Away from airports for a bit, I've been writing a paper on how to have a step change in our railways along the same lines as how airports work.
The basic idea is that each terminal station has landing and take off slots and any company can bid for any slot at a government auction. Unpopular slots in the afternoon go for cheap and peak time slots are more expensive. Commuters can buy season tickets with the company (say Virgin trains) that has bought peak time slots while ordinary people can travel on non-peak services for very cheap with Easytrain. Given that the government owns the rolling stock and the tracks there really isn't much of an issue with companies wet leasing trains either.
Does the gov't own the actual trains (Rolling stock) ? Didn't know that - thought it was Virgin etc..
Yes, of course. Think about it, if the company owns the trains and then the franchise changes hands it leaves the new franchise owner a bit stuffed!
The governmet doesn't own the rolling stock. There's two private companies that lease out the trains.
Anti-Government case As a residual power, the prerogative cannot today be extended. The need to ensure executive accountability to Parliament by limiting the exercise of prerogative power, particularly in respect of important decisions affecting citizens' fundamental rights has been endorsed across the political spectrum including the Defendant himself. (David Davis)
Government case A notification under Article 50 would be an administrative act on the international law plane about which complaint cannot be made by any individual claimant in the domestic courts.
The Government may well lose the case and it will then go to appeal which it may also lose.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Mildly ironic that referendum lost because the governments scope to govern has been curtailed and the response is to use an unelected court to reduce the government's scope to govern...
It wouldn't be technically reducing it though, would it? Just clarifying what the legal position already is. If someone thinks they have the power to do something and a court says they don't, that's not reducing their power, they never had the power isn't it?
On another topic I have been watching these Lib Dem byelection results over the last few weeks and they are quite remarkable. Swings of over 20% seem the normwhich was SNP magnitude. They are creating the perfect storm for the Tories in areas that voted remain tapping into that cohort and as usual getting their own vote out. Last nights victory in Stow is beyond comprehension..if that is repeated across the board in Witney then the Tories have a fight on their hands. Richmond Park goes back Lib Dem if Goldsmith resigns on present trends.
Parish council elections, not Westminster elections. My grandmother, who makes Thatcher look left wing, votes LD in local elections (Torbay) - but laughs at them as a national party.
I suspect the Government will lose the court case.
Commons vote gets passed, probably, but the Lords won't. By the time the Parliament Act is used, triggering Article 50 will have taken rather longer than it should've.
On another topic I have been watching these Lib Dem byelection results over the last few weeks and they are quite remarkable. Swings of over 20% seem the normwhich was SNP magnitude. They are creating the perfect storm for the Tories in areas that voted remain tapping into that cohort and as usual getting their own vote out. Last nights victory in Stow is beyond comprehension..if that is repeated across the board in Witney then the Tories have a fight on their hands. Richmond Park goes back Lib Dem if Goldsmith resigns on present trends.
Parish council elections, not Westminster elections. My grandmother, who makes Thatcher look left wing, votes LD in local elections (Torbay) - but laughs at them as a national party.
How many times do I have to post this. These results are NOT Parish Council results. Please get your facts right.
I suspect the Government will lose the court case.
Commons vote gets passed, probably, but the Lords won't. By the time the Parliament Act is used, triggering Article 50 will have taken rather longer than it should've.
Assuming that happens.
The government could trigger article 50 before any vote. Just announce its triggered.
Away from airports for a bit, I've been writing a paper on how to have a step change in our railways along the same lines as how airports work.
The basic idea is that each terminal station has landing and take off slots and any company can bid for any slot at a government auction. Unpopular slots in the afternoon go for cheap and peak time slots are more expensive. Commuters can buy season tickets with the company (say Virgin trains) that has bought peak time slots while ordinary people can travel on non-peak services for very cheap with Easytrain. Given that the government owns the rolling stock and the tracks there really isn't much of an issue with companies wet leasing trains either.
The problem with the idea is that it is not landing and takeoff slots at terminal stations that govern rail travel but paths across the network . Virgin may have the slot at London Euston say but cant move the train out unless they have a path to Manchester/Liverpool/Glasgow .
The same is to some extent true in the air, you cant depart without an airways clearance even if you have an arrival slot at your destination. One of the reason why many expanding several London airports would not be the panacea it appears, the ATC environment, already hideously complicated would become an utter nightmare.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
I suspect the Government will lose the court case.
Commons vote gets passed, probably, but the Lords won't. By the time the Parliament Act is used, triggering Article 50 will have taken rather longer than it should've.
Assuming that happens.
The government could trigger article 50 before any vote. Just announce its triggered.
Not if the courts have ruled against surely? Article 50 specifies that the leaving nation needs to follow their constitutional requirements.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
Like an opposition perceived to be likely to do very poorly and a riled up Leave vote, including usually non-voters, who would rally behind the party using the GE to get a mandate to trigger a50 through the commons?
I suspect the Government will lose the court case.
Commons vote gets passed, probably, but the Lords won't. By the time the Parliament Act is used, triggering Article 50 will have taken rather longer than it should've.
Assuming that happens.
The government could trigger article 50 before any vote. Just announce its triggered.
Not if the courts have ruled against surely? Article 50 specifies that the leaving nation needs to follow their constitutional requirements.
What if the government writes a letter triggering a50, then the court rules?
Away from airports for a bit, I've been writing a paper on how to have a step change in our railways along the same lines as how airports work.
The basic idea is that each terminal station has landing and take off slots and any company can bid for any slot at a government auction. Unpopular slots in the afternoon go for cheap and peak time slots are more expensive. Commuters can buy season tickets with the company (say Virgin trains) that has bought peak time slots while ordinary people can travel on non-peak services for very cheap with Easytrain. Given that the government owns the rolling stock and the tracks there really isn't much of an issue with companies wet leasing trains either.
The problem with the idea is that it is not landing and takeoff slots at terminal stations that govern rail travel but paths across the network . Virgin may have the slot at London Euston say but cant move the train out unless they have a path to Manchester/Liverpool/Glasgow .
There are very much paths (airways) for planes, but you're right that generally the airport slots (as busy terminals like LHR and LGW) are the restricting issue for planes, whereas the paths are the limiting issue for trains.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
Like an opposition perceived to be likely to do very poorly and a riled up Leave vote, including usually non-voters, who would rally behind the party using the GE to get a mandate to trigger a50 through the commons?
Possibly but the danger is that those riled up voters go UKIP rather than Tory.
Plus it's still so early it only adds two extra years to her mandate.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
May 2019 is looking the likeliest date if it were to be early. We'd be just about to leave the EU and sign trade deals, and the new boundaries will be in effect. Hopefully Jeremy Corbyn will also still be in place and failing miserably to be a government in waiting.
I suspect the Government will lose the court case.
Commons vote gets passed, probably, but the Lords won't. By the time the Parliament Act is used, triggering Article 50 will have taken rather longer than it should've.
Assuming that happens.
The government could trigger article 50 before any vote. Just announce its triggered.
Not if the courts have ruled against surely? Article 50 specifies that the leaving nation needs to follow their constitutional requirements.
What if the government writes a letter triggering a50, then the court rules?
Sounds like one for the ECJ!
The court is going to rule before the government writes a letter. If the court rules against the government which writes the letter anyway then that'd be clearly ending in the ECJ and I just don't realistically see that happening.
I suspect the Government will lose the court case.
Commons vote gets passed, probably, but the Lords won't. By the time the Parliament Act is used, triggering Article 50 will have taken rather longer than it should've.
Assuming that happens.
The government could trigger article 50 before any vote. Just announce its triggered.
Not if the courts have ruled against surely? Article 50 specifies that the leaving nation needs to follow their constitutional requirements.
What if the government writes a letter triggering a50, then the court rules?
Sounds like one for the ECJ!
Oo! That would be fun. The ECJ only rules on what the treaties say, not what national laws think, so we would be in the interesting position of the ECJ telling us what our constitutional requirements are, can't see that being controversial at all!
The Brexit A50 court case is going to be difficult The Government may well lose the case and it will then go to appeal which it may also lose.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
The legal question is an interesting one, even if the proponents' motivation for raising it are focused on wanting to find a way to prevent Brexit (even though a vote in parliament is by no means certain to prevent it, in fact more likely the opposite).
I had been skeptical of their being an early general election because the mechanism for calling one is a little tricky and at present I see no appetite from anyone for an early election. However, should the government, which has been unequivocal that it has the power to take the decision without going though parliament, loses, I can see the Tories at the least changing tack on that, for mandate purposes as you say.
Despite many previously remainer MPs, surely not much chance the Tories would not go into a snap GE promising to immediately trigger A50 in a vote, not sure about Labour. And given the sky won't have fallen in by 2017, hard to see a great many leave-remain switchers trying to elect a bunch of Remainer MPs (particular since Labour may well stick to Leave too), and Leave will be more exercised than ever - we've already seen the anger at the courts potentially preventing Brexit (even though that is not what would be happening, it would still be in the power of parliament to do it), whenever this subject comes up I hear real visceral anger and worry it would be stealing the referendum result, so I'd expect the usual non-voters who turned out for Leave to do so again.
It puts the LibDems in a good spot, though. Such a scenario would tie the Tory Party as a whole to Brexit (to the extent that it isn't already), which may come back to bite them down the line. Consequently UKIP will struggle to make headway as it would be too early to gain by crying "betrayal". I guess they might try "keep the bastards honest" but doubt that will get them that far. The SNP will clean up on the Remain vote in Scotland. Labour will be torn between its national preference for remain and its voters' (outside the cities) preference for leave. Which leaves the LibDems in a very good position to broaden its appeal amongst the 48%.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
May 2019 is looking the likeliest date if it were to be early. We'd be just about to leave the EU and sign trade deals, and the new boundaries will be in effect. Hopefully Jeremy Corbyn will also still be in place and failing miserably to be a government in waiting.
Don't forget that Labour have to support calling a general election early, if things are looking good for May that means they will be bad for Labour, so which way do you think they will vote. No, she could have done it while Labour were asking her to, but not at any old time of her choosing.
Finally it looks like the decision is coming. Two decades too late, but coming at last.
Heathrow expansion is the correct decision.
But the question as put for an either/or job of Gatwick, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester, Stanstead was ridiculous.
Heathrow needs to expand because it is at capacity for itself, on it's own flight traffic in/out (Schipol has 6 runways and is less busy I think !)
It should have no bearing on expansion at any other UK airport.
Yes, I'd let the free market decide, give them all permission to build an additional runway and let them raise their own money to do it. One school of thought is that if both Heathrow and Gatwick get the green light then Gatwick would be unable to raise the £6bn necessary to fund their second runway as all the private money would end up at Heathrow for refurbishing T4 and possibly building a new T1/3 to increase passenger capacity along with the new runway.
That's far too sensible.
It's not just the site within the perimeter though. Without major changes to the M4/M3/M25 area, will road network cope (and in some respects Gatwick is worse). Do we have the ATC capacity without fundamental changes in approach. Given that we seem to want to turn LHR into GBHR should there be a proper integrated HST network through there (as per, for example, Frankfurt)?
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
Like an opposition perceived to be likely to do very poorly and a riled up Leave vote, including usually non-voters, who would rally behind the party using the GE to get a mandate to trigger a50 through the commons?
Possibly but the danger is that those riled up voters go UKIP rather than Tory.
Plus it's still so early it only adds two extra years to her mandate.
But that would be five years with an majority probably over a hundred which might be attractive for getting stuff done, especially if there are suspicions that the usual economic variations might make getting re-elected in 2020 an uphill struggle.
Mutti's anti-Midas touch. After single-handedly creating a European crisis out of the migration tragedy, she now foments world-wide financial panic with her unnecessary assurance to Focus magazine that there would be no bail-out for DB. A wrecking ball without precedent. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/want-bank-rescued-dont-ask-german/
It was used twice last year, and so far twice this year. The average has changed because of the exceptional number of uses in one season 2013-14
You're making the mistake of thinking that climate is the same as weather. Climate change is over a longer period, the average is exactly what we should look at.
On another topic I have been watching these Lib Dem byelection results over the last few weeks and they are quite remarkable. Swings of over 20% seem the normwhich was SNP magnitude. They are creating the perfect storm for the Tories in areas that voted remain tapping into that cohort and as usual getting their own vote out. Last nights victory in Stow is beyond comprehension..if that is repeated across the board in Witney then the Tories have a fight on their hands. Richmond Park goes back Lib Dem if Goldsmith resigns on present trends.
Parish council elections, not Westminster elections. My grandmother, who makes Thatcher look left wing, votes LD in local elections (Torbay) - but laughs at them as a national party.
They aren't parish, are they? They are county, borough, and unitary.
And the LibDems had a pretty torrid time in the 2010 to 2015 period in local elections, so I think they are a sign of a tentative recovery for the party.
I suspect the Government will lose the court case.
Commons vote gets passed, probably, but the Lords won't. By the time the Parliament Act is used, triggering Article 50 will have taken rather longer than it should've.
Assuming that happens.
The government could trigger article 50 before any vote. Just announce its triggered.
Not if the courts have ruled against surely? Article 50 specifies that the leaving nation needs to follow their constitutional requirements.
What if the government writes a letter triggering a50, then the court rules?
Sounds like one for the ECJ!
Oo! That would be fun. The ECJ only rules on what the treaties say, not what national laws think, so we would be in the interesting position of the ECJ telling us what our constitutional requirements are, can't see that being controversial at all!
If our courts have ruled our constitutional requirement is that Parliament needs to vote then the ECJ would just need to say we haven't followed the constitutional requirements required by Treaty as laid out by our courts.
Finally it looks like the decision is coming. Two decades too late, but coming at last.
Heathrow expansion is the correct decision.
But the question as put for an either/or job of Gatwick, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester, Stanstead was ridiculous.
Heathrow needs to expand because it is at capacity for itself, on it's own flight traffic in/out (Schipol has 6 runways and is less busy I think !)
It should have no bearing on expansion at any other UK airport.
Yes, I'd let the free market decide, give them all permission to build an additional runway and let them raise their own money to do it. One school of thought is that if both Heathrow and Gatwick get the green light then Gatwick would be unable to raise the £6bn necessary to fund their second runway as all the private money would end up at Heathrow for refurbishing T4 and possibly building a new T1/3 to increase passenger capacity along with the new runway.
That's far too sensible.
It's not just the site within the perimeter though. Without major changes to the M4/M3/M25 area, will road network cope (and in some respects Gatwick is worse). Do we have the ATC capacity without fundamental changes in approach. Given that we seem to want to turn LHR into GBHR should there be a proper integrated HST network through there (as per, for example, Frankfurt)?
Have these questions been answered properly?
I don't understand why LHR has not been properly integrated into HS2. Being able to get the train from Manchester to Heathrow in 1.30 and then onto a plane makes it much more of a UK hub airport than having to fly from Manchester to LHR, getting stuck in a landing pattern and then missing your connection.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
May 2019 is looking the likeliest date if it were to be early. We'd be just about to leave the EU and sign trade deals, and the new boundaries will be in effect. Hopefully Jeremy Corbyn will also still be in place and failing miserably to be a government in waiting.
That makes sense to me. Four years and an early vote would return us to our normal cycle of Parliamentary votes too.
It puts the LibDems in a good spot, though. Such a scenario would tie the Tory Party as a whole to Brexit (to the extent that it isn't already), which may come back to bite them down the line. Consequently UKIP will struggle to make headway as it would be too early to gain by crying "betrayal". I guess they might try "keep the bastards honest" but doubt that will get them that far. The SNP will clean up on the Remain vote in Scotland. Labour will be torn between its national preference for remain and its voters' (outside the cities) preference for leave. Which leaves the LibDems in a very good position to broaden its appeal amongst the 48%.
Most of the 48% are AB voters, the "I'm alright Jacques" set, which would be a good pool to fish in for say Clegg, but Farron is too leftie for that audience, for whom the majority will be more concerned about the stability of their assets and their mortgages than BrExit, Farron is going to smell too "magic money tree" to them, especially if nothing has dramatically spooked the economic horses by the time of the election. The number of obsessive remainers that will vote on that to the excusion of all else wont be enough to make a difference.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
May 2019 is looking the likeliest date if it were to be early. We'd be just about to leave the EU and sign trade deals, and the new boundaries will be in effect. Hopefully Jeremy Corbyn will also still be in place and failing miserably to be a government in waiting.
Don't forget that Labour have to support calling a general election early, if things are looking good for May that means they will be bad for Labour, so which way do you think they will vote. No, she could have done it while Labour were asking her to, but not at any old time of her choosing.
Yes, the vagaries of the fixed term parliament act require a couple of parliamentary votes - but surely the opposition, by the nature of their role, have to be in favour of an election? Labour would commit electoral suicide (more than they are already!) if they didn't jump at the opportunity to form the government via the ballot box.
From another point of view, the moderates in the PLP might find that an early election prevents a lot of the deselections from happening.
Finally it looks like the decision is coming. Two decades too late, but coming at last.
Heathrow expansion is the correct decision.
But the question as put for an either/or job of Gatwick, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester, Stanstead was ridiculous.
Heathrow needs to expand because it is at capacity for itself, on it's own flight traffic in/out (Schipol has 6 runways and is less busy I think !)
It should have no bearing on expansion at any other UK airport.
Yes, I'd let the free market decide, give them all permission to build an additional runway and let them raise their own money to do it. One school of thought is that if both Heathrow and Gatwick get the green light then Gatwick would be unable to raise the £6bn necessary to fund their second runway as all the private money would end up at Heathrow for refurbishing T4 and possibly building a new T1/3 to increase passenger capacity along with the new runway.
That's far too sensible.
It's not just the site within the perimeter though. Without major changes to the M4/M3/M25 area, will road network cope (and in some respects Gatwick is worse). Do we have the ATC capacity without fundamental changes in approach. Given that we seem to want to turn LHR into GBHR should there be a proper integrated HST network through there (as per, for example, Frankfurt)?
Have these questions been answered properly?
I don't understand why LHR has not been properly integrated into HS2. Being able to get the train from Manchester to Heathrow in 1.30 and then onto a plane makes it much more of a UK hub airport than having to fly from Manchester to LHR, getting stuck in a landing pattern and then missing your connection.
You can reach most long haul destinations direct from Manchester now anyway. Makes far more sense to expand Manchester (in addition not instead of expanding LHR) and so ease congestion in London while expanding British capacity dramatically.
On another topic I have been watching these Lib Dem byelection results over the last few weeks and they are quite remarkable. Swings of over 20% seem the normwhich was SNP magnitude. They are creating the perfect storm for the Tories in areas that voted remain tapping into that cohort and as usual getting their own vote out. Last nights victory in Stow is beyond comprehension..if that is repeated across the board in Witney then the Tories have a fight on their hands. Richmond Park goes back Lib Dem if Goldsmith resigns on present trends.
Parish council elections, not Westminster elections. My grandmother, who makes Thatcher look left wing, votes LD in local elections (Torbay) - but laughs at them as a national party.
How many times do I have to post this. These results are NOT Parish Council results. Please get your facts right.
There's a meme in Glasgow that when Celtic or the Renaissance Rangers get knocked out of a competition, it becomes a diddy* cup to their supporters. Tories and council elections seem to be of the same stripe.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
May 2019 is looking the likeliest date if it were to be early. We'd be just about to leave the EU and sign trade deals, and the new boundaries will be in effect. Hopefully Jeremy Corbyn will also still be in place and failing miserably to be a government in waiting.
Don't forget that Labour have to support calling a general election early, if things are looking good for May that means they will be bad for Labour, so which way do you think they will vote. No, she could have done it while Labour were asking her to, but not at any old time of her choosing.
The opposition have no choice they have to back an early vote or they will be humiliated. It's only in hung parliaments were the opposition could form a new coalition that they can vote down a ballot.
Finally it looks like the decision is coming. Two decades too late, but coming at last.
Heathrow expansion is the correct decision.
But the question as put for an either/or job of Gatwick, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester, Stanstead was ridiculous.
Heathrow needs to expand because it is at capacity for itself, on it's own flight traffic in/out (Schipol has 6 runways and is less busy I think !)
It should have no bearing on expansion at any other UK airport.
Yes, I'd let the free market decide, give them all permission to build an additional runway and let them raise their own money to do it. One school of thought is that if both Heathrow and Gatwick get the green light then Gatwick would be unable to raise the £6bn necessary to fund their second runway as all the private money would end up at Heathrow for refurbishing T4 and possibly building a new T1/3 to increase passenger capacity along with the new runway.
That's far too sensible.
It's not just the site within the perimeter though. Without major changes to the M4/M3/M25 area, will road network cope (and in some respects Gatwick is worse). Do we have the ATC capacity without fundamental changes in approach. Given that we seem to want to turn LHR into GBHR should there be a proper integrated HST network through there (as per, for example, Frankfurt)?
Have these questions been answered properly?
I don't understand why LHR has not been properly integrated into HS2. Being able to get the train from Manchester to Heathrow in 1.30 and then onto a plane makes it much more of a UK hub airport than having to fly from Manchester to LHR, getting stuck in a landing pattern and then missing your connection.
You can reach most long haul destinations direct from Manchester now anyway. Makes far more sense to expand Manchester (in addition not instead of expanding LHR) and so ease congestion in London while expanding British capacity dramatically.
Sorry, my general point was that we needed much better integration of our High Speed train line network and our airports. Flying people from one airport in the UK to another seems like a huge waste when airport capacity is at a premia. Mainly it just encourages people to go to Schipol or one of the other European hub airports.
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
May 2019 is looking the likeliest date if it were to be early. We'd be just about to leave the EU and sign trade deals, and the new boundaries will be in effect. Hopefully Jeremy Corbyn will also still be in place and failing miserably to be a government in waiting.
Don't forget that Labour have to support calling a general election early, if things are looking good for May that means they will be bad for Labour, so which way do you think they will vote. No, she could have done it while Labour were asking her to, but not at any old time of her choosing.
The vast majority of Labour MPs would actively welcome an early GE and would vote for it accordingly. It would mean (1) those who retain their seats do so for five more years and (2) the possible end of Corbyn with no rule changes on leadership nominations or reselection having gone through.
Morning. Looking forward to the Ryder Cup this weekend.
Isn't this thread just a very long, rambling – albeit elegantly phrased – way of saying that it would be good if we did something good (but we don't have the foggiest idea how that is going to work as we are Brexiteers, ergo, we have planned for sweet FA)?
You can reach most long haul destinations direct from Manchester now anyway. Makes far more sense to expand Manchester (in addition not instead of expanding LHR) and so ease congestion in London while expanding British capacity dramatically.
Sorry, my general point was that we needed much better integration of our High Speed train line network and our airports. Flying people from one airport in the UK to another seems like a huge waste when airport capacity is at a premia. Mainly it just encourages people to go to Schipol or one of the other European hub airports.
Agreed with that. HS2 should reach both LHR and MAN airports.
It was used twice last year, and so far twice this year. The average has changed because of the exceptional number of uses in one season 2013-14
You're making the mistake of thinking that climate is the same as weather. Climate change is over a longer period, the average is exactly what we should look at.
and you are cherry picking, the 5 year rolling average was higher at the beginning of the century that it is now, with the exception of one truly exceptional year that knocks all the averages off.
On line capacity, yes that's an issue, but also an existing one. Signalling and train control is done separately anyway and could still be done separately. Basically the proposal is to introduce competition within lines by having different companies being able to run different trains and offering different prices or service levels. Otherwise we're stuck with franchises and local monopolies with no incentive to give better service or cut prices.
F1: bah, ignore the prior ramble. Alonso's odds must be due to his 30 place grid penalty, which had slipped my mind. Sorry about that.
Like Hamilton in Spa, he probably won't try to qualify, beyond getting within 107% in Q1. I did wonder why these odds were mismatched too.
He'll be awarded the 107% from practice times if they don't get the car out in Q1.
Yes, but if they do that they'll have a trip to the stewards to explain why they didn't bother going out. Much better to do one slow lap and quality at the back, to eliminate any chances of catching the stewards in a bad mood.
Sixteen per cent of voters think Mrs May is doing well in negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union, a poll has shown, and half think she is doing badly. People who voted Remain in June were especially suspicious: only 10 per cent endorsed Mrs May’s approach. That proportion rose to 24 per cent among those who voted to leave.
The poll for The Times by YouGov interviewed 1,658 British adults on September 28 and 29. A persistent minority of those questioned — 16 per cent — still believed that Britain would never leave, rising to 20 per cent of Remain voters.
You can reach most long haul destinations direct from Manchester now anyway. Makes far more sense to expand Manchester (in addition not instead of expanding LHR) and so ease congestion in London while expanding British capacity dramatically.
Sorry, my general point was that we needed much better integration of our High Speed train line network and our airports. Flying people from one airport in the UK to another seems like a huge waste when airport capacity is at a premia. Mainly it just encourages people to go to Schipol or one of the other European hub airports.
Agreed with that. HS2 should reach both LHR and MAN airports.
Yes, if we're going to waste so many billions on it then we should make domestic flying a thing of the past. The integrated train/flight tickets they sell in Switzerland are great. With Heathrow the connection will be via Old Oak Common with crossrail.
''(but we don't have the foggiest idea how that is going to work as we are Brexiteers, ergo, we have planned for sweet FA)? ''
Tell you what, you may be right. And those wailing about what Nissan thinks may have a point. But looking at the eurozone this morning, with its banks prostrate and the authorities like rabbits in the headlights, I am happier than ever we are out.
Finally it looks like the decision is coming. Two decades too late, but coming at last.
Heathrow expansion is the correct decision.
But the question as put for an either/or job of Gatwick, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester, Stanstead was ridiculous.
Heathrow needs to expand because it is at capacity for itself, on it's own flight traffic in/out (Schipol has 6 runways and is less busy I think !)
It should have no bearing on expansion at any other UK airport.
Yes, I'd let the free market decide, give them all permission to build an additional runway and let them raise their own money to do it. One school of thought is that if both Heathrow and Gatwick get the green light then Gatwick would be unable to raise the £6bn necessary to fund their second runway as all the private money would end up at Heathrow for refurbishing T4 and possibly building a new T1/3 to increase passenger capacity along with the new runway.
That's far too sensible.
It's not just the site within the perimeter though. Without major changes to the M4/M3/M25 area, will road network cope (and in some respects Gatwick is worse). Do we have the ATC capacity without fundamental changes in approach. Given that we seem to want to turn LHR into GBHR should there be a proper integrated HST network through there (as per, for example, Frankfurt)?
Have these questions been answered properly?
I don't understand why LHR has not been properly integrated into HS2. Being able to get the train from Manchester to Heathrow in 1.30 and then onto a plane makes it much more of a UK hub airport than having to fly from Manchester to LHR, getting stuck in a landing pattern and then missing your connection.
F1: bah, ignore the prior ramble. Alonso's odds must be due to his 30 place grid penalty, which had slipped my mind. Sorry about that.
Like Hamilton in Spa, he probably won't try to qualify, beyond getting within 107% in Q1. I did wonder why these odds were mismatched too.
He'll be awarded the 107% from practice times if they don't get the car out in Q1.
Yes, but if they do that they'll have a trip to the stewards to explain why they didn't bother going out. Much better to do one slow lap and quality at the back, to eliminate any chances of catching the stewards in a bad mood.
Sixteen per cent of voters think Mrs May is doing well in negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union, a poll has shown, and half think she is doing badly. People who voted Remain in June were especially suspicious: only 10 per cent endorsed Mrs May’s approach. That proportion rose to 24 per cent among those who voted to leave.
The poll for The Times by YouGov interviewed 1,658 British adults on September 28 and 29. A persistent minority of those questioned — 16 per cent — still believed that Britain would never leave, rising to 20 per cent of Remain voters.
Sixteen per cent of voters think Mrs May is doing well in negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union, a poll has shown, and half think she is doing badly. People who voted Remain in June were especially suspicious: only 10 per cent endorsed Mrs May’s approach. That proportion rose to 24 per cent among those who voted to leave.
The poll for The Times by YouGov interviewed 1,658 British adults on September 28 and 29. A persistent minority of those questioned — 16 per cent — still believed that Britain would never leave, rising to 20 per cent of Remain voters.
Sixteen per cent of voters think Mrs May is doing well in negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union, a poll has shown, and half think she is doing badly. People who voted Remain in June were especially suspicious: only 10 per cent endorsed Mrs May’s approach. That proportion rose to 24 per cent among those who voted to leave.
The poll for The Times by YouGov interviewed 1,658 British adults on September 28 and 29. A persistent minority of those questioned — 16 per cent — still believed that Britain would never leave, rising to 20 per cent of Remain voters.
Results for all 33 September council by elections with vote change from previous time contested
Con 13,889 29.6% minus 2.7% Lab 12,512 26.7% minus 3.5% LD 10,362 22.1% plus 12.0% UKIP 5,454 11.6% minus 2.4% Green 1,242 2.6% minus 2.3% Nats 1,639 3.5% plus 1.1% Oth 1,851 3.9% minus 2.1%
33 more council by elections in October nominations in for 30 of these so far candidates Con 28 Lab 27 LD 25 UKIP 18 Green 15 Nat 4 Ind/Others 22
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that Theresa May will call a General Election in May 2017 to get an unambiguous mandate and sort out her majority.
Calling an early election in 2017 means old boundaries though. If it wasn't for that I'd agree but May should wait for the new boundaries unless there is an extremely generous situation.
May 2019 is looking the likeliest date if it were to be early. We'd be just about to leave the EU and sign trade deals, and the new boundaries will be in effect. Hopefully Jeremy Corbyn will also still be in place and failing miserably to be a government in waiting.
Don't forget that Labour have to support calling a general election early, if things are looking good for May that means they will be bad for Labour, so which way do you think they will vote. No, she could have done it while Labour were asking her to, but not at any old time of her choosing.
The vast majority of Labour MPs would actively welcome an early GE and would vote for it accordingly. It would mean (1) those who retain their seats do so for five more years and (2) the possible end of Corbyn with no rule changes on leadership nominations or reselection having gone through.
Indeed. The best possible outcome would be a May 2017 election – goodbye Corbyn, hello world.
On line capacity, yes that's an issue, but also an existing one. Signalling and train control is done separately anyway and could still be done separately. Basically the proposal is to introduce competition within lines by having different companies being able to run different trains and offering different prices or service levels. Otherwise we're stuck with franchises and local monopolies with no incentive to give better service or cut prices.
That's a bit of a fallacy. Even where a company does have a local monopoly, other competition usually exists. I have at least three options for getting from home to work and vice versa. I can drive, take the bus or take the train. Most people in the larger urban areas will have similar options. If the train service becomes sufficiently bad, people will switch to other forms of transport (or change the job / lifestyle that makes the journey necessary). Likewise, if it becomes better - faster, more comfortable, more frequent etc - people will switch to it.
There are pros and cons to local time-limited franchises. We should certainly be looking as to whether there are better models but we need to keep an eye on the systemic priorities as well.
Sixteen per cent of voters think Mrs May is doing well in negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union, a poll has shown, and half think she is doing badly. People who voted Remain in June were especially suspicious: only 10 per cent endorsed Mrs May’s approach. That proportion rose to 24 per cent among those who voted to leave.
The poll for The Times by YouGov interviewed 1,658 British adults on September 28 and 29. A persistent minority of those questioned — 16 per cent — still believed that Britain would never leave, rising to 20 per cent of Remain voters.
Sixteen per cent of voters think Mrs May is doing well in negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union, a poll has shown, and half think she is doing badly. People who voted Remain in June were especially suspicious: only 10 per cent endorsed Mrs May’s approach. That proportion rose to 24 per cent among those who voted to leave.
The poll for The Times by YouGov interviewed 1,658 British adults on September 28 and 29. A persistent minority of those questioned — 16 per cent — still believed that Britain would never leave, rising to 20 per cent of Remain voters.
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
Must be a concern to Labour if therea been no movement whatsoever. I mean, they promised 600+ billion pounds worth of spending, whats not to like
As much of a concern as Brown's honeymoon polling two months into his leadership would've been to the Tories.
The Labour share has next to nothing to do with May's honeymoon period. It's been wobbling around 30 for months now. The change in Tory leader (or perhaps the EURef result) prompted a UKIP-Con swing. That's what's driven the bigger Tory leads.
Must be a concern to Labour if therea been no movement whatsoever. I mean, they promised 600+ billion pounds worth of spending, whats not to like
As much of a concern as Brown's honeymoon polling two months into his leadership would've been to the Tories.
The Labour share has next to nothing to do with May's honeymoon period. It's been wobbling around 30 for months now. The change in Tory leader (or perhaps the EURef result) prompted a UKIP-Con swing. That's what's driven the bigger Tory leads.
Before May's honeymoon period, Labour beat the Tories in the projected voteshare at the local elections.
Away from airports for a bit, I've been writing a paper on how to have a step change in our railways along the same lines as how airports work.
The basic idea is that each terminal station has landing and take off slots and any company can bid for any slot at a government auction. Unpopular slots in the afternoon go for cheap and peak time slots are more expensive. Commuters can buy season tickets with the company (say Virgin trains) that has bought peak time slots while ordinary people can travel on non-peak services for very cheap with Easytrain. Given that the government owns the rolling stock and the tracks there really isn't much of an issue with companies wet leasing trains either.
Does the gov't own the actual trains (Rolling stock) ? Didn't know that - thought it was Virgin etc..
Yes, of course. Think about it, if the company owns the trains and then the franchise changes hands it leaves the new franchise owner a bit stuffed!
The governmet doesn't own the rolling stock. There's two private companies that lease out the trains.
Then why the bloody hell is the government paying for new rolling stock?
Because they want to pay over the odds? (cough) IEP (cough).
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
We saw that during the last Parliament (and in other Parliaments too)
Whilst not yet decided on May, criticising her for taking her time now is unjustified, given Cameron and Osborne prevented any contingency planning should Leave win. That dereliction of duty means there's much lost ground to be covered.
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
We saw that during the last Parliament (and in other Parliaments too)
Cameron's approval ratings were usually a bit better than the government's, but there was never as HUGE a gap as there currently is.
The last IPSOS-MORI had May at net +26, while simultaneously having "the government" at net -13. I'm really not sure there was ever anything similar in the Cameron era.
Isn't this thread just a very long, rambling – albeit elegantly phrased – way of saying that it would be good if we did something good (but we don't have the foggiest idea how that is going to work as we are Brexiteers, ergo, we have planned for sweet FA)?
Yes, I confess I have no idea what it's doing on PB. Elegantly phrased but doesn't seem to have much to do with the site's ostensible subject matter. It might sit well on ConHome.
Finally it looks like the decision is coming. Two decades too late, but coming at last.
Heathrow expansion is the correct decision.
But the question as put for an either/or job of Gatwick, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester, Stanstead was ridiculous.
Heathrow needs to expand because it is at capacity for itself, on it's own flight traffic in/out (Schipol has 6 runways and is less busy I think !)
It should have no bearing on expansion at any other UK airport.
Yes, I'd let the free market decide, give them all permission to build an additional runway and let them raise their own money to do it. One school of thought is that if both Heathrow and Gatwick get the green light then Gatwick would be unable to raise the £6bn necessary to fund their second runway as all the private money would end up at Heathrow for refurbishing T4 and possibly building a new T1/3 to increase passenger capacity along with the new runway.
That's far too sensible.
It's not just the site within the perimeter though. Without major changes to the M4/M3/M25 area, will road network cope (and in some respects Gatwick is worse). Do we have the ATC capacity without fundamental changes in approach. Given that we seem to want to turn LHR into GBHR should there be a proper integrated HST network through there (as per, for example, Frankfurt)?
Have these questions been answered properly?
I don't think they have been answered at all. The M25 is now essentially stuffed from the M3 round to the M40 in both directions between 0800 and 2000 one can expect long delays on the approach to at least one junction at least and on bad days all through the section. Giving Heathrow a third runway (which I suspect will also eventually entail a fifth terminal) will load even more traffic onto a road network which already cannot cope, not to mention years of disruption while the new runway is built (it is to go over the M25, I think).
I read that the cost to the exchequer of building the required infrastructure to cater for the third runway is estimated at £9bn (in reality we can add at least 50% to that) but that does not include any expansion to the approaches. The only way I can see that an expansion of Heathrow can be made to work without completely blocking the M25 is for a mandatory park and ride system to be introduced. Just ban private cars/taxis from the airport.
The LA Times Tracker is now either the greatest poll in the history of the world or a poll so aberrant as to defy description. Trump +5.6 with 16.9% African American Support.
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
We saw that during the last Parliament (and in other Parliaments too)
Wouldn't you expect May to score highly on Brexit compared to "The gov't", seeing as "The Gov't" on Brexit is May + the three Brexiteers. If she does absolubtely nothing than offer banal platitudes and similies, then one would still expect a largish gap over "The Gov't" as that is Fox, Boris and Davis...
The LA Times Tracker is now either the greatest poll in the history of the world or a poll so aberrant as to defy description. Trump +5.6 with 16.9% African American Support.
Most of the 48% are AB voters, the "I'm alright Jacques" set, which would be a good pool to fish in for say Clegg, but Farron is too leftie for that audience
Perhaps, but the current (fairly meager) by-election data suggests otherwise. The LibDems are winning seats in middle-class areas, but going nowhere or even backwards in working class areas such as Blackpool last night.
Sixteen per cent of voters think Mrs May is doing well in negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union, a poll has shown, and half think she is doing badly.
Weird question. Did they have an option for "She's not actually doing it yet"?
On line capacity, yes that's an issue, but also an existing one. Signalling and train control is done separately anyway and could still be done separately. Basically the proposal is to introduce competition within lines by having different companies being able to run different trains and offering different prices or service levels. Otherwise we're stuck with franchises and local monopolies with no incentive to give better service or cut prices.
ISTR this was an option considered in a paper before privatisation in the early 1990s. I'll see if I can dig it out ..
Also: have you considered a concessionary system? TfL Overground and other local services are a concession, not a franchise.
The LA Times Tracker is now either the greatest poll in the history of the world or a poll so aberrant as to defy description. Trump +5.6 with 16.9% African American Support.
Most of the 48% are AB voters, the "I'm alright Jacques" set, which would be a good pool to fish in for say Clegg, but Farron is too leftie for that audience
Perhaps, but the current (fairly meager) by-election data suggests otherwise. The LibDems are winning seats in middle-class areas, but going nowhere or even backwards in working class areas such as Blackpool last night.
Mosborough and Tupton are 'working class', and we did very well here.
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
We saw that during the last Parliament (and in other Parliaments too)
Wouldn't you expect May to score highly on Brexit compared to "The gov't", seeing as "The Gov't" on Brexit is May + the three Brexiteers. If she does absolubtely nothing than offer banal platitudes and similies, then one would still expect a largish gap over "The Gov't" as that is Fox, Boris and Davis...
That YouGov really has cheered me up.
The country agrees with that David Davis and Liam Fox are crap
Isn't this thread just a very long, rambling – albeit elegantly phrased – way of saying that it would be good if we did something good (but we don't have the foggiest idea how that is going to work as we are Brexiteers, ergo, we have planned for sweet FA)?
Yes, I confess I have no idea what it's doing on PB. Elegantly phrased but doesn't seem to have much to do with the site's ostensible subject matter. It might sit well on ConHome.
IF - and yes, it's a big IF - the upcoming Tory party conference does reveal that there has indeed been some behind-the-scenes thinking about how we want to frame our inevitable ongoing relationship with Berlin and Paris (and to an extent, Brussels), thinking that would give even Ken Clarke cause to pause, then it will have huge impact on political betting.
And Ms Cyclefree's thread was not only elegantly phrased, it was well conceived. Or maybe you would rather have another thread about the death of Labour - or the upcoming LibDem Golden Age?
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
We saw that during the last Parliament (and in other Parliaments too)
Wouldn't you expect May to score highly on Brexit compared to "The gov't", seeing as "The Gov't" on Brexit is May + the three Brexiteers. If she does absolubtely nothing than offer banal platitudes and similies, then one would still expect a largish gap over "The Gov't" as that is Fox, Boris and Davis...
Finally it looks like the decision is coming. Two decades too late, but coming at last.
Heathrow expansion is the correct decision.
But the question as put for an either/or job of Gatwick, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester, Stanstead was ridiculous.
Heathrow needs to expand because it is at capacity for itself, on it's own flight traffic in/out (Schipol has 6 runways and is less busy I think !)
It should have no bearing on expansion at any other UK airport.
Yes, I'd let the free market decide, give them all permission to build an additional runway and let them raise their own money to do it. One school of thought is that if both Heathrow and Gatwick get the green light then Gatwick would be unable to raise the £6bn necessary to fund their second runway as all the private money would end up at Heathrow for refurbishing T4 and possibly building a new T1/3 to increase passenger capacity along with the new runway.
That's far too sensible.
It's not just the site within the perimeter though. Without major changes to the M4/M3/M25 area, will road network cope (and in some respects Gatwick is worse). Do we have the ATC capacity without fundamental changes in approach. Given that we seem to want to turn LHR into GBHR should there be a proper integrated HST network through there (as per, for example, Frankfurt)?
Have these questions been answered properly?
I don't understand why LHR has not been properly integrated into HS2. Being able to get the train from Manchester to Heathrow in 1.30 and then onto a plane makes it much more of a UK hub airport than having to fly from Manchester to LHR, getting stuck in a landing pattern and then missing your connection.
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
We saw that during the last Parliament (and in other Parliaments too)
Wouldn't you expect May to score highly on Brexit compared to "The gov't", seeing as "The Gov't" on Brexit is May + the three Brexiteers. If she does absolubtely nothing than offer banal platitudes and similies, then one would still expect a largish gap over "The Gov't" as that is Fox, Boris and Davis...
How are things going in Tim Fallon's gang?
My facebook feed has never been so alive with hope and optimism
Good article, FYI I'm on the Mercedes drivers to win the race at around 1/6 in total, from a series of small odds-against bets on both drivers. I disagree that McLaren will have a good qualifying session, as one of their drivers won't be bothering!
The Sepang track has seen a couple of changes this year, most notably the addition of three or four gravel traps where previously there were big runoffs. Safety car at 1.68 might be value, especially if there's a shower or two.
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
We saw that during the last Parliament (and in other Parliaments too)
Wouldn't you expect May to score highly on Brexit compared to "The gov't", seeing as "The Gov't" on Brexit is May + the three Brexiteers. If she does absolubtely nothing than offer banal platitudes and similies, then one would still expect a largish gap over "The Gov't" as that is Fox, Boris and Davis...
That YouGov really has cheered me up.
The country agrees with that David Davis and Liam Fox are crap
Actually, by a very wide margin, the country 'doesn't know' - 57% for Davis, 62% for Fox.
Conservatives on the other hand, rate them both positively.....(+12 and +15 respectively)
Finally it looks like the decision is coming. Two decades too late, but coming at last.
Heathrow expansion is the correct decision.
But the question as put for an either/or job of Gatwick, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester, Stanstead was ridiculous.
Heathrow needs to expand because it is at capacity for itself, on it's own flight traffic in/out (Schipol has 6 runways and is less busy I think !)
It should have no bearing on expansion at any other UK airport.
Yes, I'd let the free market decide, give them all permission to build an additional runway and let them raise their own money to do it. One school of thought is that if both Heathrow and Gatwick get the green light then Gatwick would be unable to raise the £6bn necessary to fund their second runway as all the private money would end up at Heathrow for refurbishing T4 and possibly building a new T1/3 to increase passenger capacity along with the new runway.
That's far too sensible.
It's not just the site within the perimeter though. Without major changes to the M4/M3/M25 area, will road network cope (and in some respects Gatwick is worse). Do we have the ATC capacity without fundamental changes in approach. Given that we seem to want to turn LHR into GBHR should there be a proper integrated HST network through there (as per, for example, Frankfurt)?
Have these questions been answered properly?
I don't understand why LHR has not been properly integrated into HS2. Being able to get the train from Manchester to Heathrow in 1.30 and then onto a plane makes it much more of a UK hub airport than having to fly from Manchester to LHR, getting stuck in a landing pattern and then missing your connection.
Heathrow's train links are a total mess
Not so much a mess as functionally non-existent.
Agreed, with the exception of the really expensive one to Paddington, which is fantastic as long as someone else is paying for it.
What's interesting is, in all these polls, how so many people distinguish between approval of Theresa May and approval of "the government" as a whole. Even throughout May's honeymoon period and her excellent personal ratings, the government's approval ratings have been mediocre at best, consistently a net negative score with IPSOS-MORI. A pattern which continues with this new YouGov asking how people think "the government" is doing on Brexit.
We saw that during the last Parliament (and in other Parliaments too)
Wouldn't you expect May to score highly on Brexit compared to "The gov't", seeing as "The Gov't" on Brexit is May + the three Brexiteers. If she does absolubtely nothing than offer banal platitudes and similies, then one would still expect a largish gap over "The Gov't" as that is Fox, Boris and Davis...
That YouGov really has cheered me up.
The country agrees with that David Davis and Liam Fox are crap
Actually, by a very wide margin, the country 'doesn't know' - 57% for Davis, 62% for Fox.
Conservatives on the other hand, rate them both positively.....(+12 and +15 respectively)
It's Labour voters who are most hostile......
Is there something you want to tell us?
I'm very good at spotting Tory duffers ahead of most Tories.
I kept on pointing out IDS was crap when the rest of my party elected him as leader.
Comments
http://tinyurl.com/zyhvwbd
This was one of the more controversial aspects of privatization - some people made a lot of money out of these companies.
And of course the government may well not lose.
However, given the bed-wetting headline news of inflation rising by 0.1%, it'll be interesting to compare and contrast the media response.
Commons vote gets passed, probably, but the Lords won't. By the time the Parliament Act is used, triggering Article 50 will have taken rather longer than it should've.
Assuming that happens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airway_(aviation)
Sounds like one for the ECJ!
It was used twice last year, and so far twice this year. The average has changed because of the exceptional number of uses in one season 2013-14
Plus it's still so early it only adds two extra years to her mandate.
Have these questions been answered properly?
After single-handedly creating a European crisis out of the migration tragedy, she now foments world-wide financial panic with her unnecessary assurance to Focus magazine that there would be no bail-out for DB.
A wrecking ball without precedent.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/want-bank-rescued-dont-ask-german/
And the LibDems had a pretty torrid time in the 2010 to 2015 period in local elections, so I think they are a sign of a tentative recovery for the party.
I don't understand why LHR has not been properly integrated into HS2. Being able to get the train from Manchester to Heathrow in 1.30 and then onto a plane makes it much more of a UK hub airport than having to fly from Manchester to LHR, getting stuck in a landing pattern and then missing your connection.
From another point of view, the moderates in the PLP might find that an early election prevents a lot of the deselections from happening.
*small, insignificant.
My only consolation is that there's only £13 and I did say it wasn't a tip.
I've more or less written the pre-qualifying piece but I'll check odds again before posting it, just in case anything's bubbled up.
Isn't this thread just a very long, rambling – albeit elegantly phrased – way of saying that it would be good if we did something good (but we don't have the foggiest idea how that is going to work as we are Brexiteers, ergo, we have planned for sweet FA)?
FFS.
The poll for The Times by YouGov interviewed 1,658 British adults on September 28 and 29. A persistent minority of those questioned — 16 per cent — still believed that Britain would never leave, rising to 20 per cent of Remain voters.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/may-fails-to-convince-voters-on-brexit-9chpmqphs
Tell you what, you may be right. And those wailing about what Nissan thinks may have a point. But looking at the eurozone this morning, with its banks prostrate and the authorities like rabbits in the headlights, I am happier than ever we are out.
http://tinyurl.com/hr7hyvn
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/320wjqu4i2/TimesResults_160929_VI_Cons_W.pdf
Con 13,889 29.6% minus 2.7%
Lab 12,512 26.7% minus 3.5%
LD 10,362 22.1% plus 12.0%
UKIP 5,454 11.6% minus 2.4%
Green 1,242 2.6% minus 2.3%
Nats 1,639 3.5% plus 1.1%
Oth 1,851 3.9% minus 2.1%
33 more council by elections in October nominations in for 30 of these so far candidates
Con 28 Lab 27 LD 25 UKIP 18 Green 15 Nat 4 Ind/Others 22
'Did Crooked Hillary help disgusting (check out sex tape and past) Alicia M become a U.S. citizen so she could use her in the debate?'
so, day 4 of trump attacking a citizen who criticised him. and calling her 'disgusting'!
There are pros and cons to local time-limited franchises. We should certainly be looking as to whether there are better models but we need to keep an eye on the systemic priorities as well.
The next general election is currently due to happen in May 2020. Do you think there should
or should not be an early general election?
Should be an early election 36%
Should NOT be an early election 46%
Maybe the public are fed up of politics and just want to get on with life for the next couple of years.
The last IPSOS-MORI had May at net +26, while simultaneously having "the government" at net -13. I'm really not sure there was ever anything similar in the Cameron era.
I read that the cost to the exchequer of building the required infrastructure to cater for the third runway is estimated at £9bn (in reality we can add at least 50% to that) but that does not include any expansion to the approaches. The only way I can see that an expansion of Heathrow can be made to work without completely blocking the M25 is for a mandatory park and ride system to be introduced. Just ban private cars/taxis from the airport.
If she does absolubtely nothing than offer banal platitudes and similies, then one would still expect a largish gap over "The Gov't" as that is Fox, Boris and Davis...
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/malaysia-pre-qualifying.html
Also: have you considered a concessionary system? TfL Overground and other local services are a concession, not a franchise.
The country agrees with that David Davis and Liam Fox are crap
And Ms Cyclefree's thread was not only elegantly phrased, it was well conceived. Or maybe you would rather have another thread about the death of Labour - or the upcoming LibDem Golden Age?
The Sepang track has seen a couple of changes this year, most notably the addition of three or four gravel traps where previously there were big runoffs. Safety car at 1.68 might be value, especially if there's a shower or two.
Conservatives on the other hand, rate them both positively.....(+12 and +15 respectively)
It's Labour voters who are most hostile......
Is there something you want to tell us?
Well, on pace the McLaren looks nice. Stop quibbling like a ninny.
I did not know some gravel traps had been added. Blimey. Track changes to make things better. Whatever next?
I kept on pointing out IDS was crap when the rest of my party elected him as leader.
Eventually they saw the light.