Perhaps the trigger for Dave resigning is that Witney is also going to be abolished in the boundary shake-up?
Witney is above average, although perhaps the surrounding constituencies are not?
Oxfordshire keeps 6 seats, however, there will need to be some shuffling around as Banbury constituency is too large and so Banbury and Bicester will have to be split up.
Julia Hartley Brewer Anyone else agree with me that @DanielJHannan should run for @David_Cameron 's safe Witney seat...? Need more like Dan in Westminster.
The reason Dave has quit. He didn't want to vote regularly against Theresa May's government, he didn't want to become the incredible sulk.
Oh well, if I can't get a peerage, perhaps I'll get his seat.
How nailed-on are the Tories here? I'm still struggling to move out of the 1989-2014 mindset wherein the governing Conservatives always lost by-elections, no matter how safe. But it's hard to see any of the opposition parties making the enormous heave required here?
Hey, WItney has had several years of Labour representation.
Granted, that was due to crossing the floor.
Oooh, that's perfect for Twitter memes baiting the Corbynistas.
"Tony Blair held Witney in his first term - if Jeremy Corbyn is serious about becoming PM he needs to win this by-election"
The reason Dave has quit. He didn't want to vote regularly against Theresa May's government, he didn't want to become the incredible sulk.
Oh well, if I can't get a peerage, perhaps I'll get his seat.
How nailed-on are the Tories here? I'm still struggling to move out of the 1989-2014 mindset wherein the governing Conservatives always lost by-elections, no matter how safe. But it's hard to see any of the opposition parties making the enormous heave required here?
The only example that comes to mind which might give the Tories any cause for concern here is the Penrith by election in 1983 caused by Willie Whitelaw's elevation to the Lords. He had a stonking majority at the 83 election yet the Tories only held off the LibDems at the consequent by election by a few hundred votes.
Cameron news means no early GE any time soon, right? Otherwise he'd have waited for that.
Not neccesarily, Cameron would not have notice of an early GE. If May is going to play that card she'll be keeping it close to her chest with possibly only a few select members of the cabinet knowing about it.
What excuse does the boundary commission have for releasing the draft boundaries early to MPs (and thus the political parties) whilst the general population has to wait another 12 hours?
As a courtesy I suppose, given that their constituency may be being abolished.
Entirely reasonable. If my job is in jeopardy a heads up before it is announced to the public would seem responsible.
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I can't for the life of me see why Parliament would be enhanced at this moment by the introduction of yet another Eurosceptic monomaniac. It seems fully stocked on that front already.
Off Topic (Bored with discussing Corbyn ceaselessly)
If not Tim Kaine, then who else could replace Hillary ..... once fancied Paul Ryan for instance is currently available on Betfair at 700.
The Betfair settlement rules indicate to me it will be Clinton, Trump or if Clinton needs to step down for health reasons pre-GE, Kaine.
Tricky wording, isn't it?
This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2016 presidential election. Any subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market.
It's *projected* Electoral College votes, so if you had a situation where Hillary Clinton stood aside in favour of some other candidate, like Joe Biden or Chelsea Clinton, you could make the argument that the projected votes would go to Biden/Chelsea despite nominally going for Hillary, but it doesn't quite seem clear-cut.
Also - the arse/stomach of the person who appeared waving in blue glasses wasn't the same shape as bell tent Hillary. That person is about a stone or more thinner.
It's probably all angles and stuff, but a bit weird.
Don't be ridiculous, it's ruddy obviously her.
It never ceases to amaze me (and this isn't specifically aimed at you Plato) the people here who decry conspiracy theories in general, but leap on the most bizarre of them if they support their own notions.
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I may expand if you buy the first round of drinks....
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I like him, and find him persuasive if a bit big-headed, but I must say I was very disappointed by his post-referendum denial that he had used immigration as an argument; as outright lies go, that one was a zinger - he was on the board of Vote Leave, FFS!
Hmm Not really, some small Lib Dem danger I think.
It is not a seat that any flavour of Labour could win, nor UKIP. The LibDems are the only party that could possibly topple the Tories there - not that this looks very likely right now. They would have to make the by-election solely about Brexit, fought by a credible local candidate with deep roots.
At GE 2015, the Labour candidate in Witney (Duncan Enright) was extremely impressive. I'm presuming he'll get selected again. He's very vocally anti-Corbyn but then I've not seen any signs of Momentum in this area. (Labour has another very strong county councillor in Witney, Laura Price, who would make for an excellent candidate.)
Green (Stuart Macdonald) and LD (Andy Graham) were less impressive in 2015, even though there are some strong LD redoubts in the constituency. I would imagine the Greens will run the same candidate again though they may go for Larry Sanders (Bernie's brother, fought neighbouring Oxford West at GE2015). LDs do potentially have some good candidates, both based in the constituency and in Oxford, and would be smart to go for one of them.
I can't see any stand-out candidate in the local Conservative party. Ian Hudspeth (leader of Oxfordshire County Council) is clearly Top Tory round here and I think would be good at it, but he publicly fell out with Cameron and that has seriously blotted his copybook. There's a few ambitious youngsters in the constituency but I'd be very surprised if they make it past the inevitably strong external competition. So my guess is that the Tory candidate will be from outside.
This isn't UKIP territory at all and I think it would be a mistake for Farage (or another big hitter) to stand, but who knows.
What excuse does the boundary commission have for releasing the draft boundaries early to MPs (and thus the political parties) whilst the general population has to wait another 12 hours?
As a courtesy I suppose, given that their constituency may be being abolished.
Entirely reasonable. If my job is in jeopardy a heads up before it is announced to the public would seem responsible.
It's just the way they work - they do the same for local council rewardings, and when I asked, the council didn't know why. Partly I suspect it is just a courtesy to allow interested parties a day to have a think about the line they will take; I suspect it is also a form of gross error check before the proposals become public.
Can't blame Cameron for leaving he has a young family and has achieved a lot in the highest office (somethings he must regret as well but don't they all). He can relax now and pursue other interests and Sam can do what she wants.
Still think he could have had a comeback in some form some years down the line as he was young enough and the talent is there but the party seems to be taking a new direction under May.
By the sounds of it he doesn't agree with some of the things May is planning or has already announced and instead of causing her problems (she will have plenty in the years to come but with a former PM and Conservative great criticizing her policies it would have carried great weight) he has decided to bow out.
Wow re: Cameron. What a mess he is walking away from.
My understanding of West Oxfordshire Lib Dems is that they are better organised than most non-held seats in the Coalition years, and can put up a good fight in a by-election. But I wouldn't touch the 20-1, I think a good 2nd for the yellows, matching the Henley by-election or thereabouts, would be the target.
It's *projected* Electoral College votes, so if you had a situation where Hillary Clinton stood aside in favour of some other candidate, like Joe Biden or Chelsea Clinton, you could make the argument that the projected votes would go to Biden/Chelsea despite nominally going for Hillary, but it doesn't quite seem clear-cut.
The other consideration is that while bookmakers often make ex gratia payments on the "right" result, Betfair very rarely does, since it needs to balance backers and layers (and at no time put its hand into its own pocket).
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
Hannan is a lightweight charlatan - a Farage for people who think of themselves as above all that. He serves a role as a legislator but is not someone you'd want having any responsibility. To his credit, he doesn't seem to want any responsibility either.
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I may expand if you buy the first round of drinks....
Shadow Education Secretary, Angela Rayner, is just direeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's great to see Labour defending selection by house price.
It'll be good to see the evidence for this selection by house price shtick. I wonder how much of it there actually is.
"In fact, a link between better schools and higher house prices has emerged as one of the most stable empirical regularities, with studies worldwide reporting effects of a similar order of magnitude."
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I like him, and find him persuasive if a bit big-headed, but I must say I was very disappointed by his post-referendum denial that he had used immigration as an argument; as outright lies go, that one was a zinger - he was on the board of Vote Leave, FFS!
To be fair, Dan never used the inmigration argument once and was consistent in arguing against it as the reason to leave the EU, even in private.
I don't think he was in the majority of those who took the decision at the Vote Leave board.
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I like him, and find him persuasive if a bit big-headed, but I must say I was very disappointed by his post-referendum denial that he had used immigration as an argument; as outright lies go, that one was a zinger - he was on the board of Vote Leave, FFS!
To be fair, Dan never used the inmigration argument once and was consistent in arguing against it as the reason to leave the EU, even in private.
I don't think he was in the majority of those who took the decision at the Vote Leave board.
I'm sorry, that won't wash. You can't be a leading member of a campaign, and on the board making policy decisions (which he was), and then wash your hands of the most prominent, controversial, divisive and successful argument used by the campaign. Not if you have integrity, in my book.
List of the 9 Tory MPs who lost their seats last year:
Nick de Bois (Enfield North) Angie Bray (Ealing Central & Acton) Mary Macleod (Brentford & Isleworth) Esther McVey (Wirral West) Stephen Mosley (City of Chester) Eric Ollerenshaw (Lancaster & Fleetwood) Simon Reevell (Dewsbury) Lee Scott (Ilford North) Paul Uppal (Wolverhampton South West)
Shadow Education Secretary, Angela Rayner, is just direeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's great to see Labour defending selection by house price.
It'll be good to see the evidence for this selection by house price shtick. I wonder how much of it there actually is.
"In fact, a link between better schools and higher house prices has emerged as one of the most stable empirical regularities, with studies worldwide reporting effects of a similar order of magnitude."
Yep, I knew it was true for primary schools (at least back in 2006), but what evidence is there for secondary's? Presumably, this will be produced. In somewhere like London, all house prices are beyond most non-high earners so that in itself will distort the picture. Most non-high earners live in rented accommodation.
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I may expand if you buy the first round of drinks....
Why are grammar schools so unpopular with the privately educated?
A rhetorical question I guess.
Because we look at the evidence, and the evidence stacks up against grammar schools. They only help a few, not all.
Bit like public schools, but hey..selection by largest wallet is just fine and dandy.
Bit of a difference, though - grammar (and comprehensive) schools are paid for by the taxpayer, whereas public schools are paid for by the parents (who have also contributed to the costs of other children's schools). So the cost-effectiveness or otherwise of public schools is none of the business of government.
No. The East London seats will be dramatically affected by the review as the 'loss' of electors following IER was particularly acute. In the last proposals his seat disappeared, and that was using the old numbers. I expect Mike knows not only that his seat has been significantly redrawn but that there's one fewer Labour seat overall, and given that his neighbours are a lot younger and more up-and-coming (insofar as there is anywhere to come to in Labour nowadays) than he is, I expect he will announce his retirement tomorrow. His health hasn't been that great recently, either; he was seriously ill at the end of last year. He will probably throw in a few lines blaming Corbyn just for good measure, however.
I can't for the life of me see why Parliament would be enhanced at this moment by the introduction of yet another Eurosceptic monomaniac. It seems fully stocked on that front already.
If the last few months have taught us anything on this score, it is surely that parliament is rather less Eurosceptic than the population at large.
But maybe not in Witney (I presume this was Remainier than most, given the demographics?)
Of course, Dan Hannan is far from the only soon-to-be-unemployed Conservative MEPs. Are there any others who might reasonably be considered for this seat?
I can't for the life of me see why Parliament would be enhanced at this moment by the introduction of yet another Eurosceptic monomaniac. It seems fully stocked on that front already.
If the last few months have taught us anything on this score, it is surely that parliament is rather less Eurosceptic than the population at large.
But maybe not in Witney (I presume this was Remainier than most, given the demographics?)
Of course, Dan Hannan is far from the only soon-to-be-unemployed Conservative MEPs. Are there any others who might reasonably be considered for this seat?
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I may expand if you buy the first round of drinks....
* All grammar schools abolished. * All private public and fee paying schools abolished. * Homeschooling illegal. * Private tutoring illegal. * No choice as to school, you can just express an interest All pupils told which school they are going to with selection by lottery of all pupils who have selected an interest.
Why are grammar schools so unpopular with the privately educated?
A rhetorical question I guess.
Because we look at the evidence, and the evidence stacks up against grammar schools. They only help a few, not all.
Bit like public schools, but hey..selection by largest wallet is just fine and dandy.
Bit of a difference, though - grammar (and comprehensive) schools are paid for by the taxpayer, whereas public schools are paid for by the parents (who have also contributed to the costs of other children's schools). So the cost-effectiveness or otherwise of public schools is none of the business of government.
Except for the tax relief. And the teachers we train for them.
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I may expand if you buy the first round of drinks....
* All grammar schools abolished. * All private public and fee paying schools abolished. * Homeschooling illegal. * Private tutoring illegal. * No choice as to school, you can just express an interest All pupils told which school they are going to with selection by lottery of all pupils who have selected an interest.
Do that or shut up about grammar schols.
No they wouldn't. There would be absolutely no incentive for improvement.
* All grammar schools abolished. * All private public and fee paying schools abolished. * Homeschooling illegal. * Private tutoring illegal. * No choice as to school, you can just express an interest All pupils told which school they are going to with selection by lottery of all pupils who have selected an interest.
Do that or shut up about grammar schols.
Blimey, I thought it was only the hard left that wanted to abolish private schools.
Shadow Education Secretary, Angela Rayner, is just direeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's great to see Labour defending selection by house price.
It'll be good to see the evidence for this selection by house price shtick. I wonder how much of it there actually is.
"In fact, a link between better schools and higher house prices has emerged as one of the most stable empirical regularities, with studies worldwide reporting effects of a similar order of magnitude."
Yep, I knew it was true for primary schools (at least back in 2006), but what evidence is there for secondary's? Presumably, this will be produced. In somewhere like London, all house prices are beyond most non-high earners so that in itself will distort the picture. Most non-high earners live in rented accommodation.
When people kept reporting the rise in 'London Education Standards' I rather suspected it was because the cost of living was squeezing out the low earners and gentrification was occurring in the school system year by year.
Shadow Education Secretary, Angela Rayner, is just direeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's great to see Labour defending selection by house price.
It'll be good to see the evidence for this selection by house price shtick. I wonder how much of it there actually is.
"In fact, a link between better schools and higher house prices has emerged as one of the most stable empirical regularities, with studies worldwide reporting effects of a similar order of magnitude."
Probably a minority of one, but I cannot stand Dan Hannan (notwithstanding his legendary courtesy).
The reason(s) being?
Shamelss demagoguery for a start, unlike most here, I was wholly immune to his vitriol against Gordon Brown and I've heard his nonsense twice at Tory meetings which left me ice cold.
I'm at a loss to understand your dislike of Dan Hannan, but it takes all sorts I suppose.
I like him, and find him persuasive if a bit big-headed, but I must say I was very disappointed by his post-referendum denial that he had used immigration as an argument; as outright lies go, that one was a zinger - he was on the board of Vote Leave, FFS!
To be fair, Dan never used the inmigration argument once and was consistent in arguing against it as the reason to leave the EU, even in private.
I don't think he was in the majority of those who took the decision at the Vote Leave board.
I'm sorry, that won't wash. You can't be a leading member of a campaign, and on the board making policy decisions (which he was), and then wash your hands of the most prominent, controversial, divisive and successful argument used by the campaign. Not if you have integrity, in my book.
Steady. There's no reason to impinge upon Dan's integrity.
Look at his videos and arguments he used during the campaign. Not once did he use migration and, in fact, he suggested EFTA and conceded free movement would continue in the weeks leading up to the vote. The biggest criticism you could make of him was that he was off message. That's why he featured so little in the debates.
I suppose you could argue he should have resigned from the Vote Leave board. But I suspect that wouldn't have been very helpful to Leave.
Why are grammar schools so unpopular with the privately educated?
A rhetorical question I guess.
Because we look at the evidence, and the evidence stacks up against grammar schools. They only help a few, not all.
Bit like public schools, but hey..selection by largest wallet is just fine and dandy.
Bit of a difference, though - grammar (and comprehensive) schools are paid for by the taxpayer, whereas public schools are paid for by the parents (who have also contributed to the costs of other children's schools). So the cost-effectiveness or otherwise of public schools is none of the business of government.
Except that most public schools are registered charities and therefore get substantial subsidies from taxpayers through the government .
Why are grammar schools so unpopular with the privately educated?
A rhetorical question I guess.
Because we look at the evidence, and the evidence stacks up against grammar schools. They only help a few, not all.
Because we look at the evidence, and the evidence stacks up against grammar private schools. They only help a few, not all.
Evidence please, not anecdotes.
All grammar school advocates seem to have is 'I went to school, that makes me an expert'
Having read the 'debate' on grammar schools, here and elsewhere, and I've decided I'm against May's new policy.
Why?
It's all utterly disjointed. There'll be faith schools, academies, grammar schools, all competing to get the best state pupils and sod the kids who really need help. Despite her words, she's moved the debate onto the people who need help the least.
It's not a policy for education: it's a policy for the party.
Bloody hell the High Tories are coming out this afternoon. Camron resigning his seat so he can go off and earn a fortune on the lecture circuit seems to be treated as a tragedy and the idea that a Conservative who was actually on the winning side might be put forward for Cameron's seat is treated with disdain bordering on horror.
So, which tory who isn't an MP at the moment wants the safest of safe seats for the Tories?
TSE
What a terrible birthday present.
I shall wear black for the rest of the day.
Happy Birthday!
Now - with all due respect to you, your Tory-ness and your shoes - I think that we need an eloquent, experienced lady for the Witney seat. Someone tough-minded, someone who can spot bullshit and bullshitters at a thousand paces, someone used to dealing with egomaniacs with more puff than substance, someone with a sense of history and knowledge of other countries and, crucial this, someone who went to neither Eton nor a grammar school, etc. Being a Tory is a mere detail and really quite unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
A sense of impudence too......
But could you handle the pay cut Ms Cyclefree?
So long as I can still indulge my love of gardening and books, I'm sure I can.
Imagine what fun I could have telling a load of self-important men with scarcely an ounce of common-sense between them what to do..... It will scarcely be any different from work!
The timing is bad for May but she's at the height of her powers right now so maybe it does nothing.
You can bet every headline is going to be about this being over the Grammar schools policy and Cameron's stance on academies even though Cameron may have been thinking for some time about stepping down as an MP.
Afternoon all. Catching up, it appears we have a by-election! A lovely safe seat for someone, who do the Tories want to get into Parliament who isn't there already?
Except for the tax relief. And the teachers we train for them.
What tax relief? OK, they are charities, but that doesn't make a big difference - certainly nothing like the amount of money that they save the state.
There is no tax relief on private healthcare
Indeed not. So, yes, that also saves the state a lot of money.
(This, I imagine, is why Labour governments have never shut down private healthcare or public schools, despite the politics of envy being their most important driver. Some civil servant will have done the sums...).
Why are grammar schools so unpopular with the privately educated?
A rhetorical question I guess.
Because we look at the evidence, and the evidence stacks up against grammar schools. They only help a few, not all.
Because we look at the evidence, and the evidence stacks up against grammar private schools. They only help a few, not all.
Evidence please, not anecdotes.
All grammar school advocates seem to have is 'I went to school, that makes me an expert'
You really are making yourself quite the idiot on the issue. You have no answer as to why Public schools should be exempt from your ant-Grammar rhetoric.
Except for the tax relief. And the teachers we train for them.
What tax relief? OK, they are charities, but that doesn't make a big difference - certainly nothing like the amount of money that they save the state.
There is no tax relief on private healthcare
Indeed not. So, yes, that also saves the state a lot of money.
(This, I imagine, is why Labour governments have never shut down private healthcare or public schools, despite the politics of envy being their most important driver. Some civil servant will have done the sums...).
Could the state afford to educate all the kids who are in private school? It'd surely add at least 5% onto the education budget, yet alone the school places that would have to be created.
Why are grammar schools so unpopular with the privately educated?
A rhetorical question I guess.
Because we look at the evidence, and the evidence stacks up against grammar schools. They only help a few, not all.
Bit like public schools, but hey..selection by largest wallet is just fine and dandy.
Bit of a difference, though - grammar (and comprehensive) schools are paid for by the taxpayer, whereas public schools are paid for by the parents (who have also contributed to the costs of other children's schools). So the cost-effectiveness or otherwise of public schools is none of the business of government.
It kind of is if their existence is denying other schools of the necessary talent to broaden their intake.
* All grammar schools abolished. * All private public and fee paying schools abolished. * Homeschooling illegal. * Private tutoring illegal. * No choice as to school, you can just express an interest All pupils told which school they are going to with selection by lottery of all pupils who have selected an interest.
Comments
(I'll get my coat)
Labour's Angela Rayner with a bold opening and she offers Tories advice: "Stop your silly class war."
Tories start laughing.
"Tony Blair held Witney in his first term - if Jeremy Corbyn is serious about becoming PM he needs to win this by-election"
And Happy Birthday TSE.
Transcript of David Cameron's interview announcing he is resigning as an MP
https://twitter.com/sharpeangle/status/775347130823213056
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/775349581722873856
It never ceases to amaze me (and this isn't specifically aimed at you Plato) the people here who decry conspiracy theories in general, but leap on the most bizarre of them if they support their own notions.
Huge interest on Tory benches in grammars policy - must be 80 MPs wanting to ask Q
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37336947
At GE 2015, the Labour candidate in Witney (Duncan Enright) was extremely impressive. I'm presuming he'll get selected again. He's very vocally anti-Corbyn but then I've not seen any signs of Momentum in this area. (Labour has another very strong county councillor in Witney, Laura Price, who would make for an excellent candidate.)
Green (Stuart Macdonald) and LD (Andy Graham) were less impressive in 2015, even though there are some strong LD redoubts in the constituency. I would imagine the Greens will run the same candidate again though they may go for Larry Sanders (Bernie's brother, fought neighbouring Oxford West at GE2015). LDs do potentially have some good candidates, both based in the constituency and in Oxford, and would be smart to go for one of them.
I can't see any stand-out candidate in the local Conservative party. Ian Hudspeth (leader of Oxfordshire County Council) is clearly Top Tory round here and I think would be good at it, but he publicly fell out with Cameron and that has seriously blotted his copybook. There's a few ambitious youngsters in the constituency but I'd be very surprised if they make it past the inevitably strong external competition. So my guess is that the Tory candidate will be from outside.
This isn't UKIP territory at all and I think it would be a mistake for Farage (or another big hitter) to stand, but who knows.
Not that the result is in any doubt!
Still think he could have had a comeback in some form some years down the line as he was young enough and the talent is there but the party seems to be taking a new direction under May.
By the sounds of it he doesn't agree with some of the things May is planning or has already announced and instead of causing her problems (she will have plenty in the years to come but with a former PM and Conservative great criticizing her policies it would have carried great weight) he has decided to bow out.
My understanding of West Oxfordshire Lib Dems is that they are better organised than most non-held seats in the Coalition years, and can put up a good fight in a by-election. But I wouldn't touch the 20-1, I think a good 2nd for the yellows, matching the Henley by-election or thereabouts, would be the target.
https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/772440212282675200
If olive oil is made from olives
If corn oil is made from corn
What is baby oil made from?
A rhetorical question I guess.
https://twitter.com/MikeGapes/status/775350426476609536
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/school-house-prices-gibbons/
https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/775353024843767808
I don't think he was in the majority of those who took the decision at the Vote Leave board.
All grammar school advocates seem to have is 'I went to school, that makes me an expert'
But maybe not in Witney (I presume this was Remainier than most, given the demographics?)
Of course, Dan Hannan is far from the only soon-to-be-unemployed Conservative MEPs. Are there any others who might reasonably be considered for this seat?
* All grammar schools abolished.
* All private public and fee paying schools abolished.
* Homeschooling illegal.
* Private tutoring illegal.
* No choice as to school, you can just express an interest All pupils told which school they are going to with selection by lottery of all pupils who have selected an interest.
Do that or shut up about grammar schols.
Fixed it for you.
But certainly in my part of London, I have a choice:
a) go private
b) move
The time-honoured 30/40- something migration from London is a factor of just two things really - house prices and education options.
Academisation and free schools means I have more options, but I'd still have to move to get into the best catchments.
Look at his videos and arguments he used during the campaign. Not once did he use migration and, in fact, he suggested EFTA and conceded free movement would continue in the weeks leading up to the vote. The biggest criticism you could make of him was that he was off message. That's why he featured so little in the debates.
I suppose you could argue he should have resigned from the Vote Leave board. But I suspect that wouldn't have been very helpful to Leave.
Why?
It's all utterly disjointed. There'll be faith schools, academies, grammar schools, all competing to get the best state pupils and sod the kids who really need help. Despite her words, she's moved the debate onto the people who need help the least.
It's not a policy for education: it's a policy for the party.
NEW THREAD
Imagine what fun I could have telling a load of self-important men with scarcely an ounce of common-sense between them what to do..... It will scarcely be any different from work!
You can bet every headline is going to be about this being over the Grammar schools policy and Cameron's stance on academies even though Cameron may have been thinking for some time about stepping down as an MP.
A lovely safe seat for someone, who do the Tories want to get into Parliament who isn't there already?
(This, I imagine, is why Labour governments have never shut down private healthcare or public schools, despite the politics of envy being their most important driver. Some civil servant will have done the sums...).