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;
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.
Did they not used to send the invitations out as coming from HMQ, even if the party was hosted by Airmiles Andy and the trade minister? As you say, difficult for anyone to turn down.
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
Edit - old oak common because crosssrail will link from old oak common to all the heathrow terminals in a few minutes.
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;
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.
The best description of the role of PM I heard was "the person we chose to do the stuff we don't want to do but know that we must"
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;
In the tory worldview bankers need security and certainty.
Families, apparently, don't.
Don't bankers have families too?
You have, astonishingly, missed the point. Obviously those bankers that have families here would be treated like anyone else.
Are you sure? As I read it, Hammond is offering preferential treatment to bankers:
"He insisted post-Brexit controls on free movement should “not strike fear into the heart of Japanese financial institutions”, as he responded to pleas by Tokyo to ensure EU nationals could continue to work in Britain.
Referring to the prospects of free movement control, the chancellor said: “We would use it in a sensible way [to] facilitate movement of highly skilled people between financial institutions and businesses.”"
Why would that not include letting their families live here, if they won't come otherwise?
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;
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.
Sure they can kick out all the Brita if they want. But why should they expect us to guarantee rights of they are not prepared to do likewise?
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
Edit - old oak common because crosssrail will link from old oak common to all the heathrow terminals in a few minutes.
It's worth remembering that HS2 has made it this far partly because the Tories saw it as a logical way to oppose a third runway at Heathrow. Now they appear to be ready to bite the bullet on the third runway, perhaps HS2 isn't a done deal?
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 ?
TBF the Goldsmiths is one of the few Companies with a meaningful role - the Trial of the Pyx for example, as well as Hallmarking.
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;
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.
Sure they can kick out all the Brita if they want. But why should they expect us to guarantee rights of they are not prepared to do likewise?
EU nationals currently here should be lobbying their own governments about this.
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.
Did they not used to send the invitations out as coming from HMQ, even if the party was hosted by Airmiles Andy and the trade minister? As you say, difficult for anyone to turn down.
It is a great idea. Have it permanently overseas and rotate in the royals. It can split attendance between Queen/Charles/William/Andy/Harry etc etc.
We're not negotiating with the EU per se but 27 other governments. I imagine Poland would be delighted to settle on reciprocal grandparent rights for EU citizens straight away. Spain however might feel the issue gives them a powerful card to play and certainly not play too early. So I actually agree with May's position on this. We shouldn't conceed the point until we get the quid pro quo. The ( fairly minimal ) uncertainty for our current EU residents is just collateral damage from the Brexit disaster. What I find amusing is the Brexit fantasists are out in force again this afternoon. Unscrambling the Omelette would easy if the " EU " would just be " reasonable ". Hilarious.
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;
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.
Sure they can kick out all the Brita if they want. But why should they expect us to guarantee rights of they are not prepared to do likewise?
EU nationals currently here should be lobbying their own governments about this.
They should and I'm sure they are. But it's the same with the reporting on the Jungle: the Guardianista tendency seems to have a very parochial worldview
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.
Did they not used to send the invitations out as coming from HMQ, even if the party was hosted by Airmiles Andy and the trade minister? As you say, difficult for anyone to turn down.
It is a great idea. Have it permanently overseas and rotate in the royals. It can split attendance between Queen/Charles/William/Andy/Harry etc etc.
We're not negotiating with the EU per se but 27 other governments. I imagine Poland would be delighted to settle on reciprocal grandparent rights for EU citizens straight away. Spain however might feel the issue gives them a powerful card to play and certainly not play too early. So I actually agree with May's position on this. We shouldn't conceed the point until we get the quid pro quo. The ( fairly minimal ) uncertainty for our current EU residents is just collateral damage from the Brexit disaster. What I find amusing is the Brexit fantasists are out in force again this afternoon. Unscrambling the Omelette would easy if the " EU " would just be " reasonable ". Hilarious.
To be fair that last sentence referred to a very narrow point: that there is an obvious trade to do on receiprocal rights and it will be settled as soon as the EU wants to settle. (Or be "reasonable" - as everyone knows what the trade is it doesn't actually have much negotiation value).
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
Edit - old oak common because crosssrail will link from old oak common to all the heathrow terminals in a few minutes.
It's worth remembering that HS2 has made it this far partly because the Tories saw it as a logical way to oppose a third runway at Heathrow. Now they appear to be ready to bite the bullet on the third runway, perhaps HS2 isn't a done deal?
Maybe all this prevarication around the new runway is just a ruse to sell more A380s to the world's airlines, as anything else will become too expensive to land at Heathrow.
But really, the rest of the world is now laughing at the inability of London to get on with expanding airport capacity. When the fog starts rolling in next month, we will all be reminded, again, about how little excess capacity exists on those two pieces of tarmac.
Yougov had a majority of Tory voters backing new grammars, even if there was less support amongst voters overall (though still a plurality.) Most likely it will be based on local parental demand and with measures to ensure more free school meals pupils in any new grammars so that should keep Greening on board
'Sure they can kick out all the Brita if they want. But why should they expect us to guarantee rights of they are not prepared to do likewise?'
They will eventually wake up and realize it's a bit one-sided, 1.2 million UK nationals living in the EU (majority retired people) and 3.2 million EU nationals living in the UK (majority working).
"Paul Richards, the Blairite commentator, predicts many slow years of “attrition” between the party’s two flanks. “Eventually, the bitter shock of defeat after defeat will start to focus minds. That’s what happened in the 1980s. It may be a 10- to 15-year project,” "
As a pb tory I have to say that her premiership is not necessarily turning out to our advantage. She has yielded half a dozen eeeuw moments and nothing really positive. Early days though.
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;
In the tory worldview bankers need security and certainty.
Families, apparently, don't.
If the EU curbs residency rights of UK financiers the UK would of course respond. Once the residency rights of UK citizens in the EU are protected so the the UK will protect the residency rights of EU citizens in the UK
While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?
While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?
The Times of course backed Remain and New Labour in 2001 and 2005, it is not really a Tory paper nowadays but a Blairite/Cameroon one. The Sun was rather more enthusiastic
The boundary changes aren't bad for UKIP. They seem to have created new targets for the party in Isle of Wight East, Chelmsley Wood & Solihull North, and Stoke-on-Trent North.
The Times of course backed Remain and New Labour in 2001 and 2005, it is not really a Tory paper nowadays but a Blairite/Cameroon one. The Sun was rather more enthusiastic
The boundary changes aren't bad for UKIP. They seem to have created new targets for the party in Isle of Wight East, Chelmsley Wood & Solihull North, and Stoke-on-Trent North.
We're not negotiating with the EU per se but 27 other governments. I imagine Poland would be delighted to settle on reciprocal grandparent rights for EU citizens straight away. Spain however might feel the issue gives them a powerful card to play and certainly not play too early. So I actually agree with May's position on this. We shouldn't conceed the point until we get the quid pro quo. The ( fairly minimal ) uncertainty for our current EU residents is just collateral damage from the Brexit disaster. What I find amusing is the Brexit fantasists are out in force again this afternoon. Unscrambling the Omelette would easy if the " EU " would just be " reasonable ". Hilarious.
I find it hard to believe that the EU is going to deport Brits if we have pro-actively said we will not be deporting current EU nationals. It would completely take away any 'moral high ground' the EU has over Brexit, it would look ridiculously vindictive - while the EU may not want Brexit to succeed it doesn't want to be seen actively being spiteful and petty.
Speaking as a Brit in the EU, with EU national family members in the UK, I don't like the idea of us both being used as bargaining chips against each other. Of course, no-one in the UK or EU really wants mass deportations, so I guess in reality it is all a bit of posturing. I can't see negotiations going so badly that I am frogmarched out of France crossing past my aunt in the chunnel as she is being frogmarched back to Spain.
The Times of course backed Remain and New Labour in 2001 and 2005, it is not really a Tory paper nowadays but a Blairite/Cameroon one. The Sun was rather more enthusiastic
Exactly.
Indeed and most Times readers will still vote Tory anyway when the alternative is Corbyn
Paul Brand ITV If next UKIP leader is @DianeJames2016 then ironically that just leaves 'equality' parties Labour & Lib Dems never having had female leader
We're not negotiating with the EU per se but 27 other governments. I imagine Poland would be delighted to settle on reciprocal grandparent rights for EU citizens straight away. Spain however might feel the issue gives them a powerful card to play and certainly not play too early. So I actually agree with May's position on this. We shouldn't conceed the point until we get the quid pro quo. The ( fairly minimal ) uncertainty for our current EU residents is just collateral damage from the Brexit disaster. What I find amusing is the Brexit fantasists are out in force again this afternoon. Unscrambling the Omelette would easy if the " EU " would just be " reasonable ". Hilarious.
I find it hard to believe that the EU is going to deport Brits if we have pro-actively said we will not be deporting current EU nationals. It would completely take away any 'moral high ground' the EU has over Brexit, it would look ridiculously vindictive - while the EU may not want Brexit to succeed it doesn't want to be seen actively being spiteful and petty.
Speaking as a Brit in the EU, with EU national family members in the UK, I don't like the idea of us both being used as bargaining chips against each other. Of course, no-one in the UK or EU really wants mass deportations, so I guess in reality it is all a bit of posturing. I can't see negotiations going so badly that I am frogmarched out of France crossing past my aunt in the chunnel as she is being frogmarched back to Spain.
What I don't know is how many of the British living in France and Spain have a uk vote. They have already taken a hit from brexit - trying to live a euro lifestyle on a sterling income - and when it actually happens they will either have to hang in there, having to pay all their own medical costs, or try to come back home and discover that their equity in their lovely villas will just about cover the deposit on a basement flat in Halifax. A perfect storm.
"As Breitbart News reported earlier this month, other left-wing media outlets, like Politico and the Guardian, had already traced the Birther movement back to Democrats and Ms. Clinton. Using his wayback machine on Wednesday, the Post‘s David Weigel took an in-depth look at the origins of the false rumors that President Obama is a practicing Muslim who was not born in a America. Weigel’s reporting contains the final pieces of a very disturbing puzzle.
While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?
Thanks. No one could accuse Mrs May of being out of touch with Con voters.....nearly three quarters (74%) want to either increase the number of grammar schools (57%) or retain current ones (17%).....
We're not negotiating with the EU per se but 27 other governments. I imagine Poland would be delighted to settle on reciprocal grandparent rights for EU citizens straight away. Spain however might feel the issue gives them a powerful card to play and certainly not play too early. So I actually agree with May's position on this. We shouldn't conceed the point until we get the quid pro quo. The ( fairly minimal ) uncertainty for our current EU residents is just collateral damage from the Brexit disaster. What I find amusing is the Brexit fantasists are out in force again this afternoon. Unscrambling the Omelette would easy if the " EU " would just be " reasonable ". Hilarious.
I find it hard to believe that the EU is going to deport Brits if we have pro-actively said we will not be deporting current EU nationals. It would completely take away any 'moral high ground' the EU has over Brexit, it would look ridiculously vindictive - while the EU may not want Brexit to succeed it doesn't want to be seen actively being spiteful and petty.
Speaking as a Brit in the EU, with EU national family members in the UK, I don't like the idea of us both being used as bargaining chips against each other. Of course, no-one in the UK or EU really wants mass deportations, so I guess in reality it is all a bit of posturing. I can't see negotiations going so badly that I am frogmarched out of France crossing past my aunt in the chunnel as she is being frogmarched back to Spain.
Given what is coming out of Brussels nothing is guaranteed at the moment
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
Edit - old oak common because crosssrail will link from old oak common to all the heathrow terminals in a few minutes.
It's worth remembering that HS2 has made it this far partly because the Tories saw it as a logical way to oppose a third runway at Heathrow. Now they appear to be ready to bite the bullet on the third runway, perhaps HS2 isn't a done deal?
Phase 1 is needed (Euston to Crewe/Birmingham) because the government built three damn great new towns along the existing route making it overcrowded.
The rest looks to me to be a white elephant, especially the east midlands/leeds branch that will be little faster from city centres - leeds excepted - than the current route and a lot more inconvenient in the case of the east midlands.
Descoping the max speed to 180 mph would also save a lot and building an additional station near aylesbury would throw a bone to the protesters.
The boundary changes aren't bad for UKIP. They seem to have created new targets for the party in Isle of Wight East, Chelmsley Wood & Solihull North, and Stoke-on-Trent North.
UKIP and target seats?
Their target seat should be Clacton. They might be able to take it off Carswell ;-).
Something else to thank George Osborne for. Hopefully now we won't be getting the two new Chinese spec power stations but who knows? It will create thousands of jobs in France though I'm told and the money we pay China in our energy bills for a generation won't figure on the national debt.
We're not negotiating with the EU per se but 27 other governments. I imagine Poland would be delighted to settle on reciprocal grandparent rights for EU citizens straight away. Spain however might feel the issue gives them a powerful card to play and certainly not play too early. So I actually agree with May's position on this. We shouldn't conceed the point until we get the quid pro quo. The ( fairly minimal ) uncertainty for our current EU residents is just collateral damage from the Brexit disaster. What I find amusing is the Brexit fantasists are out in force again this afternoon. Unscrambling the Omelette would easy if the " EU " would just be " reasonable ". Hilarious.
I find it hard to believe that the EU is going to deport Brits if we have pro-actively said we will not be deporting current EU nationals. It would completely take away any 'moral high ground' the EU has over Brexit, it would look ridiculously vindictive - while the EU may not want Brexit to succeed it doesn't want to be seen actively being spiteful and petty.
Speaking as a Brit in the EU, with EU national family members in the UK, I don't like the idea of us both being used as bargaining chips against each other. Of course, no-one in the UK or EU really wants mass deportations, so I guess in reality it is all a bit of posturing. I can't see negotiations going so badly that I am frogmarched out of France crossing past my aunt in the chunnel as she is being frogmarched back to Spain.
What I don't know is how many of the British living in France and Spain have a uk vote. They have already taken a hit from brexit - trying to live a euro lifestyle on a sterling income - and when it actually happens they will either have to hang in there, having to pay all their own medical costs, or try to come back home and discover that their equity in their lovely villas will just about cover the deposit on a basement flat in Halifax. A perfect storm.
If you live in the EU the sensible thing is to keep at least a flat in the UK if needed
Diane James is the new UKIP leader. I think it's bad news for Labour's attempts to win back working-class and lower middle-class women, especially if Corbyn remains leader.
May has a majority of 12 (or 16, whatever) and yet she went out of her way to burn bridges with the Cameroons in general. Cameron, rather than be a focus for dissent has done the decent thing and stepped off the stage. Osborne, however, has made it clear that he is hanging around.
It is difficult to think what level of imbecility is required to go out of your way to make an enemy of Osborne gratuitously. Other than perhaps Peter Mandelson I struggle to think of anyone in the last 30 years where that is such a bad idea.
The cabinet is full of no marks, unfortunately particularly in the female part of it. Greening, Truss, Patel, Rudd and Leadsom. If I was a woman's libber I would be wanting my money back. Worse it has idiots or untrustworthy buffoons like Davis, Grayling and Fox.
Political talent is thin on the ground. Osborne and Gove are both problematic but we simply cannot waste such talent. If Osborne wants to champion the northern powerhouse for goodness sake let him. If the Brexit negotiations are too hard for Davis to understand get Gove in to help. Hold the party together. Use what you have. That is what a real leader would do. May is not showing any understanding of her task or the challenges she is facing. I genuinely fear that this is not going to end well either for May or, more importantly, for the UK.
While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?
So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.
What I don't know is how many of the British living in France and Spain have a uk vote.
Not that many: To screw the Tories, Labour took away the right to vote from people who have lived outside the UK (not necessarily in the same place) for 15 years or over.
The Tories then screwed Labour by tweaking voter registration to unregister mobile and/or young people. I'm not sure if these things in combination add up to the Brexit margin.
Diane James is the new UKIP leader. I think it's bad news for Labour's attempts to win back working-class and lower middle-class women, especially if Corbyn remains leader.
Wasn't she the third choice behind Steven Woolfe and Suzanne Evans?
The boundary changes aren't bad for UKIP. They seem to have created new targets for the party in Isle of Wight East, Chelmsley Wood & Solihull North, and Stoke-on-Trent North.
UKIP and target seats?
Their target seat should be Clacton. They might be able to take it off Carswell ;-).
That's getting messed around with as well, it sounds like it'll get less UKIP-friendly.
Thanks. No one could accuse Mrs May of being out of touch with Con voters.....nearly three quarters (74%) want to either increase the number of grammar schools (57%) or retain current ones (17%).....
49% of UKIP voters also want more grammars and significantly more Leave voters than Remain voters. A plurality of LDs want to keep existing grammars but not open any more, a plurality of Labour voters want to close all existing grammars
Diane James is the new UKIP leader. I think it's bad news for Labour's attempts to win back working-class and lower middle-class women, especially if Corbyn remains leader.
Good choice – hopefully Farage can now step back and let her run the party without too much interference, other than advice when called upon.
The Guardian fears she has a lot of work cut out for her mending rifts etc.
Something else to thank George Osborne for. Hopefully now we won't be getting the two new Chinese spec power stations but who knows? It will create thousands of jobs in France though I'm told and the money we pay China in our energy bills for a generation won't figure on the national debt.
*Two* generations; they're talking of a 60 year life. Having spent £18 bn to build it, another ?£10 bn for waste disposal in 2100 and further £bn per year to run it, I suppose the economics look better if they can 'sweat the assets' a bit longer.
A depressing example of the worst of both worlds: 1 private ownership (hence higher returns on capital needed and higher prices, unless it works more efficiently) 2 government central planning (as with the CEGB 1947-90).
This sounds ominous: "Sky News understands that on his advice, she pulled out of the 12 leadership hustings to the consternation of many in the party and decided instead to run her own events, unchallenged by debate." and this: "In an interview this summer she made it clear she supports a purge: "There's going to be no place in UKIP under my leadership for those who have sought or seek to destabilise, destroy or even obstruct what a new constitution will outline for the new governance of this party.""
While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?
So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.
Though more younger voters back opening new grammars than closing existing ones
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;
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.
Err - they should because then their citizens in the UK would be safe. I'm not a Brexiteer fantasist but even I can see that one.
Diane James is the new UKIP leader. I think it's bad news for Labour's attempts to win back working-class and lower middle-class women, especially if Corbyn remains leader.
She could certainly broaden UKIP's appeal but she will also keep Farage as an influence in the party
Something else to thank George Osborne for. Hopefully now we won't be getting the two new Chinese spec power stations but who knows? It will create thousands of jobs in France though I'm told and the money we pay China in our energy bills for a generation won't figure on the national debt.
May did have a choice. Leaders LEAD. The couple of billion in sunk costs were neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things and diplomacy could have been done with the French and Chinese, though she completely ballsed up by overtly "looking at" the security angle wrt China.
A complete cock up from start to finish.
Oh and that £10 Bn "clean up" cost in 2100 is laughably low.
@DavidL When you voted Leave, who did you think would become Prime Minister in the event that your vote was in the majority and what did you think that his or her government would look like?
Diane James is the new UKIP leader. I think it's bad news for Labour's attempts to win back working-class and lower middle-class women, especially if Corbyn remains leader.
Wasn't she the third choice behind Steven Woolfe and Suzanne Evans?
May has a majority of 12 (or 16, whatever) and yet she went out of her way to burn bridges with the Cameroons in general. Cameron, rather than be a focus for dissent has done the decent thing and stepped off the stage. Osborne, however, has made it clear that he is hanging around.
It is difficult to think what level of imbecility is required to go out of your way to make an enemy of Osborne gratuitously. Other than perhaps Peter Mandelson I struggle to think of anyone in the last 30 years where that is such a bad idea.
The cabinet is full of no marks, unfortunately particularly in the female part of it. Greening, Truss, Patel, Rudd and Leadsom. If I was a woman's libber I would be wanting my money back. Worse it has idiots or untrustworthy buffoons like Davis, Grayling and Fox.
Political talent is thin on the ground. Osborne and Gove are both problematic but we simply cannot waste such talent. If Osborne wants to champion the northern powerhouse for goodness sake let him. If the Brexit negotiations are too hard for Davis to understand get Gove in to help. Hold the party together. Use what you have. That is what a real leader would do. May is not showing any understanding of her task or the challenges she is facing. I genuinely fear that this is not going to end well either for May or, more importantly, for the UK.
I think you are being rather over-dramatic. I agree that it was foolish and churlish to be ungracious to Osborne, and I've raised my eyebrows at a few other things she has done, but overall she's got off to a reasonable start.
As for the quality of the Cabinet, I'd say it is about par for the course; Blair had John Prescott, Margaret Beckett and Geoff Hoon in senior positions, for heaven's sake!
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;
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.
Sure they can kick out all the Brita if they want. But why should they expect us to guarantee rights of they are not prepared to do likewise?
EU nationals currently here should be lobbying their own governments about this.
This is what Brits in Spain are doing - although in my area some idiots prefer to ask the EU to guarantee their pensions and healthcare rights - which of course is pointless as they are provided by UK taxpayers currently.
So Farage is remaining leader of the UKIP group in the EU ? And set three tests of whether Brexit s real at least one of which is utterly undeliverable. And sets the next General Election as the judgement date. Having previously said that he had " stood aside from " the UKIP leadership. No wonder the Tory Dr Frankenstein's who've built up UKIP to serve one cause are all over the media saying the ' party's is over. Come on home. ' As we've discovered since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan when you arm Jihadists they never demobilise when you you're done with them.
May has a majority of 12 (or 16, whatever) and yet she went out of her way to burn bridges with the Cameroons in general. Cameron, rather than be a focus for dissent has done the decent thing and stepped off the stage. Osborne, however, has made it clear that he is hanging around.
It is difficult to think what level of imbecility is required to go out of your way to make an enemy of Osborne gratuitously. Other than perhaps Peter Mandelson I struggle to think of anyone in the last 30 years where that is such a bad idea.
The cabinet is full of no marks, unfortunately particularly in the female part of it. Greening, Truss, Patel, Rudd and Leadsom. If I was a woman's libber I would be wanting my money back. Worse it has idiots or untrustworthy buffoons like Davis, Grayling and Fox.
Political talent is thin on the ground. Osborne and Gove are both problematic but we simply cannot waste such talent. If Osborne wants to champion the northern powerhouse for goodness sake let him. If the Brexit negotiations are too hard for Davis to understand get Gove in to help. Hold the party together. Use what you have. That is what a real leader would do. May is not showing any understanding of her task or the challenges she is facing. I genuinely fear that this is not going to end well either for May or, more importantly, for the UK.
Gove may have a future role but would likely be even more confrontational with the EU than Davis
At the last election 59.4% in Britain voted either Green, SNP, UKIP or Conservative. All those parties are now led by women (with the Greens having a man as joint leader with Caroline Lucas).
We're not negotiating with the EU per se but 27 other governments. I imagine Poland would be delighted to settle on reciprocal grandparent rights for EU citizens straight away. Spain however might feel the issue gives them a powerful card to play and certainly not play too early. So I actually agree with May's position on this. We shouldn't conceed the point until we get the quid pro quo. The ( fairly minimal ) uncertainty for our current EU residents is just collateral damage from the Brexit disaster. What I find amusing is the Brexit fantasists are out in force again this afternoon. Unscrambling the Omelette would easy if the " EU " would just be " reasonable ". Hilarious.
I find it hard to believe that the EU is going to deport Brits if we have pro-actively said we will not be deporting current EU nationals. It would completely take away any 'moral high ground' the EU has over Brexit, it would look ridiculously vindictive - while the EU may not want Brexit to succeed it doesn't want to be seen actively being spiteful and petty.
Speaking as a Brit in the EU, with EU national family members in the UK, I don't like the idea of us both being used as bargaining chips against each other. Of course, no-one in the UK or EU really wants mass deportations, so I guess in reality it is all a bit of posturing. I can't see negotiations going so badly that I am frogmarched out of France crossing past my aunt in the chunnel as she is being frogmarched back to Spain.
What I don't know is how many of the British living in France and Spain have a uk vote. They have already taken a hit from brexit - trying to live a euro lifestyle on a sterling income - and when it actually happens they will either have to hang in there, having to pay all their own medical costs, or try to come back home and discover that their equity in their lovely villas will just about cover the deposit on a basement flat in Halifax. A perfect storm.
All of those who've been away less than 15 years already have the vote. In Spain where I live the living is pretty cheap - even at £1; €1 [ current rate is £1: €1.17]. Typically the cost of living here is between 25- 35% cheaper for most things. Healthcare is a big worry for those who cannot afford [or qualify] for private cover. for pensioners this is currently paid for by the UK and it makes absolute sense for that to continue to avoid the return of the poor and sick who for obvious reasons, would not be of much use to the UK economy.
While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?
So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.
May has a majority of 12 (or 16, whatever) and yet she went out of her way to burn bridges with the Cameroons in general. Cameron, rather than be a focus for dissent has done the decent thing and stepped off the stage. Osborne, however, has made it clear that he is hanging around.
It is difficult to think what level of imbecility is required to go out of your way to make an enemy of Osborne gratuitously. Other than perhaps Peter Mandelson I struggle to think of anyone in the last 30 years where that is such a bad idea.
The cabinet is full of no marks, unfortunately particularly in the female part of it. Greening, Truss, Patel, Rudd and Leadsom. If I was a woman's libber I would be wanting my money back. Worse it has idiots or untrustworthy buffoons like Davis, Grayling and Fox.
Political talent is thin on the ground. Osborne and Gove are both problematic but we simply cannot waste such talent. If Osborne wants to champion the northern powerhouse for goodness sake let him. If the Brexit negotiations are too hard for Davis to understand get Gove in to help. Hold the party together. Use what you have. That is what a real leader would do. May is not showing any understanding of her task or the challenges she is facing. I genuinely fear that this is not going to end well either for May or, more importantly, for the UK.
I think you are being rather over-dramatic. I agree that it was foolish and churlish to be ungracious to Osborne, and I've raised my eyebrows at a few other things she has done, but overall she's got off to a reasonable start.
As for the quality of the Cabinet, I'd say it is about par for the course; Blair had John Prescott, Margaret Beckett and Geoff Hoon in senior positions, for heaven's sake!
Maybe a bit overdramatic and I am hardly suggesting that previous governments were full of intellectual giants either but this government has a hell of a job on its hands, undertaking one of the most difficult tasks since WW2. It needs to work together and use the talent available to it without silly factional nonsense or distractions.
@DavidL When you voted Leave, who did you think would become Prime Minister in the event that your vote was in the majority and what did you think that his or her government would look like?
Plan A was that Cameron and Osborne would continue to manage the shop, at least for the majority of this Parliament. Plan B was Boris with Gove as Chancellor (and no unnecessary sharp implements in either's anatomy). May was probably plan C. I am not hostile to her, genuinely. I am just a bit underwhelmed and daunted with what she now needs to do.
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
Edit - old oak common because crosssrail will link from old oak common to all the heathrow terminals in a few minutes.
It's worth remembering that HS2 has made it this far partly because the Tories saw it as a logical way to oppose a third runway at Heathrow. Now they appear to be ready to bite the bullet on the third runway, perhaps HS2 isn't a done deal?
Phase 1 is needed (Euston to Crewe/Birmingham) because the government built three damn great new towns along the existing route making it overcrowded.
The rest looks to me to be a white elephant, especially the east midlands/leeds branch that will be little faster from city centres - leeds excepted - than the current route and a lot more inconvenient in the case of the east midlands.
Descoping the max speed to 180 mph would also save a lot and building an additional station near aylesbury would throw a bone to the protesters.
My fantasy HS3 (I mean real HS, not the Transpennine idea) would go from Old Oak Common under Heathrow and on to Portsmouth (ca 30min to Euston), Southampton (40), Bournemouth (55) and Exeter (85) perhap even addressing the Dawlish problem by extending to Plymouth (100mins) and incorporate an HS shuttle between Heathrow and my new airport south of Birmingham (yep, my Walter Mitty airport idea again as whichever wag called it). Could have fun with the New Forest and other AONB's though
While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?
So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.
So what - since when did older voters not count?
I think the point was that if you are over 60 you're not likely to be looking for secondary schooling for your children.
Theresa May inherited a poisoned chalice. The energy world has changed utterly over the last decade as climate policy drives a massive global push for renewable power, transforming the calculus of future costs. “It looks like a contract that was written five years ago on a business case that was probably pulled together 10 years ago,” says ScottishPower.
Perhaps her lack of enthusiasm for Osborne's genius was in part driven by this?
What I don't know is how many of the British living in France and Spain have a uk vote.
Not that many: To screw the Tories, Labour took away the right to vote from people who have lived outside the UK (not necessarily in the same place) for 15 years or over.
The Tories then screwed Labour by tweaking voter registration to unregister mobile and/or young people. I'm not sure if these things in combination add up to the Brexit margin.
Individual voter registration was referred to as an achievement in Labour's 2010 manifesto.
Theresa May inherited a poisoned chalice. The energy world has changed utterly over the last decade as climate policy drives a massive global push for renewable power, transforming the calculus of future costs. “It looks like a contract that was written five years ago on a business case that was probably pulled together 10 years ago,” says ScottishPower.
Perhaps her lack of enthusiasm for Osborne's genius was in part driven by this?
Then she should have said no. I frankly expected her too. But she has gone along with it. Unwisely.
JM Keynes: "When the facts change I change my opinion, what do you do sir?" Or something like that.
Comments
Lab 22595
Green 4338
Con 3533
LDem 1818
One Love 494
"He insisted post-Brexit controls on free movement should “not strike fear into the heart of Japanese financial institutions”, as he responded to pleas by Tokyo to ensure EU nationals could continue to work in Britain.
Referring to the prospects of free movement control, the chancellor said: “We would use it in a sensible way [to] facilitate movement of highly skilled people between financial institutions and businesses.”"
Why would that not include letting their families live here, if they won't come otherwise?
But really, the rest of the world is now laughing at the inability of London to get on with expanding airport capacity. When the fog starts rolling in next month, we will all be reminded, again, about how little excess capacity exists on those two pieces of tarmac.
'Sure they can kick out all the Brita if they want. But why should they expect us to guarantee rights of they are not prepared to do likewise?'
They will eventually wake up and realize it's a bit one-sided, 1.2 million UK nationals living in the EU (majority retired people) and 3.2 million EU nationals living in the UK (majority working).
https://www.ft.com/content/f706fb1e-7ac6-11e6-b837-eb4b4333ee43
"Paul Richards, the Blairite commentator, predicts many slow years of “attrition” between the party’s two flanks. “Eventually, the bitter shock of defeat after defeat will start to focus minds. That’s what happened in the 1980s. It may be a 10- to 15-year project,” "
Adrift
After just two months this government is already losing its way on grammar schools, the Orgreave inquiry and Hinkley Point....
....Mrs May approved a return to grammar schools and selection that is at best nostalgic and could harm rather than help school standards.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/adrift-73c6qkxmv
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/08/15/two-thirds-people-would-send-their-child-grammar-s/
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/grammar-school-fans-know-theyre-worse-for-less-abl/
Hearing Diane James has won the Ukip leadership by a comfortable margin
Speaking as a Brit in the EU, with EU national family members in the UK, I don't like the idea of us both being used as bargaining chips against each other. Of course, no-one in the UK or EU really wants mass deportations, so I guess in reality it is all a bit of posturing. I can't see negotiations going so badly that I am frogmarched out of France crossing past my aunt in the chunnel as she is being frogmarched back to Spain.
If next UKIP leader is @DianeJames2016 then ironically that just leaves 'equality' parties Labour & Lib Dems never having had female leader
Lives in the constituency, active in the local party, superb backstory (Falklands MC, trained as a priest, former headteacher).
"As Breitbart News reported earlier this month, other left-wing media outlets, like Politico and the Guardian, had already traced the Birther movement back to Democrats and Ms. Clinton. Using his wayback machine on Wednesday, the Post‘s David Weigel took an in-depth look at the origins of the false rumors that President Obama is a practicing Muslim who was not born in a America. Weigel’s reporting contains the final pieces of a very disturbing puzzle.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/09/26/washington-post-confirms-hillary-clinton-started-the-birther-movement/
The rest looks to me to be a white elephant, especially the east midlands/leeds branch that will be little faster from city centres - leeds excepted - than the current route and a lot more inconvenient in the case of the east midlands.
Descoping the max speed to 180 mph would also save a lot and building an additional station near aylesbury would throw a bone to the protesters.
They might be able to take it off Carswell ;-).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/15/hinkley-point-will-be-obsolete-before-it-even-starts-but-theresa/
Something else to thank George Osborne for. Hopefully now we won't be getting the two new Chinese spec power stations but who knows? It will create thousands of jobs in France though I'm told and the money we pay China in our energy bills for a generation won't figure on the national debt.
May has a majority of 12 (or 16, whatever) and yet she went out of her way to burn bridges with the Cameroons in general. Cameron, rather than be a focus for dissent has done the decent thing and stepped off the stage. Osborne, however, has made it clear that he is hanging around.
It is difficult to think what level of imbecility is required to go out of your way to make an enemy of Osborne gratuitously. Other than perhaps Peter Mandelson I struggle to think of anyone in the last 30 years where that is such a bad idea.
The cabinet is full of no marks, unfortunately particularly in the female part of it. Greening, Truss, Patel, Rudd and Leadsom. If I was a woman's libber I would be wanting my money back. Worse it has idiots or untrustworthy buffoons like Davis, Grayling and Fox.
Political talent is thin on the ground. Osborne and Gove are both problematic but we simply cannot waste such talent. If Osborne wants to champion the northern powerhouse for goodness sake let him. If the Brexit negotiations are too hard for Davis to understand get Gove in to help. Hold the party together. Use what you have. That is what a real leader would do. May is not showing any understanding of her task or the challenges she is facing. I genuinely fear that this is not going to end well either for May or, more importantly, for the UK.
The Tories then screwed Labour by tweaking voter registration to unregister mobile and/or young people. I'm not sure if these things in combination add up to the Brexit margin.
http://news.sky.com/story/the-full-story-behind-the-rise-of-diane-james-ukips-new-leader-10580026
The Guardian fears she has a lot of work cut out for her mending rifts etc.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/16/ukip-elects-diane-james-as-new-party-leader?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo
A depressing example of the worst of both worlds:
1 private ownership (hence higher returns on capital needed and higher prices, unless it works more efficiently)
2 government central planning (as with the CEGB 1947-90).
"Sky News understands that on his advice, she pulled out of the 12 leadership hustings to the consternation of many in the party and decided instead to run her own events, unchallenged by debate."
and this:
"In an interview this summer she made it clear she supports a purge: "There's going to be no place in UKIP under my leadership for those who have sought or seek to destabilise, destroy or even obstruct what a new constitution will outline for the new governance of this party.""
A complete cock up from start to finish.
Oh and that £10 Bn "clean up" cost in 2100 is laughably low.
As for the quality of the Cabinet, I'd say it is about par for the course; Blair had John Prescott, Margaret Beckett and Geoff Hoon in senior positions, for heaven's sake!
I have a feeling it may stick
Osborne fans ∩ Brexiteers
Michael Spicer
So to recap:
Tories - Female
SNP - Female
UKIP - Female
Labour - A cartoon cloud with fists poking out
DUP - Female
@Eel_Pie_Pete @tinyrayray I hit send by accident. Green, Scottish Tories, Plaid Cymru.
A friend lives near Granada. At the local market I could have started my own fruit and veg stall for 15 euros.
http://linkis.com/thegatewaypundit.com/kEZP1
"Harry Reid with sidekick Chuck Schumer smirking in the background tried out a new attack line on Donald Trump today.
Democrats decided the best way to defeat Donald Trump is to fat shame him.
https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/776767740145172480
What are Dems doing?!
Losing.
Desperate.
Miss Plato, makes sense. Very few Americans are overweight, after all. Ahem.
Perhaps her lack of enthusiasm for Osborne's genius was in part driven by this?
JM Keynes: "When the facts change I change my opinion, what do you do sir?" Or something like that.
A number of people liked both Cameron and Osborne before their behaviour in the referendum campaign.
Golly. How he changed my mind on that in a few weeks.