I am a bit surprised that none of the senior reporters seem to understand the British Constitution. I thought that might have been a requirement for the job...
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Well that's exactly the nub of the view of my former Corbyn-sympathetic wife and my numerous Corbynite friends (some of whom who are party members and actually voted for him, to my horror). They can't see why he shouldn't have to get nominations: anything less just looks like clinging on.
The difference with the Cons and with Lab is that in all likelihood someone with a some degree of pragmatism and common sense whispered into Andrea's ear that enough was enough.
The only people doing the whispering in Lab are Seumas Milne and John McDonnell.
Seumas Milne, McDonnell and Tom Watson without doubt - but the rules are clear !
The rules aren't stopping Jezza from stepping down.
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Well that's exactly the nub of the view of my former Corbyn-sympathetic wife and my numerous Corbynite friends (some of whom who are party members and actually voted for him, to my horror). They can't see why he shouldn't have to get nominations: anything less just looks like clinging on.
The difference with the Cons and with Lab is that in all likelihood someone with a some degree of pragmatism and common sense whispered into Andrea's ear that enough was enough.
The only people doing the whispering in Lab are Seumas Milne and John McDonnell.
Seumas Milne, McDonnell and Tom Watson without doubt - but the rules are clear !
The coup leaders want Corbyn to be excluded from the meeting and a secret ballot
Extraordinary to what lengths they will go to.
Aint gonna end well for them IMO
Corbyn supporters should refuse any secret ballot, and insist on somehow recording and publishing their vote [e.g. photo/twitter], thereby revealing those who do want a secret ballot to be the plotters...
So now you are advocating undermining a secret ballot. You aren't even a member or supporter of the party. Yet you are obsessed.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
The public are mad.
66% for single market 34% against would suggest about 18% of the 52% who voted Leave would be happy with a single market deal even if it did not cut immigration, 34% opposed, so add that roughly 1/3 of the Leave vote to the 48% who voted Remain and there is a clear majority for an EFTA/EEA deal but a solid potential base for UKIP of about a quarter to a third of the vote
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Well that's exactly the nub of the view of my former Corbyn-sympathetic wife and my numerous Corbynite friends (some of whom who are party members and actually voted for him, to my horror). They can't see why he shouldn't have to get nominations: anything less just looks like clinging on.
The difference with the Cons and with Lab is that in all likelihood someone with a some degree of pragmatism and common sense whispered into Andrea's ear that enough was enough.
The only people doing the whispering in Lab are Seumas Milne and John McDonnell.
Seumas Milne, McDonnell and Tom Watson without doubt - but the rules are clear !
The coup leaders want Corbyn to be excluded from the meeting and a secret ballot
Extraordinary to what lengths they will go to.
Aint gonna end well for them IMO
Corbyn supporters should refuse any secret ballot, and insist on somehow recording and publishing their vote [e.g. photo/twitter], thereby revealing those who do want a secret ballot to be the plotters...
So now you are advocating undermining a secret ballot. You aren't even a member or supporter of the party. Yet you are obsessed.
It is true I have money on Corbyn surviving - but ... above all I believe rules should be followed !
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Well that's exactly the nub of the view of my former Corbyn-sympathetic wife and my numerous Corbynite friends (some of whom who are party members and actually voted for him, to my horror). They can't see why he shouldn't have to get nominations: anything less just looks like clinging on.
The difference with the Cons and with Lab is that in all likelihood someone with a some degree of pragmatism and common sense whispered into Andrea's ear that enough was enough.
The only people doing the whispering in Lab are Seumas Milne and John McDonnell.
They've tried and tried and tried. Tried everyone. The bunker won't budge. Corbyn was close to resigning. Milne stopped him as he knew that would be game over for the hard left. They don't care what damage they do. They'd rather split the party.
@SouthamObserver I think you're excluded from the vote at the present time, but good on you for joining a cause you want to fight for anyway.
I want to meet and debate with potential fellow travellers and learn more about the Corbynites. It's better to be in the thick of it than shouting from the sidelines.
If I am excluded from voting in the leadership ballot, so be it. That would mean an awful lot of Corbyn cultists will be too. Might be a good thing.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
She won't be able to with the current majority. Maybe she will go to the country if she's serious.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
Did she mention a cure for blindness and a crime free society too?
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Suspect Tory members and voters do not fall quite the same way. May does not have the benefit of hinting at sacrificing a little on the immigration front in exchange for single market and having that position endorsed by the members, so she'll face plenty of opposition on anything other than full english brexit (look, it's an awful phrase, but it'll do for now).
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
"Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope."
Net result, most divisive PM so far. Does not bode well.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
Did she mention a cure for blindness and a crime free society too?
Lol. I am just old enough to remember the first female PM promising harmony for all
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
Did she mention a cure for blindness and a crime free society too?
She has to save something for her second speech of course.
Although given the paroxysms of ecstatic approval fanatics get at hints from their leaders all over the spectrum, a little over expectation before she even takes over the country formally is par for the course.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
Did she mention a cure for blindness and a crime free society too?
She did mention that Ed Milliband is her new speech writer ;-)
I would say that's pretty clear cut. It states "challengers" need nominees. Feck all about the sitting tenant requiring them.
However....
If they declare a leadership contest when a challenger has achieved the required number of nominations as per this rule then if the present leader wishes to continue in post does the leader by default then also become a "challenger" ( for the position) and if that's so then they would I suppose need the required nominations.
Or not?
A sitting Leader isn't a challenger.
I agree I do but even so If a contest is declared then they would become " a challenger".
Unless it states clearly such a contest can continue with a leader who has not resigned which is a political coup in all but name.
There's also the matter of due process. As a leadership election is only declared if a candidate submits a properly-documented challenge, with all the MPs/MEPs supporting it, then a leader is always placed in a reactive position. True, he or she could be obliged to secure the 20% each year as a failsafe but I'm pretty sure that the precedent will be that leaders never have in the past. If that's the case then a challenger could simply wait until just before the deadline before submitting, leaving the leader stranded simply by playing the timetable. That consideration doesn't apply to any other MP, only the leader. As such, due process would have to be - as is implied in the rules anyway - automatic entry to the ballot.
Kinnock had to find the nominations when challenged by Benn in 1988.
I am a bit surprised that none of the senior reporters seem to understand the British Constitution. I thought that might have been a requirement for the job...
Hello and welcome. What do u mean?
Huw Edwards and Laura Kuenssberg repeatedly mentioning that Theresa May didn't have a personal mandate. We are a Parliamentary Democracy - all you need to be Prime Minister is to be able to form a government and carry a vote of confidence in the HoC...
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
This is the MP who formerly worked at the Bank of England.
It's the same spinning nonsense as claiming EU citizens rights are on the table...
I would say that's pretty clear cut. It states "challengers" need nominees. Feck all about the sitting tenant requiring them.
However....
If they declare a leadership contest when a challenger has achieved the required number of nominations as per this rule then if the present leader wishes to continue in post does the leader by default then also become a "challenger" ( for the position) and if that's so then they would I suppose need the required nominations.
Or not?
A sitting Leader isn't a challenger.
I agree I do but even so If a contest is declared then they would become " a challenger".
Unless it states clearly such a contest can continue with a leader who has not resigned which is a political coup in all but name.
There's also the matter of due process. As a leadership election is only declared if a candidate submits a properly-documented challenge, with all the MPs/MEPs supporting it, then a leader is always placed in a reactive position. True, he or she could be obliged to secure the 20% each year as a failsafe but I'm pretty sure that the precedent will be that leaders never have in the past. If that's the case then a challenger could simply wait until just before the deadline before submitting, leaving the leader stranded simply by playing the timetable. That consideration doesn't apply to any other MP, only the leader. As such, due process would have to be - as is implied in the rules anyway - automatic entry to the ballot.
Kinnock had to find the nominations when challenged by Benn in 1988.
Had to, or just did?
And in any event haven't the rules been amended since?
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Corbyn genuinely doesn't care about Parliament.
I think he should be on the ballot and I will rejoin to give it one last shot but if he wins again I genuinely believe Labour is finished as a potential,future government. I say that because there will be an exodus of non-Corbynites and the Momentum crowd will gain control of the NEC and stitch up the party rules to ensure no-one but a hard leftie can win again, we'll get annual mandatory reselections etc et.
There will be a split because 170 MPs will have nothing to lose because they know they will be deselected before the next GE. It is a very different scenario to SDP1 when only about a dozen MPs defected. If Corbyn Labour ceases to be the official opposition for the next 4 years and are just a rump of 40 MPs (4th largest grouping behind the SNP} they will wither from public view. They have no god-given right to exist and could easily disappear from the political scene in England/Wales as fast as they did in Scotland.
Can anyone explain to me (Who is supporting @Watto 's interpretations of the rules why a LEADER of the party would require more nominations than a random MP going for a vacant position ?)
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Well that's exactly the nub of the view of my former Corbyn-sympathetic wife and my numerous Corbynite friends (some of whom who are party members and actually voted for him, to my horror). They can't see why he shouldn't have to get nominations: anything less just looks like clinging on.
The difference with the Cons and with Lab is that in all likelihood someone with a some degree of pragmatism and common sense whispered into Andrea's ear that enough was enough.
The only people doing the whispering in Lab are Seumas Milne and John McDonnell.
They've tried and tried and tried. Tried everyone. The bunker won't budge. Corbyn was close to resigning. Milne stopped him as he knew that would be game over for the hard left. They don't care what damage they do. They'd rather split the party.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
"Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope."
Net result, most divisive PM so far. Does not bode well.
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Well that's exactly the nub of the view of my former Corbyn-sympathetic wife and my numerous Corbynite friends (some of whom who are party members and actually voted for him, to my horror). They can't see why he shouldn't have to get nominations: anything less just looks like clinging on.
The difference with the Cons and with Lab is that in all likelihood someone with a some degree of pragmatism and common sense whispered into Andrea's ear that enough was enough.
The only people doing the whispering in Lab are Seumas Milne and John McDonnell.
Seumas Milne, McDonnell and Tom Watson without doubt - but the rules are clear !
The coup leaders want Corbyn to be excluded from the meeting and a secret ballot
Extraordinary to what lengths they will go to.
Aint gonna end well for them IMO
Corbyn supporters should refuse any secret ballot, and insist on somehow recording and publishing their vote [e.g. photo/twitter], thereby revealing those who do want a secret ballot to be the plotters...
So now you are advocating undermining a secret ballot. You aren't even a member or supporter of the party. Yet you are obsessed.
You don't know what I am. Keep guessing.
And as it happens, I have gone through a very similar experience to Corbyn in another unincorporated association many years ago. After very similar gyrations, conspiracies, breach of rules, breach of natural justice, mala fides, etc, it ended up in court.
I represented myself, and won [my opponents folded, on the morning of the trial]...
The following year they tried a 'revenge' operation against me, with identical results.
Needless to say, the association no longer exists...
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
"Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope."
Net result, most divisive PM so far. Does not bode well.
Well yes, but May did come out with some concrete proposals, rather than just some woolly rhetoric about "bringing harmony". Though I totally concede that we're yet to see whether she actually delivers on the promises (I may be giving her too much benefit of the doubt, since I've always quite liked her as far as Tories go -- if someone I really hated like Osborne had given May's speech, I probably would've taken it with a LOT more salt).
@SouthamObserver I think you're excluded from the vote at the present time, but good on you for joining a cause you want to fight for anyway.
I want to meet and debate with potential fellow travellers and learn more about the Corbynites. It's better to be in the thick of it than shouting from the sidelines.
If I am excluded from voting in the leadership ballot, so be it. That would mean an awful lot of Corbyn cultists will be too. Might be a good thing.
Some research on the origin of the phrase 'fellow traveller' would be an interesting place to start...?
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day.
The sooner the BBC is canned the better.
A vote on the EU not the EEA. Ipsos Mori 3 days ago did a poll that had it tighter but still a plurality for the single market and free movement
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Corbyn genuinely doesn't care about Parliament.
I think he should be on the ballot and I will rejoin to give it one last shot but if he wins again I genuinely believe Labour is finished as a potential,future government. I say that because there will be an exodus of non-Corbynites and the Momentum crowd will gain control of the NEC and stitch up the party rules to ensure no-one but a hard leftie can win again, we'll get annual mandatory reselections etc et.
There will be a split because 170 MPs will have nothing to lose because they know they will be deselected before the next GE. It is a very different scenario to SDP1 when only about a dozen MPs defected. If Corbyn Labour ceases to be the official opposition for the next 4 years and are just a rump of 40 MPs (4th largest grouping behind the SNP} they will wither from public view. They have no god-given right to exist and could easily disappear from the political scene in England/Wales as fast as they did in Scotland.
Most of the MPs seem to insist they don't have a problem with Corbyn's views, per se, but with his leadership. A few also have a problem with his views, but by and large the objections don't seem focused on it. That being the case, I expect we'll be surprised how many of the plotters go back to be quiet, pliant MPs - maybe they'll get deselected, maybe they won't, but lacking policy reasons to go elsewhere, even if they are facing deselection I expect most would let that happen rather than set up a new party.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
This is the MP who formerly worked at the Bank of England.
It's the same spinning nonsense as claiming EU citizens rights are on the table...
I'm not sure what her experience working at the BoE means to anything.
I am a bit surprised that none of the senior reporters seem to understand the British Constitution. I thought that might have been a requirement for the job...
Hello and welcome. What do u mean?
Huw Edwards and Laura Kuenssberg repeatedly mentioning that Theresa May didn't have a personal mandate. We are a Parliamentary Democracy - all you need to be Prime Minister is to be able to form a government and carry a vote of confidence in the HoC...
Yep. This mandate idea is nonsense. Brown, Major, Callaghan plus at least a Baker's dozen of others put the kibosh on the whole concept.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
Did she mention a cure for blindness and a crime free society too?
She did mention that Ed Milliband is her new speech writer ;-)
The best thing about modern politics is that most of the main players are so superficial and useless they sink without trace in no time. God knows what Miliband does with himself, Cameron watches tennis, Clegg has vanished and Osborne is on round the clock suicide watch. Give it a year or so May will be scrambling around like a drowning rat, nobody knows what she stands for.
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Corbyn genuinely doesn't care about Parliament.
I think he should be on the ballot and I will rejoin to give it one last shot but if he wins again I genuinely believe Labour is finished as a potential,future government. I say that because there will be an exodus of non-Corbynites and the Momentum crowd will gain control of the NEC and stitch up the party rules to ensure no-one but a hard leftie can win again, we'll get annual mandatory reselections etc et.
There will be a split because 170 MPs will have nothing to lose because they know they will be deselected before the next GE. It is a very different scenario to SDP1 when only about a dozen MPs defected. If Corbyn Labour ceases to be the official opposition for the next 4 years and are just a rump of 40 MPs (4th largest grouping behind the SNP} they will wither from public view. They have no god-given right to exist and could easily disappear from the political scene in England/Wales as fast as they did in Scotland.
I think quite a few MPs will blink and fall into line. But a lot more won't. If there are enough to become the biggrst opposition party then that will be a very good place to start from; though a split will inevitably lead to an early GE and a huge Tory majority. Sadly, though, if Corbyn is re-elected as we all expect there's no alternative.
I am a bit surprised that none of the senior reporters seem to understand the British Constitution. I thought that might have been a requirement for the job...
Hello and welcome. What do u mean?
Huw Edwards and Laura Kuenssberg repeatedly mentioning that Theresa May didn't have a personal mandate. We are a Parliamentary Democracy - all you need to be Prime Minister is to be able to form a government and carry a vote of confidence in the HoC...
Yep. This mandate idea is nonsense. Brown, Major, Callaghan plus at least a Baker's dozen of others put the kibosh on the whole concept.
The BBC didn't say she needed a mandate. They just said she didn't have one, by which they mean shorthand for winning any sort of election. You can't argue with that.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
The public are mad.
No, that feels about right. That 66% will be made up of all the 48%, plus a further 18% who voted Leave but whose favoured outcome is the Norway model or something similar AND and who interpret the question as being a choice between EFTA or WTO. (I think the question is a bit ambiguous - is it offering a hypothetical question of full EU or WTO, or is it offering EFTA or WTO?) It shows there are probably at least a third of Leave voters who favour a Norway style outcome - which seems about right. There may be a few more who didn't get picked up because they interpreted the question differently, but that may be cancelled out by Leave voters with Bregrets.
Of course, we may be vastly overestimating the understanding of the various nuances and options that those sampled have!
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Suspect Tory members and voters do not fall quite the same way. May does not have the benefit of hinting at sacrificing a little on the immigration front in exchange for single market and having that position endorsed by the members, so she'll face plenty of opposition on anything other than full english brexit (look, it's an awful phrase, but it'll do for now).
Indeed but I think a narrow majority of Tories will accept a single market, free movement deal (with some small concessions), the main anti free movement vote comes from UKIP voters
I'm curiously hopeful for a May government. Let's hope the likes of Damien Green, Crispin Blunt (currently on Newsnight) Rory Stewart, Dominic Grieve, Sarah Wollaston and others are in line for promotion.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day.
The sooner the BBC is canned the better.
A vote on the EU not the EEA. Ipsos Mori 3 days ago did a poll that had it tighter but still a plurality for the single market and free movement
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
I would say that's pretty clear cut. It states "challengers" need nominees. Feck all about the sitting tenant requiring them.
However....
If they declare a leadership contest when a challenger has achieved the required number of nominations as per this rule then if the present leader wishes to continue in post does the leader by default then also become a "challenger" ( for the position) and if that's so then they would I suppose need the required nominations.
Or not?
A sitting Leader isn't a challenger.
I agree I do but even so If a contest is declared then they would become " a challenger".
Unless it states clearly such a contest can continue with a leader who has not resigned which is a political coup in all but name.
There's also the matter of due process. As a leadership election is only declared if a candidate submits a properly-documented challenge, with all the MPs/MEPs supporting it, then a leader is always placed in a reactive position. True, he or she could be obliged to secure the 20% each year as a failsafe but I'm pretty sure that the precedent will be that leaders never have in the past. If that's the case then a challenger could simply wait until just before the deadline before submitting, leaving the leader stranded simply by playing the timetable. That consideration doesn't apply to any other MP, only the leader. As such, due process would have to be - as is implied in the rules anyway - automatic entry to the ballot.
Kinnock had to find the nominations when challenged by Benn in 1988.
Had to, or just did?
And in any event haven't the rules been amended since?
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Well that's exactly the nub of the view of my former Corbyn-sympathetic wife and my numerous Corbynite friends (some of whom who are party members and actually voted for him, to my horror). They can't see why he shouldn't have to get nominations: anything less just looks like clinging on.
The difference with the Cons and with Lab is that in all likelihood someone with a some degree of pragmatism and common sense whispered into Andrea's ear that enough was enough.
The only people doing the whispering in Lab are Seumas Milne and John McDonnell.
Seumas Milne, McDonnell and Tom Watson without doubt - but the rules are clear !
The coup leaders want Corbyn to be excluded from the meeting and a secret ballot
Extraordinary to what lengths they will go to.
Aint gonna end well for them IMO
Corbyn supporters should refuse any secret ballot, and insist on somehow recording and publishing their vote [e.g. photo/twitter], thereby revealing those who do want a secret ballot to be the plotters...
So now you are advocating undermining a secret ballot. You aren't even a member or supporter of the party. Yet you are obsessed.
You don't know what I am. Keep guessing.
And as it happens, I have gone through a very similar experience to Corbyn in another unincorporated association many years ago. After very similar gyrations, conspiracies, breach of rules, breach of natural justice, mala fides, etc, it ended up in court.
I represented myself, and won [my opponents folded, on the morning of the trial]...
The following year they tried a 'revenge' operation against me, with identical results.
Needless to say, the association no longer exists...
Maybe you have hit upon the solution? Go back to Liberal v Tory like in the old days.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day. .
You think you know what the public think, there was not a vote on the question of accepting the single market rather than cutting immigration.
It's fine to disagree with the suggestion, and there's a case to be made cutting immigration and free movement would be the most popular option, but this obsession people have with pretending the referendum vote explicitly answered those questions baffles me (or would do, if it were not apparent that in most instances it is a case of people insisting their version of Leave is the only version that is acceptable).
I voted Leave, I'd rather keep the single market than cut immigration. I've no doubt that puts me in a minority of Leavers, and some Remainers will have or now would not want to keep access to the single market as the price for not cutting immigration. It isn't as clear as 52 vs 48 is the point, and no matter how many times people point out the proportions of Leave vs Remain, that doesn't clear up that issue definitively, at best the result was suggestive on that point given the primary campaigning points.
The only definitive answer was Leave. The rest is up for grabs, and it wouldn't even be undemocratic to explore what type of Leave most people want, in fact it is essential to figure that out.
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
Brexit means Brexit means next to nothing. It's a soundbite, not a plan.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day.
The sooner the BBC is canned the better.
A vote on the EU not the EEA. Ipsos Mori 3 days ago did a poll that had it tighter but still a plurality for the single market and free movement
People don't know what free movement means ask them whether we should be able to control immigration from the E.U you will get a different answer, they probably think it means going on holiday to Europe without a visa etc.
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
I think the last month showed who the nutjobs are, at least in terms of political awareness and judgement.
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
They were the ones with the pens. MI5 may have failed on 23 June but they could do a lot worse than go through the papers now and note down the numbers of all those completed in ink.
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
Most unlike you using the banned word on PB 'Nutjobs' - lol
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
Definitely true. Whatever anyone says about Dave, he delivered the referendum he said he would and we've got what many of us wanted. May will deliver Brexit and take us out of the EU in the same way. Those who have moved from Labour to Tory and now to UKIP seem never to be satisfied.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
Did she mention a cure for blindness and a crime free society too?
She did mention that Ed Milliband is her new speech writer ;-)
The best thing about modern politics is that most of the main players are so superficial and useless they sink without trace in no time. God knows what Miliband does with himself, Cameron watches tennis, Clegg has vanished and Osborne is on round the clock suicide watch. Give it a year or so May will be scrambling around like a drowning rat, nobody knows what she stands for.
I think she herself said she is not ideological and she is only in politics for public service.
Re NEC: There is other legal opinion that says the opposite, my reading is that the nomination issue only applies to challengers. However it will I presume end up in the Courts, heaven knows how long that will take, what with the need to adjourn so that the matter can be given consideration and then there are the prospect of appeals, hey ho sometime next year then.
I have to say, based on the rules posted here the PLP will lose. As far as I can see the PLP is relying entirely on precedent.
They're relying on nothing, but a tortured reading of the rules, and wishful thinking for words that are not even there.
I would say that's pretty clear cut. It states "challengers" need nominees. Feck all about the sitting tenant requiring them.
However....
If they declare a leadership contest when a challenger has achieved the required number of nominations as per this rule then if the present leader wishes to continue in post does the leader by default then also become a "challenger" ( for the position) and if that's so then they would I suppose need the required nominations.
Or not?
A sitting Leader isn't a challenger.
I agree I do but even so If a contest is declared then they would become " a challenger".
Unless it states clearly such a contest can continue with a leader who has not resigned which is a political coup in all but name.
As the Labour party is treated in law as a private members club I think the courts will take the view that it is up to the NEC to determine how its rules are interpreted. Whilst they will hear the case (if it is brought) I think the courts will only overturn the NEC's decision if it is discriminatory (e.g. Corbyn being excluded due to age) or illegal. That would be in line with precedents.
All gone, all gone, all gone. All those Tory Brexiteers, gone, gone gone. A merry, plucky, shameless band, who scaled the heights of the greasy pole, surveyed the view, and then threw themselves off. First Boris Johnson, visibly wobbling with vertigo, then shoved from the platform by Michael Gove. Then Gove himself, somehow unable to balance on his own. And now, finally, Andrea Leadsom; a woman who perhaps had simply never before climbed so high, and didn’t have the coat for it, and couldn’t stand the weather.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day.
The sooner the BBC is canned the better.
A vote on the EU not the EEA. Ipsos Mori 3 days ago did a poll that had it tighter but still a plurality for the single market and free movement
People don't know what free movement means ask them whether we should be able to control immigration from the E.U you will get a different answer, they probably think it means going on holiday to Europe without a visa etc.
Equally they don't know what the Single Market is. If you ask them if we should make it more expensive to buy German cars then you will get a different answer.
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
Definitely true. Whatever anyone says about Dave, he delivered the referendum he said he would and we've got what many of us wanted. May will deliver Brexit and take us out of the EU in the same way. Those who have moved from Labour to Tory and now to UKIP seem never to be satisfied.
Indeed, one wonders what is next for such people. Britain First?
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Suspect Tory members and voters do not fall quite the same way. May does not have the benefit of hinting at sacrificing a little on the immigration front in exchange for single market and having that position endorsed by the members, so she'll face plenty of opposition on anything other than full english brexit (look, it's an awful phrase, but it'll do for now).
Indeed but I think a narrow majority of Tories will accept a single market, free movement deal (with some small concessions), the main anti free movement vote comes from UKIP voters
I'm not sure May will go for the single market to be honest, not with the hard core of the awkward squad and UKIP causing her just as much trouble as Cameron if she tried. We've already seen the paranoid convinced May wants to prevent Brexit, despite the point that even if that were the case, she would be removed for trying it.
All gone, all gone, all gone. All those Tory Brexiteers, gone, gone gone. A merry, plucky, shameless band, who scaled the heights of the greasy pole, surveyed the view, and then threw themselves off. First Boris Johnson, visibly wobbling with vertigo, then shoved from the platform by Michael Gove. Then Gove himself, somehow unable to balance on his own. And now, finally, Andrea Leadsom; a woman who perhaps had simply never before climbed so high, and didn’t have the coat for it, and couldn’t stand the weather.
And yet again, Tessa Jowell making me sure that Corbyn should stay. Empty platitudes like "Labour should reach out to communities" is going to do worse in a General Election than Corbyn's (flawed) platform.
All gone, all gone, all gone. All those Tory Brexiteers, gone, gone gone. A merry, plucky, shameless band, who scaled the heights of the greasy pole, surveyed the view, and then threw themselves off. First Boris Johnson, visibly wobbling with vertigo, then shoved from the platform by Michael Gove. Then Gove himself, somehow unable to balance on his own. And now, finally, Andrea Leadsom; a woman who perhaps had simply never before climbed so high, and didn’t have the coat for it, and couldn’t stand the weather.
All gone, all gone, all gone. All those Tory Brexiteers, gone, gone gone. A merry, plucky, shameless band, who scaled the heights of the greasy pole, surveyed the view, and then threw themselves off. First Boris Johnson, visibly wobbling with vertigo, then shoved from the platform by Michael Gove. Then Gove himself, somehow unable to balance on his own. And now, finally, Andrea Leadsom; a woman who perhaps had simply never before climbed so high, and didn’t have the coat for it, and couldn’t stand the weather.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Suspect Tory members and voters do not fall quite the same way. May does not have the benefit of hinting at sacrificing a little on the immigration front in exchange for single market and having that position endorsed by the members, so she'll face plenty of opposition on anything other than full english brexit (look, it's an awful phrase, but it'll do for now).
Indeed but I think a narrow majority of Tories will accept a single market, free movement deal (with some small concessions), the main anti free movement vote comes from UKIP voters
I'm not sure May will go for the single market to be honest, not with the hard core of the awkward squad and UKIP causing her just as much trouble as Cameron if she tried. We've already seen the paranoid convinced May wants to prevent Brexit, despite the point that even if that were the case, she would be removed for trying it.
Good night all.
Of course she will, UKIP and the awkward squad can go hang, if she wants to win the next general election she has to get in the single market and she will, notice her phrase at the weekend, she wants 'controlled free movement' ie not an end to it!
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
I think the last month showed who the nutjobs are, at least in terms of political awareness and judgement.
Well I thought Leave would win a referendum and said so years ago, and backed Leave, and I think Mr Nabavi is right on that one. So if I'm a nutjob, then I'm afraid some Leavers are nutjobs at least.
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
Definitely true. Whatever anyone says about Dave, he delivered the referendum he said he would and we've got what many of us wanted. May will deliver Brexit and take us out of the EU in the same way. Those who have moved from Labour to Tory and now to UKIP seem never to be satisfied.
The only sensible position is to wait and see. We've probably all got our own little internal version of Brexit. I know I have.
However, there's a very complex dynamic at play, which doesn't just involve the UK, the individual EU27 countries and the EU Institutions. We know that the USA has skin the game as well. There will be others.
At the moment, we have battlin' slogans. "Brexit means Brexit" vs "no à la carte Single Market".
Let's see what happens. What we collectively want and what we can practically achieve might be two different things.
Will any of the Labour moderates/172 come out and state that they should think Jezza should be on the ballot. The positions are NOT mutually exclusive, and any that does so would go up in my estimation.
He can get on the ballot if he gets the required nominations. He should count himself bloody lucky - if he were bound by Tory Party rules he wouldn't even be able to run! What are Liberal rules by the way?
A Conservative MP only needs the support of two MPs to enter a party leadership contest.
Once the leader of the Conservative party has lost a confidence vote they are prohibited from standing in the following election no matter how many nominations they get. So Jobabob is correct. If Corbyn was bound by Tory party rules he would be able to run.
And yet again, Tessa Jowell making me sure that Corbyn should stay. Empty platitudes like "Labour should reach out to communities"
Are these communities particularly out of reach? Sounds like a mistake made by property developers, or the local authority not ensuring infrastructure requirements are in place before occupation.
I can't help observing that the intersection of the set of nutjobs who were convinced that Cameron wouldn't deliver on his promise of a referendum, and the set of nutjobs who think Theresa May won't deliver on her promise that Brexit means Brexit, is close to 100%.
I think the last month showed who the nutjobs are, at least in terms of political awareness and judgement.
Well I thought Leave would win a referendum and said so years ago, and backed Leave, and I think Mr Nabavi is right on that one. So if I'm a nutjob, then I'm afraid some Leavers are nutjobs at least.
I was never convinced Leave would win, Mr Nabavi was absolutely convinced Remain would win and spoke often of his bets on the winning margin.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day.
The sooner the BBC is canned the better.
A vote on the EU not the EEA. Ipsos Mori 3 days ago did a poll that had it tighter but still a plurality for the single market and free movement
People don't know what free movement means ask them whether we should be able to control immigration from the E.U you will get a different answer, they probably think it means going on holiday to Europe without a visa etc.
No, the BBC question asked them if they wanted to cut immigration and even then the single market had a majority. The City will force us to stay in the single market in the end and we will, the economy demands it, Hartlepool and Basildon can go hang as far as they are concerned!
We're back to trusting polls that support the pro-EU position again I see?
Meanwhile on Newsnight, Matthew Hancock MP was waffling away and didn't seem to be able to come up with a single thing Theresa May is likely to do differently as Prime Minister.
Article 50 won't be implemtented this year (if ever) we know that. Meanwhile we have her close allies Green and Grieve hinting that actually Brexit doesn't mean Brexit afterall...
These are unbelievably dangerous times for the Tory Party.
I am a bit surprised that none of the senior reporters seem to understand the British Constitution. I thought that might have been a requirement for the job...
Hello and welcome. What do u mean?
Huw Edwards and Laura Kuenssberg repeatedly mentioning that Theresa May didn't have a personal mandate. We are a Parliamentary Democracy - all you need to be Prime Minister is to be able to form a government and carry a vote of confidence in the HoC...
Yep. This mandate idea is nonsense. Brown, Major, Callaghan plus at least a Baker's dozen of others put the kibosh on the whole concept.
Not quite. The record of PM's being chosen by internal party mechanism while in post at the subsequent election is rather poor:
Brown lost, Callaghan lost, Douglas Home lost.
Major won the election, but lost seats in 92
I think that the last PM who assumed office this way who increased their majority in the subsequent election was MacMillan in 1959.
Of course none of them had to face an opposition as chaotic and hopeless as the current Labour party!
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day.
The sooner the BBC is canned the better.
A vote on the EU not the EEA. Ipsos Mori 3 days ago did a poll that had it tighter but still a plurality for the single market and free movement
Re NEC: There is other legal opinion that says the opposite, my reading is that the nomination issue only applies to challengers. However it will I presume end up in the Courts, heaven knows how long that will take, what with the need to adjourn so that the matter can be given consideration and then there are the prospect of appeals, hey ho sometime next year then.
I have to say, based on the rules posted here the PLP will lose. As far as I can see the PLP is relying entirely on precedent.
They're relying on nothing, but a tortured reading of the rules, and wishful thinking for words that are not even there.
I would say that's pretty clear cut. It states "challengers" need nominees. Feck all about the sitting tenant requiring them.
However....
If they declare a leadership contest when a challenger has achieved the required number of nominations as per this rule then if the present leader wishes to continue in post does the leader by default then also become a "challenger" ( for the position) and if that's so then they would I suppose need the required nominations.
Or not?
A sitting Leader isn't a challenger.
I agree I do but even so If a contest is declared then they would become " a challenger".
Unless it states clearly such a contest can continue with a leader who has not resigned which is a political coup in all but name.
Awkward.
There are tons of grey areas, those you cite above plus the fact that the leader needs to command the support of the PLP. Indeed, the NCV was only never specified to be binding because it was assumed that any leader who lost one would immediately stand down. The rules have been drafted incredibly badly, but were done on the assumption that anyone leading a great British party of state would have a sense of honour. Fitalass's post up thread is worth reading - as she says, the Corbynistas have tested the rules to their very limits.
No. The rules are silent because otherwise it would give the PLP a veto over the leader.
Labour may be seen as a rabble but if Tories argue like Ferrets then they will be ok. I just can't see a split party. Everyone knows that the election is lost if a split.
The NEC needs to apply the necessary medicine tomorrow. It will be easier to overcome the fallout from that than Corbyn automatically making the ballot in the face of an precedented PLP rebellion.
If Corbyn cannot get 50 odd people to support him in Parliament, then what credibility is left?
Corbyn genuinely doesn't care about Parliament.
I think he should be on the ballot and I will rejoin to give it one last shot but if he wins again I genuinely believe Labour is finished as a potential,future government. I say that because there will be an exodus of non-Corbynites and the Momentum crowd will gain control of the NEC and stitch up the party rules to ensure no-one but a hard leftie can win again, we'll get annual mandatory reselections etc et.
There will be a split because 170 MPs will have nothing to lose because they know they will be deselected before the next GE. It is a very different scenario to SDP1 when only about a dozen MPs defected. If Corbyn Labour ceases to be the official opposition for the next 4 years and are just a rump of 40 MPs (4th largest grouping behind the SNP} they will wither from public view. They have no god-given right to exist and could easily disappear from the political scene in England/Wales as fast as they did in Scotland.
Most of the MPs seem to insist they don't have a problem with Corbyn's views, per se, but with his leadership. A few also have a problem with his views, but by and large the objections don't seem focused on it. That being the case, I expect we'll be surprised how many of the plotters go back to be quiet, pliant MPs - maybe they'll get deselected, maybe they won't, but lacking policy reasons to go elsewhere, even if they are facing deselection I expect most would let that happen rather than set up a new party.
I have no doubt that Momentum will set about deselecting anyone who is not 100% of the true faith. The atmosphere is poison at the moment, far worse than in 1982.
BBC Comres poll has 66% backing entry to the single market as more important than cutting immigration given a straight choice between the two
Does that mean BBC paid Comres for a poll? Disgraceful if so, their function is to report the news in an unbiased manner not waste licence payer's money.
It is one of the crucial issues of the day, I don't think it is a waste to find out what the public think on it personally, though I may be in a minority
We know what the public think, there was a vote the other day.
The sooner the BBC is canned the better.
A vote on the EU not the EEA. Ipsos Mori 3 days ago did a poll that had it tighter but still a plurality for the single market and free movement
People don't know what free movement means ask them whether we should be able to control immigration from the E.U you will get a different answer, they probably think it means going on holiday to Europe without a visa etc.
Not if the choice is exit from the single market as the price of that control and the economic damage that will do, it is likely to be either or in some form, with some token concessions on free movement and in that scenario the single market wins. Of course if we lose free movement we may well end up having to to to Europe with a visa
I am a bit surprised that none of the senior reporters seem to understand the British Constitution. I thought that might have been a requirement for the job...
Hello and welcome. What do u mean?
Huw Edwards and Laura Kuenssberg repeatedly mentioning that Theresa May didn't have a personal mandate. We are a Parliamentary Democracy - all you need to be Prime Minister is to be able to form a government and carry a vote of confidence in the HoC...
Yep. This mandate idea is nonsense. Brown, Major, Callaghan plus at least a Baker's dozen of others put the kibosh on the whole concept.
Not quite. The record of PM's being chosen by internal party mechanism while in post at the subsequent election is rather poor:
Brown lost, Callaghan lost, Douglas Home lost.
Major won the election, but lost seats in 92
I think that the last PM who assumed office this way who increased their majority in the subsequent election was MacMillan in 1959.
Of course none of them had to face an opposition as chaotic and hopeless as the current Labour party!
I am a bit surprised that none of the senior reporters seem to understand the British Constitution. I thought that might have been a requirement for the job...
Hello and welcome. What do u mean?
Huw Edwards and Laura Kuenssberg repeatedly mentioning that Theresa May didn't have a personal mandate. We are a Parliamentary Democracy - all you need to be Prime Minister is to be able to form a government and carry a vote of confidence in the HoC...
Yep. This mandate idea is nonsense. Brown, Major, Callaghan plus at least a Baker's dozen of others put the kibosh on the whole concept.
Not quite. The record of PM's being chosen by internal party mechanism while in post at the subsequent election is rather poor:
Brown lost, Callaghan lost, Douglas Home lost.
Major won the election, but lost seats in 92
I think that the last PM who assumed office this way who increased their majority in the subsequent election was MacMillan in 1959.
Of course none of them had to face an opposition as chaotic and hopeless as the current Labour party!
To be fair how often do government's increase their majority?
I thought 2015 was the first modern era time a government increased both its share of the vote and seats albeit even then that is only if you exclude the Lib Dems.
Have to say, I'm very impressed by Theresa May's speech today. Time will tell if she's actually going to follow through on what she promised (or indeed, whether her MPs let her follow through), but if she really does bring the big-business fat cats back into line and starts getting a better deal for the average worker, then she would be the best Tory PM of my lifetime.
Did she mention a cure for blindness and a crime free society too?
She did mention that Ed Milliband is her new speech writer ;-)
The best thing about modern politics is that most of the main players are so superficial and useless they sink without trace in no time. God knows what Miliband does with himself, Cameron watches tennis, Clegg has vanished and Osborne is on round the clock suicide watch. Give it a year or so May will be scrambling around like a drowning rat, nobody knows what she stands for.
I think she herself said she is not ideological and she is only in politics for public service.
Yeah, Cameron supports our man at tennis between attending a NATO meeting in Warsaw and supporting our people at the Farnborough Air Show. Another comment with no ideas, just insults.
Comments
Backing David Miliband
I have visions of a dap bag being passed around the table and afterwards seeing if there are any black balls within.
If I am excluded from voting in the leadership ballot, so be it. That would mean an awful lot of Corbyn cultists will be too. Might be a good thing.
Net result, most divisive PM so far. Does not bode well.
The sooner the BBC is canned the better.
Although given the paroxysms of ecstatic approval fanatics get at hints from their leaders all over the spectrum, a little over expectation before she even takes over the country formally is par for the course.
I just watched the BBC News at 10.
I am a bit surprised that none of the senior reporters seem to understand the British Constitution. I thought that might have been a requirement for the job...
Hello and welcome. What do u mean?
Huw Edwards and Laura Kuenssberg repeatedly mentioning that Theresa May didn't have a personal mandate.
We are a Parliamentary Democracy - all you need to be Prime Minister is to be able to form a government and carry a vote of confidence in the HoC...
It's the same spinning nonsense as claiming EU citizens rights are on the table...
And in any event haven't the rules been amended since?
There will be a split because 170 MPs will have nothing to lose because they know they will be deselected before the next GE. It is a very different scenario to SDP1 when only about a dozen MPs defected. If Corbyn Labour ceases to be the official opposition for the next 4 years and are just a rump of 40 MPs (4th largest grouping behind the SNP} they will wither from public view. They have no god-given right to exist and could easily disappear from the political scene in England/Wales as fast as they did in Scotland.
A new GE: 22%
Article 50 triggered: 33%
(Betfair)
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-party-home-no-longer-8378139
And as it happens, I have gone through a very similar experience to Corbyn in another unincorporated association many years ago. After very similar gyrations, conspiracies, breach of rules, breach of natural justice, mala fides, etc, it ended up in court.
I represented myself, and won [my opponents folded, on the morning of the trial]...
The following year they tried a 'revenge' operation against me, with identical results.
Needless to say, the association no longer exists...
Q: Who in 2000 said Ted Heath was one of Britain's greatest prime ministers?
A: The answer will surprise you
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36745875
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/749880938813722624?lang=en-gb
It shows there are probably at least a third of Leave voters who favour a Norway style outcome - which seems about right. There may be a few more who didn't get picked up because they interpreted the question differently, but that may be cancelled out by Leave voters with Bregrets.
Of course, we may be vastly overestimating the understanding of the various nuances and options that those sampled have!
It's fine to disagree with the suggestion, and there's a case to be made cutting immigration and free movement would be the most popular option, but this obsession people have with pretending the referendum vote explicitly answered those questions baffles me (or would do, if it were not apparent that in most instances it is a case of people insisting their version of Leave is the only version that is acceptable).
I voted Leave, I'd rather keep the single market than cut immigration. I've no doubt that puts me in a minority of Leavers, and some Remainers will have or now would not want to keep access to the single market as the price for not cutting immigration. It isn't as clear as 52 vs 48 is the point, and no matter how many times people point out the proportions of Leave vs Remain, that doesn't clear up that issue definitively, at best the result was suggestive on that point given the primary campaigning points.
The only definitive answer was Leave. The rest is up for grabs, and it wouldn't even be undemocratic to explore what type of Leave most people want, in fact it is essential to figure that out.
That was a response aimed at RodCrosby. I know to ignore your moralising as you are just talking up your own book
The undoing of British democracy
If this were happening in a country behind the Iron Curtain in the 80s, we would be shaking our heads in disbelief
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/andrea-leadsoms-demise-signals-the-end-of-the-nasty-party-h3k3nbwsz
Good night all.
:: Daily Mirror
Theresa May was chosen by 199 Tory MPs, equalling 0.0004% of the electorate.
However, there's a very complex dynamic at play, which doesn't just involve the UK, the individual EU27 countries and the EU Institutions. We know that the USA has skin the game as well. There will be others.
At the moment, we have battlin' slogans. "Brexit means Brexit" vs "no à la carte Single Market".
Let's see what happens. What we collectively want and what we can practically achieve might be two different things.
He now has the temerity to call people nutjobs.
Ok, let's RON
Meanwhile on Newsnight, Matthew Hancock MP was waffling away and didn't seem to be able to come up with a single thing Theresa May is likely to do differently as Prime Minister.
Article 50 won't be implemtented this year (if ever) we know that. Meanwhile we have her close allies Green and Grieve hinting that actually Brexit doesn't mean Brexit afterall...
These are unbelievably dangerous times for the Tory Party.
Brown lost, Callaghan lost, Douglas Home lost.
Major won the election, but lost seats in 92
I think that the last PM who assumed office this way who increased their majority in the subsequent election was MacMillan in 1959.
Of course none of them had to face an opposition as chaotic and hopeless as the current Labour party!
I thought 2015 was the first modern era time a government increased both its share of the vote and seats albeit even then that is only if you exclude the Lib Dems.