politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Get ready for another CON by-election defence if the Heathrow

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Get ready for another CON by-election defence if the Heathrow expansion is given the go-ahead

Sun

Read the full story here

CarlottaVance

First!

Sandpit

Second!

CarlottaVance

MULTI-MILLIONAIRE Tory MP

Not sure The Sun are Fans.....

It will be an interesting contest - and if the Tories do lose, no doubt grist to the mill of the 'grammar school grocer's Vicar's daughter not up to it' brigade......what we need is a nice posh public schoolboy.....

CarlottaVance

"why if leaving the EU is such a bad thing for Scotland, how come leaving the UK isn't?". Salmond's answer betrays the cognitive dissonance at the heart the SNP's current position: "I don't accept Scotland becoming independent means needing to put trade barriers between Scotland and England [...] England is Scotland's first export market."

There's a mind-boggling obvious contradiction here: if Scotland needs to leave a post-Brexit UK and join the EU to defend its EU trade, it's because there's a belief that EU/UK trade barriers will exist. To then dismiss the inevitable corollary (that Scotland in the EU would then face trade barriers with England) is just plain daft.

https://chokkablog.blogspot.co.id/2016/10/salmond-spins-again_16.html

CarlottaVance

OGH Writes: What we don’t know is whether Zac himself would fight the seat as an independent.

In The Sun article:
He would stand as an independent candidate after triggering a by-election in his constituency if Heathrow gets the go-ahead.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1986001/tory-mp-zac-goldsmith-vows-to-resign-if-theresa-may-gives-green-light-to-a-third-runway-at-heathrow/

Sandpit

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, they need to JFDI when it comes to the new runways. Two of them. They've put the decision off for so long that it's now urgent. Wait for the first foggy day with 100 cancelled flights to see how far over capacity LHR is running and how much damage some minor bad weather can do to the economy.

There's something like three times as many flights to China from Amsterdam as there are from Heathrow, the middle eastern hubs are cleaning up the Asian market and meanwhile the government are about to announce their decision here - of the start of a process that contains a bill to pass Parliament, followed by a public enquiry, followed by the planning process, followed a decade or more from now by actually seeing a spade in the ground. It's killing the economy of the UK and London more than anything else right now, just get on and start building!!!

williamglenn

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/10/15/trump-campaign-declares-war-ohio-gop-chairman/92153228/

Trump campaign declares war on Ohio GOP chairman

CarlottaVance

Sandpit said:

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, they need to JFDI when it comes to the new runways. Two of them. They've put the decision off for so long that it's now urgent. Wait for the first foggy day with 100 cancelled flights to see how far over capacity LHR is running and how much damage some minor bad weather can do to the economy.

There's something like three times as many flights to China from Amsterdam as there are from Heathrow, the middle eastern hubs are cleaning up the Asian market and meanwhile the government are about to announce their decision here - of the start of a process that contains a bill to pass Parliament, followed by a public enquiry, followed by the planning process, followed a decade or more from now by actually seeing a spade in the ground. It's killing the economy of the UK and London more than anything else right now, just get on and start building!!!

Agree entirely. And start looking for the best option for an additional third runway ex-LHR/LGW - good chance King William will be on the thrown by the time they build it, so best crack on.....

RobD

Ninth

DecrepitJohnL

Would Zac's resignation let Justine Greening off the hook? Worth considering if you've backed her to be first minister out.

Fishing

I know the area fairly well, and my instinct, unsupported by any analysis, is that the by-election would be single-issue, and Zac would prevail if he ran as an independent. If he did not run, it would be very difficult to predict - feeling in West London over R3 runs very high, as I remember from the last time the government tried to build one.

I'm not even sure that R3 will ever get built - we've been here before and it didn't. Personally, I'd support another runway at Gatwick and one at Stansted, as there would be less political opposition or environment damage. Airport capacity in London should be abundant, as it is in most other great cities around the world.

JackW

National - Franklin Pierce/Boston Globe - Sample 1,103 - 9-13 Oct

Clinton 46 .. Trump 41

http://www.bostonherald.com/sites/default/files/media/2016/10/16/FPU-BH-Memo-101616.pdf

DecrepitJohnL

Fishing said:

I know the area fairly well, and my instinct, unsupported by any analysis, is that the by-election would be single-issue, and Zac would prevail if he ran as an independent. If he did not run, it would be very difficult to predict - feeling in West London over R3 runs very high, as I remember from the last time the government tried to build one.

I'm not even sure that R3 will ever get built - we've been here before and it didn't. Personally, I'd support another runway at Gatwick and one at Stansted, as there would be less political opposition or environment damage. Airport capacity in London should be abundant, as it is in most other great cities around the world.

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

IanB2

CarlottaVance said:

OGH Writes: What we don’t know is whether Zac himself would fight the seat as an independent.

In The Sun article:
He would stand as an independent candidate after triggering a by-election in his constituency if Heathrow gets the go-ahead.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1986001/tory-mp-zac-goldsmith-vows-to-resign-if-theresa-may-gives-green-light-to-a-third-runway-at-heathrow/

What we don't know is what the (official) Tories would do.....?

JackW

In an excellent article Jamelle Bouie of "Slate" looks at how the GOP lost the black vote in the 60's, the latino vote in the past ten years and thus have handed the Democrats potentially decisive bloc votes in recent elections :

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/trump_and_the_gop_are_alienating_latinos_the_way_they_once_alienated_black.html

Paul_Bedfordshire

This raven says. To the Tower with them. Bremaitors all.

"I am trying to delay Brexit, admits Clegg: Anger as ex-deputy PM leads Bremoaner plot to snub voters' wishes... and says keeping Britain shackled to the EU for longer would be a 'good thing'"

Nick Clegg said pro-EU MPs are deliberately trying to delay Brexit
Remainers are demanding to know how ministers plan to exit the EU
Group will try to force vote aimed at rejecting negotiating stance
Mr Clegg has teamed up with former Labour leader Ed Miliband"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3842190/Nick-Clegg-says-s-trying-delay-Brexit.html

Fishing

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

CarlottaVance

Can someone explain Mr Clegg's thinking - how export tariffs affect domestic prices - or indeed import prices?

The price of chocolate, cheese and wine will increase sharply if Britain heads towards a so-called hard Brexit, according to Nick Clegg.

Speaking ahead of a Liberal Democrats food and drink Brexit impact report, he warned that Britain could only avoid tariffs on beef exports of 59%, chocolate at 38%, cheese at 40% and wine at 14%, with a soft Brexit.

http://news.sky.com/story/nick-clegg-chocolate-cheese-and-wine-to-be-hit-by-hard-brexit-10620761

Of course, Tusk has already explained that the alternative to 'Hard Brexit' is 'No Brexit'.....which evidently is what Mr Clegg is after.....

IanB2

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

And it is closer to residential west London, when the whole point of the concern about Heathrow is about more flights over an urban area. The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

Fishing

IanB2 said:

And it is closer to residential west London, when the whole point of the concern about Heathrow is about more flights over an urban area. The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

Absolutely.

JackW

Vaughn Hillyard of "NBC News" looks at Trump struggling to keep Arizona in his column :

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-risk-losing-arizona-state-officials-say-n667281

RobD

Fishing said:

IanB2 said:

And it is closer to residential west London, when the whole point of the concern about Heathrow is about more flights over an urban area. The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

Absolutely.

Those are the ones going over an M4 tunnel?

Fishing

RobD said:

Those are the ones going over an M4 tunnel?

Shurely M25?

Either way, Gatwick makes more sense.

RobD

Fishing said:

RobD said:

Those are the ones going over an M4 tunnel?

Or is it M25?

Right... that'd make more sense. LOL

CarlottaVance

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

RobD

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

Helpfully offset slightly to the North. Even being a few miles north/south of the runway makes the world of difference.

IanB2

RobD said:

Fishing said:

RobD said:

Those are the ones going over an M4 tunnel?

Or is it M25?

Right... that'd make more sense. LOL

Yes, out by the Staines reservoir.

The plan was set out and endorsed by the Economist, although it was produced by some think tank. By shifting the runways west, whilst leaving the airport terminals and infrastructure where they are, you significantly increase the height of aircraft over west London, and hence dramatically reduce both noise and pollution.

As I recall from the plan, one of the runways extended out over the motorway itself. Basically as you drove round the M25 you would go into a tunnel with the aircraft landing on top of you. There is a similar arrangement at a Belgian airport - Kortyk as I recall (spelling may not be right), which I have landed a light aircraft at.

edmundintokyo

CarlottaVance said:

Can someone explain Mr Clegg's thinking - how export tariffs affect domestic prices - or indeed import prices?

The price of chocolate, cheese and wine will increase sharply if Britain heads towards a so-called hard Brexit, according to Nick Clegg.

Speaking ahead of a Liberal Democrats food and drink Brexit impact report, he warned that Britain could only avoid tariffs on beef exports of 59%, chocolate at 38%, cheese at 40% and wine at 14%, with a soft Brexit.

http://news.sky.com/story/nick-clegg-chocolate-cheese-and-wine-to-be-hit-by-hard-brexit-10620761

Of course, Tusk has already explained that the alternative to 'Hard Brexit' is 'No Brexit'.....which evidently is what Mr Clegg is after.....

Britain could certainly unilaterally open its markets to imports from countries that charged tariffs on British exports. But does anyone think it would?

IanB2

The plan is here:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21582025-heathrow-revives-plans-third-runway-and-talks-fourth-go-west

IanB2

The Economist: a minority of leavers are changing their minds, or bailing out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21708679-minority-leavers-have-changed-their-minds-others-are-bailing-out-after-brexit-bregret

IanB2

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

And Windsor Castle, which was spotted as a perhaps more significant issue.

CarlottaVance

edmundintokyo said:

CarlottaVance said:

Can someone explain Mr Clegg's thinking - how export tariffs affect domestic prices - or indeed import prices?

The price of chocolate, cheese and wine will increase sharply if Britain heads towards a so-called hard Brexit, according to Nick Clegg.

Speaking ahead of a Liberal Democrats food and drink Brexit impact report, he warned that Britain could only avoid tariffs on beef exports of 59%, chocolate at 38%, cheese at 40% and wine at 14%, with a soft Brexit.

http://news.sky.com/story/nick-clegg-chocolate-cheese-and-wine-to-be-hit-by-hard-brexit-10620761

Of course, Tusk has already explained that the alternative to 'Hard Brexit' is 'No Brexit'.....which evidently is what Mr Clegg is after.....

Britain could certainly unilaterally open its markets to imports from countries that charged tariffs on British exports. But does anyone think it would?

There are more sources of cheese, wine & chocolate than the EU.....

foxinsoxuk

IanB2 said:

The plan is here:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21582025-heathrow-revives-plans-third-runway-and-talks-fourth-go-west

Is it right that the expansion of LHR will cost the Govt £30 billion? Or will it be tbe private company that owns which forks out?

Tbis taxpayer doesn't care much for paying for it.

CarlottaVance

IanB2 said:

The Economist: a minority of leavers are changing their minds, or bailing out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21708679-minority-leavers-have-changed-their-minds-others-are-bailing-out-after-brexit-bregret

the authors point out that voters for the winning side feel some regret after most elections

foxinsoxuk

IanB2 said:

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

And Windsor Castle, which was spotted as a perhaps more significant issue.

As a tourist observed : "why did they build a castle so close to a busy airport?"

CarlottaVance

IanB2 said:

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

And Windsor Castle, which was spotted as a perhaps more significant issue.

Coming into land at Heathrow once pilot comes on 'those sitting on the left have a great view of Windsor Castle'

American passenger in row in front 'Such a pity they built it so close to the airport'......(in fairness I think she recognised her foolishness)

Fishing

foxinsoxuk said:

Tbis taxpayer doesn't care much for paying for it.

That's a very interesting point. Heathrow used to say that the new runway could be paid for through borrowing, financed by future airline and retail fees, as Terminal 5 and Terminal 2 were funded. But if you look at Heathrow's publicity, it has changed recently from "will not require public subsidy" to use far more weasel words.

Also, IAG, by far Heathrow's largest customer, has said it will not pay the resulting high charges, moving flights to Madrid or Dublin instead.

DavidL

The government needs to get on with it. It was shameful that this decision was not made by the last labour government. Having had 6 years since the failure to get building is a blot on Cameron's Premiership. We simply cannot waste any more time. And if the price is Zac becoming even more semi detached than he is right now it is a price that the government needs to pay.

IanB2

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

And Windsor Castle, which was spotted as a perhaps more significant issue.

Coming into land at Heathrow once pilot comes on 'those sitting on the left have a great view of Windsor Castle'

American passenger in row in front 'Such a pity they built it so close to the airport'......(in fairness I think she recognised her foolishness)

Lol (although the castle would be on the right hand side)

edmundintokyo

IanB2 said:

The Economist: a minority of leavers are changing their minds, or bailing out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21708679-minority-leavers-have-changed-their-minds-others-are-bailing-out-after-brexit-bregret

This is a weird thing to poll when you could just poll all the voters on the original question again. I think if you do this you still get a clear majority for Leave.

IanB2

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

david_herdson

IanB2 said:

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

Indeed. That would be a stupid policy to put to local voters. But if the natural answer is to nominate an anti-runway candidate for the Conservatives, the natural answer would be to nominate Zac.

PlatoSaid

Wikileaks are claiming Assange has had internet link cut deliberately.

Along with the dead man keys from earlier - this is great guerilla PR from them, and CNN stupidly said it was illegal to read the Wikileaks at all.

logical_song

IanB2 said:

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

Good point. So they put up a pro-runway candidate, who then loses. And they go ahead with the runway.

RobD

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

And Windsor Castle, which was spotted as a perhaps more significant issue.

Coming into land at Heathrow once pilot comes on 'those sitting on the left have a great view of Windsor Castle'

American passenger in row in front 'Such a pity they built it so close to the airport'......(in fairness I think she recognised her foolishness)

Amazing to think it's been there for over 900 years.

logical_song

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

The Economist: a minority of leavers are changing their minds, or bailing out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21708679-minority-leavers-have-changed-their-minds-others-are-bailing-out-after-brexit-bregret

This is a weird thing to poll when you could just poll all the voters on the original question again. I think if you do this you still get a clear majority for Leave.

"The British Election Study, a long-running panel survey, asked voters in July whether they regretted their choice. Only 1% of Remainers did; another 1% of them were unsure. Among Leavers, 6% wished they had not voted the way they did, and a further 4% were in two minds. That may not be much—and the authors point out that voters for the winning side feel some regret after most elections—but it suggests that the slim pro-Brexit majority had evaporated within a month of the referendum. Remorse was strongest among Leavers who didn’t expect their side to win, adding some weight to the idea that many were motivated by frustration with the establishment rather than by Euroscepticism."

RobD

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

The Economist: a minority of leavers are changing their minds, or bailing out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21708679-minority-leavers-have-changed-their-minds-others-are-bailing-out-after-brexit-bregret

This is a weird thing to poll when you could just poll all the voters on the original question again. I think if you do this you still get a clear majority for Leave.

"The British Election Study, a long-running panel survey, asked voters in July whether they regretted their choice. Only 1% of Remainers did; another 1% of them were unsure. Among Leavers, 6% wished they had not voted the way they did, and a further 4% were in two minds. That may not be much—and the authors point out that voters for the winning side feel some regret after most elections—but it suggests that the slim pro-Brexit majority had evaporated within a month of the referendum. Remorse was strongest among Leavers who didn’t expect their side to win, adding some weight to the idea that many were motivated by frustration with the establishment rather than by Euroscepticism."

I thought the polls were suggesting that there hadn't been any remorse for the decision made?

edmundintokyo

IanB2 said:

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

They let the local party pick a candidate. Since the runway is unpopular, that candidate will presumably be anti-runway. One of the three anti-runway candidates wins the by-election. The government builds the runway.

JennyFreeman

Just read TSE latest bitter bile below. I hope he gets over this soon, for everyone's sake.

IanB2

logical_song said:

IanB2 said:

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

Good point. So they put up a pro-runway candidate, who then loses. And they go ahead with the runway.

And, more to the point, the Tories would be in a bind - not standing would make them look cowardly and ridiculous, standing would probably see them come in third, as Mike says. And possibly hand the seat to the LibDems, depending on how Zak fares in the campaign.

nielh

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

The Economist: a minority of leavers are changing their minds, or bailing out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21708679-minority-leavers-have-changed-their-minds-others-are-bailing-out-after-brexit-bregret

This is a weird thing to poll when you could just poll all the voters on the original question again. I think if you do this you still get a clear majority for Leave.

"The British Election Study, a long-running panel survey, asked voters in July whether they regretted their choice. Only 1% of Remainers did; another 1% of them were unsure. Among Leavers, 6% wished they had not voted the way they did, and a further 4% were in two minds. That may not be much—and the authors point out that voters for the winning side feel some regret after most elections—but it suggests that the slim pro-Brexit majority had evaporated within a month of the referendum. Remorse was strongest among Leavers who didn’t expect their side to win, adding some weight to the idea that many were motivated by frustration with the establishment rather than by Euroscepticism."

This is why leave needed to bank their victory by trigerring art 50 on June 24.
Longer it drifts,the more problems emerge

ThreeQuidder

Fishing said:

I know the area fairly well, and my instinct, unsupported by any analysis, is that the by-election would be single-issue, and Zac would prevail if he ran as an independent. If he did not run, it would be very difficult to predict - feeling in West London over R3 runs very high, as I remember from the last time the government tried to build one.

I'm not even sure that R3 will ever get built - we've been here before and it didn't. Personally, I'd support another runway at Gatwick and one at Stansted, as there would be less political opposition or environment damage. Airport capacity in London should be abundant, as it is in most other great cities around the world.

The original R3 proposal wasn't full length. I presume the idea was that all the regional flights would have used it with the existing two runways reserved for long haul, but it always sounded like a silly proposal.

edmundintokyo

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

The Economist: a minority of leavers are changing their minds, or bailing out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21708679-minority-leavers-have-changed-their-minds-others-are-bailing-out-after-brexit-bregret

This is a weird thing to poll when you could just poll all the voters on the original question again. I think if you do this you still get a clear majority for Leave.

"The British Election Study, a long-running panel survey, asked voters in July whether they regretted their choice. Only 1% of Remainers did; another 1% of them were unsure. Among Leavers, 6% wished they had not voted the way they did, and a further 4% were in two minds. That may not be much—and the authors point out that voters for the winning side feel some regret after most elections—but it suggests that the slim pro-Brexit majority had evaporated within a month of the referendum. Remorse was strongest among Leavers who didn’t expect their side to win, adding some weight to the idea that many were motivated by frustration with the establishment rather than by Euroscepticism."

Right but it's still a weird way to poll it. There's a simple, neutral question on that was on the ballot paper. Why not ask that?

I think the "regret" wording kind-of nudges towards a "yes", because it encourages you to think of the downsides and/or the claims that turned out to be lies.

IanB2

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

They let the local party pick a candidate. Since the runway is unpopular, that candidate will presumably be anti-runway. One of the three anti-runway candidates wins the by-election. The government builds the runway.

Tories aren't likely to be queuing to get the chance to become the next Frank Dobson? Unless the Tories are clever enough to promise them the nomination in 2020 as well.

PlatoSaid

Matt Ridley is on point today

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/weve-become-a-nation-paralysed-by-protest-8w7n3n2f5

RobD

IanB2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

They let the local party pick a candidate. Since the runway is unpopular, that candidate will presumably be anti-runway. One of the three anti-runway candidates wins the by-election. The government builds the runway.

Tories aren't likely to be queuing to get the chance to become the next Frank Dobson? Unless the Tories are clever enough to promise them the nomination in 2020 as well.

Surely that'd be a given?

DecrepitJohnL

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

And Windsor Castle, which was spotted as a perhaps more significant issue.

Coming into land at Heathrow once pilot comes on 'those sitting on the left have a great view of Windsor Castle'

American passenger in row in front 'Such a pity they built it so close to the airport'......(in fairness I think she recognised her foolishness)

Tbf, she may well have been making a joke -- it is an old chestnut along the lines of it was bad luck for Jesus having his birthday fall on Christmas Day.

JennyFreeman

I still rather liked the idea of a brand new estuary airport. Places like Hong Kong did it with style. Heathrow's a bit of a mess.

edmundintokyo

IanB2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

They let the local party pick a candidate. Since the runway is unpopular, that candidate will presumably be anti-runway. One of the three anti-runway candidates wins the by-election. The government builds the runway.

Tories aren't likely to be queuing to get the chance to become the next Frank Dobson? Unless the Tories are clever enough to promise them the nomination in 2020 as well.

They won't be short of candidates. It's a potentially winnable race, and if you win it you're just as likely to be reselected for 2020 as any other incumbent MP, boundary changes permitting.

Paul_Bedfordshire

Sooner or later a block of these timber framed flats is going to go up in smoke when its full of people asleep rather than half built:

http://dailym.ai/2e72SJn

RobD

JennyFreeman said:

I still rather liked the idea of a brand new estuary airport. Places like Hong Kong did it with style. Heathrow's a bit of a mess.

Trouble is it is even further from everyone else than Heathrow (apart from those in East London)

DecrepitJohnL

[OT -- ADMIN] the blog spam filter has failed -- see ozil8

IanB2

RobD said:

IanB2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

On topic - so there's a by-election; Zak stands as an anti-runway Indendent, the LibDems stand as anti-runway LibDems, what does the Conservative Party do? They can hardly stand down and give the anti-runway side a free pass, surely?

They let the local party pick a candidate. Since the runway is unpopular, that candidate will presumably be anti-runway. One of the three anti-runway candidates wins the by-election. The government builds the runway.

Tories aren't likely to be queuing to get the chance to become the next Frank Dobson? Unless the Tories are clever enough to promise them the nomination in 2020 as well.

Surely that'd be a given?

Yes you are probably right. But it would still be a gamble on Zak having got fed up as an independent by then, and the LibDems not winning the seat back. And having the conservatives actually digging the runway at the time. LibDem in 2020 would be my prediction.

Fishing

ThreeQuidder said:

The original R3 proposal wasn't full length. I presume the idea was that all the regional flights would have used it with the existing two runways reserved for long haul, but it always sounded like a silly proposal.

No, but at 6,600 feet it was rather longer than the existing Northolt runway, which is 5,500 feet - that can only take the very smallest passenger jets. And the problem with using it for regional flights would be that it would be so difficult for passengers to connect to long-haul flights at Heathrow, which is why most regional passengers want to go through Heathrow in the first place.

RobD

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Sooner or later a block of these timber framed flats is going to go up in smoke when its full of people asleep rather than half built:

http://dailym.ai/2e72SJn

New flats are being built out of timber? That does seem surprising...

IanB2

JennyFreeman said:

I still rather liked the idea of a brand new estuary airport. Places like Hong Kong did it with style. Heathrow's a bit of a mess.

Except that the idea was dumb from the beginning - it existed solely to allow Boris to pretend both to oppose Heathrow and be pro-business by supporting more runways.

CarlottaVance

IanB2 said:

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

CarlottaVance said:

IanB2 said:

Fishing said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

It is occasionally suggested that Heathrow could swallow RAF Northolt. Would that help?

Almost certainly not, for three reasons. Northolt is far too close to Heathrow for there to be much of an increase in traffic flows without significantly disrupting LHR's traffic; the runway is too short to take big jets; and surface access is inadequate. That's why the Dft and the CAA have repeatedly rejected that option.

The more clever Heathrow proposals shift the runways out toward the west, away from town.

And nearer Maidenhead......

And Windsor Castle, which was spotted as a perhaps more significant issue.

Coming into land at Heathrow once pilot comes on 'those sitting on the left have a great view of Windsor Castle'

American passenger in row in front 'Such a pity they built it so close to the airport'......(in fairness I think she recognised her foolishness)

Lol (although the castle would be on the right hand side)

Coming into land it would always be on the left hand side - Windsor Castle is north of the northerly runway centreline....taking off, it would be to your right....

Paul_Bedfordshire

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Fishing

RobD said:

JennyFreeman said:

I still rather liked the idea of a brand new estuary airport. Places like Hong Kong did it with style. Heathrow's a bit of a mess.

Trouble is it is even further from everyone else than Heathrow (apart from those in East London)

... and that its cost is simply frightening ...

East Londoners don't fly much - the demand is in the centre, west and south-west. See the Competition Commission's 2008 Provisional Findings on its Airports Inquiry.

DecrepitJohnL

JennyFreeman said:

I still rather liked the idea of a brand new estuary airport. Places like Hong Kong did it with style. Heathrow's a bit of a mess.

One problem with Boris Island is that it (or rather the death of Heathrow) will kill off the M4 corridor of American technology companies (although to be fair, that is not what it once was).

DecrepitJohnL

JennyFreeman said:

I still rather liked the idea of a brand new estuary airport. Places like Hong Kong did it with style. Heathrow's a bit of a mess.

One problem with Boris Island is that it (or rather the death of Heathrow) will kill off the M4 corridor of American technology companies (although to be fair, that is not what it once was).

Sandpit

Fishing said:

ThreeQuidder said:

The original R3 proposal wasn't full length. I presume the idea was that all the regional flights would have used it with the existing two runways reserved for long haul, but it always sounded like a silly proposal.

No, but at 6,600 feet it was rather longer than the existing Northolt runway, which is 5,500 feet - that can only take the very smallest passenger jets. And the problem with using it for regional flights would be that it would be so difficult for passengers to connect to long-haul flights at Heathrow, which is why most regional passengers want to go through Heathrow in the first place.

Northolt was at best a stop-gap solution, but would have needed a runway extension and an airside tunnel between the two airports to work properly - so wouldn't have saved much cash.

logical_song

edmundintokyo said:

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

IanB2 said:

The Economist: a minority of leavers are changing their minds, or bailing out:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21708679-minority-leavers-have-changed-their-minds-others-are-bailing-out-after-brexit-bregret

This is a weird thing to poll when you could just poll all the voters on the original question again. I think if you do this you still get a clear majority for Leave.

"The British Election Study, a long-running panel survey, asked voters in July whether they regretted their choice. Only 1% of Remainers did; another 1% of them were unsure. Among Leavers, 6% wished they had not voted the way they did, and a further 4% were in two minds. That may not be much—and the authors point out that voters for the winning side feel some regret after most elections—but it suggests that the slim pro-Brexit majority had evaporated within a month of the referendum. Remorse was strongest among Leavers who didn’t expect their side to win, adding some weight to the idea that many were motivated by frustration with the establishment rather than by Euroscepticism."

Right but it's still a weird way to poll it. There's a simple, neutral question on that was on the ballot paper. Why not ask that?

I think the "regret" wording kind-of nudges towards a "yes", because it encourages you to think of the downsides and/or the claims that turned out to be lies.

I wasn't disagreeing, however I think that it was just a better story that some Leavers were regretting their decision rather than a new poll shows that Remain would now win.
I've seen polling elsewhere that shows Remainers sticking to their decision more than Leavers.

DavidL

Chris Cillizza notes the collapse of the last vestiges of coherence in the Trump campaign: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/an-unshackled-trump-an-unmoored-campaign-lurching-to-the-finish-line/2016/10/16/16e09b4c-93aa-11e6-ae9d-0030ac1899cd_story.html

The relatively brief attempt at disciplining and professionalising Trump's campaign seems to have been abandoned. This is a disaster for the Republicans who must seriously fear the down ticket consequences.

IanB2

Fishing said:

RobD said:

JennyFreeman said:

I still rather liked the idea of a brand new estuary airport. Places like Hong Kong did it with style. Heathrow's a bit of a mess.

Trouble is it is even further from everyone else than Heathrow (apart from those in East London)

... and that its cost is simply frightening ...

East Londoners don't fly much - the demand is in the centre, west and south-west. See the Competition Commission's 2008 Provisional Findings on its Airports Inquiry.

And there is no workforce. Nor any infrastructure or support industry of any kind, from maintenance though hotels

And there are birds everywhere

And it would devastate the employment market in west London

And it would have cost a fortune

And the transport links would have started a whole new debate about the impact on east London


Boris island was no more real than Tracey Island.

logical_song

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

JackW

National - GWU/Battleground - Sample 1.000 - 8-13 Oct

Clinton 47 .. Trump 39

https://mediarelations.gwu.edu/new-gw-battleground-poll-clinton-begins-pull-away-trump-and-voters-think-she’ll-win

rottenborough

Morning all,

Update on early POTUS voting:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-p-mcdonald/early-voting-more-states_b_12517738.html

ydoethur

DavidL said:

Chris Cillizza notes the collapse of the last vestiges of coherence in the Trump campaign: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/an-unshackled-trump-an-unmoored-campaign-lurching-to-the-finish-line/2016/10/16/16e09b4c-93aa-11e6-ae9d-0030ac1899cd_story.html

The relatively brief attempt at disciplining and professionalising Trump's campaign seems to have been abandoned. This is a disaster for the Republicans who must seriously fear the down ticket consequences.

I would have thought their best hope is that people turn out in droves to stop Trump by voting Clinton - but then vote for a Republican congress to stop her actually doing anything (although given her track record it would be a seriously optimistic individual who thought she would achieve anything anyway).

However, a hammering more humiliating than that doled out to Gorbachev in 1996 is starting to look a real possibility.

Paul_Bedfordshire

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

Alanbrooke

CarlottaVance said:

Can someone explain Mr Clegg's thinking - how export tariffs affect domestic prices - or indeed import prices?

The price of chocolate, cheese and wine will increase sharply if Britain heads towards a so-called hard Brexit, according to Nick Clegg.

Speaking ahead of a Liberal Democrats food and drink Brexit impact report, he warned that Britain could only avoid tariffs on beef exports of 59%, chocolate at 38%, cheese at 40% and wine at 14%, with a soft Brexit.

http://news.sky.com/story/nick-clegg-chocolate-cheese-and-wine-to-be-hit-by-hard-brexit-10620761

Of course, Tusk has already explained that the alternative to 'Hard Brexit' is 'No Brexit'.....which evidently is what Mr Clegg is after.....

so we will save a fortune on obesity as we buy less of out favourite treats

Sandpit

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Of all the uncertainly in the US election, the one sure thing is that the need for popcorn is far from over!

JackW

National Panel Tracker - LA Times - Sample 2,946 - 16 Oct

Clinton 43.9 .. Trump 44.5

http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

logical_song

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

Oh, but he is. You highlighted the closet poll - and he still loses. Other polls have Clinton 11 points ahead.

rottenborough

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

Chris Cillizza notes the collapse of the last vestiges of coherence in the Trump campaign: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/an-unshackled-trump-an-unmoored-campaign-lurching-to-the-finish-line/2016/10/16/16e09b4c-93aa-11e6-ae9d-0030ac1899cd_story.html

The relatively brief attempt at disciplining and professionalising Trump's campaign seems to have been abandoned. This is a disaster for the Republicans who must seriously fear the down ticket consequences.

I would have thought their best hope is that people turn out in droves to stop Trump by voting Clinton - but then vote for a Republican congress to stop her actually doing anything (although given her track record it would be a seriously optimistic individual who thought she would achieve anything anyway).

However, a hammering more humiliating than that doled out to Gorbachev in 1996 is starting to look a real possibility.

I think we are looking at a landslide myself. Trump's final meltdown is yet to come I suspect as we enter the last three weeks or so.

I'm on Texas going Dem, for a bit of late night fun on the night.

logical_song

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

Oh, but he is. You highlighted the closet poll - and he still loses. Other polls have Clinton 11 points ahead.

closest !

RobD

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

Oh, but he is. You highlighted the closet poll - and he still loses. Other polls have Clinton 11 points ahead.

Aren't you guilty of the same, by highlighting Clinton's most favourable poll?

538 makes the gap six points

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/

dugarbandier

Sandpit said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Of all the uncertainly in the US election, the one sure thing is that the need for popcorn is far from over!

The popcorn is fixed by a global conspiracy. they're using chemtrails.

DavidL

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

Chris Cillizza notes the collapse of the last vestiges of coherence in the Trump campaign: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/an-unshackled-trump-an-unmoored-campaign-lurching-to-the-finish-line/2016/10/16/16e09b4c-93aa-11e6-ae9d-0030ac1899cd_story.html

The relatively brief attempt at disciplining and professionalising Trump's campaign seems to have been abandoned. This is a disaster for the Republicans who must seriously fear the down ticket consequences.

I would have thought their best hope is that people turn out in droves to stop Trump by voting Clinton - but then vote for a Republican congress to stop her actually doing anything (although given her track record it would be a seriously optimistic individual who thought she would achieve anything anyway).

However, a hammering more humiliating than that doled out to Gorbachev in 1996 is starting to look a real possibility.

Some will split ticket and some will come out for their Congressmen and Senators but not bother with the Presidential vote but the risk of a significant number of Republicans just not turning out at all resulting in differential turnout for the Dems must be high and getting higher. I will be surprised if Clinton gets less than 350 ECVs now.

Innocent_Abroad

Fishing said:

I know the area fairly well, and my instinct, unsupported by any analysis, is that the by-election would be single-issue, and Zac would prevail if he ran as an independent. If he did not run, it would be very difficult to predict - feeling in West London over R3 runs very high, as I remember from the last time the government tried to build one.

I'm not even sure that R3 will ever get built - we've been here before and it didn't. Personally, I'd support another runway at Gatwick and one at Stansted, as there would be less political opposition or environment damage. Airport capacity in London should be abundant, as it is in most other great cities around the world.

How do you measure airport capacity?

I take it the Heathrow puffers here know that R3 would cost twice as much as Gatwick R2?

Philip_Thompson

RobD said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

Oh, but he is. You highlighted the closet poll - and he still loses. Other polls have Clinton 11 points ahead.

Aren't you guilty of the same, by highlighting Clinton's most favourable poll?

538 makes the gap six points

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/

Six points is not as close as Romney got so no he's not.

Paul_Bedfordshire

logical_song said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

Oh, but he is. You highlighted the closet poll - and he still loses. Other polls have Clinton 11 points ahead.

closest !

Except the one just posted that puts Trump ahead!.

Are us polls normally this variable. Clinton anything from landslide to losing?

edmundintokyo

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

She's not as good a candidate as Obama but she's clearly polling ahead of his 2012 result. You picked a poll that happened to show a weaker performance than her average. You could just as well have quoted the NBC/WSJ one, which has her 11% ahead.

RobD

Philip_Thompson said:

RobD said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

Oh, but he is. You highlighted the closet poll - and he still loses. Other polls have Clinton 11 points ahead.

Aren't you guilty of the same, by highlighting Clinton's most favourable poll?

538 makes the gap six points

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/

Six points is not as close as Romney got so no he's not.

No, but it's a lot closer than 11.

Alistair

DavidL said:

Chris Cillizza notes the collapse of the last vestiges of coherence in the Trump campaign: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/an-unshackled-trump-an-unmoored-campaign-lurching-to-the-finish-line/2016/10/16/16e09b4c-93aa-11e6-ae9d-0030ac1899cd_story.html

The relatively brief attempt at disciplining and professionalising Trump's campaign seems to have been abandoned. This is a disaster for the Republicans who must seriously fear the down ticket consequences.

Part of Trump's problem is that, as he isn't a politician, he hasn't used the correct code words.

If you remember his disastrous 17 positions on abortion in 3 minutes fiasco from earlier in the year. He got into trouble because he said women seeking abortion should be punished.

Now to man on the street it is logically obvious that if abortion is illegal and you consider abortion murder then the women has to be punished otherwise your entire legal system falls into incoherence but Rep candidates have got incredibly skilled at talking round this to give the impression that banning abortion wouldn't involve prosecuting the mother as that causes outrage amongst too many people. But wink wink nudge nudge it will totally happen.

rottenborough

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

logical_song said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

I see the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump only 4 points behind Hilary.

Dont put the popcorn away yet folks!

Obama beat Romney by 3.9%

Do you not think it odd that despite everything he ia no further behind than romney was?

Oh, but he is. You highlighted the closet poll - and he still loses. Other polls have Clinton 11 points ahead.

Imagine if Biden was the Dem candidate. It would be 15 points or more. He must be rueing not running now.

CarlottaVance

Alanbrooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

Can someone explain Mr Clegg's thinking - how export tariffs affect domestic prices - or indeed import prices?

The price of chocolate, cheese and wine will increase sharply if Britain heads towards a so-called hard Brexit, according to Nick Clegg.

Speaking ahead of a Liberal Democrats food and drink Brexit impact report, he warned that Britain could only avoid tariffs on beef exports of 59%, chocolate at 38%, cheese at 40% and wine at 14%, with a soft Brexit.

http://news.sky.com/story/nick-clegg-chocolate-cheese-and-wine-to-be-hit-by-hard-brexit-10620761

Of course, Tusk has already explained that the alternative to 'Hard Brexit' is 'No Brexit'.....which evidently is what Mr Clegg is after.....

so we will save a fortune on obesity as we buy less of out favourite treats

And it would banjax the Irish agricultural sector:

http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/irish-beef-tops-uk-beef-imports-while-we-took-37-of-the-uks-beef-exports/

rottenborough

Innocent_Abroad said:

Fishing said:

I know the area fairly well, and my instinct, unsupported by any analysis, is that the by-election would be single-issue, and Zac would prevail if he ran as an independent. If he did not run, it would be very difficult to predict - feeling in West London over R3 runs very high, as I remember from the last time the government tried to build one.

I'm not even sure that R3 will ever get built - we've been here before and it didn't. Personally, I'd support another runway at Gatwick and one at Stansted, as there would be less political opposition or environment damage. Airport capacity in London should be abundant, as it is in most other great cities around the world.

How do you measure airport capacity?

I take it the Heathrow puffers here know that R3 would cost twice as much as Gatwick R2?

A Zac win as an independent opens up some interesting possibilities for Caroline Lucas. He is clearly an environmentalist-Tory (not as mad as it sounds) and she has been a little hamstrung iirc by not having a second MP to propose stuff with.

Essexit

IanB2 said:

(snip)

Boris island was no more real than Tracey Island.

Thunderbirds is set in 2065, there's still time.

Paul_Bedfordshire

CarlottaVance said:

Alanbrooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

Can someone explain Mr Clegg's thinking - how export tariffs affect domestic prices - or indeed import prices?

The price of chocolate, cheese and wine will increase sharply if Britain heads towards a so-called hard Brexit, according to Nick Clegg.

Speaking ahead of a Liberal Democrats food and drink Brexit impact report, he warned that Britain could only avoid tariffs on beef exports of 59%, chocolate at 38%, cheese at 40% and wine at 14%, with a soft Brexit.

http://news.sky.com/story/nick-clegg-chocolate-cheese-and-wine-to-be-hit-by-hard-brexit-10620761

Of course, Tusk has already explained that the alternative to 'Hard Brexit' is 'No Brexit'.....which evidently is what Mr Clegg is after.....

so we will save a fortune on obesity as we buy less of out favourite treats

And it would banjax the Irish agricultural sector:

http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/irish-beef-tops-uk-beef-imports-while-we-took-37-of-the-uks-beef-exports/

They could always rejoin the UK. No one forced them to leave.