected to court them. I am sceptical that he can have overcome that simply by coming out for Leave.
But Dave may be un-seated following a close 'Remain' vote by angry MPs, driven on by their even angrier constituency members.
Sanders certainly has a real shot in the general and could well beat Trump or Cruz, though probably not Kasich, so you can see why Democrats are having second thoughts on Hillary whose main selling point is 'electability'
Is the photo sitting atop Nick Palmer's article below supposed to amplify his advice that Remain should be more positive and give airtime to politicians who genuinely like the EU?
Because if I'm not mistaken, what it shows is Cambridge University students swanning up a cobbled street in Cambridge trying to sell the "I'm in" message.
If Remain have a positive answer to the immigration question, what on earth is it? Are those students going to sell it? "We love paellas. We love cappuccinos. I spent last summer in Madrid and the previous one in Copenhagen and had an awfully good time." Right.
Anyone who has read David Ogilvy's book on advertising will know that what makes a successful advert doesn't change much over the years, over the decades even. And political campaigning is advertising. Nick, you're trying to be sophisticated. Yes, debates do tend to be negative versus negative, but you're not going to change that. They are almost always Time for a Change versus Better the Devil You Know too, and you're not going to change that either. Commenters think they're so knowing about "Project Fear", but in actual fact Project Fear is all the Remain side has got. The question isn't how they can be positive. You really must be joking about that! Everyone in Britain dislikes the EU, even those who want Britain to stay in it! Go to a sporting event, and those who support the French team will be waving the EU flag as well as the French tricolour. The same is true at many French political events. Britain isn't like that. It's straight cucumbers and supposed "loads o' rules" all the way, and perceptions aren't about to change. The question for the Remain side is how they can best scare people about the consequences of Brexit.
If the result doesn't become a foregone conclusion - and it's quite possible it will, if for example Cameron falls before the vote - I suspect that significant shifts in voting intention will occur in the last 2 weeks, and even in the last few days, in response to major news stories. Perhaps featuring Calais or Dover or "hordes" of refugees at a continental railway station. Or Arab men assaulting white women. Or terrorist attacks. Or some other events seasoned with reports that "Men were heard shouting in Arabic".
It's hard to imagine a major news story that's going to boost Remain. Try it!
For example I think Maggies obvious Euro-enthusiasm in the seventies was in part down to her leadership ambitions and in part that the saw the EU as a way of cementing the European countries together in the Cold War.
I think there's a lot of truth in that: when defeating communism was the goal, she saw supranational European institutions as a positive. When communism was gone, the irritations of the EU became much more pressing.
Forgive me, I am too young. Did people know communism was on the way out in 1988? I got the impression that predicting the fall of communism was a minority view even during Gorbachev, and that there was a big question mark right into the early 90s.
While no-one could have foreseen quite how quickly the collapse came, the signs were clearly visible from 1981 onwards (principally, the Gdansk shipyard strike and subsequent rise of Solidarity in Poland).
I remember as a sixth former way back in 1981 attending a lecture by a history prof who told us the Soviet Union would collapse in the next decade or two thanks to the disparities in income and access to technology between East and West. I think it was Norman Stone, who has gone on to be a leading historian, but I can't be certain.
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
I don't see it.
MPs don't just nominate. The vote by exhaustive secret ballot. It's not like the Labour process. There will be a real contest with multiple candidates from both sides of the referendum divide. I think Boris will have problems because of his faltering performances in the House and on TV and the suspicion that he is simply not up to the job. Also, going back to the depths of time, ie the end of last year before the referendum consumed Tory consciousness, it used to be said that Boris lacked a following among MPs and that he neglected to court them. I am sceptical that he can have overcome that simply by coming out for Leave.
But Dave may be un-seated following a close 'Remain' vote by angry MPs, driven on by their even angrier constituency members.
But how does that lead to Boris becoming PM? It's not like the old days where a challenger took the fight to the leader, like Thatcher in 1975 or Heseltine in 1990 - the VoNC and election are two distinct processes.
I do wonder what will happen with Osborne and, more widely, the Conservative leadership. Osborne seems busted. Boris is unlikely to get PCP support and isn't substantial enough. Gove's got the brains but lots of people dislike him. Hunt is a lightweight and his NHS moves will not endear him to people, one suspects.
I'm not a fan of May, but by virtue of not being the others she's in a strong position.
Javid's the most lightweight lightweight since Andy Burnham. Priti Patel would be super, but apparently she's rubbish at interviews and can't think on her feet.
I can't vote for Priti, alas. While I do not support the death penalty, it would not prevent me from voting for someone generally. In the case of Priti, her failure to even accept there might be miscarriages of justice was staggering. It put me right off her.
Same here. The feebleness of her thinking shocked me actually.
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
I don't see it.
snip
But Dave may be un-seated following a close 'Remain' vote by angry MPs, driven on by their even angrier constituency members.
But how does that lead to Boris becoming PM? It's not like the old days where a challenger took the fight to the leader, like Thatcher in 1975 or Heseltine in 1990 - the VoNC and election are two distinct processes.
"The rules of the Tory leadership contest provide that the final ballot shall be between an Inner and an Outer, and that the Outer shall win. Naturally, that is not quite how the rules are worded but, given that Tory MPs select a shortlist of two and party members have the final say, that is how it will work."
I do wonder what will happen with Osborne and, more widely, the Conservative leadership. Osborne seems busted. Boris is unlikely to get PCP support and isn't substantial enough. Gove's got the brains but lots of people dislike him. Hunt is a lightweight and his NHS moves will not endear him to people, one suspects.
I'm not a fan of May, but by virtue of not being the others she's in a strong position.
Javid's the most lightweight lightweight since Andy Burnham. Priti Patel would be super, but apparently she's rubbish at interviews and can't think on her feet.
I can't vote for Priti, alas. While I do not support the death penalty, it would not prevent me from voting for someone generally. In the case of Priti, her failure to even accept there might be miscarriages of justice was staggering. It put me right off her.
Same here. The feebleness of her thinking shocked me actually.
Forgive me, I am too young. Did people know communism was on the way out in 1988? I got the impression that predicting the fall of communism was a minority view even during Gorbachev,
In 1988, hardly any Sovietologists were predicting the fall of the CPSU regime, whether they were conservatives or liberals. Andrei Amalrik had written a book in 1970 but few took it seriously. The other exception is Hillel Ticktin, who got it right but isn't widely known.
and that there was a big question mark right into the early 90s.
That's not true though. Once the wall was down and Poland had gone...
As for the "Cold War", it was over by the mid-1960s. Some commentators like to say the Fischer-Spassky chess match in Reykjavik happened "at the height of the Cold War", but they are ignoramuses. It happened at the height of détente.
Surely leaving the EU would greatly reduce the numbers of health tourists, and allow the UK to decide from which countries to accept medical qualifications?
I was in the out patients department at Barnet General last week. There was a poster behind the reception desk saying 'Health Care isn't free to all' It went on to say that if you can't prove that you're a UK citizen or resident you may be asked to pay upfront. Can't recall seeing anything like that before.
That all sounds fine and dandy, but I wonder how many health tourists in Barnet or indeed elsewhere have actually been charged. Is there a published tariff showing how such charges are calculated? Thought not.
I do wonder what will happen with Osborne and, more widely, the Conservative leadership. Osborne seems busted. Boris is unlikely to get PCP support and isn't substantial enough. Gove's got the brains but lots of people dislike him. Hunt is a lightweight and his NHS moves will not endear him to people, one suspects.
I'm not a fan of May, but by virtue of not being the others she's in a strong position.
Javid's the most lightweight lightweight since Andy Burnham. Priti Patel would be super, but apparently she's rubbish at interviews and can't think on her feet.
I can't vote for Priti, alas. While I do not support the death penalty, it would not prevent me from voting for someone generally. In the case of Priti, her failure to even accept there might be miscarriages of justice was staggering. It put me right off her.
Talking of Osborne there is an interesting column by David Smith in the ST today available here: http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/
The 7.5% increase in the Minimum Wage comes into force on Friday giving our lowest paid an increase of 10.8% from last October. A reminder of happier times for Osborne (with IDS clenching his fists in delight) or a new opportunity? He will certainly get a more favourable press this week than in the last fortnight.
I argued for a significant increase in the NMW before the budget as I thought it was important that more of the cost of employing the least skilled fell on the employer rather than the tax payer so I was delighted with what he did. The risk was that the marginal rate of employment of the least skilled would fall but the employment market has remained remarkably robust in the months up to the change (a point rather ignored by DS who is somewhat sceptical in tone).
If Osborne is to move on or out his greatest legacies will be the incredible improvement in employment and this step change in wages which will significantly reduce inequality in our society whilst giving a more sustainable base to the public finances.
The other side of the coin is stagnant productivity and the higher government borrowing which is sustaining all these low skilled, low productivity and low pay wealth consuming jobs.
An important part of working is the opportunity to better yourself through more experience leading to higher pay to being able to buy a house and afford a higher standard of living. I suspect that process has been greatly damaged during the last decade as real wages have stagnated, housing has become less affordable, ever greater student debt etc. Instead we're at risk of creating ever more inequality which isn't good for the economy or for society in general.
It also occurs to me that you if you applaud Osborne's employment strategy you must as a consequence condemn that of the Thatcher government.
If Thatcher (or Howe and Lawson) had pumped equivalently vast amounts of money into the economy then unemployment would have been certainly below three million and most probably below two million during the early and mid 1980s (and so saved themselves a great deal of political damage).
Instead their economic strategy was based on economic reform and sound public finances.
Surely leaving the EU would greatly reduce the numbers of health tourists, and allow the UK to decide from which countries to accept medical qualifications?
I was in the out patients department at Barnet General last week. There was a poster behind the reception desk saying 'Health Care isn't free to all' It went on to say that if you can't prove that you're a UK citizen or resident you may be asked to pay upfront. Can't recall seeing anything like that before.
That's an interesting development. Good to hear - if it is more than words.
My understanding is that although in theory those treated under what used to be the E111 are supposed to be billed back to their home country for treatment, and those from other countries are supposed to either pay themselves or provide insurance details, the reality on the ground is that A&E departments especially are just not set up to provide billing services.
While I agree that asking questions of a guy with a minor injury is probably counter productive - even most US hospitals will patch you up with dressings and stitches - one would like to assume that anyone presenting with a serious illness or needing to stay for a week does get followed up and the bill sent to the appropriate country or insurance company.
Two recent anecdotes (which of course are not data). 1. UK Citizen living in Middle East, had road accident when in the UK, provided his insurance details to the hospital but six months later has heard nothing. 2. Woman from Africa gives birth at Dubai Airport while trying to get to London. She had a doctor's note from African doctor that said she was 25 weeks when she was actually 35 weeks. These two scenarios seem to repeat themselves on a regular basis.
Surely leaving the EU would greatly reduce the numbers of health tourists, and allow the UK to decide from which countries to accept medical qualifications?
I was in the out patients department at Barnet General last week. There was a poster behind the reception desk saying 'Health Care isn't free to all' It went on to say that if you can't prove that you're a UK citizen or resident you may be asked to pay upfront. Can't recall seeing anything like that before.
That all sounds fine and dandy, but I wonder how many health tourists in Barnet or indeed elsewhere have actually been charged. Is there a published tariff showing how such charges are calculated? Thought not.
Indeed, it looked very much like a 'Being seen to do something' type thing. I will ask about a tariff when I'm back there in a few weeks.
If Remain win Cameron will stay PM as the country has backed his position, even if it is a little less secure after a close Remain. Boris could well be kept out of the final 2 by MPs in favour of Gove, we shall see
The West Indies are making hard work of chasing down 124 to win against Afghanistan. They are 41-3 off 7 overs and need to get 101 to finish above England on net run rate.
In 1988, hardly any Sovietologists were predicting the fall of the CPSU regime
It was a bit like how things were on this website before the 2015 general election, when almost everyone regurgitated the opinion that a hung parliament was almost a foregone conclusion. Sovietologists were taken by surprise and had egg all over their faces.
For example I think Maggies obvious Euro-enthusiasm in the seventies was in part down to her leadership ambitions and in part that the saw the EU as a way of cementing the European countries together in the Cold War.
I think there's a lot of truth in that: when defeating communism was the goal, she saw supranational European institutions as a positive. When communism was gone, the irritations of the EU became much more pressing.
Forgive me, I am too young. Did people know communism was on the way out in 1988? I got the impression that predicting the fall of communism was a minority view even during Gorbachev, and that there was a big question mark right into the early 90s.
While no-one could have foreseen quite how quickly the collapse came, the signs were clearly visible from 1981 onwards (principally, the Gdansk shipyard strike and subsequent rise of Solidarity in Poland).
I remember as a sixth former way back in 1981 attending a lecture by a history prof who told us the Soviet Union would collapse in the next decade or two thanks to the disparities in income and access to technology between East and West. I think it was Norman Stone, who has gone on to be a leading historian, but I can't be certain.
As a first year undergrad in 1974, my young junior college lecturer was also predicting the Soviet demise but IIRC more because of internal divisions within the USSR. But such prescience was only to be expected from the future Sir Lawrence Freedman. Shame about Chilcot though, Larry.....
For example I think Maggies obvious Euro-enthusiasm in the seventies was in part down to her leadership ambitions and in part that the saw the EU as a way of cementing the European countries together in the Cold War.
I think there's a lot of truth in that: when defeating communism was the goal, she saw supranational European institutions as a positive. When communism was gone, the irritations of the EU became much more pressing.
Forgive me, I am too young. Did people know communism was on the way out in 1988? I got the impression that predicting the fall of communism was a minority view even during Gorbachev, and that there was a big question mark right into the early 90s.
I'm reading the Robert Service history of the cold war right now, and the economic problems of the Soviet Union were obvious, even if collapse was not forecast. The briefing papers delivered to Thatcher, Reagan and co constantly emphasised how the low price of oil was hammering the Russian economy.
This is interesting. The consensus on pb comments seems to be that the signs of economic decline were obvious, but that nonetheless most experts did not predict the implication upon political decline until its signs were apparent. So you have to assume that Mrs Thatcher didn't either.
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
I don't see it.
MPs don't just nominate. The vote by exhaustive secret ballot. It's not like the Labour process. There will be a real contest with multiple candidates from both sides of the referendum divide. I think Boris will have problems because of his faltering performances in the House and on TV and the suspicion that he is simply not up to the job. Also, going back to the depths of time, ie the end of last year before the referendum consumed Tory consciousness, it used to be said that Boris lacked a following among MPs and that he neglected to court them. I am sceptical that he can have overcome that simply by coming out for Leave.
But Dave may be un-seated following a close 'Remain' vote by angry MPs, driven on by their even angrier constituency members.
A coup following a close Remain vote on a relatively low turnout would be insane. But if the Tories want to go full Corbyn nuts who are we to stop them?
Surely leaving the EU would greatly reduce the numbers of health tourists, and allow the UK to decide from which countries to accept medical qualifications?
I was in the out patients department at Barnet General last week. There was a poster behind the reception desk saying 'Health Care isn't free to all' It went on to say that if you can't prove that you're a UK citizen or resident you may be asked to pay upfront. Can't recall seeing anything like that before.
That's an interesting development. Good to hear - if it is more than words.
My understanding is that although in theory those treated under what used to be the E111 are supposed to be billed back to their home country for treatment, and those from other countries are supposed to either pay themselves or provide insurance details, the reality on the ground is that A&E departments especially are just not set up to provide billing services.
While I agree that asking questions of a guy with a minor injury is probably counter productive - even most US hospitals will patch you up with dressings and stitches - one would like to assume that anyone presenting with a serious illness or needing to stay for a week does get followed up and the bill sent to the appropriate country or insurance company.
Two recent anecdotes (which of course are not data). 1. UK Citizen living in Middle East, had road accident when in the UK, provided his insurance details to the hospital but six months later has heard nothing. 2. Woman from Africa gives birth at Dubai Airport while trying to get to London. She had a doctor's note from African doctor that said she was 25 weeks when she was actually 35 weeks. These two scenarios seem to repeat themselves on a regular basis.
I had to give my credit card details before a doctor would even see me in the US.
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
I don't see it.
MPs don't just nominate. The vote by exhaustive secret ballot. It's not like the Labour process. There will be a real contest with multiple candidates from both sides of the referendum divide. I think Boris will have problems because of his faltering performances in the House and on TV and the suspicion that he is simply not up to the job. Also, going back to the depths of time, ie the end of last year before the referendum consumed Tory consciousness, it used to be said that Boris lacked a following among MPs and that he neglected to court them. I am sceptical that he can have overcome that simply by coming out for Leave.
But Dave may be un-seated following a close 'Remain' vote by angry MPs, driven on by their even angrier constituency members.
A coup following a close Remain vote on a relatively low turnout would be insane. But if the Tories want to go full Corbyn nuts who are we to stop them?
It ain't going to happen; it really isn't. Trust me, I know my party.
Aidan Kerr Sunday Post #SP16 poll of 1,000 over 60s.
SNP 43% CON 28% LAB 19%
Brutal for Labour. Absolutely brutal.
I frankly don't believe that poll at all. The SNP are too low, the Tories are way too high and Labour, well who knows about Labour? Looking at the headlines in the SP today it seemed to be suggesting that Labour support has simply collapsed in the over 60s. I can believe that up to a point but 28% Tories in Scotland? No chance.
For the over sixties it is quite believeable. Selective mortality in Labour voters and so on.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like it to be true. It just seems very unlikely.
The recent Survation and Yougov sub-sample numbers from Scottish polls tell a similar story.
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
I don't see it.
MPs don't just nominate. The vote by exhaustive secret ballot. It's not like the Labour process. There will be a real contest with multiple candidates from both sides of the referendum divide. I think Boris will have problems because of his faltering performances in the House and on TV and the suspicion that he is simply not up to the job. Also, going back to the depths of time, ie the end of last year before the referendum consumed Tory consciousness, it used to be said that Boris lacked a following among MPs and that he neglected to court them. I am sceptical that he can have overcome that simply by coming out for Leave.
But Dave may be un-seated following a close 'Remain' vote by angry MPs, driven on by their even angrier constituency members.
A coup following a close Remain vote on a relatively low turnout would be insane. But if the Tories want to go full Corbyn nuts who are we to stop them?
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions: 1) When will a vacancy arise? 2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election. The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender. For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
I don't see it.
MPs don't just nominate. The vote by exhaustive secret ballot. It's not like the Labour process. There will be a real contest with multiple candidates from both sides of the referendum divide. I think Boris will have problems because of his faltering performances in the House and on TV and the suspicion that he is simply not up to the job. Also, going back to the depths of time, ie the end of last year before the referendum consumed Tory consciousness, it used to be said that Boris lacked a following among MPs and that he neglected to court them. I am sceptical that he can have overcome that simply by coming out for Leave.
But Dave may be un-seated following a close 'Remain' vote by angry MPs, driven on by their even angrier constituency members.
A coup following a close Remain vote on a relatively low turnout would be insane. But if the Tories want to go full Corbyn nuts who are we to stop them?
It ain't going to happen; it really isn't. Trust me, I know my party.
Seconded.There are lots of Lefties thinking the Tories will lose their marbles the way Labour did when electing their new leader. Not going to happen.
By the way, somone (AndyJS?) was asking if anyone had seen the new Scandi noir Blue Eyes on More4. I saw it (on catch-up) last night, and it's pretty good. The theme is a far-right movement (clearly modelled on the Sweden Democrats, though the SD have protested and the film-makers have denied it), one of whose regional leaders is murdered.
As usual everyone is portrayed with some depth and sympathy - the victim in particular is motivated by genuine concern about overstretched social services, but under pressure from her son, who is upset to find his mother taking a controversial public role. There is a Thick of It style government spin doctor and the general flavour is more Borgen-plus-murder than The Killing or The Bridge. The series has been criticised in Sweden from both left ("why are you showing these fascists in a sympathetic light?") and right (the party leader is shown as a calculating chap who conceals his real militancy), but it strikes me as pretty fair, and really well acted. At present there isn't a stand-out lead character, though it's clearly going to be the woman assistant to a party leader.
Comments
It's also surprising how some cars are instantly recognisable (leaving aside the Tyrell six-wheeler
edit: it was up to 2007, and is here:
http://www.motoringalliance.com/images/wallpaper/1950_2007.jpg
The 7.5% increase in the Minimum Wage comes into force on Friday giving our lowest paid an increase of 10.8% from last October. A reminder of happier times for Osborne (with IDS clenching his fists in delight) or a new opportunity? He will certainly get a more favourable press this week than in the last fortnight.
I argued for a significant increase in the NMW before the budget as I thought it was important that more of the cost of employing the least skilled fell on the employer rather than the tax payer so I was delighted with what he did. The risk was that the marginal rate of employment of the least skilled would fall but the employment market has remained remarkably robust in the months up to the change (a point rather ignored by DS who is somewhat sceptical in tone).
If Osborne is to move on or out his greatest legacies will be the incredible improvement in employment and this step change in wages which will significantly reduce inequality in our society whilst giving a more sustainable base to the public finances.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/laurasilver/dick-hunt#.xv9zQXPa38
In religious news, a judge appears to have banned a father taking his son to any Christian building after his Muslim mother (with whom the son lives for most of the time) objected.
'Hunt's a Stalinist with a good bedside manner': The PM’s verdict on his Health Secretary in the memoirs by former Lib Dem minister that have electrified Westminster
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3511007/David-Cameron-s-verdict-Health-Secretary-memoirs-former-Lib-Dem-minister-electrified-Westminster.html
Given that recent polling shows Boris is in an even more unassailable position of popularity than before among the Tory membership, this seems to boil down to two questions:
1) When will a vacancy arise?
2) Could there be a change in the landscape significant enough to mean AN Other could defeat Boris in the second round? ( I assume Boris makes it to the second round on the basis that he is a prominent Leaver and Tory associations will want him nominated)
On the first question, three possibilities: Soon after the referendum, (which would suit Boris), before the next election campaign but after the referendum had died down (mid 2017 to early 2019), or essentially at the 2020 election.
The greater the ructions in the PCP, the likelier a contest is triggered sooner rather than later.
On the second question it seems to me that Boris has a Teflon coating and any failings will slip straight off. So the only issue is whether a young powerful inspiring candidate who appeals to the grassroots can come forward and establish themselves as a serious contender.
For me this either Javid or Crabb as everyone else is tainted or old hat.
Essentially for Boris to be stopped, Dave needs to hang on and ride out the referendum and the backlash, make sure George doesn't cock anything else up and hope that one of the younger candidates can step up to the mark. Any more misfires and the 1922 chairman could be getting his letters, leading to PM Boris.
Better than fasting, anyway.
Sunday Post #SP16 poll of 1,000 over 60s.
SNP 43%
CON 28%
LAB 19%
Brutal for Labour. Absolutely brutal.
It's not just Boris, though. For most contenders, it's easier to see their flaws than virtues. There's a lack of genuinely impressive candidates. I think highly of Gove, but don't think he'll even stand for the job.
Belgium prosecutors told the Sunday Telegraph that Mr Prospero (security guard murdered in suspicious circumstances) was not employed at a nuclear plant, but worked guarding a nuclear medical research facility in Fleurus, near Charleroi, about 30 miles from his home in Froidchapelle.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12196908/Britains-NHS-cant-survive-staying-in-the-European-Union.html
http://www.biggestglobalsports.com/
May might get the gig because of who she isn't, rather than who she is. On the other hand, Julian the Apostate got made Caesar on the basis he was the only male relative of Constantius who hadn't been murdered, and he ended up being a very competent emperor.
And an interesting mix of circuits from tracks to streets to short ovals to super speedways. Ok so the ovals look odd to European eyes but the speed they do around them is sensational. Oh, you can watch all the races as live on YouTube a couple of hours after they finish. And with little media or social media or political betting blog coverage I don't have to hide under a rock until I watch a race
MPs don't just nominate. The vote by exhaustive secret ballot. It's not like the Labour process. There will be a real contest with multiple candidates from both sides of the referendum divide. I think Boris will have problems because of his faltering performances in the House and on TV and the suspicion that he is simply not up to the job. Also, going back to the depths of time, ie the end of last year before the referendum consumed Tory consciousness, it used to be said that Boris lacked a following among MPs and that he neglected to court them. I am sceptical that he can have overcome that simply by coming out for Leave.
Belgian interior minister admits neglect over decades has caused deficiencies in responding to violent extremism: https://t.co/oGz2s61WOB
Opinium poll: 52% would prefer to leave the EU and join EFTA (European Free Trade Association). 42% prefer EU membership. #Brexit.
There was a poster behind the reception desk saying 'Health Care isn't free to all'
It went on to say that if you can't prove that you're a UK citizen or resident you may be asked to pay upfront.
Can't recall seeing anything like that before.
Have you learnt about what happened at Stafford yet, and who commissioned which reports?
Many of these reports were in the public domain and widely reported in the press. The NHS was seriously mismanaged by a succession of Labour health ministers, and many of the people overseeing the mid staffs Trust remain in public employment in the NHS under the Tories. Your attempts to personalise it to Burnham risks letting the guilty parties off the hook (Alan Johnson and John Reid were in charge at the height of the Staffs mismanagement for example).
We have argued over this many times and I think unlikely to agree. I think Andy Burnham is no more responsible than a half dozen other ministers and much less so than dozens of NHS beaurocrats.
(Stick with it past some indifferent acting in the first few minutes.)
Have the IPCC not reported on that shooting of an individual when there was the armed attempted bust out of the Turkish mafia member? That happened 4 months ago.
We won't agree if you continue to claim that Burnham ordered the full public inquiry, as you have in the past! My attempt to 'personalise' it on Burnham is simply an attempt to show how the truth was repeatedly hidden.
I would have thought the truth would have mattered to a doc ...
Because if I'm not mistaken, what it shows is Cambridge University students swanning up a cobbled street in Cambridge trying to sell the "I'm in" message.
If Remain have a positive answer to the immigration question, what on earth is it? Are those students going to sell it? "We love paellas. We love cappuccinos. I spent last summer in Madrid and the previous one in Copenhagen and had an awfully good time." Right.
Anyone who has read David Ogilvy's book on advertising will know that what makes a successful advert doesn't change much over the years, over the decades even. And political campaigning is advertising. Nick, you're trying to be sophisticated. Yes, debates do tend to be negative versus negative, but you're not going to change that. They are almost always Time for a Change versus Better the Devil You Know too, and you're not going to change that either. Commenters think they're so knowing about "Project Fear", but in actual fact Project Fear is all the Remain side has got. The question isn't how they can be positive. You really must be joking about that! Everyone in Britain dislikes the EU, even those who want Britain to stay in it! Go to a sporting event, and those who support the French team will be waving the EU flag as well as the French tricolour. The same is true at many French political events. Britain isn't like that. It's straight cucumbers and supposed "loads o' rules" all the way, and perceptions aren't about to change. The question for the Remain side is how they can best scare people about the consequences of Brexit.
If the result doesn't become a foregone conclusion - and it's quite possible it will, if for example Cameron falls before the vote - I suspect that significant shifts in voting intention will occur in the last 2 weeks, and even in the last few days, in response to major news stories. Perhaps featuring Calais or Dover or "hordes" of refugees at a continental railway station. Or Arab men assaulting white women. Or terrorist attacks. Or some other events seasoned with reports that "Men were heard shouting in Arabic".
It's hard to imagine a major news story that's going to boost Remain. Try it!
Support for Remain is "sticky upwards".
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/its-time-to-get-used-to-the-idea-of-living-under-prime-minister-boris-johnson-a6952466.html
As for the "Cold War", it was over by the mid-1960s. Some commentators like to say the Fischer-Spassky chess match in Reykjavik happened "at the height of the Cold War", but they are ignoramuses. It happened at the height of détente.
An important part of working is the opportunity to better yourself through more experience leading to higher pay to being able to buy a house and afford a higher standard of living. I suspect that process has been greatly damaged during the last decade as real wages have stagnated, housing has become less affordable, ever greater student debt etc. Instead we're at risk of creating ever more inequality which isn't good for the economy or for society in general.
It also occurs to me that you if you applaud Osborne's employment strategy you must as a consequence condemn that of the Thatcher government.
If Thatcher (or Howe and Lawson) had pumped equivalently vast amounts of money into the economy then unemployment would have been certainly below three million and most probably below two million during the early and mid 1980s (and so saved themselves a great deal of political damage).
Instead their economic strategy was based on economic reform and sound public finances.
My understanding is that although in theory those treated under what used to be the E111 are supposed to be billed back to their home country for treatment, and those from other countries are supposed to either pay themselves or provide insurance details, the reality on the ground is that A&E departments especially are just not set up to provide billing services.
While I agree that asking questions of a guy with a minor injury is probably counter productive - even most US hospitals will patch you up with dressings and stitches - one would like to assume that anyone presenting with a serious illness or needing to stay for a week does get followed up and the bill sent to the appropriate country or insurance company.
Two recent anecdotes (which of course are not data). 1. UK Citizen living in Middle East, had road accident when in the UK, provided his insurance details to the hospital but six months later has heard nothing. 2. Woman from Africa gives birth at Dubai Airport while trying to get to London. She had a doctor's note from African doctor that said she was 25 weeks when she was actually 35 weeks. These two scenarios seem to repeat themselves on a regular basis.
I will ask about a tariff when I'm back there in a few weeks.
I guess I would have to grit teeth and vote for George, sorry but Boris is just not MP material.
As usual everyone is portrayed with some depth and sympathy - the victim in particular is motivated by genuine concern about overstretched social services, but under pressure from her son, who is upset to find his mother taking a controversial public role. There is a Thick of It style government spin doctor and the general flavour is more Borgen-plus-murder than The Killing or The Bridge. The series has been criticised in Sweden from both left ("why are you showing these fascists in a sympathetic light?") and right (the party leader is shown as a calculating chap who conceals his real militancy), but it strikes me as pretty fair, and really well acted. At present there isn't a stand-out lead character, though it's clearly going to be the woman assistant to a party leader.