Theresa May says she hopes she will continue having discussions with Corbyn “for many years to come”. - Now why would she want that? (innocent face)
She's having a good first outing.
How’s May’s body language? – I’m only following the text.
Very good. The odd nervous glitch but seriously impressive for a first outing at PMQs. Guess that's what 20 years experience does for you.
If anything (as others have said) her dry womanly put downs are better at shrivelling Corbyn than Cameron's posho thumpings, which often seemed like showboating.
In a way it should scare Labour more that May was effective, whilst looking like there was room for improvement.
Have you met anyone from the Protestant NI community?
Because I have and they'd sooner sell their souls to the devil than take up Irish nationality.
Don't forget that 45% of NI voted Leave. These people are very, very, very pro-British.
Given the very close commercial, cultural and social relationships between the UK and Ireland (one might even say interdependence from the RoI's perspective), if the UK does successfully put in place new arrangements between itself and the countries of the EU, I'd be more inclined to think the RoI Government may come under pressure to join us...
That's what Daniel Hannan thinks but it might mean ditching the euro, and an awful lot else, and they love it.
Those who talk about Ireland leaving the EU to join some kind of confederation of the British Isles clearly do not know much about Irish history or the Irish identity. There is absolutely no way on God's earth it will happen. As many Leavers pointed out during the EU referendum, there are some things that are more important than money.
I agree, however it wouldn't be a bad thing for the UK to aspire to create a country which some Irish people (if not a majority) would wish to join. If nothing else it's a way of reframing the debate about devo-max for Scotland: If Scotland were independent today, what kind of arrangement might it chose to join?
The English might also finally learn something about what federalism really means.
Federalism wouldn't work in the British Isles - England is just too big.
For the same reason, plus the rise of Nationalism, the UK has no long-term future either.
We all know that a constitutional realignment is necessary - we are just (understandably) hesitant about actually doing something about it, because we know it will be difficult and messy.
Why? In the US Texas and California are about as many times bigger than Vermont and Wyoming as England is bigger than Scotland and Wales
yes, but they're also balanced by 'the rest'. California is still only about 20% overall. England within the UK would be even larger than Prussia within the German Empire. i can't think of another federation where one component accounts for 80% of the whole.
The logical solution is to implement it on a regional basis within England, particularly as London already has its own devolution deal.
Morris Dancer is, I believe, a big fan of the idea.
Looked a bit laboured to me. But it suffices because there is still no opposition.
I agree, there's room for improvement in May's delivery.
Someone (TSE?) said that Dave had to hold back, as his "Flashman" mode was so unattractive.
May has a real ability to deliver a kicking without coming across as conceited, which will serve her well against Corbyn.
It was I, I also felt a lot of the time the Flashman criticisms were unfair on Dave
In y opinion, it was unfair in the sense that it was a problem of delivery, not of substance. However if you are PM you really have to acknowledge that delivery matters, and get on with it.
"Snap PMQs Verdict: Theresa May continues to surprise us. We were told that she does not do jokes, but the highlight of her first exchange with Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs was a sustained, comic analogy that ended with May dropping her voice and saying “Remind him of anybody?” in a tone that made her sound just like Margaret Thatcher. We never knew impressionism was one of her talents. It was rather funny joke, but unsettling, and it jarred slightly because it was out of character. If Corbyn thought that the removal of David Cameron would spare him from scorn, he will have been disappointed. May is not as insulting as Cameron, but she delivered several withering put-downs in a PMQs which will be judged a success. For Corbyn this was always going to be tricky, because May has the goodwill of Tory MPs behind her. He was right to identify some wide gaps between the rhetoric in May’s “one nation” Downing Street speech last week, and the government’s record, but his scattergun approach meant that he never highlighted these effectively. Starting with a question on Orgeave was odd too. For the public at large, this is an obscure piece of history, but it is a subject that matters to Labour and union members, and so perhaps this illustrated how the leadership contest is already dominating his thinking."
Theresa May says she hopes she will continue having discussions with Corbyn “for many years to come”. - Now why would she want that? (innocent face)
She's having a good first outing.
How’s May’s body language? – I’m only following the text.
Very good. The odd nervous glitch but seriously impressive for a first outing at PMQs. Guess that's what 20 years experience does for you.
If anything (as others have said) her dry womanly put downs are better at shrivelling Corbyn than Cameron's posho thumpings, which often seemed like showboating.
In a way it should scare Labour more that May was effective, whilst looking like there was room for improvement.
Can't remember the reply context - think it was about the length of Labour's leadership election woes, but Eagles visibly crumpled.
Have you met anyone from the Protestant NI community?
Because I have and they'd sooner sell their souls to the devil than take up Irish nationality.
Don't forget that 45% of NI voted Leave. These people are very, very, very pro-British.
Given the very close commercial, cultural and social relationships between the UK and Ireland (one might even say interdependence from the RoI's perspective), if the UK does successfully put in place new arrangements between itself and the countries of the EU, I'd be more inclined to think the RoI Government may come under pressure to join us...
That's what Daniel Hannan thinks but it might mean ditching the euro, and an awful lot else, and they love it.
Those who talk about Ireland leaving the EU to join some kind of confederation of the British Isles clearly do not know much about Irish history or the Irish identity. There is absolutely no way on God's earth it will happen. As many Leavers pointed out during the EU referendum, there are some things that are more important than money.
I agree, however it wouldn't be a bad thing for the UK to aspire to create a country which some Irish people (if not a majority) would wish to join. If nothing else it's a way of reframing the debate about devo-max for Scotland: If Scotland were independent today, what kind of arrangement might it chose to join?
The English might also finally learn something about what federalism really means.
Federalism wouldn't work in the British Isles - England is just too big.
For the same reason, plus the rise of Nationalism, the UK has no long-term future either.
We all know that a constitutional realignment is necessary - we are just (understandably) hesitant about actually doing something about it, because we know it will be difficult and messy.
Why? In the US Texas and California are about as many times bigger than Vermont and Wyoming as England is bigger than Scotland and Wales
yes, but they're also balanced by 'the rest'. California is still only about 20% overall. England within the UK would be even larger than Prussia within the German Empire. i can't think of another federation where one component accounts for 80% of the whole.
The logical solution is to implement it on a regional basis within England, particularly as London already has its own devolution deal.
Morris Dancer is, I believe, a big fan of the idea.
We could follow the American model and give California/England the same number of senators as Wyoming/Wales
Looked a bit laboured to me. But it suffices because there is still no opposition.
I agree, there's room for improvement in May's delivery.
Someone (TSE?) said that Dave had to hold back, as his "Flashman" mode was so unattractive.
May has a real ability to deliver a kicking without coming across as conceited, which will serve her well against Corbyn.
Assuming she wants Corbyn to stay in post, she needs to tone this shit kicking down. I understand the need to stamp herself all over PMQs - but after this one...
What are MPs going to do? A vote of no confidence?
Looked a bit laboured to me. But it suffices because there is still no opposition.
I agree, there's room for improvement in May's delivery.
Someone (TSE?) said that Dave had to hold back, as his "Flashman" mode was so unattractive.
May has a real ability to deliver a kicking without coming across as conceited, which will serve her well against Corbyn.
Assuming she wants Corbyn to stay in post, she needs to tone this shit kicking down. I understand the need to stamp herself all over PMQs - but after this one...
What are MPs going to do? A vote of no confidence?
On Ireland: if it becomes very common for the protestant community to take dual UK/Irish nationality in order to have access to EU citizenship, then in the long term that could well lead to a change of self-identity and eventual reunification.
Have you met anyone from the Protestant NI community?
Because I have and they'd sooner sell their souls to the devil than take up Irish nationality.
Don't forget that 45% of NI voted Leave. These people are very, very, very pro-British.
Given the very close commercial, cultural and social relationships between the UK and Ireland (one might even say interdependence from the RoI's perspective), if the UK does successfully put in place new arrangements between itself and the countries of the EU, I'd be more inclined to think the RoI Government may come under pressure to join us...
That's what Daniel Hannan thinks but it might mean ditching the euro, and an awful lot else, and they love it.
Those who talk about Ireland leaving the EU to join some kind of confederation of the British Isles clearly do not know much about Irish history or the Irish identity. There is absolutely no way on God's earth it will happen. As many Leavers pointed out during the EU referendum, there are some things that are more important than money.
I agree, however it wouldn't be a bad thing for the UK to aspire to create a country which some Irish people (if not a majority) would wish to join. If nothing else it's a way of reframing the debate about devo-max for Scotland: If Scotland were independent today, what kind of arrangement might it chose to join?
The English might also finally learn something about what federalism really means.
Federalism wouldn't work in the British Isles - England is just too big.
For the same reason, plus the rise of Nationalism, the UK has no long-term future either.
We all know that a constitutional realignment is necessary - we are just (understandably) hesitant about actually doing something about it, because we know it will be difficult and messy.
Why? In the US Texas and California are about as many times bigger than Vermont and Wyoming as England is bigger than Scotland and Wales
See the post by @FF43 at 12:11 upthread for the answer.
Brexit is going to bring real inflation back to the UK, which is a classic mixed blessing. We've had services inflation of ~2.5% for a while, countered by goods deflation.
The employment figures are interesting, even if the data is pre-Brexit. Everyone looks at the headline figures, goes 'yay' and moves on.
The issue for me is that it doesn't tell us all that much. Around 15% of the work force is now self-employed (4.8 million). That covers a lot of ground, from the 16-hour per week faux nail bar business to an IT contractor.
There are ~500k LT unemployed, the same number of young unemployed and just over 2 million long term sick. That last number is astonishingly high.
It will be more informative when we get data about the quality of jobs we're generating.
PS Then there are 1.1 million lucky bastards who have retired before state pension age. I'm one of 'em huzzah!
I quite agree, Mr. M. Around here we have had supposedly full employment for quite a while, anyone who wants a job and can work can get a job. Yet there still seem to be a lot of apparently healthy young men wandering the streets (usually going to or from the Co-op, where a bottle of vodka costs £12 and fags can be bought for <£6 a packet). Those that are not working in mid-Sussex are either too lazy and/or unemployable as they do not have the basic life skills to do even minimum wage jobs.
As for 2 million people being too disabled to do any sort of work, I too struggle to believe the figure is accurate. However, HMG has been trying to sort the sheep from the goats in this area for the best part of a decade, with mixed results.
All in all we have a record number of people in work (probably because we have a record number of people living in the UK) and a record percentage of the workforce gainfully employed at some level. But we still have far too many people whose lives are being wasted in idleness.</p>
Even if you assume the worst, unemployment falling and economic inactivity falling is good news - they may be few hours, or low pay, but they still represent a significant improvement in the personal situation of thousands of families. There is further to go after that, of course, but it is a necessary first step.
Wouldn't argue with that, Mr. Rabbit. Much better that some is economically active for 16 hours a week than not at all. However, I remain concerned about the very large numbers of people left in idleness, those whose lives are bound by cheap booze, cheap fags, cannabis use, internet pornography and daytime TV.
Of Beveridge's five giants Idleness still stalks the land, and indeed if you go and see how some of these people live so do ignorance and squalor.
Brexit is going to bring real inflation back to the UK, which is a classic mixed blessing. We've had services inflation of ~2.5% for a while, countered by goods deflation.
There are ~500k LT unemployed, the same number of young unemployed and just over 2 million long term sick. That last number is astonishingly high.
It will be more informative when we get data about the quality of jobs we're generating.
PS Then there are 1.1 million lucky bastards who have retired before state pension age. I'm one of 'em huzzah!
I quite agree, Mr. M. Around here we have had supposedly full employment for quite a while, anyone who wants a job and can work can get a job. Yet there still seem to be a lot of apparently healthy young men wandering the streets (usually going to or from the Co-op, where a bottle of vodka costs £12 and fags can be bought for <£6 a packet). Those that are not working in mid-Sussex are either too lazy and/or unemployable as they do not have the basic life skills to do even minimum wage jobs.
As for 2 million people being too disabled to do any sort of work, I too struggle to believe the figure is accurate. However, HMG has been trying to sort the sheep from the goats in this area for the best part of a decade, with mixed results.
All in all we have a record number of people in work (probably because we have a record number of people living in the UK) and a record percentage of the workforce gainfully employed at some level. But we still have far too many people whose lives are being wasted in idleness.</p>
Yiou are assuming, Mr L, that all the jobs are 9-6 or thereabouts. There are quite a lot of jobs out there which are evening only, or largely weekend. Or these lads may have been sent home as “there’s nothing today”.
About 20% of the UK workforce are employed on some flavour of shift pattern. It's a 24/7 world, or so they tell me.
I was mainly using the ONS stats to illustrate how we need a more forensic approach to public data. I'm not trying to rain on the Tory parade.
Today's figures show that there are around 3.7 million people of working age who aren't; a further 4.7 million people with less job security than we might expect (some self-employed will be fine, others hand-to-mouth). I haven't bothered to dig up the under-employed stats, neither have I looked at regional variations but I hope I've illustrated my point.
My concern Mr M was Mr LLama’s comments on the lads hanging around the Co-op, possibly with cheap vodka. Agree totally that the crude statistics don’t show the whole picture.
Taking orders for Humble Pie from the May nay-sayers.....
Meanwhile, Robertson's question on what the German Foreign Minister said about 'doing whatever it takes to keep Scotland in the EU' was a mis-translation, at best:
Gabriel said the EU would certainly accept Scotland as a member in its own right if the country leaves the United Kingdom and wants to join the EU.
Looked a bit laboured to me. But it suffices because there is still no opposition.
I agree, there's room for improvement in May's delivery.
Someone (TSE?) said that Dave had to hold back, as his "Flashman" mode was so unattractive.
May has a real ability to deliver a kicking without coming across as conceited, which will serve her well against Corbyn.
Assuming she wants Corbyn to stay in post, she needs to tone this shit kicking down. I understand the need to stamp herself all over PMQs - but after this one...
Ms Plato, I disagree! I think that as the leadership election will now be decided by the membership then the Tories should go for the jugular to make the labour MP's even more uncomfortable
As Corbyn and Corbyn supporters have no interest in Parliament as the vehicle through which to gain power, the outcome of PMQs is as irrelevant to them as the outcome of general elections. Of course, that will make it all even more depressing for Labour MPs. They are living in a parallel universe over which they have absolutely no control.
Brexit is going to bring real inflation back to the UK, which is a classic mixed blessing. We've had services inflation of ~2.5% for a while, countered by goods deflation.
There are ~500k LT unemployed, the same number of young unemployed and just over 2 million long term sick. That last number is astonishingly high.
It will be more informative when we get data about the quality of jobs we're generating.
PS Then there are 1.1 million lucky bastards who have retired before state pension age. I'm one of 'em huzzah!
As for 2 million people being too disabled to do any sort of work, I too struggle to believe the figure is accurate. However, HMG has been trying to sort the sheep from the goats in this area for the best part of a decade, with mixed results.
All in all we have a record number of people in work (probably because we have a record number of people living in the UK) and a record percentage of the workforce gainfully employed at some level. But we still have far too many people whose lives are being wasted in idleness.
Yiou are assuming, Mr L, that all the jobs are 9-6 or thereabouts. There are quite a lot of jobs out there which are evening only, or largely weekend. Or these lads may have been sent home as “there’s nothing today”.
About 20% of the UK workforce are employed on some flavour of shift pattern. It's a 24/7 world, or so they tell me.
I was mainly using the ONS stats to illustrate how we need a more forensic approach to public data. I'm not trying to rain on the Tory parade.
Today's figures show that there are around 3.7 million people of working age who aren't; a further 4.7 million people with less job security than we might expect (some self-employed will be fine, others hand-to-mouth). I haven't bothered to dig up the under-employed stats, neither have I looked at regional variations but I hope I've illustrated my point.
My concern Mr M was Mr LLama’s comments on the lads hanging around the Co-op, possibly with cheap vodka. Agree totally that the crude statistics don’t show the whole picture.
On day like today, hanging around an offy in search of cheap booze sounds like a splendid idea. Unfortunately, it's far too pleasant to move from the paddling pool.
This is why Corbyn is crap, he can't think on his feet.
He asked about the piccaninnies language of Boris, May just ignored it, and he failed to press her on it,
Corbyn has spent his career preaching to the converted. Of course he can't think on his feet.
Owen Smith, however, might achieve the impossible and be more ludicrious than Jez. He was shockingly bad on Sky News this am.
Owen Smith sounds precisely like the sort of politician that will say anything that is convienient at the time to further his own ambition. Which I reckon is considerably above his ability.
Have you met anyone from the Protestant NI community?
Because I have and they'd sooner sell their souls to the devil than take up Irish nationality.
Don't forget that 45% of NI voted Leave. These people are very, very, very pro-British.
Given the very close commercial, cultural and social relationships between the UK and Ireland (one might even say interdependence from the RoI's perspective), if the UK does successfully put in place new arrangements between itself and the countries of the EU, I'd be more inclined to think the RoI Government may come under pressure to join us...
That's what Daniel Hannan thinks but it might mean ditching the euro, and an awful lot else, and they love it.
Those who talk about Ireland leaving the EU to join some kind of confederation of the British Isles clearly do not know much about Irish history or the Irish identity. There is absolutely no way on God's earth it will happen. As many Leavers pointed out during the EU referendum, there are some things that are more important than money.
I agree, however it wouldn't be a bad thing for the UK tnd: If Scotland were independent today, what kind of arrangement might it chose to join?
The English might also finally learn something about what federalism really means.
Federalism wouldn't work in the British Isles - England is just too big.
For the same reason, plus the rise of Nationalism, the UK has no long-term future either.
We cause we know it will be difficult and messy.
Why? In the US Texas and California are about as many times bigger than Vermont and Wyoming as England is bigger than Scotland and Wales
yes, but they're also balanced by 'the rest'. California is still only about 20% overall. England within the UK would be even larger than Prussia within the German Empire. i can't think of another federation where one component accounts for 80% of the whole.
The logical solution is to implement it on a regional basis within England, particularly as London already has its own devolution deal.
Morris Dancer is, I believe, a big fan of the idea.
Yes but the UK is already almost a century older than the U.S., personally I have no problem with regional assemblies or if they are not popular enough at least devolution of powers to county and city councils
Taking orders for Humble Pie from the May nay-sayers.....
Meanwhile, Robertson's question on what the German Foreign Minister said about 'doing whatever it takes to keep Scotland in the EU' was a mis-translation, at best:
Gabriel said the EU would certainly accept Scotland as a member in its own right if the country leaves the United Kingdom and wants to join the EU.
On Ireland: if it becomes very common for the protestant community to take dual UK/Irish nationality in order to have access to EU citizenship, then in the long term that could well lead to a change of self-identity and eventual reunification.
Have you met anyone from the Protestant NI community?
Because I have and they'd sooner sell their souls to the devil than take up Irish nationality.
Don't forget that 45% of NI voted Leave. These people are very, very, very pro-British.
Given the very close commercial, cultural and social relationships between the UK and Ireland (one might even say interdependence from the RoI's perspective), if the UK does successfully put in place new arrangements between itself and the countries of the EU, I'd be more inclined to think the RoI Government may come under pressure to join us...
That's what Daniel Hannan thinks but it might mean ditching the euro, and an awful lot else, and they love it.
Indeed, Denmark and Sweden and maybe Austria, France and the Netherlands are more likely to leave the EU than Ireland
I can't see the Netherlands or Denmark leaving the EU, because they are really just part of Greater Germany, and their economies are so integrated with it.
If I were to rank in order the most likely exits from the EU, I think I'd put Italy first. With Sweden most likely behind it.
Italy is in the Euro though so if it ever left there would be an economic collapse which would make BREXIT look like a picnic. Sweden and Denmark are not and if they were ever pushed to join the eurozone they may leave. Hungary has a rightwing populist government and also is an outside contender
I think many Danes would be most unhappy at that statement. They're joint equal with the UK on opt-outs. They mainly joined the EU in 1973 because the UK had joined.
Have you met anyone from the Protestant NI community?
Because I have and they'd sooner sell their souls to the devil than take up Irish nationality.
Don't forget that 45% of NI voted Leave. These people are very, very, very pro-British.
Given the very close commercial, .
That's what Daniel Hannan thinks but it might mean ditching the euro, and an awful lot else, and they love it.
Those who talk about Ireland leaving the EU to join some kind of confederation of the British Isles clearly do not know much about Irish history or the Irish identity. There is absolutely no way on God's earth it will happen. As many Leavers pointed out during the EU referendum, there are some things that are more important than money.
I agree, however it wouldn't be a bad thing for the UK to aspire to create a country which some Irish people (if not a majority) would wish to join. If nothing else it's a way of reframing the debate about devo-max for Scotland: If Scotland were independent today, what kind of arrangement might it chose to join?
The English might also finally learn something about what federalism really means.
Federalism wouldn't work in the British Isles - England is just too big.
For the same reason, plus the rise of Nationalism, the UK has no long-term future either.
We all know that a constitutional realignment is necessary - we are just (understandably) hesitant about actually doing something about it, because we know it will be difficult and messy.
Why? In the US Texas and California are about as many times bigger than Vermont and Wyoming as England is bigger than Scotland and Wales
yes, but they're also balanced by 'the rest'. California is still only about 20% overall. England within the UK would be even larger than Prussia within the German Empire. i can't think of another federation where one component accounts for 80% of the whole.
The logical solution is to implement it on a regional basis within England, particularly as London already has its own devolution deal.
Morris Dancer is, I believe, a big fan of the idea.
We could follow the American model and give California/England the same number of senators as Wyoming/Wales
Indeed, make the Lords, which is a shadow if its former self, into a Senate
Have you met anyone from the Protestant NI community?
Because I have and they'd sooner sell their souls to the devil than take up Irish nationality.
Don't forget that 45% of NI voted Leave. These people are very, very, very pro-British.
Given the very close commercial, .
That's what Daniel Hannan thinks but it might mean ditching the euro, and an awful lot else, and they love it.
As many Leavers pointed out during the EU referendum, there are some things that are more important than money.
I agree, however it wouldn't be a bad thing for the UK to aspire to create a country which some Irish people (if not a majority) would wish to join. If nothing else it's a way of reframing the debate about devo-max for Scotland: If Scotland were independent today, what kind of arrangement might it chose to join?
The English might also finally learn something about what federalism really means.
Federalism wouldn't work in the British Isles - England is just too big.
For the same reason, plus the rise of Nationalism, the UK has no long-term future either.
We all know that a constitutional realignment is necessary - we are just (understandably) hesitant about actually doing something about it, because we know it will be difficult and messy.
Why? In the US Texas and California are about as many times bigger than Vermont and Wyoming as England is bigger than Scotland and Wales
yes, but they're also balanced by 'the rest'. California is still only about 20% overall. England within the UK would be even larger than Prussia within the German Empire. i can't think of another federation where one component accounts for 80% of the whole.
The logical solution is to implement it on a regional basis within England, particularly as London already has its own devolution deal.
Morris Dancer is, I believe, a big fan of the idea.
We could follow the American model and give California/England the same number of senators as Wyoming/Wales
Indeed, make the Lords, which is a shadow if its former self, into a Senate
I think that would need to be done by eg region, otherwise the discrepancies were too great. 6 reps per Region, maybe?
But then we lose the depth and breadth of expertise of the Lords, and may end up with pigmy politicians, as seen too much in the devolved Parliaments.
What's the background to your single word response?
Catholics in NI are far more conservative than their Southern counterparts they haven't had 20 years of stories about previous Catholic church abuses... That's utterly destroyed the reputation of the church south of the border and many people have become more liberal as they see how the church worked the abuse it happily perpetuated
After partition the Catholic Church in RoI became basically the establishment and priests aristocracy. They took the rap for a lot of things like abuse in Childrens homes because they ran them (in the UK local councils did), also as they were treated like aristocracy they were largely unnaccountable and this allowed deviants to go unchecked.
An (English) priest I know related how his Irish uncle's reaction to him deciding to become a priest was one of disgust. This was long before the abuse etc. came out, his reaction was because even then in the 70s the clergy in RoI were seen in many quarters as a cosy, wealthy easy number for those too idle to work for a living. It was said the best Irish priests went to England where being a priest meant lots of hard work and no money.
Obviously in NI the priviliges that the RoI church had did not exist and therefore far less of the corruption and far more work, meaning that the Church is far healthier.
I realised this when we had to arrange burial in a predominately protestant town of the ashes of a close relative who had died abroad.
The local catholic parish priest was contacted to do the burial and offered to say a requiem Mass. It was on a weekday and about 100 turned up. Apologies were given that there were not many massgoers that day as the rest had gone on a pilgrimage down south!
In contrast in the RoI, I am told, churches are empty.
Have you met anyone from the Protestant NI community?
Because I have and they'd sooner sell their souls to the devil than take up Irish nationality.
Don't forget that 45% of-British.
Given the very close commercial, .
That's what Daniel Hannan thinks but it might mean ditching the euro, and an awful lot else, and they love it.
As many Leavers pointed out during the EU referendum, there are some things that are more important than money.
I agree, however it wouldn't be a bad thing for the U
The English might also finally learn something about what federalism really means.
Federalism wouldn't work in the British Isles - England is just too big.
For the same reason, plus the rise of Nationalism, the UK has no long-term future either.
We all know that a constitutional realignment is necessary - we are just (understandably) hesitant about actually doing something about it, because we know it will be difficult and messy.
Why? In the US Texas and California are about as many times bigger than Vermont and Wyoming as England is bigger than Scotland and Wales
yes, but they're also balanced by 'the rest'. California is still only about 20% overall. England within the UK would be even
Morris Dancer is, I believe, a big fan of the idea.
We could follow the American model and give California/England the same number of senators as Wyoming/Wales
Indeed, make the Lords, which is a shadow if its former self, into a Senate
I think that would need to be done by eg region, otherwise the discrepancies were too great. 6 reps per Region, maybe?
But then we lose the depth and breadth of expertise of the Lords, and may end up with pigmy politicians, as seen too much in the devolved Parliaments.
By region would be fine, the Lords is now full of pigmy ex politicians anyway and a few appointed experts could still be retained
Comments
The logical solution is to implement it on a regional basis within England, particularly as London already has its own devolution deal.
Morris Dancer is, I believe, a big fan of the idea.
"Snap PMQs Verdict: Theresa May continues to surprise us. We were told that she does not do jokes, but the highlight of her first exchange with Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs was a sustained, comic analogy that ended with May dropping her voice and saying “Remind him of anybody?” in a tone that made her sound just like Margaret Thatcher. We never knew impressionism was one of her talents. It was rather funny joke, but unsettling, and it jarred slightly because it was out of character. If Corbyn thought that the removal of David Cameron would spare him from scorn, he will have been disappointed. May is not as insulting as Cameron, but she delivered several withering put-downs in a PMQs which will be judged a success. For Corbyn this was always going to be tricky, because May has the goodwill of Tory MPs behind her. He was right to identify some wide gaps between the rhetoric in May’s “one nation” Downing Street speech last week, and the government’s record, but his scattergun approach meant that he never highlighted these effectively. Starting with a question on Orgeave was odd too. For the public at large, this is an obscure piece of history, but it is a subject that matters to Labour and union members, and so perhaps this illustrated how the leadership contest is already dominating his thinking."
It was very noticeable.
Stupid boy.
I may renew my membership. Hand me back my PB Tory badge.
Early days, but bodes well.
Polonium tipped umbrella?
Early days, but bodes well. ''
Hopefully May will make me eat my Cassandra predictions with a hearty meal of humble pie.
But as you say, the jury will be out for a while.
Of Beveridge's five giants Idleness still stalks the land, and indeed if you go and see how some of these people live so do ignorance and squalor.
Meanwhile, Robertson's question on what the German Foreign Minister said about 'doing whatever it takes to keep Scotland in the EU' was a mis-translation, at best:
Gabriel said the EU would certainly accept Scotland as a member in its own right if the country leaves the United Kingdom and wants to join the EU.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-germany-gabriel-idUKKCN0ZI0B7
Owen Smith, however, might achieve the impossible and be more ludicrious than Jez. He was shockingly bad on Sky News this am.
What a put down re Farron on being a bigger Party. A funny anecdote that backfired all over him.
NEW THREAD NEW THREAD
What strange times we live in.
But then we lose the depth and breadth of expertise of the Lords, and may end up with pigmy politicians, as seen too much in the devolved Parliaments.
An (English) priest I know related how his Irish uncle's reaction to him deciding to become a priest was one of disgust. This was long before the abuse etc. came out, his reaction was because even then in the 70s the clergy in RoI were seen in many quarters as a cosy, wealthy easy number for those too idle to work for a living. It was said the best Irish priests went to England where being a priest meant lots of hard work and no money.
Obviously in NI the priviliges that the RoI church had did not exist and therefore far less of the corruption and far more work, meaning that the Church is far healthier.
I realised this when we had to arrange burial in a predominately protestant town of the ashes of a close relative who had died abroad.
The local catholic parish priest was contacted to do the burial and offered to say a requiem Mass. It was on a weekday and about 100 turned up. Apologies were given that there were not many massgoers that day as the rest had gone on a pilgrimage down south!
In contrast in the RoI, I am told, churches are empty.