politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why part of my expected Diane James winnings will go on Jus

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why part of my expected Diane James winnings will go on Justine Greening – 20/1 to be next cabinet minster out

A new YouGov poll this morning finds that there has been a less than overwhelming response to TMay’s main domestic policy – the return of grammar schools. 34% say they back the plan; 25% want all existing grammars closed and 20% thought things should stay as they are.

Read the full story here

Theuniondivvie

Britain First.

David_Evershed

Lib Dem gain from Labour

Tupton (North East Derbyshire) result:
LDEM: 38.3% (+38.3)
LAB: 34.7% (-32.4)
CON: 17.5% (-15.4)
UKIP: 8.9% (+8.9)
BPP: 0.7% (+0.7)

williamglenn

The CSU leader is threatening to withdraw support from Merkel's candidature in 2017 if she doesn't implement an upper limit on refugees.

AlastairMeeks

@David_Evershed The Lib Dems just nosed it there.

David_Evershed

In other results

Blakelaw (Newcastle upon Tyne) result:
LAB: 43.2% (-20.0)
LDEM: 28.1% (+19.0)
UKIP: 19.1% (+3.0)
CON: 5.1% (-2.4)
GRN: 4.5% (+0.5)

Puckeridge (East Hertfordshire) result:
CON: 42.9% (-24.6)
UKIP: 18.9% (+18.9)
LDEM: 18.0% (+18.0)
LAB: 11.0% (-8.9)
GRN: 9.1% (-3.5)

Castle (Carlisle) result:
LAB: 46.5% (+9.2)
CON: 26.7% (+7.7)
UKIP: 12.5% (-10.4)
LDEM: 10.3% (-0.6)
GRN: 4.0% (-3.5)

MaxPB

Not a bad bet, the policy has not been thought through well enough and having a comprehensive educated person implement wider academic selection seems like a crazy move on the face of it.

SimonStClare

Diane James would be a excellent choice as UKIP leader imho, she might even convince some of the UKIP ladies not to abandon ship.

Richard_Nabavi

FPT:

Reading Nick's article, and the Paul Waugh article which Plato just linked to, prompted me to look again at the 'Corbyn To Go Before Next General Election?' market on Betfair.

I was already on No, and I've just topped up at 1.5. This looks like a no-brainer to me, apart from actuarial risk. Sad though it is from the points of view both of entertainment and of betting opportunities, I have to say that Nick is right when he says in his article: Forget about a third leadership election before 2020. Once was necessary when Ed stood down. Twice was perhaps understandable in view of the PLP unrest. Three would be ridiculous. At some point the result of elections needs to be respected, and we’ve reached it.

In addition, there's a kind of stalemate which makes Corbyn's position very strong indeed.

Theuniondivvie

AlastairMeeks said:

@David_Evershed The Lib Dems just nosed it there.

Still, not bad for their first bite at the cherry.

AlastairMeeks

It seems that harmony is not likely to break out in UKIP any time soon:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/776683734695161857

Richard_Nabavi

@AlastairMeeks - to be fair, Farage is right on that.

David_Evershed

Justine Greening seems to be hanging on just waiting for May's grammar school policy to get kicked into the long grass and wither on the vine. Indeed she might have some influence in making the long grass grow longer still.

AlastairMeeks

@Richard_Nabavi Is there any reason why Douglas Carswell couldn't rejoin the Conservatives now? Brexit has been voted for and his pathological hatred of David Cameron is no longer a relevant consideration on either side.

DavidL

SimonStClare said:

Diane James would be a excellent choice as UKIP leader imho, she might even convince some of the UKIP ladies not to abandon ship.

Great. 2 sugars love.

Richard_Nabavi

AlastairMeeks said:

@Richard_Nabavi Is there any reason why Douglas Carswell couldn't rejoin the Conservatives now? Brexit has been voted for and his pathological hatred of David Cameron is no longer a relevant consideration on either side.

No reason that I can see. He might prefer to be an independent, though.

Tissue_Price

AlastairMeeks said:

@Richard_Nabavi Is there any reason why Douglas Carswell couldn't rejoin the Conservatives now? Brexit has been voted for and his pathological hatred of David Cameron is no longer a relevant consideration on either side.

Maybe Theresa will wheel him out mid-conference.

Sandpit

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems that harmony is not likely to break out in UKIP any time soon:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/776683734695161857

They've kinda lost their mojo, now that they've achieved the ambition that held them together as a party. Now they're showing their differences, which were always there but now come to the fore.

AlastairMeeks

I note that Douglas Carswell did retweet this:

https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/776677681039601665

Though that might just be internal party score-settling, I suppose.

DavidL

Richard_Nabavi said:

AlastairMeeks said:

@Richard_Nabavi Is there any reason why Douglas Carswell couldn't rejoin the Conservatives now? Brexit has been voted for and his pathological hatred of David Cameron is no longer a relevant consideration on either side.

No reason that I can see. He might prefer to be an independent, though.

And it is not as if he was particularly reliable the first time around. An independent if slightly eccentric and occasionally interesting thinker. Doesn't really do party politics.

Jonathan

Richard_Nabavi said:

AlastairMeeks said:

@Richard_Nabavi Is there any reason why Douglas Carswell couldn't rejoin the Conservatives now? Brexit has been voted for and his pathological hatred of David Cameron is no longer a relevant consideration on either side.

No reason that I can see. He might prefer to be an independent, though.

Would May even accept him? She doesn't need him.

If he switched, he would have to fight another by-election. This time he might lose.

Paul_Bedfordshire

Off topic but a fabulous website on the history of London Transport Bus Stops.

http://www.eplates.info.

Sandpit

Tissue_Price said:

AlastairMeeks said:

@Richard_Nabavi Is there any reason why Douglas Carswell couldn't rejoin the Conservatives now? Brexit has been voted for and his pathological hatred of David Cameron is no longer a relevant consideration on either side.

Maybe Theresa will wheel him out mid-conference.

With the divisions in all of the parties at the moment, I'd currently be more surprised not to see a couple of defections at some point during the conference season.

Pulpstar

I think 20-1 is a very fair price and have followed our genial host in on this one.

A nice tip

TheScreamingEagles

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

DavidL

Very good interview on R4 this morning with Osborne. It was really novel hearing an intelligent grown up politician on that program.

Greenwich_Floater

Clacton is going blue at the next GE - it doesn't matter if Carswell fights it alone or under UKIP

Richard_Nabavi

Jonathan said:

Would May even accept him? She doesn't need him.

If he switched, he would have to fight another by-election. This time he might lose.

In practice he'll vote with the government on most of the key issues, so you are right, she doesn't really need him.

Another by-election would be a bit irritating to the good citizens of Clacton.

MaxPB

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

tlg86

Not a politician....

http://tinyurl.com/jml2v2a

AlastairMeeks

Off topic, I see that Betfair punters seem to have decided that Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden aren't poised to step into Hillary Clinton's $5000 shoes.

Pulpstar

AlastairMeeks said:

Off topic, I see that Betfair punters seem to have decided that Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden aren't poised to step into Hillary Clinton's $5000 shoes.

I seem to have a 4 digit red number next to Joe Biden...

GIN1138

UKIP, Conservative, Labour

#FerretsInASack

David_Evershed

With Osborne starting to build a small challenge to May, she would be advised to make sure she bends to the wises of the three Brexiteers in the cabinet and keeps them on board.

Osborne's challenge is good for hard Brexit lovers.

HurstLlama

FPT

Sandpit said:

Charles said:

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

@MrHarryCole: MPs to debate recommissioning Britannia for Brexit trade talks next month: https://t.co/AfTmdV9JCE

How desperate can they get

From the people I've spoken to over the years, it was surprising impactful in trade. People really liked being invited onto the "Royal Yacht" for trade talks. Idiotic and superficial, but very effective and low cost branding. So why not?

Quite. Republicans in the U.K. underestimate the impact these symbols have abroad. Worth every penny in marketing Britain across the world. Even £100m isn't much when spread over 30 or 40 years.

Very true, Mr. Pit, the figures are trivial and were equally so when Brown refused the cash to replace Britannia. The decision I am sure was taken not for monetary reasons but out of spite.

To have a new Royal Yacht would be a cracking idea, not least for the reasons Mr. Charles mentions (assuming there is a shipyard in the UK capable of building such a thing), but to dig the old girl out of retirement would be a very bad idea on so many levels.

One idea I did have a few years ago was that a new yacht could be built by public subscription. The livery companies in the City are filthy rich and their members even more so. Given the right approach I think one could raise £100 million for a Royal Yacht out of the city in about a month, maybe six weeks. Crikey you could probably get that much out of the Goldsmiths alone. Open the subscription up to the wider public and there would be more than enough.

The problem would be crewing the vessel. The RN haven't got enough sailors to crew their existing ships.

DavidL

AlastairMeeks said:

Off topic, I see that Betfair punters seem to have decided that Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden aren't poised to step into Hillary Clinton's $5000 shoes.

Just as well. I think she is down to one of them.

PlatoSaid

HurstLlama said:

FPT

Sandpit said:

Charles said:

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

@MrHarryCole: MPs to debate recommissioning Britannia for Brexit trade talks next month: https://t.co/AfTmdV9JCE

How desperate can they get

From the people I've spoken to over the years, it was surprising impactful in trade. People really liked being invited onto the "Royal Yacht" for trade talks. Idiotic and superficial, but very effective and low cost branding. So why not?

Quite. Republicans in the U.K. underestimate the impact these symbols have abroad. Worth every penny in marketing Britain across the world. Even £100m isn't much when spread over 30 or 40 years.

Very true, Mr. Pit, the figures are trivial and were equally so when Brown refused the cash to replace Britannia. The decision I am sure was taken not for monetary reasons but out of spite.

To have a new Royal Yacht would be a cracking idea, not least for the reasons Mr. Charles mentions (assuming there is a shipyard in the UK capable of building such a thing), but to dig the old girl out of retirement would be a very bad idea on so many levels.

One idea I did have a few years ago was that a new yacht could be built by public subscription. The livery companies in the City are filthy rich and their members even more so. Given the right approach I think one could raise £100 million for a Royal Yacht out of the city in about a month, maybe six weeks. Crikey you could probably get that much out of the Goldsmiths alone. Open the subscription up to the wider public and there would be more than enough.

The problem would be crewing the vessel. The RN haven't got enough sailors to crew their existing ships.

Didn't Lord Ashcroft or someone try to raise cash back then?

AlastairMeeks

@Pulpstar What a nice dilemma to have.

Pulpstar

Richard_Nabavi said:

FPT:

Reading Nick's article, and the Paul Waugh article which Plato just linked to, prompted me to look again at the 'Corbyn To Go Before Next General Election?' market on Betfair.

I was already on No, and I've just topped up at 1.5. This looks like a no-brainer to me, apart from actuarial risk. Sad though it is from the points of view both of entertainment and of betting opportunities, I have to say that Nick is right when he says in his article: Forget about a third leadership election before 2020. Once was necessary when Ed stood down. Twice was perhaps understandable in view of the PLP unrest. Three would be ridiculous. At some point the result of elections needs to be respected, and we’ve reached it.

In addition, there's a kind of stalemate which makes Corbyn's position very strong indeed.

sounds good to me, I also think I have a few (At longer odds of course) Corbyn out in 2018/19 and a 9-2 for him to be out in 2020.

Just have to hope the "purge" hasn't worked too well for Smith...

David_Evershed

HurstLlama said:

FPT

Sandpit said:

Charles said:

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

@MrHarryCole: MPs to debate recommissioning Britannia for Brexit trade talks next month: https://t.co/AfTmdV9JCE

How desperate can they get

From the people I've spoken to over the years, it was surprising impactful in trade. People really liked being invited onto the "Royal Yacht" for trade talks. Idiotic and superficial, but very effective and low cost branding. So why not?

Quite. Republicans in the U.K. underestimate the impact these symbols have abroad. Worth every penny in marketing Britain across the world. Even £100m isn't much when spread over 30 or 40 years.

Very true, Mr. Pit, the figures are trivial and were equally so when Brown refused the cash to replace Britannia. The decision I am sure was taken not for monetary reasons but out of spite.

To have a new Royal Yacht would be a cracking idea, not least for the reasons Mr. Charles mentions (assuming there is a shipyard in the UK capable of building such a thing), but to dig the old girl out of retirement would be a very bad idea on so many levels.

One idea I did have a few years ago was that a new yacht could be built by public subscription. The livery companies in the City are filthy rich and their members even more so. Given the right approach I think one could raise £100 million for a Royal Yacht out of the city in about a month, maybe six weeks. Crikey you could probably get that much out of the Goldsmiths alone. Open the subscription up to the wider public and there would be more than enough.

The problem would be crewing the vessel. The RN haven't got enough sailors to crew their existing ships.

Rule Britannia.

GIN1138

David_Evershed said:

With Osborne starting to build a small challenge to May, she would be advised to make sure she bends to the wises of the three Brexiteers in the cabinet and keeps them on board.

Osborne's challenge is good for hard Brexit lovers.

I don't know what Osborne is so bitter about. He sealed his own fate. It's not like Theresa could have kept him on in a high profile job after the referendum fiasco...

If he'd had any sense (and dignity) he'd have announced his intention to resign on his own terms with Cameron shortly after the referendum.

Pulpstar

AlastairMeeks said:

@Pulpstar What a nice dilemma to have.

Will just let it run

Pulpstar

@Richard_Nabavi Of course till next GE isn't necessarily 2020. An early election would improve the bet even further .

As is an 11% annualised tax free return is not to be sniffed out.

DavidL

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

TCPoliticalBetting

http://order-order.com/2016/09/16/blunt-assessment-after-saudi-farce-now-libya-report-debunked/

What are the side effects of prolonged popper use?

edmundintokyo

AlastairMeeks said:

@Richard_Nabavi Is there any reason why Douglas Carswell couldn't rejoin the Conservatives now? Brexit has been voted for and his pathological hatred of David Cameron is no longer a relevant consideration on either side.

Apparently his constituency is getting horsed around with and getting more of Harwich back:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-37344068

I'd imagine it makes it harder to hold for UKIP. But I'm not sure if that also means that were he to go back to Con he'd need a fight to the death with some sitting MP to get on the ballot.

Richard_Nabavi

GIN1138 said:

David_Evershed said:

With Osborne starting to build a small challenge to May, she would be advised to make sure she bends to the wises of the three Brexiteers in the cabinet and keeps them on board.

Osborne's challenge is good for hard Brexit lovers.

I don't know what Osborne is so bitter about. He sealed his own fate. It's not like Theresa could have kept him on in a high profile job after the referendum fiasco...

If he'd had any sense (and dignity) he'd have announced his intention to resign on his own terms with Cameron shortly after the referendum.

Did you actually listen to his interview? It wasn't bitter at all.

He's enough of a pro to realise that politics is a brutal game, and fortunes can turn on a sixpence. Who knows what the situation will look like in a few years' time?

MaxPB

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Richard_Nabavi

Pulpstar said:

@Richard_Nabavi Of course till next GE isn't necessarily 2020. An early election would improve the bet even further .

As is an 11% annualised tax free return is not to be sniffed out.

And I expect it will be possible to cash out earlier.

TCPoliticalBetting

David_Evershed said:

With Osborne starting to build a small challenge to May, she would be advised to make sure she bends to the wises of the three Brexiteers in the cabinet and keeps them on board.
Osborne's challenge is good for hard Brexit lovers.

It should be, but her political advisors are making mistakes.

rottenborough

Richard_Nabavi said:

GIN1138 said:

David_Evershed said:

With Osborne starting to build a small challenge to May, she would be advised to make sure she bends to the wises of the three Brexiteers in the cabinet and keeps them on board.

Osborne's challenge is good for hard Brexit lovers.

I don't know what Osborne is so bitter about. He sealed his own fate. It's not like Theresa could have kept him on in a high profile job after the referendum fiasco...

If he'd had any sense (and dignity) he'd have announced his intention to resign on his own terms with Cameron shortly after the referendum.

Did you actually listen to his interview? It wasn't bitter at all.

He's enough of a pro to realise that politics is a brutal game, and fortunes can turn on a sixpence. Who knows what the situation will look like in a few years' time?

He might be bitter that Cameron didn't listen to his advice that an EU referendum was a "crazy idea".

MaxPB

Richard_Nabavi said:

GIN1138 said:

David_Evershed said:

With Osborne starting to build a small challenge to May, she would be advised to make sure she bends to the wises of the three Brexiteers in the cabinet and keeps them on board.

Osborne's challenge is good for hard Brexit lovers.

I don't know what Osborne is so bitter about. He sealed his own fate. It's not like Theresa could have kept him on in a high profile job after the referendum fiasco...

If he'd had any sense (and dignity) he'd have announced his intention to resign on his own terms with Cameron shortly after the referendum.

Did you actually listen to his interview? It wasn't bitter at all.

He's enough of a pro to realise that politics is a brutal game, and fortunes can turn on a sixpence. Who knows what the situation will look like in a few years' time?

Yes, his time could come again, once Brexit is done and not reversible his stock will rise. He will never be leader while Brexit is still in process.

GIN1138

Richard_Nabavi said:

GIN1138 said:

David_Evershed said:

With Osborne starting to build a small challenge to May, she would be advised to make sure she bends to the wises of the three Brexiteers in the cabinet and keeps them on board.

Osborne's challenge is good for hard Brexit lovers.

I don't know what Osborne is so bitter about. He sealed his own fate. It's not like Theresa could have kept him on in a high profile job after the referendum fiasco...

If he'd had any sense (and dignity) he'd have announced his intention to resign on his own terms with Cameron shortly after the referendum.

Did you actually listen to his interview? It wasn't bitter at all.

He's enough of a pro to realise that politics is a brutal game, and fortunes can turn on a sixpence. Who knows what the situation will look like in a few years' time?

Well of course he wouldn't admit to being bitter... But we know enough about the character to know that he and his "think tank" will be a thorn in the side of Theresa May and when she eventually leaves office he'll probably play a big part in her downfall...

TCPoliticalBetting

DavidL said:

Very good interview on R4 this morning with Osborne. It was really novel hearing an intelligent grown up politician on that program.

Nick Robinson is I agree quite good.

rottenborough

MaxPB said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

GIN1138 said:

David_Evershed said:

With Osborne starting to build a small challenge to May, she would be advised to make sure she bends to the wises of the three Brexiteers in the cabinet and keeps them on board.

Osborne's challenge is good for hard Brexit lovers.

I don't know what Osborne is so bitter about. He sealed his own fate. It's not like Theresa could have kept him on in a high profile job after the referendum fiasco...

If he'd had any sense (and dignity) he'd have announced his intention to resign on his own terms with Cameron shortly after the referendum.

Did you actually listen to his interview? It wasn't bitter at all.

He's enough of a pro to realise that politics is a brutal game, and fortunes can turn on a sixpence. Who knows what the situation will look like in a few years' time?

Yes, his time could come again, once Brexit is done and not reversible his stock will rise. He will never be leader while Brexit is still in process.

Or, Brexit has proved such an economic disaster, or indeed, actually technically too impossible to implement, that his foresight becomes recognized.

Richard_Nabavi

GIN1138 said:

Well of course he wouldn't admit to being bitter... But we know enough about the character to know that he and his "think tank" will be a thorn in the side of Theresa May and when she eventually leaves office he'll probably play a big part in her downfall...

Quite possibly. Certainly the PM has not exactly gone out of her way to be gracious towards him, which is a clear error.

DavidL

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

I would certainly give the go ahead for a second one at Gatwick now, in addition to Heathrow. We honestly make ourselves look ridiculous with this nonsense.

rural_voter

There must have been a rush.
Ladbrokes aren't taking bets on J. Greening (well not at 20).

HurstLlama

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Or just build Boris Island. Even with all the infrastructure costs it would probably be quicker and cheaper.

Sandpit

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

It's been talked about for at least 20 years so far, and the decision - if and when it is made - will only start the planning process and inevitable public enquiry, which will waste another few years.

Major planning reform is long overdue, would be my #1 suggestion for the Queen's Speech.

Jonathan

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Why is Stanstead never in the mix?

GIN1138

Richard_Nabavi said:

GIN1138 said:

Well of course he wouldn't admit to being bitter... But we know enough about the character to know that he and his "think tank" will be a thorn in the side of Theresa May and when she eventually leaves office he'll probably play a big part in her downfall...

Quite possibly. Certainly the PM has not exactly gone out of her way to be gracious towards him, which is a clear error.

Well I'll always be grateful to her for sending him slinking off out the back door!

MaxPB

Jonathan said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Why is Stanstead never in the mix?

People hate Ryanair?

Pong

Pulpstar said:

AlastairMeeks said:

@Pulpstar What a nice dilemma to have.

Will just let it run

I'm -2.5k on biden/sanders/bloomberg/gore/obama (michelle) and a few others

My guess/hope is the clinton/trump book will tighten up to ~99% as the debates approach.

That would leave;

500 johnson
500 Pence
500 Kaine
1000 Biden
>=1000 sanders
500 Gop (other)

Realistic prices, IMO

The best POTUS bet is laying sanders.

SouthamObserver

Richard_Nabavi said:

FPT:

Reading Nick's article, and the Paul Waugh article which Plato just linked to, prompted me to look again at the 'Corbyn To Go Before Next General Election?' market on Betfair.

I was already on No, and I've just topped up at 1.5. This looks like a no-brainer to me, apart from actuarial risk. Sad though it is from the points of view both of entertainment and of betting opportunities, I have to say that Nick is right when he says in his article: Forget about a third leadership election before 2020. Once was necessary when Ed stood down. Twice was perhaps understandable in view of the PLP unrest. Three would be ridiculous. At some point the result of elections needs to be respected, and we’ve reached it.

In addition, there's a kind of stalemate which makes Corbyn's position very strong indeed.

What I think you are missing is that Corbyn is not capable of leading. He cannot do unity because he cannot do compromise. This is what will do for him. And that's why I think it is an excellent idea for the PLP to do as much as it can to be seen to be pushing for unity.

Pulpstar

rural_voter said:

There must have been a rush.
Ladbrokes aren't taking bets on J. Greening (well not at 20).

Good headed tips don't last long at the price.

Shadsy will put her back in at 12s maybe.

AlastairMeeks

On topic, Ladbrokes give 21 names and if you backed everyone who was quoted at 25/1 or longer without looking, you wouldn't go all that far wrong. Justine Greening was ok value at 20/1 but I wouldn't back her at shorter odds.

I'm not playing this market at present though.

David_Evershed

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Paradise? No, Luton Airport.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaEjIlZsuTg

MaxPB

HurstLlama said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Or just build Boris Island. Even with all the infrastructure costs it would probably be quicker and cheaper.

Nah, I've looked at BI plans over and over. Its just pie in the sky. 4 runways in the Thames Estuary means the site will have to be huge and recovering the land will cost tens of billions. In addition, 4 runways isn't enough at such an isolated airport, Heathrow will still have some feed in from other London airports as it does now negating the need for further expansion, BI won't benefit from that easily.

rottenborough

Pulpstar said:

rural_voter said:

There must have been a rush.
Ladbrokes aren't taking bets on J. Greening (well not at 20).

Good headed tips don't last long at the price.

Shadsy will put her back in at 12s maybe.

To blow my own trumpet: I tipped her on here to be first out just after the grammar school stuff kicked off.

Richard_Nabavi

SouthamObserver said:

What I think you are missing is that Corbyn is not capable of leading. He cannot do unity because he cannot do compromise. This is what will do for him. And that's why I think it is an excellent idea for the PLP to do as much as it can to be seen to be pushing for unity.

Oh, I agree. I certainly don't share Nick's view that everyone in the party can simply pretend to be friends again and the problem will go away. But that doesn't mean Corbyn can realistically be dislodged, having won (as we assume) two leadership elections in decisive fashion, and with no mechanism to dislodge him.

rural_voter

Pulpstar said:

rural_voter said:

There must have been a rush.
Ladbrokes aren't taking bets on J. Greening (well not at 20).

Good headed tips don't last long at the price.

Shadsy will put her back in at 12s maybe.

Yes, we were rather spoilt by GE-2015 when the value bets lasted for months and were still there on election day.

Pulpstar

Right so far today I've:

Backed a 20-1 shot,
Backed a 1.5
And laid an 80-1 outsider !

Luckyguy1983

Richard_Nabavi said:

Jonathan said:

Would May even accept him? She doesn't need him.

If he switched, he would have to fight another by-election. This time he might lose.

In practice he'll vote with the government on most of the key issues, so you are right, she doesn't really need him.

Another by-election would be a bit irritating to the good citizens of Clacton.

And amusing in the unlikely event that old wonky chin lost to a proper UKIP candidate.

Pulpstar

rural_voter said:

Pulpstar said:

rural_voter said:

There must have been a rush.
Ladbrokes aren't taking bets on J. Greening (well not at 20).

Good headed tips don't last long at the price.

Shadsy will put her back in at 12s maybe.

Yes, we were rather spoilt by GE-2015 when the value bets lasted for months and were still there on election day.

Truro and Falmouth @ 1-4 was the one I really couldn't get my head round.

Sandpit

MaxPB said:

HurstLlama said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Or just build Boris Island. Even with all the infrastructure costs it would probably be quicker and cheaper.

Nah, I've looked at BI plans over and over. Its just pie in the sky. 4 runways in the Thames Estuary means the site will have to be huge and recovering the land will cost tens of billions. In addition, 4 runways isn't enough at such an isolated airport, Heathrow will still have some feed in from other London airports as it does now negating the need for further expansion, BI won't benefit from that easily.

The estuary is also home to lots of birds - go watch the Sully movie for details - and USS Montgomery is still there. Would also need airspace co-ordination with AMS which currently uses a lot of the Channel.
The business plan for BI only works if LHR gets sold off to build a new town, but BI is completely the wrong side of London for most of the South East to get to it. Business located along the M3 and M4 corridors need the airport to be where it is. Would probably have to widen the whole M25 to accommodate the traffic too.

Pulpstar

Has Phil Hammond actually said anything (About anything) yet ?

He seems a remarkably quiet chancellor.

SouthamObserver

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

What I think you are missing is that Corbyn is not capable of leading. He cannot do unity because he cannot do compromise. This is what will do for him. And that's why I think it is an excellent idea for the PLP to do as much as it can to be seen to be pushing for unity.

Oh, I agree. I certainly don't share Nick's view that everyone in the party can simply pretend to be friends again and the problem will go away. But that doesn't mean Corbyn can realistically be dislodged, having won (as we assume) two leadership elections in decisive fashion, and with no mechanism to dislodge him.

Yep, Nick does have a remarkably rosy view. My guess is that Corbyn will face a challenge in 2018 (once the Unite leadership election is out of the way) and that he will either lose or step down prior to the contest taking place.

MarkHopkins

Sandpit said:

MaxPB said:

HurstLlama said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Or just build Boris Island. Even with all the infrastructure costs it would probably be quicker and cheaper.

Nah, I've looked at BI plans over and over. Its just pie in the sky. 4 runways in the Thames Estuary means the site will have to be huge and recovering the land will cost tens of billions. In addition, 4 runways isn't enough at such an isolated airport, Heathrow will still have some feed in from other London airports as it does now negating the need for further expansion, BI won't benefit from that easily.

The estuary is also home to lots of birds - go watch the Sully movie for details - and USS Montgomery is still there. Would also need airspace co-ordination with AMS which currently uses a lot of the Channel.
The business plan for BI only works if LHR gets sold off to build a new town, but BI is completely the wrong side of London for most of the South East to get to it. Business located along the M3 and M4 corridors need the airport to be where it is. Would probably have to widen the whole M25 to accommodate the traffic too.

But other than that, it's a good idea?

NickPalmer

May amuse PBers:

http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=e8920250c4df6671f54d9ea5c&id=b7dd7ed106&e=ed04d73925

weejonnie

MaxPB said:

Jonathan said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Why is Stanstead never in the mix?

People hate Ryanair?

Maybe because you have to jog a marathon to get to/from the departure gates.

rural_voter

Sandpit said:

MaxPB said:

HurstLlama said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

It looks like it's going ahead given Boris' outburst.

Thank goodness. We are way behind in having the argument about the next runway (after this one) in the south east. If there is to be any chance of it happening before 2050 we need to start the moaning and protesting and investigating and reporting and indecision really soon.

Lol, by 2022 when the third runway is nearing completion we'll need a second one at Gatwick and a fourth at Heathrow! I think we should build two at Heathrow, one at Gatwick and one at stansted. Close Luton airport.

Or just build Boris Island. Even with all the infrastructure costs it would probably be quicker and cheaper.

Nah, I've looked at BI plans over and over. Its just pie in the sky. 4 runways in the Thames Estuary means the site will have to be huge and recovering the land will cost tens of billions. In addition, 4 runways isn't enough at such an isolated airport, Heathrow will still have some feed in from other London airports as it does now negating the need for further expansion, BI won't benefit from that easily.

The estuary is also home to lots of birds - go watch the Sully movie for details - and USS Montgomery is still there. Would also need airspace co-ordination with AMS which currently uses a lot of the Channel.
The business plan for BI only works if LHR gets sold off to build a new town, but BI is completely the wrong side of London for most of the South East to get to it. Business located along the M3 and M4 corridors need the airport to be where it is. Would probably have to widen the whole M25 to accommodate the traffic too.

Most London airports are in the wrong place if one lives N of the Severn/Wash line. Heathrow has no rail connection from the west, only a bus from Reading. Gatwick takes 80 minutes from Reading and the line isn't even electrified. I can get a train from Ludlow to Manchester airport in about 2 hours but Stansted would take 5 hours ... plus an allowance for missing connecting trains.

Half the UK population lives N of the Severn/Wash line, yet 99% of the attention is on London. At the time of the Channel Tunnel, through trains; e.g., Manchester or Birmingham to Paris, were promised. It never happened; we just got a white elephant at Waterloo!

AlastairMeeks

Ben Bradshaw doesn't sound ready to kiss and make up with the current leadership:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/16/jeremy-corbyn-no-leader-labour-mps-accused-abusing

SimonStClare

AlastairMeeks said:

Ben Bradshaw doesn't sound ready to kiss and make up with the current leadership:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/16/jeremy-corbyn-no-leader-labour-mps-accused-abusing

Ben ‘Corbyn abuser’ Bradshaw does rather prove the point, the PLP will not achieve reconciliation by making Sept 24th the start of year zero, NickP ™. There’s too much bad blood and built up resentment to let sleeping dogs lie.

NickPalmer

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

What I think you are missing is that Corbyn is not capable of leading. He cannot do unity because he cannot do compromise. This is what will do for him. And that's why I think it is an excellent idea for the PLP to do as much as it can to be seen to be pushing for unity.

Oh, I agree. I certainly don't share Nick's view that everyone in the party can simply pretend to be friends again and the problem will go away. But that doesn't mean Corbyn can realistically be dislodged, having won (as we assume) two leadership elections in decisive fashion, and with no mechanism to dislodge him.

Yes, and I'm not naive enough to think that the issue will just go away. But at this point, as SO observes, the PLP is best advised to be seen to be giving unity a try.

Corbyn has compromised several times - not pressing his NATO scepticism or his republicanism, agreeing that his reference to Hamas as "friends" was a mistake and tacitly agreeing to a free vote on Trident (not yet formalised but it's clearly coming). He's not an elastic politician like Boris, but he's learned as leader - a year ago I think he'd have walked into the "why not talk with ISIS?" trap that Owen walked into.

Pong

Pulpstar said:

Has Phil Hammond actually said anything (About anything) yet ?

He seems a remarkably quiet chancellor.

He's told EU nationals who have made their lives here, and in some cases (like my sister in law), married and had children here - that their rights can't be guaranteed.

On the other hand, he's happy to publicly reassure bankers that there won't be a problem;

http://www.ftadviser.com/2016/09/09/regulation/eu-legislation/hammond-to-save-bankers-from-eu-migration-curbs-mkDYpkCp73YFs8MCsWnAqK/article.html

In the tory worldview bankers need security and certainty.

Families, apparently, don't.

Richard_Nabavi

Hmm, not often I say this, but here's an interesting comment piece by Gaby Hinsliff:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/16/theresa-may-doctrine-grammar-schools

Charles

Pong said:

Pulpstar said:

Has Phil Hammond actually said anything (About anything) yet ?

He seems a remarkably quiet chancellor.

He's told EU nationals who have made their lives here, and in some cases (like my sister in law), married and had children here - that their rights can't be guaranteed.

On the other hand, he's happy to publicly reassure bankers that there won't be a problem;

http://www.ftadviser.com/2016/09/09/regulation/eu-legislation/hammond-to-save-bankers-from-eu-migration-curbs-mkDYpkCp73YFs8MCsWnAqK/article.html

In the tory worldview bankers need security and certainty.

Families, apparently, don't.

Not quite.

What he (or at least May) has said is that they would like to guarantee the rights, but it is contingent on the rights of British citizens living in the EU being guaranteed.

If the EU would show a willingness to be sensible this could be taken off the table very quickly.

Casino_Royale

Charles said:

Pong said:

Pulpstar said:

Has Phil Hammond actually said anything (About anything) yet ?

He seems a remarkably quiet chancellor.

He's told EU nationals who have made their lives here, and in some cases (like my sister in law), married and had children here - that their rights can't be guaranteed.

On the other hand, he's happy to publicly reassure bankers that there won't be a problem;

http://www.ftadviser.com/2016/09/09/regulation/eu-legislation/hammond-to-save-bankers-from-eu-migration-curbs-mkDYpkCp73YFs8MCsWnAqK/article.html

In the tory worldview bankers need security and certainty.

Families, apparently, don't.

Not quite.

What he (or at least May) has said is that they would like to guarantee the rights, but it is contingent on the rights of British citizens living in the EU being guaranteed.

If the EU would show a willingness to be sensible this could be taken off the table very quickly.

This point is often not made. The EU have not guaranteed British residents rights either.

I think it would be reckless of HMG to surrender this card until they have.

Sandpit

rural_voter said:

Sandpit said:

MaxPB said:

HurstLlama said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I also the forthcoming contretemps over Heathrow makes this a good bet

Or just build Boris Island. Even with all the infrastructure costs it would probably be quicker and cheaper.

Nah, I've looked at BI plans over and over. Its just pie in the sky. 4 runways in the Thames Estuary means the site will have to be huge and recovering the land will cost tens of billions. In addition, 4 runways isn't enough at such an isolated airport, Heathrow will still have some feed in from other London airports as it does now negating the need for further expansion, BI won't benefit from that easily.

The estuary is also home to lots of birds - go watch the Sully movie for details - and USS Montgomery is still there. Would also need airspace co-ordination with AMS which currently uses a lot of the Channel.
The business plan for BI only works if LHR gets sold off to build a new town, but BI is completely the wrong side of London for most of the South East to get to it. Business located along the M3 and M4 corridors need the airport to be where it is. Would probably have to widen the whole M25 to accommodate the traffic too.

Most London airports are in the wrong place if one lives N of the Severn/Wash line. Heathrow has no rail connection from the west, only a bus from Reading. Gatwick takes 80 minutes from Reading and the line isn't even electrified. I can get a train from Ludlow to Manchester airport in about 2 hours but Stansted would take 5 hours ... plus an allowance for missing connecting trains.

Half the UK population lives N of the Severn/Wash line, yet 99% of the attention is on London. At the time of the Channel Tunnel, through trains; e.g., Manchester or Birmingham to Paris, were promised. It never happened; we just got a white elephant at Waterloo!

Don't disagree with any of that, but the vast majority of the population who use LHR would have to get across London to use a new island airport.

Joined up decision making would give the go-ahead to LHR and HS2 at the same time, and have the railway go to the airport.

Crossrail will I think allow direct trains from Reading to Heathrow when it opens, which will allow much better access for those without a car. Some more joined up thinking would build a massive park and ride on the route - maybe somewhere West of Maidenhead, near where the A404M crosses the train line.

Charles

HurstLlama said:

FPT

Sandpit said:

Charles said:

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

@MrHarryCole: MPs to debate recommissioning Britannia for Brexit trade talks next month: https://t.co/AfTmdV9JCE

How desperate can they get

From the people I've spoken to over the years, it was surprising impactful in trade. People really liked being invited onto the "Royal Yacht" for trade talks. Idiotic and superficial, but very effective and low cost branding. So why not?

Quite. Republicans in the U.K. underestimate the impact these symbols have abroad. Worth every penny in marketing Britain across the world. Even £100m isn't much when spread over 30 or 40 years.

Very true, Mr. Pit, the figures are trivial and were equally so when Brown refused the cash to replace Britannia. The decision I am sure was taken not for monetary reasons but out of spite.

To have a new Royal Yacht would be a cracking idea, not least for the reasons Mr. Charles mentions (assuming there is a shipyard in the UK capable of building such a thing), but to dig the old girl out of retirement would be a very bad idea on so many levels.

One idea I did have a few years ago was that a new yacht could be built by public subscription. The livery companies in the City are filthy rich and their members even more so. Given the right approach I think one could raise £100 million for a Royal Yacht out of the city in about a month, maybe six weeks. Crikey you could probably get that much out of the Goldsmiths alone. Open the subscription up to the wider public and there would be more than enough.

The problem would be crewing the vessel. The RN haven't got enough sailors to crew their existing ships.

The Goldsmiths spend a huge amount of money on education and training for the craft these days. We're not just sitting around counting our shekels.

Richard_Nabavi

Sandpit said:

Don't disagree with any of that. Joined up decision making would give the go-ahead to LHR and HS2 at the same time, and have the railway go to the airport.

Crossrail will I think allow direct trains from Reading to Heathrow when it opens, which will allow much better access for those without a car. Some more joined up thinking would build a massive park and ride on the route - maybe somewhere West of Maidenhead, near where the A404M crosses the train line.

Yes, and also make more use of Birmingham airport, which will be less than an hour from Euston if and when HS2 is up and running.

MaxPB

On the Brittania, I've been told by someone who has been to a few soirées that an invitation to a party on the Royal Yacht was essentially impossible to turn down for anyone. It didn't matter if it was Bill Gates or Bill Clinton being invited, no one would ever turn it down.

If we are going to become a trading nation again then we'll need a method of getting people together in a way that can't be offered by any other nation. The Brittania seems a solution to me, even a new replacement for a £100-150m would be worth it.

Paul_Bedfordshire

Richard_Nabavi said:

Sandpit said:

Don't disagree with any of that. Joined up decision making would give the go-ahead to LHR and HS2 at the same time, and have the railway go to the airport.

Crossrail will I think allow direct trains from Reading to Heathrow when it opens, which will allow much better access for those without a car. Some more joined up thinking would build a massive park and ride on the route - maybe somewhere West of Maidenhead, near where the A404M crosses the train line.

Yes, and also make more use of Birmingham airport, which will be less than an hour from Euston if and when HS2 is up and running.

HS2 going to heathrow would be pointless. In most cases you would still have to get a train onto your terminal from whichever terminal the HS2 station is.

So old oak common is just as good a point and would save a fortune

Sandpit

Richard_Nabavi said:

Sandpit said:

Don't disagree with any of that. Joined up decision making would give the go-ahead to LHR and HS2 at the same time, and have the railway go to the airport.

Crossrail will I think allow direct trains from Reading to Heathrow when it opens, which will allow much better access for those without a car. Some more joined up thinking would build a massive park and ride on the route - maybe somewhere West of Maidenhead, near where the A404M crosses the train line.

Yes, and also make more use of Birmingham airport, which will be less than an hour from Euston if and when HS2 is up and running.

Good point. They recently lengthened the runway there, Emirates have started flying A380s in now.

Chris_A

Casino_Royale said:

Charles said:

Pong said:

Pulpstar said:

Has Phil Hammond actually said anything (About anything) yet ?

He seems a remarkably quiet chancellor.

He's told EU nationals who have made their lives here, and in some cases (like my sister in law), married and had children here - that their rights can't be guaranteed.

On the other hand, he's happy to publicly reassure bankers that there won't be a problem;

http://www.ftadviser.com/2016/09/09/regulation/eu-legislation/hammond-to-save-bankers-from-eu-migration-curbs-mkDYpkCp73YFs8MCsWnAqK/article.html

In the tory worldview bankers need security and certainty.

Families, apparently, don't.

Not quite.

What he (or at least May) has said is that they would like to guarantee the rights, but it is contingent on the rights of British citizens living in the EU being guaranteed.

If the EU would show a willingness to be sensible this could be taken off the table very quickly.

This point is often not made. The EU have not guaranteed British residents rights either.

I think it would be reckless of HMG to surrender this card until they have.

Why should they? Just because a Brexiteer fantasist says something will happen does not mean it will. We had Raab spring again yesterday that the EU will be falling over themselves to give us a good trade deal. More bilge from the Brexit camp.

Casino_Royale

All about him, right to the end:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37384865

logical_song

Ladbroke's betting on Witney

Tories 1/100
Labour & LibDems 25/1
UKIP 50/1
Greens 100/1

https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/british/local-by-elections/witney-by-election/222606550/

Pulpstar

Charles said:

HurstLlama said:

FPT

Sandpit said:

Charles said:

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

@MrHarryCole: MPs to debate recommissioning Britannia for Brexit trade talks next month: https://t.co/AfTmdV9JCE

How desperate can they get

From the people I've spoken to over the years, it was surprising impactful in trade. People really liked being invited onto the "Royal Yacht" for trade talks. Idiotic and superficial, but very effective and low cost branding. So why not?

Quite. Republicans in the U.K. underestimate the impact these symbols have abroad. Worth every penny in marketing Britain across the world. Even £100m isn't much when spread over 30 or 40 years.

Very true, Mr. Pit, the figures are trivial and were equally so when Brown refused the cash to replace Britannia. The decision I am sure was taken not for monetary reasons but out of spite.

To have a new Royal Yacht would be a cracking idea, not least for the reasons Mr. Charles mentions (assuming there is a shipyard in the UK capable of building such a thing), but to dig the old girl out of retirement would be a very bad idea on so many levels.

One idea I did have a few years ago was that a new yacht could be built by public subscription. The livery companies in the City are filthy rich and their members even more so. Given the right approach I think one could raise £100 million for a Royal Yacht out of the city in about a month, maybe six weeks. Crikey you could probably get that much out of the Goldsmiths alone. Open the subscription up to the wider public and there would be more than enough.

The problem would be crewing the vessel. The RN haven't got enough sailors to crew their existing ships.

The Goldsmiths spend a huge amount of money on education and training for the craft these days. We're not just sitting around counting our shekels.

Have you reviewed the situation thoroughly enough to ensure your pound of flesh ?

foxinsoxuk

SimonStClare said:

Diane James would be a excellent choice as UKIP leader imho, she might even convince some of the UKIP ladies not to abandon ship.

What would she offer that May does not? Apart from social skills of course.

perdix

Pong said:

Pulpstar said:

Has Phil Hammond actually said anything (About anything) yet ?

He seems a remarkably quiet chancellor.

He's told EU nationals who have made their lives here, and in some cases (like my sister in law), married and had children here - that their rights can't be guaranteed.

On the other hand, he's happy to publicly reassure bankers that there won't be a problem;

http://www.ftadviser.com/2016/09/09/regulation/eu-legislation/hammond-to-save-bankers-from-eu-migration-curbs-mkDYpkCp73YFs8MCsWnAqK/article.html

In the tory worldview bankers need security and certainty.

Families, apparently, don't.

Don't bankers have families too?