Details from London review confirm loss of six seats, and a single Islington seat derived primarily from that of Emily Thornberry, i.e. Corbyn's Islington North is broken up. Reports in press have suggested Poplar and Limehouse as a likely new base for Corbyn, as the sitting MP is thought likely to retire.
Eastern England loses only one seat, in Essex. As per previous suggestions, this appears to include a substantial redrawing of Clacton, to make a new Harwich and Clacton seat. This is thought to be very negative for Douglas Carswell's chances of staying on after 2020.
Thought to be by who? Anyway, that's a re-creation of the Harwich seat which always existed before 2010. I think Carswell would have a good chance of holding it, particularly if Bernard Jenkin is standing elsewhere.
You got me on that one! Something I seem to have remembered reading in past, perhaps lower concentration of less wealthy voters at the Harwich end of the revised seat? If memory serves Carswell only won Clacton by about 3K votes last time.
Details from London review confirm loss of six seats, and a single Islington seat derived primarily from that of Emily Thornberry, i.e. Corbyn's Islington North is broken up. Reports in press have suggested Poplar and Limehouse as a likely new base for Corbyn, as the sitting MP is thought likely to retire.
Eastern England loses only one seat, in Essex. As per previous suggestions, this appears to include a substantial redrawing of Clacton, to make a new Harwich and Clacton seat. This is thought to be very negative for Douglas Carswell's chances of staying on after 2020.
Thought to be by who? Anyway, that's a re-creation of the Harwich seat which always existed before 2010. I think Carswell would have a good chance of holding it, particularly if Bernard Jenkin is standing elsewhere.
You got me on that one! Something I seem to have remembered reading in past, perhaps lower concentration of less wealthy voters at the Harwich end of the revised seat? If memory serves Carswell only won Clacton by about 3K votes last time.
Most people were outraged by that last time round.
Big chunk of 7 seats knocked off the North West. Presumably this will mainly affect Labour? Cumbria has had a big re-jig, going down from 6 to 5 seats: looks like 3 Labour seats down Western side replaced with only 2. In the South, Tim Farron's constituency appears the least affected and ought to remain safe. Carlisle gains a rural hinterland so presumably much safer for the Tories going forward.
Big chunk of 7 seats knocked off the North West. Presumably this will mainly affect Labour? Cumbria has had a big re-jig, going down from 6 to 5 seats: looks like 3 Labour seats down Western side replaced with only 2. In the South, Tim Farron's constituency appears the least affected and ought to remain safe. Carlisle gains a rural hinterland so presumably much safer for the Tories going forward.
It's the impact on the marginals that matters too. For instance in the N.W. I can plainly see the new Bolton West and the new Bury seat flipping Labour.
The impact on the marginals surrounding the large cities is important.
Big chunk of 7 seats knocked off the North West. Presumably this will mainly affect Labour? Cumbria has had a big re-jig, going down from 6 to 5 seats: looks like 3 Labour seats down Western side replaced with only 2. In the South, Tim Farron's constituency appears the least affected and ought to remain safe. Carlisle gains a rural hinterland so presumably much safer for the Tories going forward.
It's the impact on the marginals that matters too. For instance in the N.W. I can plainly see the new Bolton West and the new Bury seat flipping Labour.
The impact on the marginals surrounding the large cities is important.
Why? Where revised boundaries produce tight Con-Lab marginal seats (based on the performances of the parties last year) then there is no reason to suppose that the vast bulk of those, with the possible exception of any appearing in Greater London, won't go the way of the Tories - should Labour continue pressing doggedly on with a leader whom the bulk of the electorate consider not to be of Prime Ministerial material.
The only question is whether the boundary review is bad for Labour — or very bad...
But with the Messiah in charge of the Labour Party they will win all 600 seats...
It genuinely scares me to see the state of today's Labour Party. It's like something out of North Korea in terms of the blind belief in the power of the leader.
The only question is whether the boundary review is bad for Labour — or very bad...
But with the Messiah in charge of the Labour Party they will win all 600 seats...
It genuinely scares me to see the state of today's Labour Party. It's like something out of North Korea in terms of the blind belief in the power of the leader.
Its bad for the Labour Party, its bad for the country.
Mrs Clinton acknowledged she had lost her balance during Sunday morning's health scare, but said she did not faint.
"I felt dizzy and I did lose my balance for a minute, but once I got in (the van), once I could sit down, once I could cool off, once I had some water, I immediately started feeling better," she told the network.
Really...thats about as believable as Corbyn's ram packed train claims. You can see from the video she is out of it, her body goes totally limp and has to be dragged from the curb into the van.
It doesn't help battle the conspiracy theories if you just carry on lying. Why not just say something like, I stupidly ignored my doctors advice and it caused to me faint, because I overdid it.
Mrs Clinton acknowledged she had lost her balance during Sunday morning's health scare, but said she did not faint.
"I felt dizzy and I did lose my balance for a minute, but once I got in (the van), once I could sit down, once I could cool off, once I had some water, I immediately started feeling better," she told the network.
Really...thats about as believable as Corbyn's ram packed train claims. You can see from the video she is out of it, her body goes totally limp and has to be dragged from the curb into the van.
It doesn't help battle the conspiracy theories if you just carry on lying. Why not just say something like, I stupidly ignored my doctors advice and it caused to me faint, because I overdid it.
Maybe she was under doctors orders to keep lying and not get up.
Mrs Clinton acknowledged she had lost her balance during Sunday morning's health scare, but said she did not faint.
"I felt dizzy and I did lose my balance for a minute, but once I got in (the van), once I could sit down, once I could cool off, once I had some water, I immediately started feeling better," she told the network.
Really...thats about as believable as Corbyn's ram packed train claims. You can see from the video she is out of it, her body goes totally limp and has to be dragged from the curb into the van.
It doesn't help battle the conspiracy theories if you just carry on lying. Why not just say something like, I stupidly ignored my doctors advice and it caused to me faint, because I overdid it.
I'd think I'd feel a bit dizzy if I lost $2,500 worth of my foot ware at the kerbside
"Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said he is "very unhappy" that the Islington North constituency he has represented for 33 years could disappear as part of a shake-up of parliamentary boundaries."
"IMF chief Christine Lagarde will go on trial in France on December 12 over a massive state payout to tycoon Bernard Tapie made when she was finance minister, the court hearing the case said Monday."
"The case stems from Lagarde's handling of a dispute with Tapie, a colourful businessman and former minister, who claimed he was defrauded by a state bank in its sale of sportswear giant Adidas. On becoming finance minister in 2007 Lagarde ordered that Tapie's long-running battle with the state be resolved by arbitration."
"The decision proved hugely costly to the state, with Tapie walking away with a staggering 404 million euros ($445 million) in compensation in 2008"
Mrs Clinton acknowledged she had lost her balance during Sunday morning's health scare, but said she did not faint.
"I felt dizzy and I did lose my balance for a minute, but once I got in (the van), once I could sit down, once I could cool off, once I had some water, I immediately started feeling better," she told the network.
Really...thats about as believable as Corbyn's ram packed train claims. You can see from the video she is out of it, her body goes totally limp and has to be dragged from the curb into the van.
It doesn't help battle the conspiracy theories if you just carry on lying. Why not just say something like, I stupidly ignored my doctors advice and it caused to me faint, because I overdid it.
Errr.......Sky news this morning...
"The Democratic presidential candidate admits ignoring doctors' advice telling her to rest after being diagnosed with pneumonia. In the interview she admitted she had earlier been diagnosed with pneumonia and was told to rest for five days. But she admitted not following "that very wise advice"
Well they advised me not to push the button and "that was very wise advice" said President Hilary as she stood in the midst of the White House rubble and surveyed the remains of Washington DC.
Well they advised me not to push the button and "that was very wise advice" said President Hilary as she stood in the midst of the White House rubble and surveyed the remains of Washington DC.
Americans 'have had enough of experts' says the anti-establishment Mrs 'Brexit' Clinton.
Ok there was a big discussion here yesterday about whether pneumonia was catching. Well it appears HRC did put that young girl at risk by the hug according to none other than the BBC.
"The disease is contagious and spread through close contact, transmitted through sneezing or coughing. However the contagious period usually lasts less than 10 days."
As a presidential candidate, Mrs Clinton was at high risk of infection, according to Dr William Schaffner, an infectious diseases specialist at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. "Candidates are constantly out in enclosed spaces, face to face with myriads of people,'' he said. "It's an ideal opportunity for the transmission of a respiratory virus."
OT: Point of order. That is not correct that those are the boundaries of Wales 1960-2010. It is the boundaries of Wales 1974-2010, after the illegal annexation of Monmouthshire from England, facilitated by the Traitor Heath.
OT: Point of order. That is not correct that those are the boundaries of Wales 1960-2010. It is the boundaries of Wales 1974-2010, after the illegal annexation of Monmouthshire from England, facilitated by the Traitor Heath.
Mrs Clinton acknowledged she had lost her balance during Sunday morning's health scare, but said she did not faint.
"I felt dizzy and I did lose my balance for a minute, but once I got in (the van), once I could sit down, once I could cool off, once I had some water, I immediately started feeling better," she told the network.
Really...thats about as believable as Corbyn's ram packed train claims. You can see from the video she is out of it, her body goes totally limp and has to be dragged from the curb into the van.
It doesn't help battle the conspiracy theories if you just carry on lying. Why not just say something like, I stupidly ignored my doctors advice and it caused to me faint, because I overdid it.
Errr.......Sky news this morning...
"The Democratic presidential candidate admits ignoring doctors' advice telling her to rest after being diagnosed with pneumonia. In the interview she admitted she had earlier been diagnosed with pneumonia and was told to rest for five days. But she admitted not following "that very wise advice"
Well they advised me not to push the button and "that was very wise advice" said President Hilary as she stood in the midst of the White House rubble and surveyed the remains of Washington DC.
Amusing, but Trump seems much more likely to be a button pusher.
For now. But her gratuitously rude treatment of one of the greatest post-war Chancellors - who more than anyone was responsible for the fact that we have a Conservative government in the first place - was a notable miscalculation and entirely unnecessary.
Osborne deserved everything he got.
He is clearly still interested in politics. If he's smart, he'll rehabilitate himself on the backbenches and then loyally offer to dig Theresa out of a hole when the time comes.
If he's not, and he just continues to "plot the downfall of (my) enemies" he will become a Heath/Heseltine like figure.
Ok there was a big discussion here yesterday about whether pneumonia was catching. Well it appears HRC did put that young girl at risk by the hug according to none other than the BBC.
"The disease is contagious and spread through close contact, transmitted through sneezing or coughing. However the contagious period usually lasts less than 10 days."
As a presidential candidate, Mrs Clinton was at high risk of infection, according to Dr William Schaffner, an infectious diseases specialist at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. "Candidates are constantly out in enclosed spaces, face to face with myriads of people,'' he said. "It's an ideal opportunity for the transmission of a respiratory virus."
So why did she hug the girl? Why did she mix with many others while in the contagious state?
It's deplorable....
In the interview with Anderson Cooper on CNN, she spoke of going to her daughters apartment and being with her grandchildren. Those poor little mites. If she was infectious, that is the last place she should have gone.
For now. But her gratuitously rude treatment of one of the greatest post-war Chancellors - who more than anyone was responsible for the fact that we have a Conservative government in the first place - was a notable miscalculation and entirely unnecessary.
Osborne deserved everything he got.
He is clearly still interested in politics. If he's smart, he'll rehabilitate himself on the backbenches and then loyally offer to dig Theresa out of a hole when the time comes.
If he's not, and he just continues to "plot the downfall of (my) enemies" he will become a Heath/Heseltine like figure.
If someone like Osborne cannot find himself a seat somewhere then it doesn't say much for his famed political ability.
OT: Point of order. That is not correct that those are the boundaries of Wales 1960-2010. It is the boundaries of Wales 1974-2010, after the illegal annexation of Monmouthshire from England, facilitated by the Traitor Heath.
For now. But her gratuitously rude treatment of one of the greatest post-war Chancellors - who more than anyone was responsible for the fact that we have a Conservative government in the first place - was a notable miscalculation and entirely unnecessary.
Osborne deserved everything he got.
He is clearly still interested in politics. If he's smart, he'll rehabilitate himself on the backbenches and then loyally offer to dig Theresa out of a hole when the time comes.
If he's not, and he just continues to "plot the downfall of (my) enemies" he will become a Heath/Heseltine like figure.
If someone like Osborne cannot find himself a seat somewhere then it doesn't say much for his famed political ability.
Well the place is ram packed - ask Mr Corbyn.....
He is very clever but I feel immature. When you are in one of the great offices of state you act in the national interest in putting foward policies not play games of lets do this as it puts Labour on the back foot (ok they all do it to some extent but subtly - Osborne was about as subtle as a brick).
I havent forgiven him for the child benefit changes. Couple both earning £50k get it while single earning couple of £60k dont, encouraging prople to submit their children to state indoctrination in day orphanages when they have barely been weaned.
Thanks. Leics doesn't seem to change a great deal.
It looks like I am moving. I might even get to be in a seat that is a possible LD gain.
All the seats round me are now very solidly Tory. Overall, though, this article talks about 17 Tory losses in England and Wales, and 23 Labour ones. If that's true the review is not as good for the Tories as was expected:
For now. But her gratuitously rude treatment of one of the greatest post-war Chancellors - who more than anyone was responsible for the fact that we have a Conservative government in the first place - was a notable miscalculation and entirely unnecessary.
Osborne deserved everything he got.
He is clearly still interested in politics. If he's smart, he'll rehabilitate himself on the backbenches and then loyally offer to dig Theresa out of a hole when the time comes.
If he's not, and he just continues to "plot the downfall of (my) enemies" he will become a Heath/Heseltine like figure.
If someone like Osborne cannot find himself a seat somewhere then it doesn't say much for his famed political ability.
His problem is his behaviour and personality, not his ability or intelligence.
AGW comments are akin to those of people who (used to) argue that smoking didn't really damage health. Once the balance of probabilities suggests that we are causing it then if you wait until you have unequivocal data then another x-million people die from that failure to act. You don't wait, you act. I'm an engineer, I don't wait for things to break before I fix them and I look for solutions once I realise there is a problem.
I have a theory that 'expertise' founders upon matters that are simply too complex, with too many moving parts, for one person to comprehend fully. As an engineer, I'm sure you're a dab hand at dismantling a washing machine and re-assembling it, but I'm afraid I don't set any more store by your views on AGW than those of a greengrocer.
By the same token, I'd trust a surgeon to do keyhole on my knee, but not necessarily a doctor to tell me what's wrong with my body and what to do about it. Too much going on; too many different moving parts. It's really just guesswork.
You need of some education as to what an engineer is. Engineers don't dismantle equipment they tell people what is wrong and others do the dissassembling. That is what a qualified Engineer does so your analogy as to what we are re-surgeons is correct. As an engineer I'll ascertain a fix for your problem and then get the technicians to carry out the necessary repairs. A big problem in this country is the failure to appreciate engineering is not fixing a broken piece of equipment, it is fixing something BEFORE it becomes a broken piece of equipment. And no, your theory is wrong so your conclusions fail at that point.
Your answer isn't pertinent whatever to my theory, but thanks.
If the boundary changes really are less favourable than the Tories had been hoping they may well end up being shelved.
This has been suggested?
The impression I get from looking at areas I know is that safe seats of all shades are now rather more marginal due to having lumps of adjacent constituencies with a rather different demographic being tacked on -or being new with a mixed demographic.
For now. But her gratuitously rude treatment of one of the greatest post-war Chancellors - who more than anyone was responsible for the fact that we have a Conservative government in the first place - was a notable miscalculation and entirely unnecessary.
Osborne deserved everything he got.
He is clearly still interested in politics. If he's smart, he'll rehabilitate himself on the backbenches and then loyally offer to dig Theresa out of a hole when the time comes.
If he's not, and he just continues to "plot the downfall of (my) enemies" he will become a Heath/Heseltine like figure.
If someone like Osborne cannot find himself a seat somewhere then it doesn't say much for his famed political ability.
Well the place is ram packed - ask Mr Corbyn.....
He is very clever but I feel immature. When you are in one of the great offices of state you act in the national interest in putting foward policies not play games of lets do this as it puts Labour on the back foot (ok they all do it to some extent but subtly - Osborne was about as subtle as a brick).
I havent forgiven him for the child benefit changes. Couple both earning £50k get it while single earning couple of £60k dont, encouraging prople to submit their children to state indoctrination in day orphanages when they have barely been weaned.
All income taxes in the UK operate on that basis though ...
Another example of obsession with the first two questions of climate change whilst ignoring the last two.
The four questions are:
(1) Is the climate changing? (2) Are humans responsible? (3) Is it a bad thing? (4) Can we make changes to stop it?
Only if all four answered are "yes" should we take the economy-devastating measures that are suggested.
The current status of the four questions is:
(1) Yes. Climate stability is impossible. (2) Almost certainly yes, we are a factor. Quite likely we are not the only factor. (3) This question is never addressed. It is often assumed, but that's not the same thing. (4) If "we" is the whole world, possibly. If "we" is the UK alone, no.
If the boundary changes really are less favourable than the Tories had been hoping they may well end up being shelved.
This has been suggested?
The impression I get from looking at areas I know is that safe seats of all shades are now rather more marginal due to having lumps of adjacent constituencies with a rather different demographic being tacked on -or being new with a mixed demographic.
Surely one of the priorities for the Boundaries Commission should have been to create more marginal seats where peoples' votes actually matter. If they have succeeded in this they should be commended, even if politicians don't like the fact that they may have to work at their seats and no longer take them for granted. Indeed, particularly so.
For now. But her gratuitously rude treatment of one of the greatest post-war Chancellors - who more than anyone was responsible for the fact that we have a Conservative government in the first place - was a notable miscalculation and entirely unnecessary.
Osborne deserved everything he got.
He is clearly still interested in politics. If he's smart, he'll rehabilitate himself on the backbenches and then loyally offer to dig Theresa out of a hole when the time comes.
If he's not, and he just continues to "plot the downfall of (my) enemies" he will become a Heath/Heseltine like figure.
If someone like Osborne cannot find himself a seat somewhere then it doesn't say much for his famed political ability.
Well the place is ram packed - ask Mr Corbyn.....
He is very clever but I feel immature. When you are in one of the great offices of state you act in the national interest in putting foward policies not play games of lets do this as it puts Labour on the back foot (ok they all do it to some extent but subtly - Osborne was about as subtle as a brick).
I havent forgiven him for the child benefit changes. Couple both earning £50k get it while single earning couple of £60k dont, encouraging prople to submit their children to state indoctrination in day orphanages when they have barely been weaned.
All income taxes in the UK operate on that basis though ...
And for all the whining about hypothetical edge cases, were any ever found?
If the boundary changes really are less favourable than the Tories had been hoping they may well end up being shelved.
This has been suggested?
The impression I get from looking at areas I know is that safe seats of all shades are now rather more marginal due to having lumps of adjacent constituencies with a rather different demographic being tacked on -or being new with a mixed demographic.
Given the failings of the system this would actually be a good thing - safe seats are hardly good news for voters, or politics, after all.
I think the new tighter 5% thresholds are a much more significant constraint on where the lines get drawn - given that almost everywhere wards are used as building blocks, there are only so many ways that they can be combined to keep every seat within the +/- limits, and looking at a few areas it is clear that a lot of strange combinations are being proposed in order to justify the numbers. The predominance of the arithmetic over sensible local areas is a disappointing aspect of the revised approach.
It also seems to me that the Commission has taken the approach of, firstly, dividing each region into a number of sub-regions, generally blocks of neighbouring authorities within whatever clear natural boundaries exist within each region and then, secondly, worked in from the edges of each sub-region, trying to maintain the existing seats and topping them up as necessary by robbing wards from the seats towards the centre of the sub region. This means that, if your seat abuts the boundary of a sub region it isn't generally hugely changed, whereas in the middle of each sub region existing seats disappear altogether, and quite often whatever wards are then left over are lumped together in a final seat that makes no real sense in community terms whatsoever.
AGW comments are akin to those of people who (used to) argue that smoking didn't really damage health. Once the balance of probabilities suggests that we are causing it then if you wait until you have unequivocal data then another x-million people die from that failure to act. You don't wait, you act. I'm an engineer, I don't wait for things to break before I fix them and I look for solutions once I realise there is a problem.
I have a theory that 'expertise' founders upon matters that are simply too complex, with too many moving parts, for one person to comprehend fully. As an engineer, I'm sure you're a dab hand at dismantling a washing machine and re-assembling it, but I'm afraid I don't set any more store by your views on AGW than those of a greengrocer.
By the same token, I'd trust a surgeon to do keyhole on my knee, but not necessarily a doctor to tell me what's wrong with my body and what to do about it. Too much going on; too many different moving parts. It's really just guesswork.
You need of some education as to what an engineer is. Engineers don't dismantle equipment they tell people what is wrong and others do the dissassembling. That is what a qualified Engineer does so your analogy as to what we are re-surgeons is correct. As an engineer I'll ascertain a fix for your problem and then get the technicians to carry out the necessary repairs. A big problem in this country is the failure to appreciate engineering is not fixing a broken piece of equipment, it is fixing something BEFORE it becomes a broken piece of equipment. And no, your theory is wrong so your conclusions fail at that point.
Well speaking as an engineer myself there was me thinking that an engineer designed things not to fail and where that couldnt be avoided ensured redundancy so that if it failed the overall system carried on undisturbed while it was fixed.
If it isnt critical then let it fail and fix it when it does.
Applying the precautionary principle of changing it periodically in case it breaks is the worst of all worlds although in some cases like a cam belt in an engine inevitable because it deteriorates over time and the cost of fixing a failure viz swapping it out disproportionate.
If the boundary changes really are less favourable than the Tories had been hoping they may well end up being shelved.
This has been suggested?
The impression I get from looking at areas I know is that safe seats of all shades are now rather more marginal due to having lumps of adjacent constituencies with a rather different demographic being tacked on -or being new with a mixed demographic.
Given the failings of the system this would actually be a good thing - safe seats are hardly good news for voters, or politics, after all.
I think the new tighter 5% thresholds are a much more significant constraint on where the lines get drawn - given that almost everywhere wards are used as building blocks, there are only so many ways that they can be combined to keep every seat within the +/- limits, and looking at a few areas it is clear that a lot of strange combinations are being proposed in order to justify the numbers. The predominance of the arithmetic over sensible local areas is a disappointing aspect of the revised approach.
It also seems to me that the Commission has taken the approach of, firstly, dividing each region into a number of sub-regions, generally blocks of neighbouring authorities within whatever clear natural boundaries exist within each region and then, secondly, worked in from the edges of each sub-region, trying to maintain the existing seats and topping them up as necessary by robbing wards from the seats towards the centre of the sub region. This means that, if your seat abuts the boundary of a sub region it isn't generally hugely changed, whereas in the middle of each sub region existing seats disappear altogether, and quite often whatever wards are then left over are lumped together in a final seat that makes no real sense in community terms whatsoever.
That does seem to be the approach but dont be too quick to dismiss the groupings as odd. Eg Streatham and Mitcham looks barmy to an outsider but as someone who grew up there, for the first time an area split like Poland before 1918 into three/four Boroughs who care little for them has a representative for that area. Just a pity they are not redrawing the council areas on the same lines with a new London Borough of Streatham and Mitcham.
It occurs to me that just about every ward of the new Streatham and Mitcham Constituency (which is from chunks of LB Croydon, Merton and Lambeth) is partly or wholly in London SW16.
Comments
For instance in the N.W. I can plainly see the new Bolton West and the new Bury seat flipping Labour.
The impact on the marginals surrounding the large cities is important.
https://twitter.com/chucktodd/status/775468211991040000
She also said she did not disclose a recent pneumonia diagnosis immediately because "I just didn't think it was going to be that big a deal".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37346293
"I felt dizzy and I did lose my balance for a minute, but once I got in (the van), once I could sit down, once I could cool off, once I had some water, I immediately started feeling better," she told the network.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37346293
Really...thats about as believable as Corbyn's ram packed train claims. You can see from the video she is out of it, her body goes totally limp and has to be dragged from the curb into the van.
It doesn't help battle the conspiracy theories if you just carry on lying. Why not just say something like, I stupidly ignored my doctors advice and it caused to me faint, because I overdid it.
Con MPs in Wales are surely going to be very unhappy - May is going to have to sort something out for them.
That isn't really Donald Trump at 1 min 36 secs, is it? Bugger me if it is:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNq9Bjch6UA
#bullshit
The redrawing of constituencies will cost Labour seats but also allow the hard left to oust their centrist enemies
Rachel Sylvester"
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/corbyn-has-the-perfect-weapon-for-a-purge-055zmmm8h
http://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyns-seat-at-risk-under-plans-to-reduce-number-of-mps-10576092
"The case stems from Lagarde's handling of a dispute with Tapie, a colourful businessman and former minister, who claimed he was defrauded by a state bank in its sale of sportswear giant Adidas. On becoming finance minister in 2007 Lagarde ordered that Tapie's long-running battle with the state be resolved by arbitration."
"The decision proved hugely costly to the state, with Tapie walking away with a staggering 404 million euros ($445 million) in compensation in 2008"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3786294/IMF-chief-Christine-Largarde-stand-trial-huge-state-payout-tycoon.html#ixzz4K6Oy7H00
So lose 404 million euros and "risk" a paltry 15000 euro fine or up to a year in prison. Hardly worth the cost of the trial is it?
Errr.......Sky news this morning...
"The Democratic presidential candidate admits ignoring doctors' advice telling her to rest after being diagnosed with pneumonia. In the interview she admitted she had earlier been diagnosed with pneumonia and was told to rest for five days. But she admitted not following "that very wise advice"
http://news.sky.com/story/hillary-clinton-campaigning-again-in-next-couple-of-days-10576086
Well they advised me not to push the button and "that was very wise advice" said President Hilary as she stood in the midst of the White House rubble and surveyed the remains of Washington DC.
"The disease is contagious and spread through close contact, transmitted through sneezing or coughing. However the contagious period usually lasts less than 10 days."
As a presidential candidate, Mrs Clinton was at high risk of infection, according to Dr William Schaffner, an infectious diseases specialist at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.
"Candidates are constantly out in enclosed spaces, face to face with myriads of people,'' he said. "It's an ideal opportunity for the transmission of a respiratory virus."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37336943
So why did she hug the girl?
Why did she mix with many others while in the contagious state?
It's deplorable....
Kudos Mr Paul.
It looks like I am moving. I might even get to be in a seat that is a possible LD gain.
He is clearly still interested in politics. If he's smart, he'll rehabilitate himself on the backbenches and then loyally offer to dig Theresa out of a hole when the time comes.
If he's not, and he just continues to "plot the downfall of (my) enemies" he will become a Heath/Heseltine like figure.
I note the IoW has been split into two, rather undersized, constituencies sans mainland.
One assumes for a bit of future proofing.
He is very clever but I feel immature. When you are in one of the great offices of state you act in the national interest in putting foward policies not play games of lets do this as it puts Labour on the back foot (ok they all do it to some extent but subtly - Osborne was about as subtle as a brick).
I havent forgiven him for the child benefit changes. Couple both earning £50k get it while single earning couple of £60k dont, encouraging prople to submit their children to state indoctrination in day orphanages when they have barely been weaned.
http://xkcd.com/1732/
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57d713aae4b0a32e2f6c73e8
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57d713aae4b0a32e2f6c73e8
Catfjght between Siobhan and Chuka coming up.
So stop being a silly Cnut and look at long term mitigation measures like flood prevention barriers instead.
The four questions are:
(1) Is the climate changing?
(2) Are humans responsible?
(3) Is it a bad thing?
(4) Can we make changes to stop it?
Only if all four answered are "yes" should we take the economy-devastating measures that are suggested.
The current status of the four questions is:
(1) Yes. Climate stability is impossible.
(2) Almost certainly yes, we are a factor. Quite likely we are not the only factor.
(3) This question is never addressed. It is often assumed, but that's not the same thing.
(4) If "we" is the whole world, possibly. If "we" is the UK alone, no.
Day 5 done. We're still sitting second... #Supercharge #Paralympics https://t.co/khthkIIYFO
I think the new tighter 5% thresholds are a much more significant constraint on where the lines get drawn - given that almost everywhere wards are used as building blocks, there are only so many ways that they can be combined to keep every seat within the +/- limits, and looking at a few areas it is clear that a lot of strange combinations are being proposed in order to justify the numbers. The predominance of the arithmetic over sensible local areas is a disappointing aspect of the revised approach.
It also seems to me that the Commission has taken the approach of, firstly, dividing each region into a number of sub-regions, generally blocks of neighbouring authorities within whatever clear natural boundaries exist within each region and then, secondly, worked in from the edges of each sub-region, trying to maintain the existing seats and topping them up as necessary by robbing wards from the seats towards the centre of the sub region. This means that, if your seat abuts the boundary of a sub region it isn't generally hugely changed, whereas in the middle of each sub region existing seats disappear altogether, and quite often whatever wards are then left over are lumped together in a final seat that makes no real sense in community terms whatsoever.
If it isnt critical then let it fail and fix it when it does.
Applying the precautionary principle of changing it periodically in case it breaks is the worst of all worlds although in some cases like a cam belt in an engine inevitable because it deteriorates over time and the cost of fixing a failure viz swapping it out disproportionate.
http://metro.co.uk/2016/09/13/trump-and-putin-poisoned-hillary-clinton-warns-top-doctor-6124813/
Have they used postcodes in their deliberations?