Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Of all the Westminster constituencies affected by Heathrow Ric
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Of all the Westminster constituencies affected by Heathrow Richmond Park is where there’s the most opposition
"undefined"==typeof window.datawrapper&&(window.datawrapper={"RvddV":{}}),window.datawrapper["RvddV"].embedDeltas={"100":935.8,"200":699.8,"300":645.8,"400":626.8,"500":599.8,"600":599.8,"700":599.8,"800":599.8,"900":572.8,"1000":572.8},window.datawrapper["RvddV"].iframe=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-RvddV"),window.datawrapper["RvddV"].iframe.style.height=window.datawrapper["RvddV"].embedDeltas[Math.min(1e3,Math.max(100*Math.floor(window.datawrapper["RvddV"].iframe.offsetWidth/100),100))]+"px",window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if("undefined"!=typeof a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var b in a.data["datawrapper-height"])"RvddV"==b&&(window.datawrapper["RvddV"].iframe.style.height=a.data["datawrapper-height"][b]+"px")});
Comments
I think the penultimate paragraph is key; some (not all) of the public opposition is being driven by Zac's very vocal opposition.
That's a ridiculous suggestion, surely?
I see Zak is taking some flak from Tory colleagues about his grandstanding.
Boris's airport-employed constituency will be pro-expansion. A shame Maidenhead wasn't polled.
Just looking at the graph above, they would have 36 or 37% support, which could possibly win a by-election with Zac and the LDs splitting the anti-airport vote.
The key point is that, despite all the noise around hard Brexit, it looks like May may be attempting a soft Brexit approach, as many on PB anticipated. Perhaps all the hard Brexit stuff was to soften up her antis, who knows? In any event if this is right then after Brexit we will have adopted all EU law, be following EU trade rules, still be making big financial contributions to the EU, and still be accepting a significant amount of free movement for Eastern European workers.
As with many support/opposition questions, the opponents are greatly exercised about the matter and it will influence their vote. Whereas the people who tell the pollster they support the expansion are unlikely to be so motivated by the issue that it will override their other concerns and political views.
And how would one stop migrants moving from one geographic part of the UK to another once inside? It would just lead to a much larger black economy, or bureaucratic fiddling where the employee is registered in one area but mainly travels and works in another.
My view is that Theresa May will put a headline cut in absolute migration numbers as her number one political goal.
Practically I think it works. If what you're trying to control is people migrating to take jobs or claim benefits, you can do the enforcement at the workplace and/or benefits office. This is basically where you have to do the enforcement in any case; You can't stop people at the border, because the set of people permitted to work and/or claim benefits is much smaller than the people permitted to enter the country temporarily, and once they're in for a short visit the border control can't stop them staying. You'd beef up employer-level enforcement with severe penalties for employing someone illegally, and bribes for immigrants who took jobs illegally then ratted out their employers.
The political problem is that the voters mistakenly expect that control of migration is something that can be done at the border. There's an analogous mistake in IT security where people try to rely too much on securing a perimeter, and spend too much on firewall hardware and not enough on training.
I don't know if there's any way around the voters' adherence to the Perimeter Fallacy, but if you can get them to swallow it you have quite an interesting localist political angle. You could have local referendums on how much immigration to allow, which will go down well when it's introduced because pro-immigration and anti-immigration people all think that their preferred option is obviously the best, so when it's put into practice everyone will end up voting for it.
It also provides a nice solution to the Scottish and Northern Irish problems, because they'd be their own localities and they'd be able to set their own immigration policies. The Scots in particular would welcome the extra devolution.
Every carmaker in Britain will be given a government guarantee that they will remain “competitive” even if Brexit trade talks break down and the European Union imposes tariffs on exports.
In an open-ended commitment Greg Clark, the business secretary, announced yesterday that the government was prepared make the same promises to Ford, Vauxhall, Toyota and other carmakers that rely on European exports as it made last week to Nissan.
Crucially, he did not spell out how such a multibillion-pound commitment might be funded in the event of Brexit negotiations breaking down
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/you-ll-all-get-the-same-deal-as-nissan-carmakers-told-vm8wv08qw
But given their MP is medium profile, and has been very noisy on this topic at a national level, it is had to envisage that noise not altering the views of at least some of his constituents.
As an aside, here's a mischievous idea: if this by-election is about Heathrow expansion, and the constituents elect an anti-expansion MP, then ban all constituents from using Heathrow.
Florida now looks to be swinging Trump's way and with the email scandal growing* rather than diminishing there's betting value on Trump at both state and national level.
*650,000 emails on the laptop 'many of which' relate to Clinton.
I'm also guessing that any guarantee will not be legally binding to future governments.
But it comes back to the same point as was made when this charade started: who actually cares what the MP for Richmond Park thinks about an issue of such national importance? I think David Davis still holds the record for the most ridiculous bye election post war but this runs it pretty damn close.
Parliament and the British people have a right to know the price we will be paying for taking back control and how it will be paid.
And that is what we’re seeing.
Why do the Walloons get to discuss it while our own representatives do not?
https://www.parliament.uk/edm/2016-17/165
Therefore the question now becomes the price at which the EU will sell the access (membership). Financial contributions are a given, as is following EU trade rules. On movement I cannot see the Eastern European countries accepting any agreement that doesn't (mostly) protect the rights of their citizens to come and work here - and Atul may be ahead of the curve in thinking out how this can be done whilst at least creating the illusion that we have more control. As with many of the unpleasant austerity decisions that got passed down to councils, a solution that gets regional or local government to make the difficult decisions would be politically appealing to the Conservatives.
I essentially see them as meaningless.
all multinats do that, they are loyal only to themselves,
If they want to impose those restrictions on others, then they should have restrictions put on them.
(I admit I am not being fully serious about this).
This is what killed the US SST (US version of Concorde) dead - it was political suicide to back it.
On the Clinton email thing...
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-october-30-2016-n675316
The thing that people forgot in their rush to condemn Comey, is that he previously engineered a free pass for Clinton over the email investigation. Blocking avenues of investigation, giving immunity deals to staffers that resulted in them not testifying and finally, the novel theory that since no-one had bad intent, breaking the law wasn't really an issue.
This pissed off alot of FBI agents - who saw people doing things on a massive scale that they (the FBI) agents would be fired for (and lose their pensions and be prosecuted for).
And then we get this:
AUDIE CORNISH: To Andrea's point, I agree with the first part. But what I'm hearing from everybody, I mean, I have some sources in the F.B.I. and the former district attorney's. The F.B.I. is in full revolt right now. The F.B.I. has been in full revolt since the decisions made last summer.
CHUCK TODD: Not full revolt. There's been a lot. I mean it's--there are agents--Let's not say full revolt.
AUDIE CORNISH: All right, a semi-full revolt. Because what I'm getting at is if Comey hadn't said what he said to Congress and the rest of the world, it would have leaked. It would have leaked. That whole building was ready to leak that they had discovered this new source with Weiner and Abedin. So, I don't think Comey had much chance here. And I think the F.B.I. is badly divided.
On the plus side it should make a UK-Canada or UK-Australia deal quicker, since much of it will just be s/European Union/United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland/g
Still, look on the bright side, one Tory cabinet member may be out of a job already.
BTW this thread is possibly misleading because it misses out many other "affected" constituencies. Wandsworth Council for example is EXTREMELY vocal against expansion, and that has barely a LibDem in site. It is also not surprising that many of the constituencies on the list are Labour. They have a different constituency to play to.
The British people have been looking for a chance to vote against the Project since Maastricht, when it became undeniable that the first referendum had been won under false pretences. But the politicians on both sides let the pressure build and build and build.
Thus will we "take back control" and deliver "sovereignty"...
Fact is neither of us have a clue what the Canucks think
In which case, Fresh Start would have borne down heavily on him for opt-outs and concessions. I think it might have worked, but probably not on free movement because in 2009-2010 no one knew UKIP were around the corner, and how hard it would be to cut net immigration with it.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152531307171/james-comey-as-seen-through-the-persuasion
Tis indeed a funny sort of democracy and "control"!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/why-fbi-director-james-b-comey-was-able-to-defy-justice-bosses-on-clinton-email-announcement/2016/10/30/9f788f64-9edb-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html
Incidentally on EDM 165, I see a lot of SNP MPs were not happy at the lack of open discussion. What are the implications of CETA for Scotland?
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/10/30/clinton-foundation-fbi-investigation-confirmed-former-assistant-fbi-director/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/30/laptop-in-fbis-weiner-sexting-case-had-state-gov-clinton-related-emails-source-says.html
The source said an analysis of the metadata on Weiner’s computer has turned up “positive hits for state.gov and HRC emails,” which led Comey to revisit the FBI investigation into Clinton using a private email server system while secretary of state. A second law enforcement source confirmed the account.
Take back control!
F1: well, I buggered that up proper;y. 3 tips, 0 green. *sighs*
Anyway, shall set about writing the post-mortem analysis.
4h
Michael McDonald @ElectProject
Of the 20,269 people who voted today in Georgia, 48% are Black (11% are unknown, due to a slightly stale voter file) #soulstopolls
22
51
People didn't like the EU because of the money we pay them, their rules that we follow, and their people with rights to come here whenever they like.
The extent of change in all three of these things is going to be a lot less than many leavers were anticipating.
I couldn't give a hoot what the implications of CETA are for Scotland. The CETA is the EU's baby and we're leaving the EU. If they want to ratify it then we must not stand in the way.
The blueprint will feature plans for Scotland to forge a soft Brexit on its own within the UK. But it is also expected to include plans for Scotland to remain part of the EU if a separate Scottish Brexit deal cannot be negotiated, not just as an independent nation but as the UK’s “successor state”.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/sturgeon-could-ask-for-scotland-to-take-uks-eu-membership-6kkhf66dm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37819348
For the record, I was surprised neither Mercedes got any penalty at the start, but there we are.