All of whom have such bad political judgement that they just enthusiastically backed the "Remain" campaign. Why should I trust they know how to win an election, if they mis-judged the public mood on the EU so badly?
51.9 to 48.1
A defeat, then - and a defeat despite all the institutional advantages a campaign could dream of.
Ergo, anyone who thought it was a good idea to back the Remain campaign (i.e. most of the Labour MPs who now think they are qualified to dish out lectures on how to be electable) clearly does not have a good sense of how the public think themselves.
Does that include Corbyn who - in his own words - worked as hard as possible for Remain?
And all the trade unions?
In any case, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Remain side was correct: the Leavers cannot deliver the Brexit deal they promised.
What IS becoming clear is that the Leavers won't deliver the Apocalypse that the Remainers promised.
As for your earlier comments about undermining democracy, anything that "Leave" can be accused of is dwarfed into insignificance by the lies told by the Europhiles for over 40 years.
We'll have to see. Specific promises were made. No downsides were contemplated.
I know Leavers just want to block their ears to the economic costs of this, but anyway here's the economist report:
The government that negotiates the Brexit deal will be full of prominent Leavers. They will not deliver the Brexit deal they promised.
As you have said many many times I think we get it. The question will be, will the public actually care, or will they just think its politicians doing what they do. I am dubious they will care that much if we are out and the economy is doing reasonable and the new PM can point to at least notional reductions in immigration, but we will see at the GE, unless Corbyn is still running Labour of course
The next GE will take place before the Brexit deal is done. The Tories will walk it. The one after that? We'll see.
Secondly, it seems probable that a majority of Labour voters did back Remain, though the Labour vote must also have been deeply split because in many heartland areas, the Leave vote was huge.
Be interesting to see the Labour vote split with London taken out. London has masked that, in the rest of the country, there was far less enthusiasm from Labour voters to Remain.
Indeed, it was Labour voters in London, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Leeds and Liverpool who ensured Labour voters overall backed Remain. As a majority of the present Labour vote comes from metropolitan areas that determined which way the overall Labour vote went, even when Labour voters elsewhere frequently voted Leave
If your argument is that Labour voted remain overall because of the Metropolitan Cities then you should be able to see the problem...
Outside those metropolitan cities every safe labour seat is probably now a Labour / UKIP marginal.... And in the next election I would be betting on UKIP every single time...
A labour split, with both parties standing against each other in a general election under FPTP, could result in a lot of Tory and UKIP candidates coming through the middle of a split vote.
Alex White @AlexWhite1812 15h15 hours ago 16. This is a particular threat for Labour. We expect UKIP etc to mount a serious challenge in Labour heartlands (even with Corbyn gone)
If that's going to happen, UKIP need to show get some wins at next year's local elections. I'm expecting Brexit to kill them.
The PLP don't get it if they think that choosing a dyke as leader will endear them to older socially conservative WWC voters in the North of England and Midlands, whose views led to the Leave result last week. She also has very limited appeal to the Labour selectorate, who placed her 4th in the last deputy leadership contest. She is the wrong candidate to challenge JC.
If the Labour party aren't careful, UKIP could win swathes of seats in former Labour heartlands, like the SNP have done in the West of Scotland, at the next GE. I would personally prefer Farage as LOTO, to hold the new Con government's feet to the fire and deliver on the key arguments for Brexit, namely sovereignty and effective control and restriction of immigration. He made an excellent speech in the EU "parliament" the other day.
Re other elections in the next year or so, Trump has a very good chance of becoming POTUS, as Clinton is an appalling candidate. I wouldn't bet against M_LP in France either.
the majority of the northern wwc will not care that she is homosexual, not sure what country or decade you think this is? She is an unappealing choice as candidate, and indeed will not particularly appeal to the north, but not because of her sexuality (which is also not the reason that labour will be selecting her)
Your use of the word dyke indicates you're either trolling or virtue signaling how anti-PC you are. Both pretty pathetic
The PLP don't get it if they think that choosing a dyke as leader will endear them to older socially conservative WWC voters in the North of England and Midlands, whose views led to the Leave result last week. She also has very limited appeal to the Labour selectorate, who placed her 4th in the last deputy leadership contest. She is the wrong candidate to challenge JC.
If the Labour party aren't careful, UKIP could win swathes of seats in former Labour heartlands, like the SNP have done in the West of Scotland, at the next GE. I would personally prefer Farage as LOTO, to hold the new Con government's feet to the fire and deliver on the key arguments for Brexit, namely sovereignty and effective control and restriction of immigration. He made an excellent speech in the EU "parliament" the other day.
Re other elections in the next year or so, Trump has a very good chance of becoming POTUS, as Clinton is an appalling candidate. I wouldn't bet against M_LP in France either.
What on earth does her sexual orientation have to do with anything? Depressing that sort of comment is even still thought let alone made.
Anyone over 60 in the UK was brought up in era when homosexuality was a criminal offence and regarded as a cardinal sin. It is still regarded as the latter by Muslims (and Jews). If anyone was unfortunately afflicted by same-sex desire, it was the done thing to keep quiet and not be in the public eye. Beliefs and values inculcated in childhood last until one's dying day.
Rubbish. We have moved on and are the better for it. You don't get much older or crustier than the average Scottish tory (in my mid 50s I am probably still in the youth section) but Ruth is a hero to them and her sexual orientation is irrelevant. You really need to think through your attitudes. They are irrational and diminish you.
Quite. A couple of decades ago (at my mother's funeral, as it happens) an aunt wondered aloud 'Isn't it a shame about Jim Fyfe, I wonder why he never married?' (He'd lived with the same chap for decades) - the rolled eyes exchanged between the great aunts, then in their late seventies, early eighties were visions to behold.....
My mother was shocked when she found out Libarace was gay.
Who wasn't shocked that Rock Hudson was gay? And Tom Selleck!
You've changed your mind, there is a difference between can't and won't.
This is the very essence of the referendum for me, now we can.
No, I haven't. You can deliver lower immigration. You can deliver full single market access. You can't deliver both.
Why can't you?
Have the EU clearly stated they won't trade with us?
Yes, there were a number of different statements given yesterday that the four freedoms come as a single package, take them or leave them. If we want to restrict immigration we'll need to do it by reforming the benefits system by making it contributions based and improving the education system. We need supply side reforms, not consumer side restrictions.
Of course. But the Tory Leavers made specific promises and will not deliver on them.
Which is one of the reasons Theresa is ahead of Boris, party members realise that most of the Leave pledges are not deliverable, they will not want to shackle the party to the idiotic Leave manifesto.
Yep - only a Tory fool would want Boris to win. Not being a Tory or a fool, I am still hoping there are enough of them to deliver him victory.
All of whom have such bad political judgement that they just enthusiastically backed the "Remain" campaign. Why should I trust they know how to win an election, if they mis-judged the public mood on the EU so badly?
51.9 to 48.1
A defeat, then - and a defeat despite all the institutional advantages a campaign could dream of.
Ergo, anyone who thought it was a good idea to back the Remain campaign (i.e. most of the Labour MPs who now think they are qualified to dish out lectures on how to be electable) clearly does not have a good sense of how the public think themselves.
Does that include Corbyn who - in his own words - worked as hard as possible for Remain?
And all the trade unions?
In any case, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Remain side was correct: the Leavers cannot deliver the Brexit deal they promised.
What IS becoming clear is that the Leavers won't deliver the Apocalypse that the Remainers promised.
As for your earlier comments about undermining democracy, anything that "Leave" can be accused of is dwarfed into insignificance by the lies told by the Europhiles for over 40 years.
We'll have to see. Specific promises were made. No downsides were contemplated.
I know Leavers just want to block their ears to the economic costs of this, but anyway here's the economist report:
The PLP don't get it if they think that choosing a dyke as leader will endear them to older socially conservative WWC voters in the North of England and Midlands, whose views led to the Leave result last week. She also has very limited appeal to the Labour selectorate, who placed her 4th in the last deputy leadership contest. She is the wrong candidate to challenge JC.
If the Labour party aren't careful, UKIP could win swathes of seats in former Labour heartlands, like the SNP have done in the West of Scotland, at the next GE. I would personally prefer Farage as LOTO, to hold the new Con government's feet to the fire and deliver on the key arguments for Brexit, namely sovereignty and effective control and restriction of immigration. He made an excellent speech in the EU "parliament" the other day.
Re other elections in the next year or so, Trump has a very good chance of becoming POTUS, as Clinton is an appalling candidate. I wouldn't bet against M_LP in France either.
the majority of the northern wwc will care that she is homosexual, not sure what country or decade you think this is? She is an unappealing choice as candidate, and indeed will not particularly appeal to the north, but not because of her sexuality (which is also not the reason that labour will be selecting her)
Your use of the word dyke indicates you're either trolling or virtue signaling how anti-PC you are. Both pretty pathetic
The same poster who specifically referred to the religious backgrounds of individuals for no good reason other than to emphasise those backgrounds.
The PLP don't get it if they think that choosing a dyke as leader will endear them to older socially conservative WWC voters in the North of England and Midlands, whose views led to the Leave result last week. She also has very limited appeal to the Labour selectorate, who placed her 4th in the last deputy leadership contest. She is the wrong candidate to challenge JC.
If the Labour party aren't careful, UKIP could win swathes of seats in former Labour heartlands, like the SNP have done in the West of Scotland, at the next GE. I would personally prefer Farage as LOTO, to hold the new Con government's feet to the fire and deliver on the key arguments for Brexit, namely sovereignty and effective control and restriction of immigration. He made an excellent speech in the EU "parliament" the other day.
Re other elections in the next year or so, Trump has a very good chance of becoming POTUS, as Clinton is an appalling candidate. I wouldn't bet against M_LP in France either.
What on earth does her sexual orientation have to do with anything? Depressing that sort of comment is even still thought let alone made.
Anyone over 60 in the UK was brought up in era when homosexuality was a criminal offence and regarded as a cardinal sin. It is still regarded as the latter by Muslims (and Jews). If anyone was unfortunately afflicted by same-sex desire, it was the done thing to keep quiet and not be in the public eye. Beliefs and values inculcated in childhood last until one's dying day.
Rubbish. We have moved on and are the better for it. You don't get much older or crustier than the average Scottish tory (in my mid 50s I am probably still in the youth section) but Ruth is a hero to them and her sexual orientation is irrelevant. You really need to think through your attitudes. They are irrational and diminish you.
Quite. A couple of decades ago (at my mother's funeral, as it happens) an aunt wondered aloud 'Isn't it a shame about Jim Fyfe, I wonder why he never married?' (He'd lived with the same chap for decades) - the rolled eyes exchanged between the great aunts, then in their late seventies, early eighties were visions to behold.....
My mother was shocked when she found out Libarace was gay.
Who wasn't shocked that Rock Hudson was gay? And Tom Selleck!
Tom Selleck is gay? That's going to come as a bit of a shock to his wife of 30 years.
Liam Fox and Stephen Crabb are declared runners. Boris Johnson and Theresa May are certain to enter the race today. Will there be any others? Andrea Leadsom and Nicky Morgan have flirted with the idea but are they actually going to stand? Any others?
I think that is plenty. Indeed in the case of Fox and Morgan rather too many.
I am not a fan of Liam Fox but he speaks for a grouping of the Conservative party. It would be helpful to see its Parliamentary strength.
I wonder whether we might see one or two more unanticipated names come forward. Jeremy Hunt was musing on his own position. Has Phillip Hammond yet said what he is doing?
It would be helpful if Gove would clarify his position.
I thought he'd come out for Mr Johnson?
Not according to the e-mail leak yesterday from his wife. If he did clearly and unequivocally I think it would put Boris over the top.
Alex White @AlexWhite1812 15h15 hours ago 16. This is a particular threat for Labour. We expect UKIP etc to mount a serious challenge in Labour heartlands (even with Corbyn gone)
Really.... That was obvious last Friday, I'm just trying to see if the referendum result will be available by ward so I can break the damage down to a constituency by constituency basis.... Even the current (council to constituency) picture doesn't look good for Labour (on the betting front however I think its a very different picture)
Alex White @AlexWhite1812 15h15 hours ago 16. This is a particular threat for Labour. We expect UKIP etc to mount a serious challenge in Labour heartlands (even with Corbyn gone)
If that's going to happen, UKIP need to show get some wins at next year's local elections. I'm expecting Brexit to kill them.
Why next year? Bit early. The argument is that once it becomes clear that Brexit has not delivered much in the way of migration restriction there will be a backlash. This will take 2, 3 or more years. UKIP could even go backwards for a while, before bouncing up again.
You've changed your mind, there is a difference between can't and won't.
This is the very essence of the referendum for me, now we can.
No, I haven't. You can deliver lower immigration. You can deliver full single market access. You can't deliver both.
Why can't you?
Have the EU clearly stated they won't trade with us?
Yes, there were a number of different statements given yesterday that the four freedoms come as a single package, take them or leave them. If we want to restrict immigration we'll need to do it by reforming the benefits system by making it contributions based and improving the education system. We need supply side reforms, not consumer side restrictions.
It probably true, but I dont think we should take anything said by anyone this week or indeed this month as more than a negotiating position, actually worse than that, a negotiating position for public (and more importantly - domestic) consumption.
I am still tickled by the idea that London's financial sector will be shared out between Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfurt. The whole advantage of a financial cluster is that it exists in one place where all the other firms and talent is. Amsterdam is not even a second tier financial cluster. The bankers will surely love the 49% income tax rate in Paris with a wealth tax on top. And Frankfurt is one of the most boring cities in the world. People dread going on business trips there, God forbid living there. Meanwhile London will increase the two thirds of financial service exports to non-EU countries as we sign more trade deals, and we can also scrap the banker bonus cap.
I wonder how many wwc Leave voters realised that they were voting for bankers bonuses to be increased.
Very few probably, which is why UKIP will surge and accelerate Labour's demise.
You mean you’ve got to be really thick to vote UKIP?
No, I DON”T think the WWC are; Poorly informed, perhaps.
I can't persuade people to agree with me, they are thick
You've been reading David Aaronovitch in The Times? He's totally lost it. Now he's arguing down in the comments with those who believe in democracy more than he does. It's really quite remarkably entertaining given 98% are WTF Are You On?
There's certainly an awful lot of supposedly intelligent commentators showing their true colours in the past few days. That they, the elites, should run things and the little people should just shut up and do what they're told.
Well, the people have had their say - thanks Mr Cameron - and they've spoken, so deal with it.
There's so much teenage huffing from the metro-liberal set. If they weren't so insufferably superior, I'd feel a bit sorry for them. Trevor Phillips wrote a Times article earlier this week that basically called all Leavers stupid Whites. Suffice to say he deservedly got both barrels in the comments - all 500 of them.
The Sky lady who was interviewing Frank Field on sunday morning looked like she was going to hit him. So many of them seem to be on the edge of losing it. Odd.
Anna Botting. I've never seen anyone overreact as she did. It was bizarre and verging on the hysterical. Frank's total impassiveness seemed to annoy her even more.
I have been speaking to some of my relatives and discovered they mostly voted Remain. My father and my brother included! I'm really surprised. My father said he hates the EU with a passion and his heart was 100% Leave but he felt the short term grief this would cause pushed him reluctantly to Remain and he now regrets not voting Leave. I suspect this may be a very common position. Not many of the 48% are diehard Europhiles at all - but mostly those who didn't fancy some grief in order to deliver what their heart told them. They bottled it and chose a short term palliative rather than a long term cure. If you look at the politicians it describes May, Javid and many others who got persuaded into a very soft Remain position despite what they felt deep down. I also think it would be good, therefore, to be led by someone who was in this position. We must leave but perhaps not on diehard Eurosceptic terms. I like BoJo a lot and would be happy to see him become PM - but I'd prefer May. She's a safer pair of hands and that is what we need now.
Many will have voted Remain purely because they believed the tales of woe that would befall us. Some of them must be wondering if they were duped.
Because of Corbyn's intransigence two likely outcomes await.
A Corbyn stays
Labour goes into a general election where almost all of its candidates are questioned daily on why they think people should vote Labour if they have no confidence in their own leader.
B Corbyn goes
Momentum do not accept defeat and put up candidates against key PLP members dividing the vote.
The only way out is a tiny chance that a candidate could be found that can minimise (b) and avoid (a). But everything is saying that this will not happen.
As things stand, make no mistake, this is the end of the Labour party. It needs a miracle.
B will result in the usual result, a hard left candidate (in addition to Labour) on the GE ballot in the average Labour constituency gets around 2 or 3% of vote at best. I don't see any change on that front. Only by wrapping themselves in the 'Labour' brand can they get any traction. That is why McDonnell and his henchmen are fighting tooth and nail to retain the power of the party.
Quite right.
If it goes to a ballot of the selectorate and the vote goes to anyone but Corbyn, then it is a new Kinnoch/Militant moment.
If Corbyn wins then it is the end of Labour as a political force.
I am still tickled by the idea that London's financial sector will be shared out between Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfurt. The whole advantage of a financial cluster is that it exists in one place where all the other firms and talent is. Amsterdam is not even a second tier financial cluster. The bankers will surely love the 49% income tax rate in Paris with a wealth tax on top. And Frankfurt is one of the most boring cities in the world. People dread going on business trips there, God forbid living there. Meanwhile London will increase the two thirds of financial service exports to non-EU countries as we sign more trade deals, and we can also scrap the banker bonus cap.
People also appear to be forgetting employment laws in France.
I am sure dynamic businesses paying huge salaries will love that environment...........
That's also a good point. Most of the businesses that pay the very high salaries and bonuses are very performance-oriented with lots of hiring and firing. What would attract them to a country where not only are income taxes on high earners massive, but it's almost impossible to fire anyone?
I am still tickled by the idea that London's financial sector will be shared out between Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfurt. The whole advantage of a financial cluster is that it exists in one place where all the other firms and talent is. Amsterdam is not even a second tier financial cluster. The bankers will surely love the 49% income tax rate in Paris with a wealth tax on top. And Frankfurt is one of the most boring cities in the world. People dread going on business trips there, God forbid living there. Meanwhile London will increase the two thirds of financial service exports to non-EU countries as we sign more trade deals, and we can also scrap the banker bonus cap.
On a minor point, I'm amazed how often the issue of Frankfurt's alleged boring nightlife comes up. Even as a former Labour MP, I can just about swallow bankers getting ridiculous incomes in order to make vast sums (and we hope pay lots of tax). But declining to make vast sums because they can't have a wild night on the town afterwards? That's a pathetic level of job focus that would reflect badly on a Scunthorpe football player ("I don't like playing in Burnley as the strip clubs aren't very good"). Do the bloody job and have fun when you get home.
And anyway, if Frankfurt becomes the main centre, I dare say the night life or whatever you're after will follow.
It is very simple, for years we have been unable to restrict immigration, now we can. If we don't the politicians will pay the consequences.
Its called democracy, its what we voted for.
If these ones, arguably the most right wing set of Conservatives in a while, don't deliver immigration restriction, who on earth are you expecting to?
Who are you referring to?
You want to restrict immigration. You say that if the government doesn't, they will "pay the consequences" which, short of armed uprising or swinging from the Cenotaph, presumably means voting them out.
In which case which set of politicians are you expecting to be voted in to deliver your desired restriction of immigration? Labour? UKIP? Green? SDP2?
You've changed your mind, there is a difference between can't and won't.
This is the very essence of the referendum for me, now we can.
No, I haven't. You can deliver lower immigration. You can deliver full single market access. You can't deliver both.
Why can't you?
Have the EU clearly stated they won't trade with us?
Yes, there were a number of different statements given yesterday that the four freedoms come as a single package, take them or leave them. If we want to restrict immigration we'll need to do it by reforming the benefits system by making it contributions based and improving the education system. We need supply side reforms, not consumer side restrictions.
It probably true, but I dont think we should take anything said by anyone this week or indeed this month as more than a negotiating position, actually worse than that, a negotiating position for public (and more importantly - domestic) consumption.
Well this is the compromise I have heard, and I'm sure a few others as well. The EU are willing to increase the time limit in which EU citizens are expected to be completely independent from 90 days to 180 days. No state assistance in that time period. It's a fig leaf, but probably enough to placate Tory leavers.
Yes, I wouldn't be surprised if he made the same offer to die-hard EUphiles like Soubry as well.
It wouldn`t be in the least surprising, Mr PB. Tim Farron said that, working together on the same side in the Referendum campaign, he found there were several MPs of other parties who seemed to have a lot in common with the Liberal Democrats on other issues too.
And if we are to have a general realignment of the party political set-up, change is definitely in the air.
And people generally are flocking to sign up with the Lib Dems. So some MPs could be among them.
There's an interesting article on the BBC website, which suggests that the reason why such people are so angry is that it's the first time in their lives they've ever had to contemplate that history may not be on their side. It's hard to accept defeat if you've always been used to winning.
Very true. It makes me think of the famous piece by Sion Simon
"The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready."
Because of Corbyn's intransigence two likely outcomes await.
A Corbyn stays
Labour goes into a general election where almost all of its candidates are questioned daily on why they think people should vote Labour if they have no confidence in their own leader.
B Corbyn goes
Momentum do not accept defeat and put up candidates against key PLP members dividing the vote.
The only way out is a tiny chance that a candidate could be found that can minimise (b) and avoid (a). But everything is saying that this will not happen.
As things stand, make no mistake, this is the end of the Labour party. It needs a miracle.
Labour needs a position on the way forward after the referendum. Right now it doesn't even have a mechanism for forming a policy position on that question. Labour isn't just in deep trouble because of internal turmoil, it is irrelevant on the most important question in politics for many years to come.
Personnel problems are minor by comparison.
The irony, the first proper peasants revolt for seven hundred years, and it's going to crush the Labour Party.
I am still tickled by the idea that London's financial sector will be shared out between Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfurt. The whole advantage of a financial cluster is that it exists in one place where all the other firms and talent is. Amsterdam is not even a second tier financial cluster. The bankers will surely love the 49% income tax rate in Paris with a wealth tax on top. And Frankfurt is one of the most boring cities in the world. People dread going on business trips there, God forbid living there. Meanwhile London will increase the two thirds of financial service exports to non-EU countries as we sign more trade deals, and we can also scrap the banker bonus cap.
On a minor point, I'm amazed how often the issue of Frankfurt's alleged boring nightlife comes up. Even as a former Labour MP, I can just about swallow bankers getting ridiculous incomes in order to make vast sums (and we hope pay lots of tax). But declining to make vast sums because they can't have a wild night on the town afterwards? That's a pathetic level of job focus that would reflect badly on a Scunthorpe football player ("I don't like playing in Burnley as the strip clubs aren't very good"). Do the bloody job and have fun when you get home.
And anyway, if Frankfurt becomes the main centre, I dare say the night life or whatever you're after will follow.
It's highly relevant for recruitment. If you're very bright, highly employable anywhere in the world and are weighing competing job offers, are you going to go to a city that never sleeps or a drowsy town whose main attraction is a palm house?
Alex White @AlexWhite1812 15h15 hours ago 16. This is a particular threat for Labour. We expect UKIP etc to mount a serious challenge in Labour heartlands (even with Corbyn gone)
If that's going to happen, UKIP need to show get some wins at next year's local elections. I'm expecting Brexit to kill them.
I don't. People don't care enough about the local councils to vote against the current party (better the devil you know locally). Given that most northern councils have damaging cuts taking place now I wouldn't be placing much attention on local authority results as the results will be very localised based on how that council is doing relative to neighbouring ones...
You've changed your mind, there is a difference between can't and won't.
This is the very essence of the referendum for me, now we can.
No, I haven't. You can deliver lower immigration. You can deliver full single market access. You can't deliver both.
No, this is not true, even if you believe the EU will not negotiate. EEA FOM rules are NOT the same as EU rules. You can deny benefits (almost entirely) and can probably insist on registration and proof of employment before people come. This will probably LOWER immigration, but it is not the same as saying that the UK Government would have full control of immigration. They would have full single market membership.
We need to be careful about terms such as 'single market access'. Anyone can access the single market, but they are not members. In a pure FTA with the EU we would get access to the market with certain limitations to be agreed. If we have EEA membership we are members of the single market and get pretty such all rights that EU members have.
The details on FOM and single market access are going to be critical in the ongoing discussion.
Alex White @AlexWhite1812 15h15 hours ago 16. This is a particular threat for Labour. We expect UKIP etc to mount a serious challenge in Labour heartlands (even with Corbyn gone)
If that's going to happen, UKIP need to show get some wins at next year's local elections. I'm expecting Brexit to kill them.
Why next year? Bit early. The argument is that once it becomes clear that Brexit has not delivered much in the way of migration restriction there will be a backlash. This will take 2, 3 or more years. UKIP could even go backwards for a while, before bouncing up again.
The next EU Parliament election is 2019. Without that UKIP don't win national elections, have fewer elected representatives, and lose EU funding for their party infrastructure.
If they're going to continue post Brexit, they need to establish some local government power bases fast.
That said, they have almost 500 councillors, MSPs, AMs, so they're not starting from zero.
It is very simple, for years we have been unable to restrict immigration, now we can. If we don't the politicians will pay the consequences.
Its called democracy, its what we voted for.
Yes, and others will 'pay the consequences' in terms of livelihoods.
Its far from clear that we voted for that.....
And who will that be? Please be specific.
All of us generally, in terms of lower incomes and higher taxes - and some of us specifically in terms of lost jobs.......I expect pensioners will find their golden days of being protected unlike the rest of us have drawn to a close......
It is very simple, for years we have been unable to restrict immigration, now we can. If we don't the politicians will pay the consequences.
Its called democracy, its what we voted for.
If these ones, arguably the most right wing set of Conservatives in a while, don't deliver immigration restriction, who on earth are you expecting to?
Who are you referring to?
You want to restrict immigration. You say that if the government doesn't, they will "pay the consequences" which, short of armed uprising or swinging from the Cenotaph, presumably means voting them out.
In which case which set of politicians are you expecting to be voted in to deliver your desired restriction of immigration? Labour? UKIP? Green? SDP2?
I meant which right wing tories are you referring to? The govt has the ability to reduce immigration, it was implicitly told to by the electorate, if it doesn't they'll be replaced.
You've changed your mind, there is a difference between can't and won't.
This is the very essence of the referendum for me, now we can.
No, I haven't. You can deliver lower immigration. You can deliver full single market access. You can't deliver both.
No, this is not true, even if you believe the EU will not negotiate. EEA FOM rules are NOT the same as EU rules. You can deny benefits (almost entirely) and can probably insist on registration and proof of employment before people come. This will probably LOWER immigration, but it is not the same as saying that the UK Government would have full control of immigration. They would have full single market membership.
We need to be careful about terms such as 'single market access'. Anyone can access the single market, but they are not members. In a pure FTA with the EU we would get access to the market with certain limitations to be agreed. If we have EEA membership we are members of the single market and get pretty such all rights that EU members have.
The details on FOM and single market access are going to be critical in the ongoing discussion.
I was briefed by the Johnson side that third parties (the chief whip and Justine Greening) brokered a meeting between him and her on Monday at the Cabinet Office - and that he turned up and she snubbed him....
And anyway, if Frankfurt becomes the main centre, I dare say the night life or whatever you're after will follow.
This is the point the pro-EEA people need to get across if they want to block France's "Brits, you can restrict immigration and screw the banksters at the same time" gambit. It's not just the financial services jobs that would go, it's also all the supporting industries further along the value chain.
All of whom have such bad political judgement that they just enthusiastically backed the "Remain" campaign. Why should I trust they know how to win an election, if they mis-judged the public mood on the EU so badly?
51.9 to 48.1
A defeat, then - and a defeat despite all the institutional advantages a campaign could dream of.
Ergo, anyone who thought it was a good idea to back the Remain campaign (i.e. most of the Labour MPs who now think they are qualified to dish out lectures on how to be electable) clearly does not have a good sense of how the public think themselves.
Does that include Corbyn who - in his own words - worked as hard as possible for Remain?
And all the trade unions?
In any case, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Remain side was correct: the Leavers cannot deliver the Brexit deal they promised.
What IS becoming clear is that the Leavers won't deliver the Apocalypse that the Remainers promised.
As for your earlier comments about undermining democracy, anything that "Leave" can be accused of is dwarfed into insignificance by the lies told by the Europhiles for over 40 years.
We'll have to see. Specific promises were made. No downsides were contemplated.
Pretty much like ALL sides do at ANY election then!
Listening to Dr Fox, on 5 Live and advocates for BoJo and May. It seems pretty clear that Fox is going to prioritise border control over trade. I think that is much more in line with national sentiment.
RodCrosby may well be right. He may be in the final two.
It is very simple, for years we have been unable to restrict immigration, now we can. If we don't the politicians will pay the consequences.
Its called democracy, its what we voted for.
If these ones, arguably the most right wing set of Conservatives in a while, don't deliver immigration restriction, who on earth are you expecting to?
Who are you referring to?
You want to restrict immigration. You say that if the government doesn't, they will "pay the consequences" which, short of armed uprising or swinging from the Cenotaph, presumably means voting them out.
In which case which set of politicians are you expecting to be voted in to deliver your desired restriction of immigration? Labour? UKIP? Green? SDP2?
Well it's not just that, the polls (yes I know) consistently pointed to around half of the leave vote being driven by immigration, with the rest voting leave for a variety of other reasons including membership fees, sovereignty, control over our laws etc... that figure also doesn't take into account people like my sister who said yesterday she would now be okay with keeping free movement if it meant staying in the single market when just last week she voted to leave on the basis of restricting immigration. I would guess that there are around 25-30% of people who are hardcore anti-immigration leavers, currently the polls (yes I know) have UKIP on about 18-20%. Taking into account the UKIP types who wanted a leave vote for reasons other than immigration, the potential upside for them is to double their vote from 12% to 24% IMO.
You've changed your mind, there is a difference between can't and won't.
This is the very essence of the referendum for me, now we can.
No, I haven't. You can deliver lower immigration. You can deliver full single market access. You can't deliver both.
No, this is not true, even if you believe the EU will not negotiate. EEA FOM rules are NOT the same as EU rules. You can deny benefits (almost entirely) and can probably insist on registration and proof of employment before people come. This will probably LOWER immigration, but it is not the same as saying that the UK Government would have full control of immigration. They would have full single market membership.
We need to be careful about terms such as 'single market access'. Anyone can access the single market, but they are not members. In a pure FTA with the EU we would get access to the market with certain limitations to be agreed. If we have EEA membership we are members of the single market and get pretty such all rights that EU members have.
The details on FOM and single market access are going to be critical in the ongoing discussion.
Absolutely.
I don't know if you are a Leaver or Remainer and of course it doesn't matter, but every time I hear a Leaver saying "we will still have access to the single market/be able to buy BMWs" they are being at least economic with the actualite.
It is very simple, for years we have been unable to restrict immigration, now we can. If we don't the politicians will pay the consequences.
Its called democracy, its what we voted for.
Yes, and others will 'pay the consequences' in terms of livelihoods.
Its far from clear that we voted for that.....
And who will that be? Please be specific.
All of us generally, in terms of lower incomes and higher taxes - and some of us specifically in terms of lost jobs.......I expect pensioners will find their golden days of being protected unlike the rest of us have drawn to a close......
I am enjoying the fact that if a Conservative government doesn't deliver immigration reform then Labour will be the biggest losers.
Despite being on the 'europhile' left, as free movement is one of the most important aspects to keep for me personally, I'm in the strange position of wanting the conservatives to not deliver on immigration reform even though it will damage labour in the process!
Alex White @AlexWhite1812 15h15 hours ago 16. This is a particular threat for Labour. We expect UKIP etc to mount a serious challenge in Labour heartlands (even with Corbyn gone)
If that's going to happen, UKIP need to show get some wins at next year's local elections. I'm expecting Brexit to kill them.
Why next year? Bit early. The argument is that once it becomes clear that Brexit has not delivered much in the way of migration restriction there will be a backlash. This will take 2, 3 or more years. UKIP could even go backwards for a while, before bouncing up again.
The next EU Parliament election is 2019. Without that UKIP don't win national elections, have fewer elected representatives, and lose EU funding for their party infrastructure.
If they're going to continue post Brexit, they need to establish some local government power bases fast.
That said, they have almost 500 councillors, MSPs, AMs, so they're not starting from zero.
I am enjoying the fact that if a Conservative government doesn't deliver immigration reform then Labour will be the biggest losers.
Not in Tory seats like Thanet, Rochester and Strood, Harlow, Thurrock, Boston etc there the Tories would be the biggest losers. If as is likely immigration is not changed significantly it will hit Labour but the Tories will not be immune from UKIP either
I am still tickled by the idea that London's financial sector will be shared out between Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfurt. The whole advantage of a financial cluster is that it exists in one place where all the other firms and talent is. Amsterdam is not even a second tier financial cluster. The bankers will surely love the 49% income tax rate in Paris with a wealth tax on top. And Frankfurt is one of the most boring cities in the world. People dread going on business trips there, God forbid living there. Meanwhile London will increase the two thirds of financial service exports to non-EU countries as we sign more trade deals, and we can also scrap the banker bonus cap.
On a minor point, I'm amazed how often the issue of Frankfurt's alleged boring nightlife comes up. Even as a former Labour MP, I can just about swallow bankers getting ridiculous incomes in order to make vast sums (and we hope pay lots of tax). But declining to make vast sums because they can't have a wild night on the town afterwards? That's a pathetic level of job focus that would reflect badly on a Scunthorpe football player ("I don't like playing in Burnley as the strip clubs aren't very good"). Do the bloody job and have fun when you get home.
And anyway, if Frankfurt becomes the main centre, I dare say the night life or whatever you're after will follow.
It's highly relevant for recruitment. If you're very bright, highly employable anywhere in the world and are weighing competing job offers, are you going to go to a city that never sleeps or a drowsy town whose main attraction is a palm house?
I think its even simpler than that. Unless you already speak German why would you go to a country where they speak a language you don't know... 1 reason London wins is that everyone knows at least enough Tourist English to be know whats going on and talk to others...
I am enjoying the fact that if a Conservative government doesn't deliver immigration reform then Labour will be the biggest losers.
Not in Tory seats like Thanet, Rochester and Strood, Harlow, Thurrock, Boston etc there the Tories would be the biggest losers. If as is likely immigration is not changed significantly it will hit Labour but the Tories will not be immune from UKIP either
Yes, not immune, but not looking at regional wipe outs either. Also remember that there is a core if UKIP voters like our own Richard Tyndall who are not really roused by immigration, but wanted to end the democratic deficit caused by the EU. If the Tories deliver a leave vote, I don't see why these types wouldn't begin voting Tory again.
It is very simple, for years we have been unable to restrict immigration, now we can. If we don't the politicians will pay the consequences.
Its called democracy, its what we voted for.
If these ones, arguably the most right wing set of Conservatives in a while, don't deliver immigration restriction, who on earth are you expecting to?
Who are you referring to?
You want to restrict immigration. You say that if the government doesn't, they will "pay the consequences" which, short of armed uprising or swinging from the Cenotaph, presumably means voting them out.
In which case which set of politicians are you expecting to be voted in to deliver your desired restriction of immigration? Labour? UKIP? Green? SDP2?
I meant which right wing tories are you referring to? The govt has the ability to reduce immigration, it was implicitly told to by the electorate, if it doesn't they'll be replaced.
You lot are in such a muddle its hilarious.
I am certainly not in a muddle.
You, meanwhile, have not answered my question. If the forthcoming set of Conservatives don't restrict immigration, who are you expecting them to be replaced by who will restrict it?
Give me some names here, so I can get a handle on your thinking. The Moggster, John Redwood and Bill Cash at his side? Douglas Carswell and an expected other 325 UKIP MPs?
Secondly, it seems probable that a majority of Labour voters did back Remain, though the Labour vote must also have been deeply split because in many heartland areas, the Leave vote was huge.
Be interesting to see the Labour vote split with London taken out. London has masked that, in the rest of the country, there was far less enthusiasm from Labour voters to Remain.
Indeed, it was Labour voters in London, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Leeds and Liverpool who ensured Labour voters overall backed Remain. As a majority of the present Labour vote comes from metropolitan areas that determined which way the overall Labour vote went, even when Labour voters elsewhere frequently voted Leave
The turnout was 10% higher than the GE too, over three million more people. I wonder how many leave voters in Labour areas were down as DNV with the pollsters and discounted as a result?
Indeed some normally non voters clearly voted Leave
Alex White @AlexWhite1812 15h15 hours ago 16. This is a particular threat for Labour. We expect UKIP etc to mount a serious challenge in Labour heartlands (even with Corbyn gone)
If that's going to happen, UKIP need to show get some wins at next year's local elections. I'm expecting Brexit to kill them.
Why next year? Bit early. The argument is that once it becomes clear that Brexit has not delivered much in the way of migration restriction there will be a backlash. This will take 2, 3 or more years. UKIP could even go backwards for a while, before bouncing up again.
The next EU Parliament election is 2019. Without that UKIP don't win national elections, have fewer elected representatives, and lose EU funding for their party infrastructure.
If they're going to continue post Brexit, they need to establish some local government power bases fast.
That said, they have almost 500 councillors, MSPs, AMs, so they're not starting from zero.
It is very simple, for years we have been unable to restrict immigration, now we can. If we don't the politicians will pay the consequences.
Its called democracy, its what we voted for.
Yes, and others will 'pay the consequences' in terms of livelihoods.
Its far from clear that we voted for that.....
And who will that be? Please be specific.
All of us generally, in terms of lower incomes and higher taxes - and some of us specifically in terms of lost jobs.......I expect pensioners will find their golden days of being protected unlike the rest of us have drawn to a close......
Some of us specifically, all of us in general.
Give it up mate, its pathetic
None so blind.....
Investors should prepare for the British pound to hit parity with the U.S. dollar by the end of the year or early in 2017, said at least one analyst—and should parity happen, it’ll be a first
I am enjoying the fact that if a Conservative government doesn't deliver immigration reform then Labour will be the biggest losers.
Not in Tory seats like Thanet, Rochester and Strood, Harlow, Thurrock, Boston etc there the Tories would be the biggest losers. If as is likely immigration is not changed significantly it will hit Labour but the Tories will not be immune from UKIP either
Yes, not immune, but not looking at regional wipe outs either. Also remember that there is a core if UKIP voters like our own Richard Tyndall who are not really roused by immigration, but wanted to end the democratic deficit caused by the EU. If the Tories deliver a leave vote, I don't see why these types wouldn't begin voting Tory again.
Professional Tories and posh Tories are not concerned by immigration in the same way metropolitan Labour are not but many lower middle-class Tories are as concerned as white working-class Labour
He doesn't seriously think he would lead a grouping comprised of ten times as many MPs as he currently commands, does he?
Perhaps he takes the view that it's better to be senior in an organisation going somewhere than leader of a failing organisation. See by way of example the Anglo "mergers" of Scottish law firms.
Gove v May for sure now. Surely Gove is a true believer and so will be the brexiteers choice vs May as the remainer choice. Still think May would edge it.
Boris has really gone for mutually assured destruction - destroyed Dave's career and his own in the process. If he had fallen into line under remain he would still have had a good shot against Psborne etc in a couple years time.
I have been speaking to some of my relatives and discovered they mostly voted Remain. My father and my brother included! I'm really surprised. My father said he hates the EU with a passion and his heart was 100% Leave but he felt the short term grief this would cause pushed him reluctantly to Remain and he now regrets not voting Leave. I suspect this may be a very common position. Not many of the 48% are diehard Europhiles at all - but mostly those who didn't fancy some grief in order to deliver what their heart told them. They bottled it and chose a short term palliative rather than a long term cure. If you look at the politicians it describes May, Javid and many others who got persuaded into a very soft Remain position despite what they felt deep down. I also think it would be good, therefore, to be led by someone who was in this position. We must leave but perhaps not on diehard Eurosceptic terms. I like BoJo a lot and would be happy to see him become PM - but I'd prefer May. She's a safer pair of hands and that is what we need now.
Many will have voted Remain purely because they believed the tales of woe that would befall us. Some of them must be wondering if they were duped.
It's too early to judge whether the tales of woe would befall us. If they do it's not likely to be precipitous but rather like a slow death. Ask in 2 or 3 years.
Wow! I thought Gove had ruled himself out ages ago? I'd much prefer him to either Boris or May. But happy with any of the three as long as they GET US OUT.
I've been tipping Crabby for a while now. With Gove and Boris having their little spat and May still a pop-eyed loon, its wide open for 2016 John Major.
I have been speaking to some of my relatives and discovered they mostly voted Remain. My father and my brother included! I'm really surprised. My father said he hates the EU with a passion and his heart was 100% Leave but he felt the short term grief this would cause pushed him reluctantly to Remain and he now regrets not voting Leave. I suspect this may be a very common position. Not many of the 48% are diehard Europhiles at all - but mostly those who didn't fancy some grief in order to deliver what their heart told them. They bottled it and chose a short term palliative rather than a long term cure.
I think that's true.
The longer we stay out, the bigger the Leave support will get. There are already indications of that in the YouGov poll on a 2nd referendum.
I imagine it could be a fluid level of support - if things muddle along or are fine, no appetite for such disruption. If things do deteriorate, there may be more support for it, although I still think it would take both a new deal from the EU which I cannot see coming, and the MPs being bold enough to risk running another one, which I find hard to see, before it became a big deal.
Anyone over 60 in the UK was brought up in era when homosexuality was a criminal offence and regarded as a cardinal sin. It is still regarded as the latter by Muslims (and Jews). If anyone was unfortunately afflicted by same-sex desire, it was the done thing to keep quiet and not be in the public eye. Beliefs and values inculcated in childhood last until one's dying day.
First, I think you should avoid using terms here which are commonly used as sexual insults, but that's a matter for the moderators.
Substantively, I'm over 60 and I'd say you're oversimplifying - my parents' generation generally thought that homosexuality was something to be discreet about but not really a big deal, certainly not a cardinal sin. More recently, Jewish opinion has changed, and the Reform branch has openly accepted it while the Conservative branch has mixed views. And Muslim friends are broadly where my parents were - "OK, it happens, but don't go on about it".
As for your theory that ideas inculcated in childhood last forever, it doesn't bear a second's consideration. Both my parents were Tories, both thought sex before marriage was a bit unfortunate, etc. I remember them with enormous affection but their ideas were from a different era, and I think most of the WWC think so too.
There are other considerations about Angela's candidacy, but I'll wait to see what she's got to say.
He polled better than Johnson in the YouGov poll if still behind May in terms of positive/negative opinion. He wasn't a named candidate in the polling having declared himself out but it implies that a head to head with May would be closer if he gets that far.
It is very simple, for years we have been unable to restrict immigration, now we can. If we don't the politicians will pay the consequences.
Its called democracy, its what we voted for.
If these ones, arguably the most right wing set of Conservatives in a while, don't deliver immigration restriction, who on earth are you expecting to?
Who are you referring to?
You want to restrict immigration. You say that if the government doesn't, they will "pay the consequences" which, short of armed uprising or swinging from the Cenotaph, presumably means voting them out.
In which case which set of politicians are you expecting to be voted in to deliver your desired restriction of immigration? Labour? UKIP? Green? SDP2?
Well it's not just that, the polls (yes I know) consistently pointed to around half of the leave vote being driven by immigration, with the rest voting leave for a variety of other reasons including membership fees, sovereignty, control over our laws etc... that figure also doesn't take into account people like my sister who said yesterday she would now be okay with keeping free movement if it meant staying in the single market when just last week she voted to leave on the basis of restricting immigration. I would guess that there are around 25-30% of people who are hardcore anti-immigration leavers, currently the polls (yes I know) have UKIP on about 18-20%. Taking into account the UKIP types who wanted a leave vote for reasons other than immigration, the potential upside for them is to double their vote from 12% to 24% IMO.
Yes this is of course an interesting and possible outcome. Add a fudge/logic check factor to your calcs and UKIP could easily get to 15-20%.
It would also focus the UK on immigration as never before (the EUref debate would seem like a mere bagatelle) and we would see what sort of a country we are in that respect.
WOW newsflash - Gove to stand for PM. What a lying, lying, dickweasel, utter shit. What on earth is happening to (the MPs of) my party???
He polled better than Johnson in the YouGov poll if still behind May in terms of positive/negative opinion. He wasn't a named candidate in the polling having declared himself out but it implies that a head to head with May would be closer if he gets that far.
New YouGov please!
No. This requires a gold standard effort. TNS/Opinium, PB needs you!
Comments
JOHNSON V MAY It’s bonking Boris V kitten-heeled Theresa in the race for place at Number 10
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1366050/its-bonking-boris-v-kitten-heeled-theresa-in-the-race-for-place-at-number-10/
http://country.eiu.com/article.aspx?articleid=1054365689&Country=United Kingdom&topic=Economy&subtopic=Forecast&subsubtopic=Economic+growth
Grim reading.
Have the EU clearly stated they won't trade with us?
Post-Chilcot it will be impossible for anyone associated with the Iraq War to prosper in the Labour Party. I'm afraid that grounds Ms Eagle.
Your use of the word dyke indicates you're either trolling or virtue signaling how anti-PC you are. Both pretty pathetic
And they've been pretty unequivocal that with single market membership goes the four freedoms.....
Yes, and others will 'pay the consequences' in terms of livelihoods.
Its far from clear that we voted for that.....
If it goes to a ballot of the selectorate and the vote goes to anyone but Corbyn, then it is a new Kinnoch/Militant moment.
If Corbyn wins then it is the end of Labour as a political force.
And anyway, if Frankfurt becomes the main centre, I dare say the night life or whatever you're after will follow.
In which case which set of politicians are you expecting to be voted in to deliver your desired restriction of immigration? Labour? UKIP? Green? SDP2?
And if we are to have a general realignment of the party political set-up, change is definitely in the air.
And people generally are flocking to sign up with the Lib Dems. So some MPs could be among them.
"The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready."
We need to be careful about terms such as 'single market access'. Anyone can access the single market, but they are not members. In a pure FTA with the EU we would get access to the market with certain limitations to be agreed. If we have EEA membership we are members of the single market and get pretty such all rights that EU members have.
The details on FOM and single market access are going to be critical in the ongoing discussion.
If they're going to continue post Brexit, they need to establish some local government power bases fast.
That said, they have almost 500 councillors, MSPs, AMs, so they're not starting from zero.
http://www.gwydir.demon.co.uk/uklocalgov/makeup.htm
You lot are in such a muddle its hilarious.
So it is all kicking off between Johnson and May.
I was briefed by the Johnson side that third parties (the chief whip and Justine Greening) brokered a meeting between him and her on Monday at the Cabinet Office - and that he turned up and she snubbed him....
RodCrosby may well be right. He may be in the final two.
I don't know if you are a Leaver or Remainer and of course it doesn't matter, but every time I hear a Leaver saying "we will still have access to the single market/be able to buy BMWs" they are being at least economic with the actualite.
Give it up mate, its pathetic
Superb.
You, meanwhile, have not answered my question. If the forthcoming set of Conservatives don't restrict immigration, who are you expecting them to be replaced by who will restrict it?
Give me some names here, so I can get a handle on your thinking. The Moggster, John Redwood and Bill Cash at his side? Douglas Carswell and an expected other 325 UKIP MPs?
Wonderful stuff.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/05/gove-tops-our-next-party-leader-survey-for-the-second-month-running.html
Investors should prepare for the British pound to hit parity with the U.S. dollar by the end of the year or early in 2017, said at least one analyst—and should parity happen, it’ll be a first
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/british-pound-could-hit-history-making-dollar-parity-by-end-of-2016-2016-06-27
So will Boris retire meekly or come out swinging?
Boris has really gone for mutually assured destruction - destroyed Dave's career and his own in the process. If he had fallen into line under remain he would still have had a good shot against Psborne etc in a couple years time.
Gove might not be popular but there's no denying he's brave.
Who is his Edwina Currie?
Substantively, I'm over 60 and I'd say you're oversimplifying - my parents' generation generally thought that homosexuality was something to be discreet about but not really a big deal, certainly not a cardinal sin. More recently, Jewish opinion has changed, and the Reform branch has openly accepted it while the Conservative branch has mixed views. And Muslim friends are broadly where my parents were - "OK, it happens, but don't go on about it".
As for your theory that ideas inculcated in childhood last forever, it doesn't bear a second's consideration. Both my parents were Tories, both thought sex before marriage was a bit unfortunate, etc. I remember them with enormous affection but their ideas were from a different era, and I think most of the WWC think so too.
There are other considerations about Angela's candidacy, but I'll wait to see what she's got to say.
New YouGov please!
It would also focus the UK on immigration as never before (the EUref debate would seem like a mere bagatelle) and we would see what sort of a country we are in that respect.
WOW newsflash - Gove to stand for PM. What a lying, lying, dickweasel, utter shit. What on earth is happening to (the MPs of) my party???
How do PBers rank Gove's chances of getting elected?
Boris will be crying into his cornflakes now though....