So Ukip are pushing for Leadsom, they don't have a say in the outcome, people need to grow up.
She did evade the point about Banks when she was asked about it yesterday.
And, more telling, she dodged completely the question about an offer having been made to Farage. She could have said "no", but didn't, either because an offer has been made, or is being considered.
Andrea Leadsom invested in buy-to-let. It makes her unfit to hold office.
Is that comment a joke?
No. It shows a terrible lack of judgement that she thinks being a parasite is an acceptable way if investing.
Which part of the housing market do you object to?
Presumably the part not owned and run by the state.....
I didn't know communists still existed in Britain.
Genuine question, has buy to let pushed up the price of houses?
It will arguably have pushed DOWN rental prices. A higher supply of properties to let will provide more flexibility in the market for those who are more mobile and or can't afford to buy.
It's probably pushed them up as the lack of available housing for owner occupancy has driven more people into the rental sector pushing up demand.
Now, that may seem hypocritical, but let me explain. Byzantium/Constantinople was the New Rome. It was the centre of the Orthodox religion as well as capital of the Eastern Empire. As such, its main cathedral being claimed as a mosque is as jarring as if mosques in Mecca [I specifically cited Mecca because it's the centre of Islam] were converted into churches after the city was conquered, or if the reverse happened in Rome.
Don't forget though it happened in Jerusalem as well. The al-Aqsa mosque is on the site of a synagogue, and the main Christian churches were converted to mosques in the first Islamic conquest (although not reconverted after Hattin).
I know that, but I still think it is hypocritical.
It is not my period of history, but as far as I'm aware: Byzantium/Constantinople was not particularly related to the history of Jesus, and is instead more to do with the split between western and eastern churches.
Jerusalem is a fairer point, but that is even more complex because of the rich history of the area.
Your comparison is particularly egregious as Mecca (*) is sacred to Muslims in a couple of ways, firstly as the birthplace of the big Mo and a place he had revelations. As far as I'm aware, there are no such links between Jesus and Constantinople.
(*) BTW, I'm amused that if you enter 'Mecca' into google, the first three hits are for Mecca Bingo ...
It wasn't *my* comparison. I wasn't comparing it to Mecca, but to Constantinople. Moreover Jerusalem is sacred to three religions for at least five different reasons.
Sorry, I thought I was responding to Mr Dancer's post. I had a severe brain-fart.
Apologies.
No worries Josias, I wasn't offended even if I did sound a bit curt.
Mr. Doethur, yeah, I remember reading an early caliph (maybe Omar?) refused to go into a church to pray when Jerusalem fell because he knew his followers would claim it. So he prayed on the steps outside, leading to the steps being claimed
That was a very decent gesture from Omar. Most conquerors would have done as they pleased.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
This is a ridiculous comparison as Corbyn's views are mental, when Leadsom is well within the mainstream. She is also personable and capable, unlike Corbyn.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
"421 out of 574 English and Welsh Westminster constituencies probably voted to Leave"
. Whereas Gove is very well known and has plenty of experience - so his pitch to members will be much stronger than Leadsom. He'll be entirely credible as a PM and equally able to play the "PM must support Brexit" card.
Yes, but being well known for being a backstabbing git and experienced at dogmatic policy making based on careful civil service house training that causes everyone whom he is controlling to hate his guts isn't perhaps terribly helpful either.
Just in case anyone is wondering, I don't like Gove as you may have guessed before.
Have a good day everyone.
Gove is an intelligent guy who probably could be PM, but probably couldn't be party leader. Since it's all one job, that's a bit of a problem for him. And he seems obsessed with his own principles (handy to try and explain away the stabbing) even in the face of reality - the exchange concerning the Irish peace process in yesterday's interview was bizarre.
Back when the peace deal was done he was strongly against the agreement, on grounds that it was 'wrong in principle' to deal with people who were/used to be terrorists. When presented with the argument that the agreement has, so far, turned out to be a tremendous success and saved lots of lives, he just retreated to the line "yes but it was wrong in principle". You can see why he didnt go down well with the teachers etc. I am not sure I want someone as obstinate as that in charge?
Andrea Leadsom invested in buy-to-let. It makes her unfit to hold office.
Is that comment a joke?
No. It shows a terrible lack of judgement that she thinks being a parasite is an acceptable way if investing.
Which part of the housing market do you object to?
Presumably the part not owned and run by the state.....
I didn't know communists still existed in Britain.
Genuine question, has buy to let pushed up the price of houses?
Yes. BTL arises because housing is attractive as an investment (low cost of borrowing + unattractive returns almost everywhere else). Hence the demand for housing comes from people wanting to buy-and-live plus people wanting to buy-and-let. Greater demand pushes up prices.
If the reverse happens - housing becomes (relatively) less attractive as an investment and so BTL landlords start to cash up, then prices should start to come down. If there's a panic exit plus foreclosures etc. then there's a housing market crash. The Government is trying to engineer the former before we reach the latter.
Worse, there are people who Buy-to-Leave - relying on asset appreciation to give them a return. I'd imagine that's a London-only phenomenon, but it doesn't help either.
The UK property market is just so screwed up. I can't prove it, but wouldn't be surprised if the property bubble is a major contributory factor to our lousy savings rates as well.
Given the post earlier relating to the increase in BTL since 2008, the reverse is definitely true, the lack of return elsewhere means that people have turned to BTL as an investment option they can understand...
I've finally been able to collate the results of my straw poll of members, more replied than the first time, it is not demographically representative and entirely anecdata.
McDonnell donned a beret this morning to say that there is no closed door to Tom Watson and Jeremy is a Man of Steel, Labour will have a collective leadership.
His contribution to new political comedy: "There are no American tanks in Baghdad".
I also note the Labour Party presentation team is down to just him now. You can't turn on the radio without hearing his reasonable man act.
Andrea Leadsom invested in buy-to-let. It makes her unfit to hold office.
Is that comment a joke?
No. It shows a terrible lack of judgement that she thinks being a parasite is an acceptable way if investing.
Which part of the housing market do you object to?
Presumably the part not owned and run by the state.....
I didn't know communists still existed in Britain.
Genuine question, has buy to let pushed up the price of houses?
Yes. BTL arises because housing is attractive as an investment (low cost of borrowing + unattractive returns almost everywhere else). Hence the demand for housing comes from people wanting to buy-and-live plus people wanting to buy-and-let. Greater demand pushes up prices.
If the reverse happens - housing becomes (relatively) less attractive as an investment and so BTL landlords start to cash up, then prices should start to come down. If there's a panic exit plus foreclosures etc. then there's a housing market crash. The Government is trying to engineer the former before we reach the latter.
Worse, there are people who Buy-to-Leave - relying on asset appreciation to give them a return. I'd imagine that's a London-only phenomenon, but it doesn't help either.
The UK property market is just so screwed up. I can't prove it, but wouldn't be surprised if the property bubble is a major contributory factor to our lousy savings rates as well.
Given the post earlier relating to the increase in BTL since 2008, the reverse is definitely true, the lack of return elsewhere means that people have turned to BTL as an investment option they can understand...
When he says savings rates I think he means the amount of saving, rather than the interest. And, yes, I suppose this is right (although since a house purchase is a transfer between individuals, it depends on what happens to the capital gain for the seller). My guess is that the principle consequence has been to push up our levels of private debt (which I believe are amongst the highest in the world?), through all the borrowing involved.
What always strikes me is that I meet a lot of people who see their house (or houses) as their retirement fund, in the absence of any other pension provision. So when the baby boom generation reaches retirement and starts spending the capital they have accumulated, over the next ten to thirty years, there must surely be steady downward pressure on property (provided it hasn't crashed meanwhile).
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Indeed. I put it at a better than twelve to seven.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
. Whereas Gove is very well known and has plenty of experience - so his pitch to members will be much stronger than Leadsom. He'll be entirely credible as a PM and equally able to play the "PM must support Brexit" card.
Yes, but being well known for being a backstabbing git and experienced at dogmatic policy making based on careful civil service house training that causes everyone whom he is controlling to hate his guts isn't perhaps terribly helpful either.
Just in case anyone is wondering, I don't like Gove as you may have guessed before.
Have a good day everyone.
Gove is an intelligent guy who probably could be PM, but probably couldn't be party leader. Since it's all one job, that's a bit of a problem for him. And he seems obsessed with his own principles (handy to try and explain away the stabbing) even in the face of reality - the exchange concerning the Irish peace process in yesterday's interview was bizarre.
Back when the peace deal was done he was strongly against the agreement, on grounds that it was 'wrong in principle' to deal with people who were/used to be terrorists. When presented with the argument that the agreement has, so far, turned out to be a tremendous success and saved lots of lives, he just retreated to the line "yes but it was wrong in principle". You can see why he didnt go down well with the teachers etc. I am not sure I want someone as obstinate as that in charge?
I watched Gove on Marr yesterday. While fiendishly clever, he does not have the social and communication skills to be a leader.
He lacks the wisdom, like Brown, but unlike Osborne, to recognise the limits of his skills....
Well, he does now. But only a week ago he did have the wisdom and was telling people he hadn't got what it takes. What a joker. Let's hope he's out in the first round.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
By the time of the next election LEAVE may be really unpopular.
Totally unacceptable for Farage to be given any role
Why?
He is toxic in any any negotiation with the EU
You are simply projecting your own prejudices. We voted to Leave, it is now the govt's responsibility to carry that out and act in the interest of the people. Nobody understands the EU better than Nigel.
And nobody is more toxic in dealing with the EU. Remember I was for remain and now leave and I really want to leave and do not want anyone involved who could damage the process, and damage it Farage would
You have no evidence to support your claim, just prejudice. Leave won, Farage did more than anybody else, it would be entirely reasonable to give him a role.
You are correct but the reality is the Tory Leavers wanted Farage and UKIP to do the anti-immigration stuff and win those votes without them having to dirty their hands. They were the useful idiots.
Now they have won Tory Leave will obfuscate on FoM, do what it takes to protect the City and they will treat Farage/UKIP like lepers again. They know that however much they fume, under FPTP UKIP are no threat, they will do at least as much harm to Labour as the Tories and win 10 seats at most.
The only surprise is that you didn't see it coming.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
The theme of the next election is probably going to be Britain's new future outside the EU.
A Remain leader desperately trying to sell a U turn back to the EU is going to be a dog. And that's how Ms May and Mr Gove appear to be shaping up.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
"421 out of 574 English and Welsh Westminster constituencies probably voted to Leave"
No, getting a good deal for Britain and keeping us in the single market will help us at the next election. Leave and remain won't matter by 2020, all eyes will be on the more mundane things such as jobs, economy and probably still immigration. If we've left the EU by 2020 (which we should have) then most leave voters will be satisfied. Some die hards may continue the campaign to leave the single market but I doubt they will be numerous.
I watched Gove on Marr yesterday. While fiendishly clever, he does not have the social and communication skills to be a leader.
He lacks the wisdom, like Brown, but unlike Osborne, to recognise the limits of his skills....
Well, he does now. But only a week ago he did have the wisdom and was telling people he hadn't got what it takes. What a joker. Let's hope he's out in the first round.
Mr Gove thoroughly deserves to be taken down a peg or six......
No. It shows a terrible lack of judgement that she thinks being a parasite is an acceptable way if investing.
So I take it you are calling for the defenestration of Emily Thornberry, as a buy to let investor?
And what about Michael Meacher, who had multiple properties left after splitting assets in - I think - TWO separate divorces?
And these are London Landlords amongst the current crop of Labour MPs, including at least one more Shadow Cabinet member *, unless Wikipedia has lost track of the Shad Cab Fandango:
Rushanara Ali (Labour, Bethnal Green and Bow) Ruth Cadbury (Labour, Brentford and Isleworth) Meg Hillier (Labour, Hackney South and Shoreditch) David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham) Seema Malhotra (Labour, Feltham and Heston) * Joan Ryan (Labour, Enfield North) Gareth Thomas (Labour, Harrow West)
I focus on Labour because the Tories don't have this hangup.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
"421 out of 574 English and Welsh Westminster constituencies probably voted to Leave"
No, getting a good deal for Britain and keeping us in the single market will help us at the next election. Leave and remain won't matter by 2020, all eyes will be on the more mundane things such as jobs, economy and probably still immigration. If we've left the EU by 2020 (which we should have) then most leave voters will be satisfied. Some die hards may continue the campaign to leave the single market but I doubt they will be numerous.
33 million people voted the referendum. Turnout was higher than the last 5 general elections.
Whilst for better or worse alcohol is a part, in most instances a minor part, in our everyday lives. However, I can't help but conclude the suggestion that Gove has been associated with drink-fuelled gossip in the Whips Office is likely to severely compromise his political prospects, I'm afraid that's the way it is. Whenever I see references to Juncker, I can't help but think of that notorious YouTube clip in which he was decidedly the worse for wear. My guess is that sooner or later and probably sooner, that will prove to be his undoing.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
The theme of the next election is probably going to be Britain's new future outside the EU.
A Remain leader desperately trying to sell a U turn back to the EU is going to be a dog. And that's how Ms May and Mr Gove appear to be shaping up.
I must have missed something - have either said they'd be keeping us in the EU? That, or I'm missing your point entirely (quite possible).
I do wonder if Gove has more chance of making the Final 2 than some people think.
However unpopular he is, and whatever people think of what he did last week, surely the main thing MPs floating between Gove and Leadsom are thinking is that they want whoever they support to win - as they want a Brexit supporting PM.
Leadsom is surely a long shot to beat May with the members - simply because many will barely know who she even is and they'll be reluctant to vote for someone with so little experience. Whereas Gove is very well known and has plenty of experience - so his pitch to members will be much stronger than Leadsom. He'll be entirely credible as a PM and equally able to play the "PM must support Brexit" card.
Except he won't get through the MPs vote. Nor I suspect (and hope!) will Leadsom. We'll see on Tuesday and Thursday.
It definitely isn't going to be Fox which leaves Crabb. I don't think he has the support base and there will be massive howls of stitch up if May lends him enough MPs to beat Leadsom/Gove to make it onto the ballot.
All May has to do is lend support to Gove, knowing he is already busted.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
The theme of the next election is probably going to be Britain's new future outside the EU.
A Remain leader desperately trying to sell a U turn back to the EU is going to be a dog. And that's how Ms May and Mr Gove appear to be shaping up.
I must have missed something - have either said they'd be keeping us in the EU? That, or I'm missing your point entirely (quite possible).
No, but my impression is they're moving that way. It's just an opinion.
I do wonder if Gove has more chance of making the Final 2 than some people think.
However unpopular he is, and whatever people think of what he did last week, surely the main thing MPs floating between Gove and Leadsom are thinking is that they want whoever they support to win - as they want a Brexit supporting PM.
Leadsom is surely a long shot to beat May with the members - simply because many will barely know who she even is and they'll be reluctant to vote for someone with so little experience. Whereas Gove is very well known and has plenty of experience - so his pitch to members will be much stronger than Leadsom. He'll be entirely credible as a PM and equally able to play the "PM must support Brexit" card.
Except he won't get through the MPs vote. Nor I suspect (and hope!) will Leadsom. We'll see on Tuesday and Thursday.
It definitely isn't going to be Fox which leaves Crabb. I don't think he has the support base and there will be massive howls of stitch up if May lends him enough MPs to beat Leadsom/Gove to make it onto the ballot.
All May has to do is lend support to Gove, knowing he is already busted.
Hmm. That didn't exactly work well in the Labour leadership did it.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
I do wonder if Gove has more chance of making the Final 2 than some people think.
However unpopular he is, and whatever people think of what he did last week, surely the main thing MPs floating between Gove and Leadsom are thinking is that they want whoever they support to win - as they want a Brexit supporting PM.
Leadsom is surely a long shot to beat May with the members - simply because many will barely know who she even is and they'll be reluctant to vote for someone with so little experience. Whereas Gove is very well known and has plenty of experience - so his pitch to members will be much stronger than Leadsom. He'll be entirely credible as a PM and equally able to play the "PM must support Brexit" card.
Except he won't get through the MPs vote. Nor I suspect (and hope!) will Leadsom. We'll see on Tuesday and Thursday.
It definitely isn't going to be Fox which leaves Crabb. I don't think he has the support base and there will be massive howls of stitch up if May lends him enough MPs to beat Leadsom/Gove to make it onto the ballot.
All May has to do is lend support to Gove, knowing he is already busted.
Hmm. That didn't exactly work well in the Labour leadership did it.
I wonder what the result of the Labour ballot would have been had voting rights not been given to those who registered during the campaign.
Could someone on the left explain to me how it is 'parasitic' to buy a property and then rent it out. The corollary of this logic is that all property must be owned by its occupier. If a young person can't afford to buy or doesn't want to make the financial commitment it seems 100% reasonable to me that they have the option to rent a place to live. Surely no landlords implies no tenants. It seems the most barking insane philosophy to me - but happy for a lefty to explain why this is not so.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That seems like such a hard contest to poll.
Before the final two are selected, I'd be inclined to dismiss any polling. After the final two are selected polls will be interesting, but carry little weight.
The only poll that would matter is the one of voting party members. I have just completed one with ConHome and if she is ahead when that result is published then she should be PM
Am I the only one that finds it faintly alarming that the future direction of the country lies in the hands of 150,000 Tory Party members with an average age of about 70?
What I am taking away from the current situation in both parties is that we would be better served if the choice of leader reverted solely to the MPs. Giving the membership the choice is superficially more democratic but in reality puts the decision in the hands of activists who invariably more extreme than their own voters, let alone the country as a whole.
Andrea Leadsom invested in buy-to-let. It makes her unfit to hold office.
Is that comment a joke?
No. It shows a terrible lack of judgement that she thinks being a parasite is an acceptable way if investing.
Which part of the housing market do you object to?
Presumably the part not owned and run by the state.....
I didn't know communists still existed in Britain.
Genuine question, has buy to let pushed up the price of houses?
Yes. BTL arises because housing is attractive as an investment (low cost of borrowing + unattractive returns almost everywhere else). Hence the demand for housing comes from people wanting to buy-and-live plus people wanting to buy-and-let. Greater demand pushes up prices.
well.
Given the post earlier relating to the increase in BTL since 2008, the reverse is definitely true, the lack of return elsewhere means that people have turned to BTL as an investment option they can understand...
When he says savings rates I think he means the amount of saving, rather than the interest. And, yes, I suppose this is right (although since a house purchase is a transfer between individuals, it depends on what happens to the capital gain for the seller). My guess is that the principle consequence has been to push up our levels of private debt (which I believe are amongst the highest in the world?), through all the borrowing involved.
What always strikes me is that I meet a lot of people who see their house (or houses) as their retirement fund, in the absence of any other pension provision. So when the baby boom generation reaches retirement and starts spending the capital they have accumulated, over the next ten to thirty years, there must surely be steady downward pressure on property (provided it hasn't crashed meanwhile).
Thank you for rescuing me Ian . You understood my rather murky point.
A lot of the true Boomers have already retired. It's Generation Jones that are beginning to hang up their boots. I can't see the down-sizing having much effect on property prices outside of London (London is always a special case as it's not just driven by domestic demand).
We built 139k houses last year. As ever, not enough. We've only got the first quarter stats for this year, and the rate has dropped slightly. As an aside, construction PMIs are out today.
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
All May has to do is lend support to Gove, knowing he is already busted.
I think that is a possibility. I've heard that the sensible camp would rather face Gove than Leadsom which is why all the dirt on Leadsom is coming out now.
Hmm. That didn't exactly work well in the Labour leadership did it.
I haven't seen any appetite for Gove to be leader among the membership and because of leadership rules we can't have a situation where loads of UKIP entryists sign up to vote for Gove.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
"421 out of 574 English and Welsh Westminster constituencies probably voted to Leave"
If we've left the EU by 2020 (which we should have) then most leave voters will be satisfied.
True. But many of those Leave voters will have voted Labour in the past. They may well re-align their GE voting behaviour with their Brexit voting behaviour.
For that, it would help if the Conservatives had a Leave advocate as their leader.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
By the time of the next election LEAVE may be really unpopular.
Indeed. It's always worth looking at it from a party-political positioning perspective as it might be in 2020.
The Lib Dems look likely to have a position of being very pro-EU, and to rejoin later.
Labour is harder to determine, but look likely to be quietly pro-EU if Corbyn remains in charge (a big conditional there).
Hard UKIPpers will be screaming that any deal is not enough, and that we need to dig the Channel so deep that it imperils the Chunnel.
As for the Conservatives, it seems certain that a Conservative leaver or leavers will be in charge of the negotiations with the EU over Brexit. But there will be a large chunk of Conservatives who voted remain, and they need to be accommodated as well.
A leaver as PM and a leaver in charge of Brexit will not do that. A remainer as PM who is shackled in EU matters by a strong leaver Brexit team might well. It also leaves the party in a strong position whatever the result: if Brexit goes well the party can take credit, if it does not then the PM can, to a certain extent, say "not my fault guv."
But that requires a certain amount of political machinations o do well.
If I was the next PM, I would try to make the Brexit team as broad as possible. Bring in a few leavers from Labour and, if possible, the other parties as well. But not Farage.
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
I'm finding it rather entertaining, but limited. I hope some other news happens today - another 1000 posts of this is just
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
I was a Leave voter and campaigner, would never think about voting for Gove, Leadsom or Fox. Gove is damaged goods, Leadsom is inexperienced and Fox is beyond damaged goods. The dearth of quality on the leave once Gove knifed Boris has become apparent.
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
No, we just think she lacks the experience to be Prime Minister.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
"421 out of 574 English and Welsh Westminster constituencies probably voted to Leave"
If we've left the EU by 2020 (which we should have) then most leave voters will be satisfied.
True. But many of those Leave voters will have voted Labour in the past. They may well re-align their GE voting behaviour with their Brexit voting behaviour.
For that, it would help if the Conservatives had a Leave advocate as their leader.
By 2020 I don't see how it makes a difference to the race. Unless we haven't left and there has been a huge backtrack any PM which takes us out is going to be enough to satisfy the majority of leave voters and especially Tory leave voters who didn't rate immigration as highly as UKIP and Labour ones.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
It's pretty unfair. He started his political career as an intern sponsored by a charity called CARE. He still has links to them. CARE part-sponsored a conference in 2009, which had a session on 'gay cure' (that's a gross simplification).
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
The theme of the next election is probably going to be Britain's new future outside the EU.
A Remain leader desperately trying to sell a U turn back to the EU is going to be a dog. And that's how Ms May and Mr Gove appear to be shaping up.
I must have missed something - have either said they'd be keeping us in the EU? That, or I'm missing your point entirely (quite possible).
No, but my impression is they're moving that way. It's just an opinion.
I do wonder if Gove has more chance of making the Final 2 than some people think.
However unpopular he is, and whatever people think of what he did last week, surely the main thing MPs floating between Gove and Leadsom are thinking is that they want whoever they support to win - as they want a Brexit supporting PM.
Leadsom is surely a long shot to beat May with the members - simply because many will barely know who she even is and they'll be reluctant to vote for someone with so little experience. Whereas Gove is very well known and has plenty of experience - so his pitch to members will be much stronger than Leadsom. He'll be entirely credible as a PM and equally able to play the "PM must support Brexit" card.
Except he won't get through the MPs vote. Nor I suspect (and hope!) will Leadsom. We'll see on Tuesday and Thursday.
It definitely isn't going to be Fox which leaves Crabb. I don't think he has the support base and there will be massive howls of stitch up if May lends him enough MPs to beat Leadsom/Gove to make it onto the ballot.
Then cries of unfairness if she wins. And if course it's possible but unlikely crabb can get such support on his own. There will be no pleasing some regardless.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
It's pretty unfair. He started his political career as an intern sponsored by a charity called CARE. He still has links to them. CARE part-sponsored a conference in 2009, which had a session on 'gay cure' (that's a gross simplification).
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
Whilst for better or worse alcohol is a part, in most instances a minor part, in our everyday lives. However, I can't help but conclude the suggestion that Gove has been associated with drink-fuelled gossip in the Whips Office is likely to severely compromise his political prospects, I'm afraid that's the way it is. Whenever I see references to Juncker, I can't help but think of that notorious YouTube clip in which he was decidedly the worse for wear. My guess is that sooner or later and probably sooner, that will prove to be his undoing.
Funnily enough, that comment by May about not drinking in Westminster bars has contributed to my dad not wanting her to get the job. While she didn't say she doesn't drink, my dad has interpreted it that way and he says you shouldn't trust someone who doesn't drink.
Does anybody know the MPs under the most threat of being deselected by their constituency. To me Jonny Mercer springs to mind as he stood on a "Eurosceptic" ticket, had a vote on his position then ignored it by defecting to remain. His constituency voted massively to leave, and he isn't in post for long. Ditto Tom Tugendhat. I suspect there could be quite a few Labour areas although I would expect them to go with votes to UKIP.
I believe there is a newspaper article on this today but can't locate it.
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
I was a Leave voter and campaigner, would never think about voting for Gove, Leadsom or Fox. Gove is damaged goods, Leadsom is inexperienced and Fox is beyond damaged goods. The dearth of quality on the leave once Gove knifed Boris has become apparent.
Same here. May is the right person for PM now, not just on the EU issue, but overall.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
The theme of the next election is probably going to be Britain's new future outside the EU.
A Remain leader desperately trying to sell a U turn back to the EU is going to be a dog. And that's how Ms May and Mr Gove appear to be shaping up.
I must have missed something - have either said they'd be keeping us in the EU? That, or I'm missing your point entirely (quite possible).
No, but my impression is they're moving that way. It's just an opinion.
What, specifically, has May said?
She said that EU migration would take time to reduce and may even rise in the short term. I find that wholly uncontroversial, but these are strange days.
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
I was a Leave voter and campaigner, would never think about voting for Gove, Leadsom or Fox. Gove is damaged goods, Leadsom is inexperienced and Fox is beyond damaged goods. The dearth of quality on the leave once Gove knifed Boris has become apparent.
I would find it impossible to vote for a Fox-led Conservative Party, and would rather abstain. I would vote for Leadsom or Gove, but not with much enthusiasm, as I suspect that both would be pretty ordinary PMs.
I know nothing of Crabb (other than that he said some ridiculous things about 'waiting for divisions to be healed'), and I don't like Theresa May's authoritarian tendencies.
I do wonder if Gove has more chance of making the Final 2 than some people think.
However unpopular he is, and whatever people think of what he did last week, surely the main thing MPs floating between Gove and Leadsom are thinking is that they want whoever they support to win - as they want a Brexit supporting PM.
Leadsom is surely a long shot to beat May with the members - simply because many will barely know who she even is and they'll be reluctant to vote for someone with so little experience. Whereas Gove is very well known and has plenty of experience - so his pitch to members will be much stronger than Leadsom. He'll be entirely credible as a PM and equally able to play the "PM must support Brexit" card.
Except he won't get through the MPs vote. Nor I suspect (and hope!) will Leadsom. We'll see on Tuesday and Thursday.
It definitely isn't going to be Fox which leaves Crabb. I don't think he has the support base and there will be massive howls of stitch up if May lends him enough MPs to beat Leadsom/Gove to make it onto the ballot.
All May has to do is lend support to Gove, knowing he is already busted.
Hmm. That didn't exactly work well in the Labour leadership did it.
I've never been exactly clear how in Leadership contests, one contender can "lend" their support to a rival. We are familiar with the concept of backbencher voting fodder, but surely Tory MPs are not so downtrodden that they can simply be instructed on how they should vote in something as important as selecting the party's next leader.
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
The theme of the next election is probably going to be Britain's new future outside the EU.
A Remain leader desperately trying to sell a U turn back to the EU is going to be a dog. And that's how Ms May and Mr Gove appear to be shaping up.
I must have missed something - have either said they'd be keeping us in the EU? That, or I'm missing your point entirely (quite possible).
No, but people fear backsliding, particularly on points vote leave pushed but had no power yo see happen
Andrea Leadsom invested in buy-to-let. It makes her unfit to hold office.
Is that comment a joke?
No. It shows a terrible lack of judgement that she thinks being a parasite is an acceptable way if investing.
Which part of the housing market do you object to?
Presumably the part not owned and run by the state.....
I didn't know communists still existed in Britain.
Genuine question, has buy to let pushed up the price of houses?
well.
Given the post earlier relating to the increase in BTL since 2008, the reverse is definitely true, the lack of return elsewhere means that people have turned to BTL as an investment option they can understand...
When he says savings rates I think he means the amount of saving, rather than the interest. And, yes, I suppose this is right (although since a house purchase is a transfer between individuals, it depends on what happens to the capital gain for the seller). My guess is that the principle consequence has been to push up our levels of private debt (which I believe are amongst the highest in the world?), through all the borrowing involved.
What always strikes me is that I meet a lot of people who see their house (or houses) as their retirement fund, in the absence of any other pension provision. So when the baby boom generation reaches retirement and starts spending the capital they have accumulated, over the next ten to thirty years, there must surely be steady downward pressure on property (provided it hasn't crashed meanwhile).
Thank you for rescuing me Ian . You understood my rather murky point.
A lot of the true Boomers have already retired. It's Generation Jones that are beginning to hang up their boots. I can't see the down-sizing having much effect on property prices outside of London (London is always a special case as it's not just driven by domestic demand).
We built 139k houses last year. As ever, not enough. We've only got the first quarter stats for this year, and the rate has dropped slightly. As an aside, construction PMIs are out today.
For the record, 139k is Housing completions for England only.
Add in Wales - approx 7-8k, Scotland 17-18k, and NI 6720, and the UK total is 170-175k.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
It's pretty unfair. He started his political career as an intern sponsored by a charity called CARE. He still has links to them. CARE part-sponsored a conference in 2009, which had a session on 'gay cure' (that's a gross simplification).
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
I don't want a God-botherer as PM.
We're in agreement, we do not need another Blair. However, portraying Crabb as some frothing, Leviticus-quoting zealot is completely unfair and unjustified.
A little sense in the housing debate. Many people are angry about high prices in London and the South East. They see all the high rise towers for foreign millionaires and they get angry, But it is classic displacement activity. It's a classic case of a few selective statistics and some dodgey reporting from abroad from British hacks who are known for detailed investigation and not simply making it up for a sexier angle. So people think foreign millionaires are buying all the properties in London and then leaving them empty, and it's all their fault they can't get a great deal on a terrace in Stoke Newington.
The facts are foreign sales concentrated in large apartment towers in the central zones of London, as foreign buyers are prepared to buy off plan before the building is built, and therefore allowed builders to raise finance themselves to build rather than the banks who remained reluctant after the last big crash in 2008.
Foreign investment is almost exclusively in new build, only North Americans and Europeans will invest in 2nd hand properties and they are mostly living in them selves. Asian investors will only buy new properties, which matches their home markets of fast growing cities where there are very few older properties that have modern facilities and the market for period properties is extremely limited.
The new build market is 10% of the total number of sales in the UK housing market. In an interesting aside in a survey in the Economist it was interesting to note (though their not sure why) for the last 40 years the percentage of new builds has been exactly 10% of sales. Maybe it's UK market preference, like some people only want new build as they don't want the work and like modern insulation standards etc, while others want period features and will accept only one bathroom and odd room positions and no parking.
Another interesting figure to note is that house sale volumes are half what they were in the 1980's . It can be shown from this the Treasuries addiction to high stamp duty does have a harmful effect on the UK housing market.
It turns out that foreign sales amount to just 3.5% of total sales in London and that figure is really concentrated in zone 1. Logically a few thousand millionaires investors are only like to drive prices in certain sub markets in London. It turns out the majority of them will live in these properties or will be for the children to stay while they study in London, almost no one leaves their property empty, when they could of course rent it out and get some return on their money,rather than have a drain on their finances paying out property taxes.
The real reason of course for London's price rises is that 1 and half million people have moved in other the last decade or so. It's the real reason why Hackney is no longer a shithole and full of hipsters.
London's problem is of course restrictions on development and the excessive power of local democracy that allows development to be stopped. London has had a big increase in population and the solutions is either to build up and/or build out. But of course everyone want to preserve London's lovely terraced houses and many are covered by conservation areas. Of course many within walking distance of tube and train stations should have fallen to market pressures long ago and be surrounded by modern apartment blocks.
The same goes for the green fields around London, rather than forcing people to commute long distances. But yet again more restrictions have been placed. The green belt in Britain has doubled in size since the 1980's and the pressure is on to get ever more areas designated.
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
Excellent interpretation, other than the leavers who also don't think she's up for the job.
Andrea Leadsom invested in buy-to-let. It makes her unfit to hold office.
Is that comment a joke?
No. It shows a terrible lack of judgement that she thinks being a parasite is an acceptable way if investing.
Which part of the housing market do you object to?
Presumably the part not owned and run by the state.....
I didn't know communists still existed in Britain.
Genuine question, has buy to let pushed up the price of houses?
well.
Given the post earlier relating to the increase in BTL since 2008, the reverse is definitely true, the lack of return elsewhere means that people have turned to BTL as an investment option they can understand...
Thank you for rescuing me Ian . You understood my rather murky point.
A lot of the true Boomers have already retired. It's Generation Jones that are beginning to hang up their boots. I can't see the down-sizing having much effect on property prices outside of London (London is always a special case as it's not just driven by domestic demand).
We built 139k houses last year. As ever, not enough. We've only got the first quarter stats for this year, and the rate has dropped slightly. As an aside, construction PMIs are out today.
For the record, 139k is Housing completions for England only.
Add in Wales - approx 7-8k, Scotland 17-18k, and NI 6720, and the UK total is 170-175k.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
It's pretty unfair. He started his political career as an intern sponsored by a charity called CARE. He still has links to them. CARE part-sponsored a conference in 2009, which had a session on 'gay cure' (that's a gross simplification).
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
I don't want a God-botherer as PM.
I think you perhaps need a slightly more sophisticated set of opinions on that subject !
Whilst for better or worse alcohol is a part, in most instances a minor part, in our everyday lives. However, I can't help but conclude the suggestion that Gove has been associated with drink-fuelled gossip in the Whips Office is likely to severely compromise his political prospects, I'm afraid that's the way it is. Whenever I see references to Juncker, I can't help but think of that notorious YouTube clip in which he was decidedly the worse for wear. My guess is that sooner or later and probably sooner, that will prove to be his undoing.
Funnily enough, that comment by May about not drinking in Westminster bars has contributed to my dad not wanting her to get the job. While she didn't say she doesn't drink, my dad has interpreted it that way and he says you shouldn't trust someone who doesn't drink.
Given May is an ex-President of the Edmund Burke Society (whose purpose was 'the drinking of port, the making of funny speeches and the minimisation of the President's bank balance) the idea that she 'doesn't drink' is misplaced......
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
It's pretty unfair. He started his political career as an intern sponsored by a charity called CARE. He still has links to them. CARE part-sponsored a conference in 2009, which had a session on 'gay cure' (that's a gross simplification).
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
I don't want a God-botherer as PM.
We're in agreement, we do not need another Blair. However, portraying Crabb as some frothing, Leviticus-quoting zealot is completely unfair and unjustified.
How long was it before Blair even told the people he was a Catholic?
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
I was a Leave voter and campaigner, would never think about voting for Gove, Leadsom or Fox. Gove is damaged goods, Leadsom is inexperienced and Fox is beyond damaged goods. The dearth of quality on the leave once Gove knifed Boris has become apparent.
I would find it impossible to vote for a Fox-led Conservative Party, and would rather abstain. I would vote for Leadsom or Gove, but not with much enthusiasm, as I suspect that both would be pretty ordinary PMs.
I know nothing of Crabb (other than that he said some ridiculous things about 'waiting for divisions to be healed'), and I don't like Theresa May's authoritarian tendencies.
But of that bunch, she's the best option.
If Leadsom came with Farage (which may be on the cards given her non-denials) then I would probably vote Lib Dem or Labour (if they've dumped Corbyn).
Crabb is Evangelical, that's enough for me to stick him in the no pile.
Gove I could stand, but he won't make it.
Fox I'd abstain or hope he goes down in flames before 2020.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
It's pretty unfair. He started his political career as an intern sponsored by a charity called CARE. He still has links to them. CARE part-sponsored a conference in 2009, which had a session on 'gay cure' (that's a gross simplification).
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
I don't want a God-botherer as PM.
Don't let SeanT know he's a God-botherer, he'll start frothing about how wonderful he is.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
It's pretty unfair. He started his political career as an intern sponsored by a charity called CARE. He still has links to them. CARE part-sponsored a conference in 2009, which had a session on 'gay cure' (that's a gross simplification).
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
I don't want a God-botherer as PM.
Don't let SeanT know he's a God-botherer, he'll start frothing about how wonderful he is.
Horrible, horrible Construction PMI, 46.0 against our expectations of 50.2, first real evidence of slowdown, movement seems too large to be a one off.
"Though the majority of responses, around 80% were received before the Brexit result, the continuing ambiguity and indecision has flung the sector into unknown territory. Firms will likely look towards any remedies the Bank of England and the UK Government can offer if the situation worsens postBrexit.
“The only glimmer of light through the brickwork is the rate of decline was not as sharp as that experienced during the last recession. But, with business confidence at a three-year low, and purchasing activity at its lowest level for six and a half years, this is likely to offer little comfort."
So are we all agreed that Theresa "may" be Prime Minister?
Unless, Sunil, Liam foxes her or Stephen crabs her, or we wake up to find that Andrea has led some forlorn hope and succeeded against the odds, or that Michael is strugglin gove r the line ahead of her. Does that about cover it?
Horrible, horrible Construction PMI, 46.0 against our expectations of 50.2, first real evidence of slowdown, movement seems too large to be a one off. "Though the majority of responses, around 80% were received before the Brexit result, the continuing ambiguity and indecision has flung the sector into unknown territory. "
Anything to do with the Chancellor's tax increases on BTL? After all they are parasites in your eyes?
Horrible, horrible Construction PMI, 46.0 against our expectations of 50.2, first real evidence of slowdown, movement seems too large to be a one off.
"Though the majority of responses, around 80% were received before the Brexit result, the continuing ambiguity and indecision has flung the sector into unknown territory. Firms will likely look towards any remedies the Bank of England and the UK Government can offer if the situation worsens postBrexit.
“The only glimmer of light through the brickwork is the rate of decline was not as sharp as that experienced during the last recession. But, with business confidence at a three-year low, and purchasing activity at its lowest level for six and a half years, this is likely to offer little comfort."
Sharp drop from last months 51.2. Let's see if its a pause or a reset.
Horrible, horrible Construction PMI, 46.0 against our expectations of 50.2, first real evidence of slowdown, movement seems too large to be a one off.
"Though the majority of responses, around 80% were received before the Brexit result, the continuing ambiguity and indecision has flung the sector into unknown territory. Firms will likely look towards any remedies the Bank of England and the UK Government can offer if the situation worsens postBrexit.
“The only glimmer of light through the brickwork is the rate of decline was not as sharp as that experienced during the last recession. But, with business confidence at a three-year low, and purchasing activity at its lowest level for six and a half years, this is likely to offer little comfort."
Anything to do with the Chancellor's tax increases on BTL? After all they are parasites in your eyes?
If Gove's main problem is electability, he should promise to stand down in 2019 and own the 'Brexit PM' label. Acknowledge he is a PM suitable for a particular situation only (some comparisons to Churchill as a wartime but not peacetime PM for example, would help solidify this image). Tories can vote safe in the knowledge that their version of Corbyn won't destroy them in 2020.
If Gove's main problem is electability, he should promise to stand down in 2019 and own the 'Brexit PM' label. Acknowledge he is a PM suitable for a particular situation only (some comparisons to Churchill as a wartime but not peacetime PM for example, would help solidify this image). Tories can vote safe in the knowledge that their version of Corbyn won't destroy them in 2020.
As that proceeds from the premise that Gove's word can be trusted.....
If Gove's main problem is electability, he should promise to stand down in 2019 and own the 'Brexit PM' label. Acknowledge he is a PM suitable for a particular situation only (some comparisons to Churchill as a wartime but not peacetime PM for example, would help solidify this image). Tories can vote safe in the knowledge that their version of Corbyn won't destroy them in 2020.
Given how often he said he didn't want to be PM or was not capable of being PM, I doubt anyone would believe him.
So Leadsom is the Tory Corbyn. Vocally backed by non-Tories and happy to bring in people from other, more extreme parties to push an agenda that the Tories have traditionally shied away from - perhaps to the regret of a large section of the membership. Will Tory members and MPs be as stupid as Labour ones? It's hard to believe so, but these are peculiar times.
Having a Leave advocate as leader should help the Conservatives at the next election.
Having an effective PM will do much more than which side they supported in a referendum 4 years back.....and remember even LEAVE voters prefer May to Gove.....
The theme of the next election is probably going to be Britain's new future outside the EU.
A Remain leader desperately trying to sell a U turn back to the EU is going to be a dog. And that's how Ms May and Mr Gove appear to be shaping up.
I must have missed something - have either said they'd be keeping us in the EU? That, or I'm missing your point entirely (quite possible).
No, but people fear backsliding, particularly on points vote leave pushed but had no power yo see happen
I don't think the ardent leavers fear backsliding per se. What they see - as do most of us - is the very real prospect of a sustained downturn, as companies stop investing in the UK and people stop spending due to all the uncertainty. In which circumstances it is very likely that public opinion could shift significantly next year towards "why the f*** did we bring all this on ourselves?". What they want therefore is someone like Gove - who will stick to his principles in the face of any evidence - rather than a leader who might be prepared to think more pragmatically about how to get ourselves out of the mess.
/edit - ok, I guess you could say this *is* potential back-sliding, but driven by events
Andrea Leadsom invested in buy-to-let. It makes her unfit to hold office.
Is that comment a joke?
No. It shows a terrible lack of judgement that she thinks being a parasite is an acceptable way if investing.
Which part of the housing market do you object to?
Presumably the part not owned and run by the state.....
I didn't know communists still existed in Britain.
Genuine question, has buy to let pushed up the price of houses?
well.
Given the post earlier relating to the increase in BTL since 2008, the reverse is definitely true, the lack of return elsewhere means that people have turned to BTL as an investment option they can understand...
Thank you for rescuing me Ian . You understood my rather murky point.
A lot of the true Boomers have already retired. It's Generation Jones that are beginning to hang up their boots. I can't see the down-sizing having much effect on property prices outside of London (London is always a special case as it's not just driven by domestic demand).
We built 139k houses last year. As ever, not enough. We've only got the first quarter stats for this year, and the rate has dropped slightly. As an aside, construction PMIs are out today.
For the record, 139k is Housing completions for England only.
Add in Wales - approx 7-8k, Scotland 17-18k, and NI 6720, and the UK total is 170-175k.
Thanks Matt - I hope you don't think I was spinning merely to score points.
No. I think the increase is enough that this issue will be mainly put to bed before Labour has any prospect of winning an election.
I call it Osbo's "Eat Labour's Lunch" strategy.
The Landlord Attacks are similar - Mr Corbyn or his defenestrator can't soak the landlords as Osbo already did it, with the added benefit that he can make corporate letting by institutions competitive for the first time in many decades.
The attempts by PB Remain supporters to find reasons to trash every leader candidate who supported Leave is very transparent. Just be honest: you do not care about Leadsom waiting a few weeks to disclose her financial arrangements. You are just bitter about the result and want to take it out on every Leaver.
I was a Leave voter and campaigner, would never think about voting for Gove, Leadsom or Fox. Gove is damaged goods, Leadsom is inexperienced and Fox is beyond damaged goods. The dearth of quality on the leave once Gove knifed Boris has become apparent.
I would find it impossible to vote for a Fox-led Conservative Party, and would rather abstain. I would vote for Leadsom or Gove, but not with much enthusiasm, as I suspect that both would be pretty ordinary PMs.
I know nothing of Crabb (other than that he said some ridiculous things about 'waiting for divisions to be healed'), and I don't like Theresa May's authoritarian tendencies.
But of that bunch, she's the best option.
If Leadsom came with Farage (which may be on the cards given her non-denials) then I would probably vote Lib Dem or Labour (if they've dumped Corbyn).
Crabb is Evangelical, that's enough for me to stick him in the no pile.
Gove I could stand, but he won't make it.
Fox I'd abstain or hope he goes down in flames before 2020.
Views which probably coincide with those of two thirds of all Tory members, as well as a high proportion of Tory MPs. As a result, she looks virtually certain to win this by a country mile - all she has to do, sorry to relate, is simply to keep her head down.
Interesting to note that the Times comments have markedly changed since the backstabbing by Gove. He has lost Times readers which means his chance of winning the ballot is close to nil.
ICM yesterday had May on 46% with members followed by Gove on 18%, Leadsom on 7%, Crabb on 6% and Fox on 6%. So the combined vote of the two Remainers, May and Crabb is 52%. That suggests May could face a tougher fight once only one Leave candidate is left to go to the membership but she should still win
That does presuppose that people are voting on Leave/Remain lines. Suppose they are authoritarian/libertarian? That would see May, Leadsom and Fox (59%) vs Gove and Crabb (41%).
Crabb is not Libertarian. He is a religious nut job who believes gays can be 'cured'.
Suspect that is *quite* an exaggeration.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
It's pretty unfair. He started his political career as an intern sponsored by a charity called CARE. He still has links to them. CARE part-sponsored a conference in 2009, which had a session on 'gay cure' (that's a gross simplification).
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
I don't want a God-botherer as PM.
Don't let SeanT know he's a God-botherer, he'll start frothing about how wonderful he is.
SeanT ..... surely not?
He had an experience involving LSD a few years ago, and had a vision where it become clear god existed.
Comments
And, more telling, she dodged completely the question about an offer having been made to Farage. She could have said "no", but didn't, either because an offer has been made, or is being considered.
Have fun debating!
"421 out of 574 English and Welsh Westminster
constituencies probably voted to Leave"
https://medium.com/@chrishanretty/the-eu-referendum-how-did-westminster-constituencies-vote-283c85cd20e1
edit
"three quarters of Conservative-held constituencies voted to Leave, and seven in ten Labour-held constituencies. "
https://medium.com/@chrishanretty/most-labour-mps-represent-a-constituency-that-voted-leave-36f13210f5c6
Back when the peace deal was done he was strongly against the agreement, on grounds that it was 'wrong in principle' to deal with people who were/used to be terrorists. When presented with the argument that the agreement has, so far, turned out to be a tremendous success and saved lots of lives, he just retreated to the line "yes but it was wrong in principle". You can see why he didnt go down well with the teachers etc. I am not sure I want someone as obstinate as that in charge?
Under Parliamentary election rules that would be declarable as a donation.
Not sure what the rules are for the Tory leadership election......
41 people responded
Outright preference:
May - 27
Gove - 7
Leadsom - 4
Fox - 2
Crabb - 1
Matchups:
May - 33
Gove - 8
May - 28
Leadsom - 10
DK - 2
Leave voters - 24
Remain voters - 17
Members based in North and West London mainly.
What always strikes me is that I meet a lot of people who see their house (or houses) as their retirement fund, in the absence of any other pension provision. So when the baby boom generation reaches retirement and starts spending the capital they have accumulated, over the next ten to thirty years, there must surely be steady downward pressure on property (provided it hasn't crashed meanwhile).
That's worthy, but they also come across as doctrinaire, inflexible and unwilling to compromise with grubby, messy reality.
Gove compares favourably with Corbyn only in that he's far more intelligent, so some of his positions aren't completely cuckoo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/03/michael-gove-has-an-emotional-need-to-gossip-particularly-when-d/
Now they have won Tory Leave will obfuscate on FoM, do what it takes to protect the City and they will treat Farage/UKIP like lepers again. They know that however much they fume, under FPTP UKIP are no threat, they will do at least as much harm to Labour as the Tories and win 10 seats at most.
The only surprise is that you didn't see it coming.
"Look, I used to be really in favour of EU membership. But a years ago I switched, and here are my reasons ..."
I reckon this generally would have played better to undecideds.
A Remain leader desperately trying to sell a U turn back to the EU is going to be a dog. And that's how Ms May and Mr Gove appear to be shaping up.
And what about Michael Meacher, who had multiple properties left after splitting assets in - I think - TWO separate divorces?
And these are London Landlords amongst the current crop of Labour MPs, including at least one more Shadow Cabinet member *, unless Wikipedia has lost track of the Shad Cab Fandango:
Rushanara Ali (Labour, Bethnal Green and Bow)
Ruth Cadbury (Labour, Brentford and Isleworth)
Meg Hillier (Labour, Hackney South and Shoreditch)
David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham)
Seema Malhotra (Labour, Feltham and Heston) *
Joan Ryan (Labour, Enfield North)
Gareth Thomas (Labour, Harrow West)
I focus on Labour because the Tories don't have this hangup.
(I *hate* editing blockquotes)
It's going to matter.
http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm
Whenever I see references to Juncker, I can't help but think of that notorious YouTube clip in which he was decidedly the worse for wear. My guess is that sooner or later and probably sooner, that will prove to be his undoing.
Evidence, please? And that he has that belief now?
What I am taking away from the current situation in both parties is that we would be better served if the choice of leader reverted solely to the MPs. Giving the membership the choice is superficially more democratic but in reality puts the decision in the hands of activists who invariably more extreme than their own voters, let alone the country as a whole.
A lot of the true Boomers have already retired. It's Generation Jones that are beginning to hang up their boots. I can't see the down-sizing having much effect on property prices outside of London (London is always a special case as it's not just driven by domestic demand).
We built 139k houses last year. As ever, not enough. We've only got the first quarter stats for this year, and the rate has dropped slightly. As an aside, construction PMIs are out today.
For that, it would help if the Conservatives had a Leave advocate as their leader.
The Lib Dems look likely to have a position of being very pro-EU, and to rejoin later.
Labour is harder to determine, but look likely to be quietly pro-EU if Corbyn remains in charge (a big conditional there).
Hard UKIPpers will be screaming that any deal is not enough, and that we need to dig the Channel so deep that it imperils the Chunnel.
As for the Conservatives, it seems certain that a Conservative leaver or leavers will be in charge of the negotiations with the EU over Brexit. But there will be a large chunk of Conservatives who voted remain, and they need to be accommodated as well.
A leaver as PM and a leaver in charge of Brexit will not do that. A remainer as PM who is shackled in EU matters by a strong leaver Brexit team might well. It also leaves the party in a strong position whatever the result: if Brexit goes well the party can take credit, if it does not then the PM can, to a certain extent, say "not my fault guv."
But that requires a certain amount of political machinations o do well.
If I was the next PM, I would try to make the Brexit team as broad as possible. Bring in a few leavers from Labour and, if possible, the other parties as well. But not Farage.
The charity itself doesn't espouse that idea. It's classic modern Internet half-logic.
There are certainly CARE supporters who believe that homosexuality can be cured. There are probably flat-earther Conservatives or Labour voters who believe we're being monitored by aliens. That doesn't invalidate either party.
Roger Federer v. Steve Johnson
Serena Williams v. Svetlana Kuznetsova
Andy Murray v. Nick Kyrgios
See you later!
I believe there is a newspaper article on this today but can't locate it.
I know nothing of Crabb (other than that he said some ridiculous things about 'waiting for divisions to be healed'), and I don't like Theresa May's authoritarian tendencies.
But of that bunch, she's the best option.
http://order-order.com/2016/07/02/read-full-article-pulled-telegraph-pressure-may-campaign/
Add in Wales - approx 7-8k, Scotland 17-18k, and NI 6720, and the UK total is 170-175k.
Table 208 here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-house-building
The facts are foreign sales concentrated in large apartment towers in the central zones of London, as foreign buyers are prepared to buy off plan before the building is built, and therefore allowed builders to raise finance themselves to build rather than the banks who remained reluctant after the last big crash in 2008.
Foreign investment is almost exclusively in new build, only North Americans and Europeans will invest in 2nd hand properties and they are mostly living in them selves. Asian investors will only buy new properties, which matches their home markets of fast growing cities where there are very few older properties that have modern facilities and the market for period properties is extremely limited.
The new build market is 10% of the total number of sales in the UK housing market. In an interesting aside in a survey in the Economist it was interesting to note (though their not sure why) for the last 40 years the percentage of new builds has been exactly 10% of sales. Maybe it's UK market preference, like some people only want new build as they don't want the work and like modern insulation standards etc, while others want period features and will accept only one bathroom and odd room positions and no parking.
Another interesting figure to note is that house sale volumes are half what they were in the 1980's . It can be shown from this the Treasuries addiction to high stamp duty does have a harmful effect on the UK housing market.
It turns out that foreign sales amount to just 3.5% of total sales in London and that figure is really concentrated in zone 1. Logically a few thousand millionaires investors are only like to drive prices in certain sub markets in London. It turns out the majority of them will live in these properties or will be for the children to stay while they study in London, almost no one leaves their property empty, when they could of course rent it out and get some return on their money,rather than have a drain on their finances paying out property taxes.
The real reason of course for London's price rises is that 1 and half million people have moved in other the last decade or so. It's the real reason why Hackney is no longer a shithole and full of hipsters.
The same goes for the green fields around London, rather than forcing people to commute long distances. But yet again more restrictions have been placed. The green belt in Britain has doubled in size since the 1980's and the pressure is on to get ever more areas designated.
That statement is the Full Dawkins.
Crabb is Evangelical, that's enough for me to stick him in the no pile.
Gove I could stand, but he won't make it.
Fox I'd abstain or hope he goes down in flames before 2020.
"Though the majority of responses, around 80% were received before the Brexit result, the continuing ambiguity and indecision has flung the sector into unknown territory. Firms will likely look towards any remedies the Bank of England and the UK Government can offer if the situation worsens postBrexit.
“The only glimmer of light through the brickwork is the rate of decline was not as sharp as that experienced during the last recession. But, with business confidence at a three-year low, and purchasing activity at its lowest level for six and a half years, this is likely to offer little comfort."
To negotiate BREXIT we're going to need to hire immigrants:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/03/government-faces-worldwide-hunt-for-trade-negotiators-experts-wa/
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/gove-has-the-ideas-to-tackle-britains-failings-kx0vj93xl
/edit - ok, I guess you could say this *is* potential back-sliding, but driven by events
I call it Osbo's "Eat Labour's Lunch" strategy.
The Landlord Attacks are similar - Mr Corbyn or his defenestrator can't soak the landlords as Osbo already did it, with the added benefit that he can make corporate letting by institutions competitive for the first time in many decades.
Of course, it might have been the acid talking.
Aren't the LEAVE Campaign saying we should promise this anyway?
Which part of 'negotiating' don't they understand?