Tories here: why did Boris not stand ? I believe the rules require only two backers, am I right ? Or, did he really believe that he should be crowned with acclamation.
He didn't stand much chance of winning. It may have become clear to him and he decided not to face that career-ending humiliation.
But we will never know the real reason as only Boris knows and even if he admits it to himself he's not somebody whom we can trust to tell it like it was.
I can see historians fifty years from now writing endless unreadable articles on why he did it and slanging each other off like schoolchildren with no prospect of ever being right or wrong.
I'm think that PM May will swap Hammond and Osborne and put Grayling into the Home Office that she vacates.
Leadsom becomes SoS BREXIT. Crabb stays in place. Fox remains on the backbenches and is joined by Brutus. Boris to Party Chairman. SOS for Scotland, Wales and NI to be combined as SOS Devolved Admins and net +1 Cabinet new dept spot.
Three cabinet vacancies at Energy, Justice and Leader of the House with others possible from any Cabinet ministers retiring or sacked.
They will not need to worry about SOS for Scotland for much longer.
Tories here: why did Boris not stand ? I believe the rules require only two backers, am I right ? Or, did he really believe that he should be crowned with acclamation.
He is regretting it now but he seems to have been very hurt and stunned by his betrayal. It is a shame but hopefully he will be brought into the cabinet in some senior position. However I would not have voted for him
This was Boris's chance. I find it hard to envision scenarios where he'll become PM: if Cameron's replacement wins in 2020 it'll probably be another few years before the position'll be open. If they lose in 2020, they'll be looking for someone sensible to lead the party through opposition, and there'll be plenty of the 2010/15 intake who have their own ambitions and experience by that time. He's yesterday's man. Thankfully.
Boris will continue what he is best suited for. A National Treasure, panel show host and broadcaster. He has dodged a bullet.
A person who brings down the entire edifice, and then just runs away as if nothing had happened, is not really to be described as a "national treasure", Dr Fox.
May's comments this morning sound really weak and insipid. Not good enough.
I personally find her dull, authoritarian and old fashioned I am hoping she is going to surprise me but I fear not. Cameron and Osborne looking more impressive in retrospect already.
Yes, in happier days May was always dismissed as a long term PM prospect because of this. How she'll manage to deal with any real difficulties as PM I can't imagine and 4 weeks of her on the GE campaign trail probably won't secure the party a majority. Still it's what the Tory party voted for when they defenestrated Cameron.
I think Osborne will stay as CoE however to steady the ship in in the short term and to act as a shield for May when the economy goes south.
If that is the sum of their talent , May and Osborne, we would be better with Corbyn.
Mr Dancer, rain has eased off a bit, the track is drying out and they may end up on slicks by the end of the 28 lap race. 11 laps to go.
The track is in a rather mountainous region of Austria, does appear to have its own little ecosystem so it's difficult to forecast rain too far in advance.
No... But if the referendum result is essentially ignored by Mrs May chances are both Labour and Tories will collapse across the country in 2020.... And Farage will be the beneficiary.
The voters have put the political class on notice. What the politicians do next is up to them but the voters are watching and waiting...
What part of May intoning BREXIT means BREXIT passed you by ?
I believe the problem stems from that some people (such as me) are saying the only thing the result definitively said was Leave, and we'll get that, everything else is on the table. Others feel that specifically the VoteLeave prospectus was endorsed (I would argue it is impossible to calculate to what extent, and in any case the government is for all people, not just the winners) and thus having FOM or the like would be 'ignoring' the result's intentions (if not ignoring what the question actually said). It is true any deal with any amount of FOM will piss off an almighty large number of voters.
No... But if the referendum result is essentially ignored by Mrs May chances are both Labour and Tories will collapse across the country in 2020.... And Farage will be the beneficiary.
The voters have put the political class on notice. What the politicians do next is up to them but the voters are watching and waiting...
What part of May intoning BREXIT means BREXIT passed you by ?
I just can't get over the suspicion that she'll try and kick this whole thing into the "long grass".
Clarke and Hezza are championing her cause for a reason...
This was Boris's chance. I find it hard to envision scenarios where he'll become PM: if Cameron's replacement wins in 2020 it'll probably be another few years before the position'll be open. If they lose in 2020, they'll be looking for someone sensible to lead the party through opposition, and there'll be plenty of the 2010/15 intake who have their own ambitions and experience by that time. He's yesterday's man. Thankfully.
Boris will continue what he is best suited for. A National Treasure, panel show host and broadcaster. He has dodged a bullet.
A person who brings down the entire edifice, and then just runs away as if nothing had happened, is not really to be described as a "national treasure", Dr Fox.
Not THE Dr Fox, surely? Our fellow poster is far too witty and erudite to be a failed politician!
Michael Gove is a non-starter. And if the Conservatives choose Andrea Leadsom they will be choosing someone who simply isn't yet ready for primetime. She was far too wooden and far too slow on her feet.
This was Boris's chance. I find it hard to envision scenarios where he'll become PM: if Cameron's replacement wins in 2020 it'll probably be another few years before the position'll be open. If they lose in 2020, they'll be looking for someone sensible to lead the party through opposition, and there'll be plenty of the 2010/15 intake who have their own ambitions and experience by that time. He's yesterday's man. Thankfully.
Boris will continue what he is best suited for. A National Treasure, panel show host and broadcaster. He has dodged a bullet.
A person who brings down the entire edifice, and then just runs away as if nothing had happened, is not really to be described as a "national treasure", Dr Fox.
Mr Clipp, the EU as a political edifice remains, however the UK is leaving it - that is all.
May's comments this morning sound really weak and insipid. Not good enough.
I personally find her dull, authoritarian and old fashioned I am hoping she is going to surprise me but I fear not. Cameron and Osborne looking more impressive in retrospect already.
May is the Tory party reaching for the Valium in these anxious times. The Mogadon woman.
Tories here: why did Boris not stand ? I believe the rules require only two backers, am I right ? Or, did he really believe that he should be crowned with acclamation.
I’m not a Tory, but was it the prospect of an humiliation that even he couldn’t laugh off?
I think it's as simple as he didn't think he had the MP numbers to get into the final two without Gove, so didn't even bother to try, which is pretty spineless.
Looking at the front pages what a horrible bunch of people permeate the top of the Conservative Party. They need reminding that more than a year ago they were elected to govern, the PM has acted like a spoilt child, his sidekick has vanished after yet another u-turn and now senior figures are busily knifing each other front and back.
Meanwhile the country has spoken and expects the govt to act accordingly, what a useless, self serving mob they are.
Why do people keep saying 'the country has spoken'? It may have muttered a bit and indicated that it wasn't sure, really.
You obviously not clear that over 50% in a FPTP election means the people have spoken, you don't win just a little bit , it is black and white. You seem to think we are in a banana republic.
Over 37% in a FPTP election is apparently a strong mandate to govern.
Although that does seem to imply you're wrong and the UK is a banana republic,
The other factor -- which may be why some Conservatives are pressing for a coronation, is how many votes the losing leadership candidates attract. It is not just Leave and Remain that must be considered when balancing the different wings of the party in Cabinet.
As an aside, do we know (or is there betting on) when David Cameron will leave the Commons? Tony Blair left the House immediately on handing over to Gordon Brown.
Next election I'd imagine. Unless there's a big international job in a few years but I expect he will wait it out.
On the other hand, it must be frustrating to be a backbencher after being PM.
It's actually quite a nice role. You get an office in central London, a platform to speak from and the Whips have no power over you so you can do what you like (in practice you usually end up paired) so no late nights.
Plus, so long as you're not Gordon Brown, you get paid large sums for being the headline speaker at various business events.
That's a given, of course. I was just thinking of the benefits of a fully paid for central London office
The other factor -- which may be why some Conservatives are pressing for a coronation, is how many votes the losing leadership candidates attract. It is not just Leave and Remain that must be considered when balancing the different wings of the party in Cabinet.
As an aside, do we know (or is there betting on) when David Cameron will leave the Commons? Tony Blair left the House immediately on handing over to Gordon Brown.
Next election I'd imagine. Unless there's a big international job in a few years but I expect he will wait it out.
On the other hand, it must be frustrating to be a backbencher after being PM.
It's actually quite a nice role. You get an office in central London, a platform to speak from and the Whips have no power over you so you can do what you like (in practice you usually end up paired) so no late nights.
you forgot , unlimited expenses, susidised champagne and great working hours.
Looking at the front pages what a horrible bunch of people permeate the top of the Conservative Party. They need reminding that more than a year ago they were elected to govern, the PM has acted like a spoilt child, his sidekick has vanished after yet another u-turn and now senior figures are busily knifing each other front and back.
Meanwhile the country has spoken and expects the govt to act accordingly, what a useless, self serving mob they are.
Why do people keep saying 'the country has spoken'? It may have muttered a bit and indicated that it wasn't sure, really.
You obviously not clear that over 50% in a FPTP election means the people have spoken, you don't win just a little bit , it is black and white. You seem to think we are in a banana republic.
Glad you reject the 45ers nonsense. Referendums on national sovereignty should be a once in a lifetime kind of thing as Salmond wisely opined. The sovereign will of the people should be respected, you can't play ducks and drakes with it.
Tories here: why did Boris not stand ? I believe the rules require only two backers, am I right ? Or, did he really believe that he should be crowned with acclamation.
I’m not a Tory, but was it the prospect of an humiliation that even he couldn’t laugh off?
I think it's as simple as he didn't think he had the MP numbers to get into the final two without Gove, so didn't even bother to try, which is pretty spineless.
This was Boris's chance. I find it hard to envision scenarios where he'll become PM: if Cameron's replacement wins in 2020 it'll probably be another few years before the position'll be open. If they lose in 2020, they'll be looking for someone sensible to lead the party through opposition, and there'll be plenty of the 2010/15 intake who have their own ambitions and experience by that time. He's yesterday's man. Thankfully.
Boris will continue what he is best suited for. A National Treasure, panel show host and broadcaster. He has dodged a bullet.
A person who brings down the entire edifice, and then just runs away as if nothing had happened, is not really to be described as a "national treasure", Dr Fox.
I wonder if Boris is regretting his refusal to pay the tax he owed and give up his US citizenship. It would have given him a place to hide out,
Listening to Andrea Leadson on Marr, I genuinely believe she is useless.
Due to her content or delivery? I'm reserving judgement in her because the one performance I saw her give she was functional but underwhelming. Which is fine, but i do t see where the fervour of some of her supporters is coming from. Reminds me a bit of Corbyn - he has a good voice and a sort of quiet dignity, in a way, but the things he says and said during his leadership campaign were utterly standard at best, but people went nuts tor it.
She used the phrase " I genuinely believe" at least twenty times. She spoke of the "sunlit uplands". It was without content. She is presentable and appears confident most of the time but her political inexperience and lack of depth shone through.
@paulhutcheon: Wow. Michael Gove was against the Good Friday Agreement #marr
Oh dear
I don't know if Gove has a Wee Free background but he certainly has a lot of very extreme Scottish presbyterian values. Those seem to drive him more than anything else.
The other factor -- which may be why some Conservatives are pressing for a coronation, is how many votes the losing leadership candidates attract. It is not just Leave and Remain that must be considered when balancing the different wings of the party in Cabinet.
As an aside, do we know (or is there betting on) when David Cameron will leave the Commons? Tony Blair left the House immediately on handing over to Gordon Brown.
Next election I'd imagine. Unless there's a big international job in a few years but I expect he will wait it out.
On the other hand, it must be frustrating to be a backbencher after being PM.
It's actually quite a nice role. You get an office in central London, a platform to speak from and the Whips have no power over you so you can do what you like (in practice you usually end up paired) so no late nights.
you forgot , unlimited expenses, susidised champagne and great working hours.
Isn’t there a pension as well? Or is that only when one leaves Parliament?
Looking at the front pages what a horrible bunch of people permeate the top of the Conservative Party. They need reminding that more than a year ago they were elected to govern, the PM has acted like a spoilt child, his sidekick has vanished after yet another u-turn and now senior figures are busily knifing each other front and back.
Meanwhile the country has spoken and expects the govt to act accordingly, what a useless, self serving mob they are.
Why do people keep saying 'the country has spoken'? It may have muttered a bit and indicated that it wasn't sure, really.
You obviously not clear that over 50% in a FPTP election means the people have spoken, you don't win just a little bit , it is black and white. You seem to think we are in a banana republic.
Don't forget that in a FPTP election the successful candidate also has to represent those who didn't vote them.
If you assume that a "100% Brexit" position is WTO, then the fact that the vote was 52/48 between that an "Remain" means that you need to look for a compromise position between the two.
"The junior energy minister, who is also emerging a serious contender in the Conservative leadership contest, said in a recording three years ago at the Hansard Society’s annual parliamentary affairs lecture that she was going “to nail my colours to the mast here”. In the recording, obtained by the Mail on Sunday, Ms Leadsom added: “I don’t think the UK should leave the EU. I think it would be a disaster for our economy and it would lead to a decade of economic and political uncertainty at a time when the tectonic plates of global success are moving."
I don't think any of them expected to win, it's all about internal Tory party manoeuvring
Tories here: why did Boris not stand ? I believe the rules require only two backers, am I right ? Or, did he really believe that he should be crowned with acclamation.
He didn't stand much chance of winning. It may have become clear to him and he decided not to face that career-ending humiliation.
But we will never know the real reason as only Boris knows and even if he admits it to himself he's not somebody whom we can trust to tell it like it was.
I can see historians fifty years from now writing endless unreadable articles on why he did it and slanging each other off like schoolchildren with no prospect of ever being right or wrong.
The NYT article linked earlier was interesting. Apparently after Gove's move only 46 out of their 100 pledges remained loyal. And I could see more of those falling away as he lost the "inevitable" crown
No... But if the referendum result is essentially ignored by Mrs May chances are both Labour and Tories will collapse across the country in 2020.... And Farage will be the beneficiary.
The voters have put the political class on notice. What the politicians do next is up to them but the voters are watching and waiting...
What part of May intoning BREXIT means BREXIT passed you by ?
I just can't get over the suspicion that she'll try and kick this whole thing into the "long grass".
Clarke and Hezza are championing her cause for a reason...
But maybe not. We shall see.
She does have integrity and she will exit Europe.
I am concerned that the more extreme Brexiteers will damage their cause if they continue with their demands for a Brexiteer PM, as I believe that would not meet with the need to consider not only the 52% but the 48% who voted remain and will do everything to try to stop the process.
Cool determined heads are needed to ensure our exit and certainly Farage should be kept miles away from involvement.
Today lots of people — me included — are suggesting there should be a second vote on this whole Europe business, but we’re told by people in suits that this is not possible. And when we ask why, they say: “Because you just can’t.”
Why not? Where in the constitution does it say we must abide by the result of a plebiscite, no matter how moronic that result might be? It doesn’t say that. It doesn’t say anything in fact because we don’t really have a constitution in Britain. So we can do what happens to be sensible at any given moment. And what is sensible now surely is to hold a vote when everyone is equipped with the most powerful tool in the box: hindsight.
Of course this would infuriate millions of idiotic north of England coffin-dodgers who are prepared to bankrupt the country simply because they don’t want to live next door to a “darkie”. Many will write angry letters full of capital letters and underlining to their local newspapers. And there will be lots of discontent in various bingo halls, but who cares? They’ll all be dead soon anyway.
This was Boris's chance. I find it hard to envision scenarios where he'll become PM: if Cameron's replacement wins in 2020 it'll probably be another few years before the position'll be open. If they lose in 2020, they'll be looking for someone sensible to lead the party through opposition, and there'll be plenty of the 2010/15 intake who have their own ambitions and experience by that time. He's yesterday's man. Thankfully.
Boris will continue what he is best suited for. A National Treasure, panel show host and broadcaster. He has dodged a bullet.
A person who brings down the entire edifice, and then just runs away as if nothing had happened, is not really to be described as a "national treasure", Dr Fox.
I wonder if Boris is regretting his refusal to pay the tax he owed and give up his US citizenship. It would have given him a place to hide out,
I think he paid up in the end. He still has an escape route!
This was Boris's chance. I find it hard to envision scenarios where he'll become PM: if Cameron's replacement wins in 2020 it'll probably be another few years before the position'll be open. If they lose in 2020, they'll be looking for someone sensible to lead the party through opposition, and there'll be plenty of the 2010/15 intake who have their own ambitions and experience by that time. He's yesterday's man. Thankfully.
Boris will continue what he is best suited for. A National Treasure, panel show host and broadcaster. He has dodged a bullet.
A person who brings down the entire edifice, and then just runs away as if nothing had happened, is not really to be described as a "national treasure", Dr Fox.
Not THE Dr Fox, surely? Our fellow poster is far too witty and erudite to be a failed politician!
My political activities are at the ballotbox and in the hospital. Where there is people there is politrix!
Today lots of people — me included — are suggesting there should be a second vote on this whole Europe business, but we’re told by people in suits that this is not possible. And when we ask why, they say: “Because you just can’t.”
Why not? Where in the constitution does it say we must abide by the result of a plebiscite, no matter how moronic that result might be? It doesn’t say that. It doesn’t say anything in fact because we don’t really have a constitution in Britain. So we can do what happens to be sensible at any given moment. And what is sensible now surely is to hold a vote when everyone is equipped with the most powerful tool in the box: hindsight.
Of course this would infuriate millions of idiotic north of England coffin-dodgers who are prepared to bankrupt the country simply because they don’t want to live next door to a “darkie”. Many will write angry letters full of capital letters and underlining to their local newspapers. And there will be lots of discontent in various bingo halls, but who cares? They’ll all be dead soon anyway.
@neiledwardlovat: Was it not Andrea Leadsom who approved a huge loan to Bearings right before they crashed????
Yes, but.....
Two weeks later, there were murmurs through the markets of huge derivative losses in Barings’ Singapore office. I asked Barclays’ dealers if they could find out more and called Barings’ FD. He was unavailable, but later that day called me to ask for a large drawdown on a standby loan facility we had for them. I asked him outright – was there any truth in the rumours we were hearing – he answered outright – no, absolutely none. So after much discussion with Barclays’ credit department, we lent the money.
Within a week, it was clear the rumours were true and Barings was in deep trouble. I was about to leave the office for the weekend – 6pm on Friday evening – and a call came through from Andrew Buxton’s office (then Chairman of Barclays). My team and I spent the weekend in the office, working for Andrew Buxton and Eddie George, then Governor of the Bank of England, on two themes:
What was Barclays’ total exposure to Barings?
Could a consortium of banks be pulled together to underwrite Barings’ losses and thereby avoid its collapse?
There were around 20 financial institutions all working round the clock responding to the Governor’s attempt to save Barings. In the end, it proved impossible simply because over those 48 hours the potential losses could not be quantified and no financial institution would take the risk, either by buying Barings, or underwriting the losses.
The other factor -- which may be why some Conservatives are pressing for a coronation, is how many votes the losing leadership candidates attract. It is not just Leave and Remain that must be considered when balancing the different wings of the party in Cabinet.
As an aside, do we know (or is there betting on) when David Cameron will leave the Commons? Tony Blair left the House immediately on handing over to Gordon Brown.
Next election I'd imagine. Unless there's a big international job in a few years but I expect he will wait it out.
On the other hand, it must be frustrating to be a backbencher after being PM.
It's actually quite a nice role. You get an office in central London, a platform to speak from and the Whips have no power over you so you can do what you like (in practice you usually end up paired) so no late nights.
you forgot , unlimited expenses, susidised champagne and great working hours.
The Telegraph asked all five candidates whether they will “promise to end free movement and cut net migration to the tens of thousands”.
Mrs May says she would set out her “negotiating principles in more detail in the coming weeks”.
“There is clearly no mandate for a deal that involves accepting the free movement of people as it has worked until now,” she says. “We must regain more control of the numbers of people who come here from Europe, and reduce the numbers that come from outside Europe too. We need immigration to be sustainable and I think net migration in the tens of thousands is sustainable, but it is going to take time.”
What is "weak and insipid" about that? Which phrase? That it is going to take time?
Don't forget that in a FPTP election the successful candidate also has to represent those who didn't vote them.
Where do people get this nonsense from?
There is no obligation whatsoever on a succesful candidate to represent anyone, their voters or not. And there is no method for unhappy constituents to boot out failing representatives before the next election.
Obviously there is a self-preservation mantra whereby a candidate that wants to win again might want to build an electoral base. But FPTP deliberately marginalises votes so they are meaningless and minimise the requirement for candidates to support everyone in their constituency.
In reality FPTP works exactly opposite to the naive and childlike way you seem to view it.
The other factor -- which may be why some Conservatives are pressing for a coronation, is how many votes the losing leadership candidates attract. It is not just Leave and Remain that must be considered when balancing the different wings of the party in Cabinet.
As an aside, do we know (or is there betting on) when David Cameron will leave the Commons? Tony Blair left the House immediately on handing over to Gordon Brown.
Next election I'd imagine. Unless there's a big international job in a few years but I expect he will wait it out.
On the other hand, it must be frustrating to be a backbencher after being PM.
It's actually quite a nice role. You get an office in central London, a platform to speak from and the Whips have no power over you so you can do what you like (in practice you usually end up paired) so no late nights.
you forgot , unlimited expenses, susidised champagne and great working hours.
Isn’t there a pension as well? Or is that only when one leaves Parliament?
It was mentioned last week somewhere that Cameron had, on taking office, declined the traditional pension paid to former PMs and Speakers, which was 50% of salary for life. Can't imagine that he will ever struggle for income somehow, three or four speeches a year will pay him more than he's earning now.
Michael Gove is a non-starter. And if the Conservatives choose Andrea Leadsom they will be choosing someone who simply isn't yet ready for primetime. She was far too wooden and far too slow on her feet.
She is being hugely overhyped. Apparently on the basis of the fact that she could speak coherently in a debate. FFS! The bar ought to be higher than that. Her CV is average, frankly. And I think that she would be far too dependant on others who will use her.
And someone who - according to the Telegraph - is pitching herself as the next Maggie simply does not understand what a divided nation we have and that the role of the PM is to find a way of reconciling this divided country while respecting the result. A monumental task. I don't see - based on what I have seen and heard so far - that she is up to this task.
This was Boris's chance. I find it hard to envision scenarios where he'll become PM: if Cameron's replacement wins in 2020 it'll probably be another few years before the position'll be open. If they lose in 2020, they'll be looking for someone sensible to lead the party through opposition, and there'll be plenty of the 2010/15 intake who have their own ambitions and experience by that time. He's yesterday's man. Thankfully.
Boris will continue what he is best suited for. A National Treasure, panel show host and broadcaster. He has dodged a bullet.
A person who brings down the entire edifice, and then just runs away as if nothing had happened, is not really to be described as a "national treasure", Dr Fox.
I wonder if Boris is regretting his refusal to pay the tax he owed and give up his US citizenship. It would have given him a place to hide out,
I think he paid up in the end. He still has an escape route!
Perhaps in January we can look forward to the inauguration of President Trump and Vice President Boris.
May may be popular with the Blairites in the parliamentary party, but that won't be the case in the country
There will be an explosion of fury out there in six months when precisely nothing changes,as it hasn;t during May's six year tenure as Home Secretary, when as David Mellor said she ducked every major issue and turned into McCavity when things went wrong.
She is the opposite of what voters want, as the conservatives will very quickly discover to their enormous cost.
And Corbyn is what the voters want .. really really want.
No... But if the referendum result is essentially ignored by Mrs May chances are both Labour and Tories will collapse across the country in 2020.... And Farage will be the beneficiary.
The voters have put the political class on notice. What the politicians do next is up to them but the voters are watching and waiting...
If Labour replace Corbyn with a half credible leader and May takes the UK into EFTA she could get a Turnbull like result in 2020 largest party in a hung parliament with UKIP having about 10 or more seats. May is also compared to Merkel, of course in Merkel's first election in 2005 she failed to beat Schroeder outright and it was a hung parliament there too
"The junior energy minister, who is also emerging a serious contender in the Conservative leadership contest, said in a recording three years ago at the Hansard Society’s annual parliamentary affairs lecture that she was going “to nail my colours to the mast here”. In the recording, obtained by the Mail on Sunday, Ms Leadsom added: “I don’t think the UK should leave the EU. I think it would be a disaster for our economy and it would lead to a decade of economic and political uncertainty at a time when the tectonic plates of global success are moving."
I don't think any of them expected to win, it's all about internal Tory party manoeuvring
Ms Leadsom gave her side on that on Mr Marr's programme this morning. Annoyingly I was making a cup of tea at the time, so I missed a bit.
I think her line is: 1. Remark is taken out of context 2. Circumstances/EU have changed.
Looking at the front pages what a horrible bunch of people permeate the top of the Conservative Party. They need reminding that more than a year ago they were elected to govern, the PM has acted like a spoilt child, his sidekick has vanished after yet another u-turn and now senior figures are busily knifing each other front and back.
Meanwhile the country has spoken and expects the govt to act accordingly, what a useless, self serving mob they are.
Why do people keep saying 'the country has spoken'? It may have muttered a bit and indicated that it wasn't sure, really.
You obviously not clear that over 50% in a FPTP election means the people have spoken, you don't win just a little bit , it is black and white. You seem to think we are in a banana republic.
Don't forget that in a FPTP election the successful candidate also has to represent those who didn't vote them.
If you assume that a "100% Brexit" position is WTO, then the fact that the vote was 52/48 between that an "Remain" means that you need to look for a compromise position between the two.
We can no longer be a member of the EU.
But we have to find the solution that most people are happy with. That's probably EEA+EFTA rather than any bespoke deal - especially if it's sold to the British public as a temporary deal (even if it then turns out to be as temporary as income tax).
The Telegraph asked all five candidates whether they will “promise to end free movement and cut net migration to the tens of thousands”.
Mrs May says she would set out her “negotiating principles in more detail in the coming weeks”.
“There is clearly no mandate for a deal that involves accepting the free movement of people as it has worked until now,” she says. “We must regain more control of the numbers of people who come here from Europe, and reduce the numbers that come from outside Europe too. We need immigration to be sustainable and I think net migration in the tens of thousands is sustainable, but it is going to take time.”
What is "weak and insipid" about that? Which phrase? That it is going to take time?
Not answering your question (I think she's right) but that quote suggests she will do a deal on FoM - no mandate for FoM "as it has worked until now"
@paulhutcheon: Wow. Michael Gove was against the Good Friday Agreement #marr
Oh dear
I don't know if Gove has a Wee Free background but he certainly has a lot of very extreme Scottish presbyterian values. Those seem to drive him more than anything else.
Yes have to say I was humbled by Gove's statement on Marr he knifed Boris because he put his country before personal relations, his values are clearly beyond question.
No... But if the referendum result is essentially ignored by Mrs May chances are both Labour and Tories will collapse across the country in 2020.... And Farage will be the beneficiary.
The voters have put the political class on notice. What the politicians do next is up to them but the voters are watching and waiting...
What part of May intoning BREXIT means BREXIT passed you by ?
I just can't get over the suspicion that she'll try and kick this whole thing into the "long grass".
Clarke and Hezza are championing her cause for a reason...
But maybe not. We shall see.
Morning GIN, I think you are right to be concerned, she is a Tory after all so it is almost certain she will be thinking how she can help her millionaire bellend chums by any devious nasty Tory scheme possible.
Don't forget that in a FPTP election the successful candidate also has to represent those who didn't vote them.
Where do people get this nonsense from?
There is no obligation whatsoever on a succesful candidate to represent anyone, their voters or not. And there is no method for unhappy constituents to boot out failing representatives before the next election.
Obviously there is a self-preservation mantra whereby a candidate that wants to win again might want to build an electoral base. But FPTP deliberately marginalises votes so they are meaningless and minimise the requirement for candidates to support everyone in their constituency.
In reality FPTP works exactly opposite to the naive and childlike way you seem to view it.
There is no obligation for anyone to do their job, and no ability to sack anyone with a fixed 5 year contract in any walk of like. So your point, such as it is, is utterly fatuous and a waste of time.
Listening to Andrea Leadson on Marr, I genuinely believe she is useless.
Her question on tax returns was a Hacker 'no, alright, yes' moment. Didn't it occur to her she might be asked it and have her answer ready? Clear sign of inexperience.
Len McCluskey sounding as mad as that loathsome Rachel 'lots of people support Corbyn' Shami.
Maybe she can just as easily be persuaded to (return to) support our EU membership! Nixon in China and all that.
Michael Gove is a non-starter. And if the Conservatives choose Andrea Leadsom they will be choosing someone who simply isn't yet ready for primetime. She was far too wooden and far too slow on her feet.
She is being hugely overhyped. Apparently on the basis of the fact that she could speak coherently in a debate. FFS! The bar ought to be higher than that. Her CV is average, frankly. And I think that she would be far too dependant on others who will use her.
And someone who - according to the Telegraph - is pitching herself as the next Maggie simply does not understand what a divided nation we have and that the role of the PM is to find a way of reconciling this divided country while respecting the result. A monumental task. I don't see - based on what I have seen and heard so far - that she is up to this task.
The choice is between a cast of nobodies and comic singers, god help the country if this is the best we have.
The other factor -- which may be why some Conservatives are pressing for a coronation, is how many votes the losing leadership candidates attract. It is not just Leave and Remain that must be considered when balancing the different wings of the party in Cabinet.
As an aside, do we know (or is there betting on) when David Cameron will leave the Commons? Tony Blair left the House immediately on handing over to Gordon Brown.
Next election I'd imagine. Unless there's a big international job in a few years but I expect he will wait it out.
On the other hand, it must be frustrating to be a backbencher after being PM.
It's actually quite a nice role. You get an office in central London, a platform to speak from and the Whips have no power over you so you can do what you like (in practice you usually end up paired) so no late nights.
you forgot , unlimited expenses, susidised champagne and great working hours.
Don't forget the pension rights...
gold plated as well with bells on and humungous amount of holidays
The Telegraph asked all five candidates whether they will “promise to end free movement and cut net migration to the tens of thousands”.
Mrs May says she would set out her “negotiating principles in more detail in the coming weeks”.
“There is clearly no mandate for a deal that involves accepting the free movement of people as it has worked until now,” she says. “We must regain more control of the numbers of people who come here from Europe, and reduce the numbers that come from outside Europe too. We need immigration to be sustainable and I think net migration in the tens of thousands is sustainable, but it is going to take time.”
What is "weak and insipid" about that? Which phrase? That it is going to take time?
This is a subject she should know thoroughly, yet she is unable to state exactly what she would do, other than waffle on about it.
@neiledwardlovat: Was it not Andrea Leadsom who approved a huge loan to Bearings right before they crashed????
Yes, but.....
Two weeks later, there were murmurs through the markets of huge derivative losses in Barings’ Singapore office. I asked Barclays’ dealers if they could find out more and called Barings’ FD. He was unavailable, but later that day called me to ask for a large drawdown on a standby loan facility we had for them. I asked him outright – was there any truth in the rumours we were hearing – he answered outright – no, absolutely none. So after much discussion with Barclays’ credit department, we lent the money.
Within a week, it was clear the rumours were true and Barings was in deep trouble. I was about to leave the office for the weekend – 6pm on Friday evening – and a call came through from Andrew Buxton’s office (then Chairman of Barclays). My team and I spent the weekend in the office, working for Andrew Buxton and Eddie George, then Governor of the Bank of England, on two themes:
What was Barclays’ total exposure to Barings?
Could a consortium of banks be pulled together to underwrite Barings’ losses and thereby avoid its collapse?
There were around 20 financial institutions all working round the clock responding to the Governor’s attempt to save Barings. In the end, it proved impossible simply because over those 48 hours the potential losses could not be quantified and no financial institution would take the risk, either by buying Barings, or underwriting the losses.
Another 2 Tory women have had a very good EUref.are Amber Rudd,who started the ball rolling on the stop Johnson campaign,called out Farage and admirably,she wants to know whether the candidates deny anthropogenic climate science as agreed by 97% of science.Credit too to Anna Soubry for calling out Farage's racist poster.Farage is yet to apologise nor condemn increased hate crimes.It's time he did. A 50-50 gender split in cabinet before Labour could give the impression the Tory party really is a one-nation party. I hope May is able to select without ageism.It is rampant ageism in the PLP that needs an independent enquiry-victimising the Leader is proof of this.Again,the Tories can win points off the opposition by having a zero-tolerance policy on ageism.
This was Boris's chance. I find it hard to envision scenarios where he'll become PM: if Cameron's replacement wins in 2020 it'll probably be another few years before the position'll be open. If they lose in 2020, they'll be looking for someone sensible to lead the party through opposition, and there'll be plenty of the 2010/15 intake who have their own ambitions and experience by that time. He's yesterday's man. Thankfully.
Boris will continue what he is best suited for. A National Treasure, panel show host and broadcaster. He has dodged a bullet.
A person who brings down the entire edifice, and then just runs away as if nothing had happened, is not really to be described as a "national treasure", Dr Fox.
I wonder if Boris is regretting his refusal to pay the tax he owed and give up his US citizenship. It would have given him a place to hide out,
I think he paid up in the end. He still has an escape route!
Perhaps in January we can look forward to the inauguration of President Trump and Vice President Boris.
I'm hoping Mr Trump will be reach out to hispanic voters by adopting the title of El Presidente Trump. Perhaps adopt a flattering cream military uniform too.
I think they might have to create a custom role for Boris. Head of Amtrack, and Secretary of the Navy? He could brainstorm in the bath.
Looking at the front pages what a horrible bunch of people permeate the top of the Conservative Party. They need reminding that more than a year ago they were elected to govern, the PM has acted like a spoilt child, his sidekick has vanished after yet another u-turn and now senior figures are busily knifing each other front and back.
Meanwhile the country has spoken and expects the govt to act accordingly, what a useless, self serving mob they are.
Why do people keep saying 'the country has spoken'? It may have muttered a bit and indicated that it wasn't sure, really.
You obviously not clear that over 50% in a FPTP election means the people have spoken, you don't win just a little bit , it is black and white. You seem to think we are in a banana republic.
Don't forget that in a FPTP election the successful candidate also has to represent those who didn't vote them.
If you assume that a "100% Brexit" position is WTO, then the fact that the vote was 52/48 between that an "Remain" means that you need to look for a compromise position between the two.
We can no longer be a member of the EU.
But we have to find the solution that most people are happy with. That's probably EEA+EFTA rather than any bespoke deal - especially if it's sold to the British public as a temporary deal (even if it then turns out to be as temporary as income tax).
Yes: EEA+EFTA with a deal on FoM [that preserves the principle for the Europeans, but reduces the numbers - especially of unskilled workers should do it]. If it were Free Movement of Labour vs Free Movement of People that should do it.
Did Leadsom really say she could be the next Thatcher? Bold to do that, I thought it was the done thing to never claim the mantle oneself but to let others do it for you.
The other factor -- which may be why some Conservatives are pressing for a coronation, is how many votes the losing leadership candidates attract. It is not just Leave and Remain that must be considered when balancing the different wings of the party in Cabinet.
As an aside, do we know (or is there betting on) when David Cameron will leave the Commons? Tony Blair left the House immediately on handing over to Gordon Brown.
Next election I'd imagine. Unless there's a big international job in a few years but I expect he will wait it out.
On the other hand, it must be frustrating to be a backbencher after being PM.
It's actually quite a nice role. You get an office in central London, a platform to speak from and the Whips have no power over you so you can do what you like (in practice you usually end up paired) so no late nights.
you forgot , unlimited expenses, susidised champagne and great working hours.
Isn’t there a pension as well? Or is that only when one leaves Parliament?
What I most enjoy about Tory leadership elections is that each round is a fresh contest. And public declarations of support are meaningless given it's a secret ballot.
There's so much scope for stitching a rival up with faux claims of support. And once the bottom candidate is out, we start all over again!
We've 5 runners - so that's Tues/Thurs to eliminate two, then Tues to arrive at the final members choice. The timings are perfect for PB discussion
And on Wednesday - for variety we'll have Chilcott
The country doesn't want full-on LEAVE. 48.2% voted REMAIN. It was not a landslide. Nowhere near. It was a very slender majority for OUT
A skilful politician (and let's hope May is that, as she looks likely to be PM) will take account of this and steer us to some kind of EEA arrangement, where REMAINERS get the consolation of the EU Single Market, plus all those pan-European science/education programmes which everyone likes. And at the same time LEAVERS know we have LEFT.
The breaking point is going to be Free Movement. Of course. Somehow May has to square that fiendish circle. Good luck to her.
This is a very odd view, but seems to be the party line for "Well off Professionals with expensive houses and nice pensions for EEA". When the Tories won by 50.7 percent of the seats in parliament did they say that on balance they better adopt a lot of Labour policies just to keep the rest of the voters happy ?
Mr. Eagles, the same (about duplicity) could be said of Septimius Severus.
For that matter, the First Crusaders felt let down by Alexius Comnenus when a city they'd been besieging (I forget which) surrendered to him instead of them [probably a wise move, frankly].
@neiledwardlovat: Was it not Andrea Leadsom who approved a huge loan to Bearings right before they crashed????
Yes, but.....
Two weeks later, there were murmurs through the markets of huge derivative losses in Barings’ Singapore office. I asked Barclays’ dealers if they could find out more and called Barings’ FD. He was unavailable, but later that day called me to ask for a large drawdown on a standby loan facility we had for them. I asked him outright – was there any truth in the rumours we were hearing – he answered outright – no, absolutely none. So after much discussion with Barclays’ credit department, we lent the money.
Within a week, it was clear the rumours were true and Barings was in deep trouble. I was about to leave the office for the weekend – 6pm on Friday evening – and a call came through from Andrew Buxton’s office (then Chairman of Barclays). My team and I spent the weekend in the office, working for Andrew Buxton and Eddie George, then Governor of the Bank of England, on two themes:
What was Barclays’ total exposure to Barings?
Could a consortium of banks be pulled together to underwrite Barings’ losses and thereby avoid its collapse?
There were around 20 financial institutions all working round the clock responding to the Governor’s attempt to save Barings. In the end, it proved impossible simply because over those 48 hours the potential losses could not be quantified and no financial institution would take the risk, either by buying Barings, or underwriting the losses.
Did Leadsom really say she could be the next Thatcher? Bold to do that, I thought it was the done thing to never claim the mantle oneself but to let others do it for you.
@neiledwardlovat: Was it not Andrea Leadsom who approved a huge loan to Bearings right before they crashed????
Yes, but.....
Two weeks later, there were murmurs through the markets of huge derivative losses in Barings’ Singapore office. I asked Barclays’ dealers if they could find out more and called Barings’ FD. He was unavailable, but later that day called me to ask for a large drawdown on a standby loan facility we had for them. I asked him outright – was there any truth in the rumours we were hearing – he answered outright – no, absolutely none. So after much discussion with Barclays’ credit department, we lent the money.
Within a week, it was clear the rumours were true and Barings was in deep trouble. I was about to leave the office for the weekend – 6pm on Friday evening – and a call came through from Andrew Buxton’s office (then Chairman of Barclays). My team and I spent the weekend in the office, working for Andrew Buxton and Eddie George, then Governor of the Bank of England, on two themes:
What was Barclays’ total exposure to Barings?
Could a consortium of banks be pulled together to underwrite Barings’ losses and thereby avoid its collapse?
There were around 20 financial institutions all working round the clock responding to the Governor’s attempt to save Barings. In the end, it proved impossible simply because over those 48 hours the potential losses could not be quantified and no financial institution would take the risk, either by buying Barings, or underwriting the losses.
And if that's all the due diligence that was done by her / Barclays, it's an utter fail on their part, even by the standards of the time.
Depends on the terms of the standby facility, surely?
If Barings had the right to draw on it then they would have been damn sure to reject the request (especially if it was to precipitate the collapse of the firm)
NB: I've never play in the RCF/standby market so don't know their standard terms (especially as it was in the 90s).
@neiledwardlovat: Was it not Andrea Leadsom who approved a huge loan to Bearings right before they crashed????
Yes, but.....
Two weeks later, there were murmurs through the markets of huge derivative losses in Barings’ Singapore office. I asked Barclays’ dealers if they could find out more and called Barings’ FD. He was unavailable, but later that day called me to ask for a large drawdown on a standby loan facility we had for them. I asked him outright – was there any truth in the rumours we were hearing – he answered outright – no, absolutely none. So after much discussion with Barclays’ credit department, we lent the money.
Within a week, it was clear the rumours were true and Barings was in deep trouble. I was about to leave the office for the weekend – 6pm on Friday evening – and a call came through from Andrew Buxton’s office (then Chairman of Barclays). My team and I spent the weekend in the office, working for Andrew Buxton and Eddie George, then Governor of the Bank of England, on two themes:
What was Barclays’ total exposure to Barings?
Could a consortium of banks be pulled together to underwrite Barings’ losses and thereby avoid its collapse?
There were around 20 financial institutions all working round the clock responding to the Governor’s attempt to save Barings. In the end, it proved impossible simply because over those 48 hours the potential losses could not be quantified and no financial institution would take the risk, either by buying Barings, or underwriting the losses.
May claims that she will appoint a Brexiteer to lead a dept negotiating Leave. This is a serious cop out---a ducking of the PM's responsibility. If she wants to be in command, she has to do the difficult herself. Nobody expects her to do the clerking, but the she cannot delegate the main issue of the day.
And this is her problem. If her heart is not in, the UK will finish up with a poor deal. cf DC...
Michael Gove is a non-starter. And if the Conservatives choose Andrea Leadsom they will be choosing someone who simply isn't yet ready for primetime. She was far too wooden and far too slow on her feet.
She is being hugely overhyped. Apparently on the basis of the fact that she could speak coherently in a debate. FFS! The bar ought to be higher than that. Her CV is average, frankly. And I think that she would be far too dependant on others who will use her.
And someone who - according to the Telegraph - is pitching herself as the next Maggie simply does not understand what a divided nation we have and that the role of the PM is to find a way of reconciling this divided country while respecting the result. A monumental task. I don't see - based on what I have seen and heard so far - that she is up to this task.
The choice is between a cast of nobodies and comic singers, god help the country if this is the best we have.
They're applying to replace David Cameron, not Margaret Thatcher.
Is May going for a Clinton sort of approach - uncharismatic, questionable competence, sense of entitlement to the victory, but probably going to win on the basis that you know what you're getting, she's probably the safest hands available regardless, and, well, the opposition?
Looking at the front pages what a horrible bunch of people permeate the top of the Conservative Party. They need reminding that more than a year ago they were elected to govern, the PM has acted like a spoilt child, his sidekick has vanished after yet another u-turn and now senior figures are busily knifing each other front and back.
Meanwhile the country has spoken and expects the govt to act accordingly, what a useless, self serving mob they are.
Why do people keep saying 'the country has spoken'? It may have muttered a bit and indicated that it wasn't sure, really.
You obviously not clear that over 50% in a FPTP election means the people have spoken, you don't win just a little bit , it is black and white. You seem to think we are in a banana republic.
Glad you reject the 45ers nonsense. Referendums on national sovereignty should be a once in a lifetime kind of thing as Salmond wisely opined. The sovereign will of the people should be respected, you can't play ducks and drakes with it.
@neiledwardlovat: Was it not Andrea Leadsom who approved a huge loan to Bearings right before they crashed????
Yes, but.....
Two weeks later, there were murmurs through the markets of huge derivative losses in Barings’ Singapore office. I asked Barclays’ dealers if they could find out more and called Barings’ FD. He was unavailable, but later that day called me to ask for a large drawdown on a standby loan facility we had for them. I asked him outright – was there any truth in the rumours we were hearing – he answered outright – no, absolutely none. So after much discussion with Barclays’ credit department, we lent the money.
Within a week, it was clear the rumours were true and Barings was in deep trouble. I was about to leave the office for the weekend – 6pm on Friday evening – and a call came through from Andrew Buxton’s office (then Chairman of Barclays). My team and I spent the weekend in the office, working for Andrew Buxton and Eddie George, then Governor of the Bank of England, on two themes:
What was Barclays’ total exposure to Barings?
Could a consortium of banks be pulled together to underwrite Barings’ losses and thereby avoid its collapse?
There were around 20 financial institutions all working round the clock responding to the Governor’s attempt to save Barings. In the end, it proved impossible simply because over those 48 hours the potential losses could not be quantified and no financial institution would take the risk, either by buying Barings, or underwriting the losses.
Did Leadsom really say she could be the next Thatcher? Bold to do that, I thought it was the done thing to never claim the mantle oneself but to let others do it for you.
Nobody else would do it for her...
Amusing, but I'm sure that's not true - you can't be a Tory woman being talked about as a potential leader without someone saying Thatcher.
Mr. Eagles, the same (about duplicity) could be said of Septimius Severus.
For that matter, the First Crusaders felt let down by Alexius Comnenus when a city they'd been besieging (I forget which) surrendered to him instead of them [probably a wise move, frankly].
Did Leadsom really say she could be the next Thatcher? Bold to do that, I thought it was the done thing to never claim the mantle oneself but to let others do it for you.
Leadsom's quote on Thatcher: - “As a person, she was always kind and courteous and as a leader she was steely and determined,”
“I think that’s an ideal combination – and I do like to think that’s where I am.”
May claims that she will appoint a Brexiteer to lead a dept negotiating Leave. This is a serious cop out---a ducking of the PM's responsibility. If she wants to be in command, she has to do the difficult herself. Nobody expects her to do the clerking, but the she cannot delegate the main issue of the day.
And this is her problem. If her heart is not in, the UK will finish up with a poor deal. cf DC...
The PM shouldn't make themselves responsible for everything. A department dedicated to the UK-EU deal is a sensible thing, and politically it would have to be headed by a Leave advocate.
Did Leadsom really say she could be the next Thatcher? Bold to do that, I thought it was the done thing to never claim the mantle oneself but to let others do it for you.
She didn't - she said she compared herself to no-one but herself.
May's claims that she will appoint a Brexiteer to lead a dept negotiating Leave. This is a serious cop out---a ducking of the PM's responsibility. If she wants to be in command, she has to do the difficult herself. Nobody expects her to do the clerking, but the she cannot delegate the main issue of the day.
And this is her problem. If her heart is not in, the UK will finish up with a poor deal. cf DC...
I disagree. The negotiations are going to take a very long time and should be a full time job. The idea that a PM could do that as well as leading the Government seems daft to me.
Of course in the end she will be responsible for the final deal just as she is responsible for the actions of all her minsters in any department. But she certainly needs someone formally designated to lead the negotiations whether a Leaver or Remainer previously.
Did Leadsom really say she could be the next Thatcher? Bold to do that, I thought it was the done thing to never claim the mantle oneself but to let others do it for you.
She didn't - she said she compared herself to no-one but herself.
Following the script then - allow others to make the comparison.
As an aside, I'm running out of shelf space, which means I've, naturally, discovered many books I want to buy [may be doing a giveaway of books in the future]. One which seems very good value is an Asbridge history of the Crusades [NB plural, not just book on the First Crusade], which is just over £8 but 800 pages long.
May claims that she will appoint a Brexiteer to lead a dept negotiating Leave. This is a serious cop out---a ducking of the PM's responsibility. If she wants to be in command, she has to do the difficult herself. Nobody expects her to do the clerking, but the she cannot delegate the main issue of the day.
And this is her problem. If her heart is not in, the UK will finish up with a poor deal. cf DC...
No
As she just made clear, Brexit is not the PMs only job. She wants to govern the whole country for the whole country, not just Peter Bone and Bill Cash
Did Leadsom really say she could be the next Thatcher? Bold to do that, I thought it was the done thing to never claim the mantle oneself but to let others do it for you.
May claims that she will appoint a Brexiteer to lead a dept negotiating Leave. This is a serious cop out---a ducking of the PM's responsibility. If she wants to be in command, she has to do the difficult herself. Nobody expects her to do the clerking, but the she cannot delegate the main issue of the day.
And this is her problem. If her heart is not in, the UK will finish up with a poor deal. cf DC...
You want to keep the principal out of the room. Standard negotiating tactic.
Comments
But we will never know the real reason as only Boris knows and even if he admits it to himself he's not somebody whom we can trust to tell it like it was.
I can see historians fifty years from now writing endless unreadable articles on why he did it and slanging each other off like schoolchildren with no prospect of ever being right or wrong.
Help ... send more turnips !!
He is regretting it now but he seems to have been very hurt and stunned by his betrayal. It is a shame but hopefully he will be brought into the cabinet in some senior position. However I would not have voted for him
The track is in a rather mountainous region of Austria, does appear to have its own little ecosystem so it's difficult to forecast rain too far in advance.
Clarke and Hezza are championing her cause for a reason...
But maybe not. We shall see.
@neiledwardlovat: Was it not Andrea Leadsom who approved a huge loan to Bearings right before they crashed????
Oh dear
It may have been made to a bank called Barings, of course.
Also what planet was Len McCluskey on?
Erdington 63% Leave 37% Remain
Northfields 61.8% Leave 37.8% Remain
Yardley 60.1% Leave 39.9% Remain
Sutton 52% Leave 48% Remain
Hodge Hill 51.5% Leave 48.5% Remain
Perry Barr 51.2% Leave 48.8% Remain
Edgbaston 52.7% Remain 47.3% Leave
Selly Oak 53.1% Remain 46.9% Leave
Ladyhood 64.4% Remain 35.6% Leave
Hall Green 66.4% Remain 33.6% Leave
Although that does seem to imply you're wrong and the UK is a banana republic,
*in my best bad German Fawlty Towers accent* 'however did zey vin?'
Gove is a better choice. I admire his ruthlessness.
If you assume that a "100% Brexit" position is WTO, then the fact that the vote was 52/48 between that an "Remain" means that you need to look for a compromise position between the two.
From the Indy
"The junior energy minister, who is also emerging a serious contender in the Conservative leadership contest, said in a recording three years ago at the Hansard Society’s annual parliamentary affairs lecture that she was going “to nail my colours to the mast here”.
In the recording, obtained by the Mail on Sunday, Ms Leadsom added: “I don’t think the UK should leave the EU. I think it would be a disaster for our economy and it would lead to a decade of economic and political uncertainty at a time when the tectonic plates of global success are moving."
I don't think any of them expected to win, it's all about internal Tory party manoeuvring
A successful BREXIT = a lengthy May premiership.
I am concerned that the more extreme Brexiteers will damage their cause if they continue with their demands for a Brexiteer PM, as I believe that would not meet with the need to consider not only the 52% but the 48% who voted remain and will do everything to try to stop the process.
Cool determined heads are needed to ensure our exit and certainly Farage should be kept miles away from involvement.
Now the serious candidate is on Peston
Two weeks later, there were murmurs through the markets of huge derivative losses in Barings’ Singapore office. I asked Barclays’ dealers if they could find out more and called Barings’ FD. He was unavailable, but later that day called me to ask for a large drawdown on a standby loan facility we had for them. I asked him outright – was there any truth in the rumours we were hearing – he answered outright – no, absolutely none. So after much discussion with Barclays’ credit department, we lent the money.
Within a week, it was clear the rumours were true and Barings was in deep trouble. I was about to leave the office for the weekend – 6pm on Friday evening – and a call came through from Andrew Buxton’s office (then Chairman of Barclays). My team and I spent the weekend in the office, working for Andrew Buxton and Eddie George, then Governor of the Bank of England, on two themes:
What was Barclays’ total exposure to Barings?
Could a consortium of banks be pulled together to underwrite Barings’ losses and thereby avoid its collapse?
There were around 20 financial institutions all working round the clock responding to the Governor’s attempt to save Barings. In the end, it proved impossible simply because over those 48 hours the potential losses could not be quantified and no financial institution would take the risk, either by buying Barings, or underwriting the losses.
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2009/08/andrea-leadsom-the-lessons-about-banking-regulation-which-we-must-stay-with-us-from-the-collapse-of.html
The Telegraph asked all five candidates whether they will “promise to end free movement and cut net migration to the tens of thousands”.
Mrs May says she would set out her “negotiating principles in more detail in the coming weeks”.
“There is clearly no mandate for a deal that involves accepting the free movement of people as it has worked until now,” she says. “We must regain more control of the numbers of people who come here from Europe, and reduce the numbers that come from outside Europe too. We need immigration to be sustainable and I think net migration in the tens of thousands is sustainable, but it is going to take time.”
What is "weak and insipid" about that? Which phrase? That it is going to take time?
There is no obligation whatsoever on a succesful candidate to represent anyone, their voters or not. And there is no method for unhappy constituents to boot out failing representatives before the next election.
Obviously there is a self-preservation mantra whereby a candidate that wants to win again might want to build an electoral base. But FPTP deliberately marginalises votes so they are meaningless and minimise the requirement for candidates to support everyone in their constituency.
In reality FPTP works exactly opposite to the naive and childlike way you seem to view it.
And someone who - according to the Telegraph - is pitching herself as the next Maggie simply does not understand what a divided nation we have and that the role of the PM is to find a way of reconciling this divided country while respecting the result. A monumental task. I don't see - based on what I have seen and heard so far - that she is up to this task.
I am not an expert but there's an outside chance that May won't win and will therefore by given COTE isn't there?
I think her line is:
1. Remark is taken out of context
2. Circumstances/EU have changed.
But we have to find the solution that most people are happy with. That's probably EEA+EFTA rather than any bespoke deal - especially if it's sold to the British public as a temporary deal (even if it then turns out to be as temporary as income tax).
Sir Lynton Crosby's rage on Gove's duplicity “On a scale of one to 100, I’d say 928.”
I take a Burkean view of the role of a MP
@NadineDorriesMP: #Peston @pestononsunday Hi guys, it's @andrealeadsom for me. It is for lots of us declaring next week. We are spoilt with great choice.
And if that's all the due diligence that was done by her / Barclays, it's an utter fail on their part, even by the standards of the time.
...between Marr and Peston.
A 50-50 gender split in cabinet before Labour could give the impression the Tory party really is a one-nation party.
I hope May is able to select without ageism.It is rampant ageism in the PLP that needs an independent enquiry-victimising the Leader is proof of this.Again,the Tories can win points off the opposition by having a zero-tolerance policy on ageism.
I think they might have to create a custom role for Boris. Head of Amtrack, and Secretary of the Navy? He could brainstorm in the bath.
There's so much scope for stitching a rival up with faux claims of support. And once the bottom candidate is out, we start all over again!
We've 5 runners - so that's Tues/Thurs to eliminate two, then Tues to arrive at the final members choice. The timings are perfect for PB discussion
And on Wednesday - for variety we'll have Chilcott
For that matter, the First Crusaders felt let down by Alexius Comnenus when a city they'd been besieging (I forget which) surrendered to him instead of them [probably a wise move, frankly].
Obviously in all seriousness I haven't the slightest clue what proper practice would look like, but it's fun to laugh at politicians again.
If Barings had the right to draw on it then they would have been damn sure to reject the request (especially if it was to precipitate the collapse of the firm)
NB: I've never play in the RCF/standby market so don't know their standard terms (especially as it was in the 90s).
And this is her problem. If her heart is not in, the UK will finish up with a poor deal. cf DC...
“I think that’s an ideal combination – and I do like to think that’s where I am.”
Make of that what you will.
Of course in the end she will be responsible for the final deal just as she is responsible for the actions of all her minsters in any department. But she certainly needs someone formally designated to lead the negotiations whether a Leaver or Remainer previously.
Edited extra bit: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Crusades-War-Holy-Land/dp/1849836884/
As she just made clear, Brexit is not the PMs only job. She wants to govern the whole country for the whole country, not just Peter Bone and Bill Cash
Front line will be professional negotiators
Second line will be the Brexit Minister
Third line will be the PM