You're probably right. In that case nothing much will be agreed. There is neither the time nor the will to compromise from either side.
There's certainly a risk of that, which is the main reason why I think the financial markets are seriously underestimating the probability of a serious economic dislocation. More optimistically, one can see a possible way forward where there is some cosmetic 'punishment' of the UK in return for a mild settlement on migration, so that each side can talk up their 'victory' for domestic prurposes, whilst in the background they agree something which is actually in both sides' interests and doesn't cause too much economic dislocation. I don't think anyone can really know at this stage which way it will go, but the key thing is that politics will trump economics - so we do need a political face-saving deal of some kind.
On the other hand, people are still underestimating the constitutional difficulties the UK will have to even get to the point of making a legally valid decision to leave.
On the other hand, people are still underestimating the constitutional difficulties the UK will have to even get to the point of making a legally valid decision to leave.
If that is true, the only effect will be to make Brexit even messier and more disruptive than it would otherwise be. It's hard enough for the government as it is, without having to fight a simultaneous rearguard action.
Very obvious Barnier does not want the Brexit to go beyond the next Euro elections in 2019.
Well, yes, who in EU would want to pay Farage a penny more than they are already committed to.
Farage will be a broken man by then. No longer needed by Trump, an irrelevant has-been in his own country, the EU still going strong, Brexit going off the rails...
He can say what he likes - it's all posturing at this stage. Until we trigger Art 50, none of what either side says matters one toss.
This is true. An excellent example is that he wants us to agree termination payments without concluding a trade agreement. We'll say 'No way, sonny boy, they are linked." What does he do then? The default will be that we leave with no termination payments, so if we say they are linked, then they are linked.
As any fule 'no, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
You're probably right. In that case nothing much will be agreed. There is neither the time nor the will to compromise from either side.
Precisely. It's either hard Brexit or no Brexit.
Approximately. I don't think it's quite as black and white as that. It's minimal change versus minimal agreement. Neither of those are good options compared with membership of the EU. But we kind of knew that.
Is that a story though or would Wolf make the same anodyne noises about any name a reporter put to him -- good driver, definite contender, we need to think about it ?
We need another referendum along the lines of "the UK government should restrict the number of foreigners settling here". Although not ostensibly about Brexit it would clarify whether "hard" is inevitable or "soft" is politically defensible.
A row has broken out between Jeremy Corbyn loyalists over proposals to split the Tottenham constituency in two.
Members of the Tottenham Constituency Labour Party have written to Mr Corbyn and the party’s ruling body to say the plan risked creating a constituency of “mass deprivation”.
A source today claimed that Labour’s submission to the Boundary Commission was a clear attempt to ensure that Mr Corbyn retained his Islington seat by redrawing boundaries so that he faced the least competition.
I think Wehrlein's comment that he doesn't care who gets the seat suggests he may actually have gone from favourite to out of the running. It's a stupid comment to make.
Bottas may be looking good (haven't backed him directly but did back him at 21 each way for the title, now down to 15).
Incidentally, if you believe Alonso could get the gig then backing him for the title *or* Vandoorne at 67 for the title (each way for both) could make sense.
Mr. Eagles, that would be the Parliament that voted for the referendum?
Voting for a referendum then voting on whether you want to implement the result is ridiculous.
Well there should have been an automaticity clause in the bill as there was in the AV referendum legislation.
Why do some Brexiteers hate the rule of law?
Why do so many Remainers hate democracy?
We're leaving. Just working how to do so.
I mean, if we are leaving the single market as well, as Leave campaigned on, then we need to work out how and when £350 million a week is going to the NHS.
The current way that the NHS operates today, will require an extra £350m a week in the 2020s. Where it comes from is the challenge
No problem, the Leavers told us where it will come from in huge letters on the side of a bus.
Is that a story though or would Wolf make the same anodyne noises about any name a reporter put to him -- good driver, definite contender, we need to think about it ?
Mr. T, he had a rather good series about history and finance some time ago. Fascinating to hear of Spanish silver finds in South America causing huge problems due to wild inflation.
Ferguson's 4 EU failures seem to miss the even larger 5th failure: The EU is not a democracy. Or the 6th: It is trying to become a superstate, and thereby destroy its nation states. I was astonished he wasn't in the Leave camp from the outset.
Ooh feck. I really hope someone puts a complaint to the EC and the police about that. It's clearly an offer of a bribe even if the donation itself was eventually turned down.
Ferguson's 4 EU failures seem to miss the even larger 5th failure: The EU is not a democracy. Or the 6th: It is trying to become a superstate, and thereby destroy its nation states. I was astonished he wasn't in the Leave camp from the outset.
Ferguson's original stance was a surprise and it did make me reconsider, as it also did make SeanT re-consider. Big move by Ferguson to admit he was wrong.
I think Wehrlein's comment that he doesn't care who gets the seat suggests he may actually have gone from favourite to out of the running. It's a stupid comment to make.
Bottas may be looking good (haven't backed him directly but did back him at 21 each way for the title, now down to 15).
Incidentally, if you believe Alonso could get the gig then backing him for the title *or* Vandoorne at 67 for the title (each way for both) could make sense.
The trouble is we need to know why the reporter asked the question. Is there something in the air or is he just filling space? You are probably right about looking at the title markets.
Thinking of getting Kingdom Asunder for my teenage daughter - she likes that genre. I note that the same author has on Amazon a book called Prey: Seven Tales of Beastly Terror. New and used versions selling at the price of £999.11 each! Stretches my Xmas prezzie budget a touch.
Mr. JohnL, at the moment, Ladbrokes has removed the Mercedes' driver market, so it's not a matter of choice any more, but I did advocate that the other day too.
And I agree entirely that knowing the question asked and any info behind it is important. It's like when a political journalist talks about a cliff-edge to get a politician to use the term back for a quote.
This is fascinating. I think Niall Ferguson is one of the smartest thinkers and historians around (I've met him and he is just frighteningly bright and sharp)
He was opposed to Brexit, and his position added to my many grave doubts about my Leave vote.
But he now admits he was wrong, and says he should have backed Brexit.
I have nothing to disagree with Niall Ferguson in the abstract. And I realise you can't expand in a Tweet. But we don't live in an abstract world. If we cut out the EU as having failed in those areas, and remove that particular forum, how would we succeed in the Ukraine, the Middle East, controlling migration and radical Islam? All these things require countries to work together.
Er, how old is she? I find it hard to gauge 'adultness' of books (there's no sex, no strong swearing [surprisingly] but a fair helping of violence). If she reads Abercrombie or Martin, it'll be absolutely fine.
Ferguson's 4 EU failures seem to miss the even larger 5th failure: The EU is not a democracy. Or the 6th: It is trying to become a superstate, and thereby destroy its nation states. I was astonished he wasn't in the Leave camp from the outset.
His STimes Remain columns were awful, snobby, elitism and unworthy of him - I was astonished at his whole sneery manner. He didn't even attempt to understand the alternative viewpoint - or analyse it beyond 'urgh, oiks'. He was on a par with Parris.
This is fascinating. I think Niall Ferguson is one of the smartest thinkers and historians around (I've met him and he is just frighteningly bright and sharp)
He was opposed to Brexit, and his position added to my many grave doubts about my Leave vote.
But he now admits he was wrong, and says he should have backed Brexit.
His public spat with Paul Krugman was addictive reading but was basically style vs. substance. He's a cracking writer and very entertaining but totally cavalier with facts.
Mr. E, I agree. That's why the likes of Miller et al. want it to go through Parliament, to allow delay, and amendments, and the possibility of it being voted down.
I tried to ask Anna Soubry if she wanted a general election soon - she didn't want to answer that.
She'd make a great target for Paul Nuttall in an early GE. He could easily come through the middle of a three-way marginal.
I think you misunderstand the electorate in Broxtowe.
Don't tell me Niall Ferguson has seen the light. It was bright enough for his historians eyes in the first place. I remember him backing EU policy on the Ukraine, so it's a big change of view.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
There's no evidence that the Lib Dems were involved even indirectly. But if the allegation is true, whoever the donor was ought to be identified.
One for the lawyers: is what's been suggested technically illegal? There was no candidate to induce, never mind an electorate. And although the linking of the donation to an action might be considered bribery, you could equally make the case that given that Lucas had already (IIRC) given support to the concept of a Progressive Alliance, the donor might reasonably argue that s/he was willing to support that concept but only if it was meaningful, of which the Greens' intentions in Richmond were a test - and the fact that the Greens didn't stand despite not taking the money showed that it was not an offer to make them act abnormally. It seems a very dodgy area without necessarily crossing the line.
Gisela Stuart is probably the only Labour MP I'd vote for, which probably explains why she still holds Edgbaston.
Her role in the Leave campaign in the debates was crucial - she could make the moderate case as a European and someone who'd been involved in the EU constitution, which led to her changing her mind and heavily influencing my own wife - and yet she was overshadowed by virtually everyone else in get aftermath of the vote.
Her lack of ego (just contrast to Farage) is to her immense credit.
Both sides will claim victory, and life will go on. Hardcore Brexiteers and Continuity Remain will vent and fume.
This makes logical sense as it is the least damaging outcome, politically and economically, for BOTH sides.
But for a great nation it's surely the crappest outcome. Left as a hanger on, a satellite of the EU with no clear new direction. It will all have been for nought.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
If it's a complete and baseless smear, then the Electoral Commission and the police won't have much work to do before dismissing the complaint.
If as the article implies there was no actual donation why should the Electoral Commission get involved .
Broadly, the Bribery Act 2010 defines bribery as giving or receiving a financial or other advantage in connection with the "improper performance" of a position of trust, or a function that is expected to be performed impartially or in good faith. Bribery does not have to involve cash or an actual payment exchanging hands.
Mr. E, I agree. That's why the likes of Miller et al. want it to go through Parliament, to allow delay, and amendments, and the possibility of it being voted down.
I tried to ask Anna Soubry if she wanted a general election soon - she didn't want to answer that.
She'd make a great target for Paul Nuttall in an early GE. He could easily come through the middle of a three-way marginal.
I think you misunderstand the electorate in Broxtowe.
Maybe I do, or maybe the local Tories and a large chunk of the Labour vote would like a Leave supporter to vote for.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
There's no evidence that the Lib Dems were involved even indirectly. But if the allegation is true, whoever the donor was ought to be identified.
One for the lawyers: is what's been suggested technically illegal? There was no candidate to induce, never mind an electorate. And although the linking of the donation to an action might be considered bribery, you could equally make the case that given that Lucas had already (IIRC) given support to the concept of a Progressive Alliance, the donor might reasonably argue that s/he was willing to support that concept but only if it was meaningful, of which the Greens' intentions in Richmond were a test - and the fact that the Greens didn't stand despite not taking the money showed that it was not an offer to make them act abnormally. It seems a very dodgy area without necessarily crossing the line.
If it's a private donation for or on behalf of a candidate, then it could be classed as by-election spending.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
If it's a complete and baseless smear, then the Electoral Commission and the police won't have much work to do before dismissing the complaint.
If as the article implies there was no actual donation why should the Electoral Commission get involved .
Broadly, the Bribery Act 2010 defines bribery as giving or receiving a financial or other advantage in connection with the "improper performance" of a position of trust, or a function that is expected to be performed impartially or in good faith. Bribery does not have to involve cash or an actual payment exchanging hands.
So we should also investigate the decision by both UKIP and the Conservatives not to contest Richmond - a whole can of worms !!!
Mr. E, I agree. That's why the likes of Miller et al. want it to go through Parliament, to allow delay, and amendments, and the possibility of it being voted down.
I tried to ask Anna Soubry if she wanted a general election soon - she didn't want to answer that.
She'd make a great target for Paul Nuttall in an early GE. He could easily come through the middle of a three-way marginal.
I think you misunderstand the electorate in Broxtowe.
Maybe I do, or maybe the local Tories and a large chunk of the Labour vote would like a Leave supporter to vote for.
Nuttall standing would probably squeeze enough of the Labour/libdem-Remain vote towards Sourby.
Both sides will claim victory, and life will go on. Hardcore Brexiteers and Continuity Remain will vent and fume.
This makes logical sense as it is the least damaging outcome, politically and economically, for BOTH sides.
But for a great nation it's surely the crappest outcome. Left as a hanger on, a satellite of the EU with no clear new direction. It will all have been for nought.
The ability to independently trade with the rest of the world on negotiated terms set by the UK can hardly be described as 'nought'.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
If it's a complete and baseless smear, then the Electoral Commission and the police won't have much work to do before dismissing the complaint.
If as the article implies there was no actual donation why should the Electoral Commission get involved .
Broadly, the Bribery Act 2010 defines bribery as giving or receiving a financial or other advantage in connection with the "improper performance" of a position of trust, or a function that is expected to be performed impartially or in good faith. Bribery does not have to involve cash or an actual payment exchanging hands.
So we should also investigate the decision by both UKIP and the Conservatives not to contest Richmond - a whole can of worms !!!
Yes, if the Tories or UKIP withdrew because someone had tied a £250,000 donation to them doing so, that was also completely wrong of them.
Mr. E, I agree. That's why the likes of Miller et al. want it to go through Parliament, to allow delay, and amendments, and the possibility of it being voted down.
I tried to ask Anna Soubry if she wanted a general election soon - she didn't want to answer that.
She'd make a great target for Paul Nuttall in an early GE. He could easily come through the middle of a three-way marginal.
I think you misunderstand the electorate in Broxtowe.
Maybe I do, or maybe the local Tories and a large chunk of the Labour vote would like a Leave supporter to vote for.
Historically Broxtowe has had Pro EU MPs.
In 1997 The Times urged Tories in Broxtowe to vote for Nick Palmer as he was more Eurosceptic than the Tory incumbent Jim Lester.
US President-elect Donald Trump is considering a billionaire Wall Street private equity investor who also owns the New York Jets American football franchise as his pick for his UK ambassador.
If you read Barnier's answers at his presser it is clear the EU will offer us something like EEA status, still paying contributions, fudging the issue of Free Movement..
"Q: Are you in principle in favour of a transitional arrangement?
Barnier says this would be useful it it were the path towards a new relationship.
But we need to know what what the perspective would be.
He says third countries, like EEA members, might be affected.
Norway and Iceland are examples of how a transitional arrangement could operate"
This is very likely where we will end up. The EU will say Look they still pay money and have less influence = bad deal; TMay will say Look we're out, with little damage, and we've taken back control of all laws bar single market, plus control on migrant benefits = good deal
Both sides will claim victory, and life will go on. Hardcore Brexiteers and Continuity Remain will vent and fume.
This makes logical sense as it is the least damaging outcome, politically and economically, for BOTH sides.
But we cannot ignore the other possibility of total and angry collapse in negotiation, and Full on Tumescent Brexit.
Exactly. In fact, that's how it has to be because unless both sides can claim political victory there will be no deal.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
There's no evidence that the Lib Dems were involved even indirectly. But if the allegation is true, whoever the donor was ought to be identified.
One for the lawyers: is what's been suggested technically illegal? There was no candidate to induce, never mind an electorate. And although the linking of the donation to an action might be considered bribery, you could equally make the case that given that Lucas had already (IIRC) given support to the concept of a Progressive Alliance, the donor might reasonably argue that s/he was willing to support that concept but only if it was meaningful, of which the Greens' intentions in Richmond were a test - and the fact that the Greens didn't stand despite not taking the money showed that it was not an offer to make them act abnormally. It seems a very dodgy area without necessarily crossing the line.
If it's a private donation for or on behalf of a candidate, then it could be classed as by-election spending.
Sure, I originally wrote that if the person offering it had a direct interest in the election that that'd clearly be illegal but found myself wandering down a route then that'd need another paragraph to finish and decided against it. But if the donation was from someone with no direct interest in the by-election?
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
But are you suggesting this allegation should not be investigated as if above board there is no problem
Remember the Tories and UKIp both gave Zac an assisted place. There was no screaming over that.
The LDs won - get over it.
I accept that but I find it a little disconcerting that you just want to dismiss it as a smear when there does seem to be some truth in the allegation and it needs laying to rest.
If this had happened in a conservative seat you would want it investigating
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
If it's a complete and baseless smear, then the Electoral Commission and the police won't have much work to do before dismissing the complaint.
Full leaked document has been published by OrderOrder.
Oh dear, so it has.
Sounds like the local Richmond. Greens are mightily pissed off that 'head office' told them not to stand. There's a reasonable chance the leak came from close to the author himself, given that he's produced a 30-page internal report on the issue. This needs investigating, even if it turns out there's no case to answer, it stinks.
Both sides will claim victory, and life will go on. Hardcore Brexiteers and Continuity Remain will vent and fume.
This makes logical sense as it is the least damaging outcome, politically and economically, for BOTH sides.
But for a great nation it's surely the crappest outcome. Left as a hanger on, a satellite of the EU with no clear new direction. It will all have been for nought.
Furthermore and incidentally, a hanger on and a satellite of the EU, with no clear direction, was precisely what we WERE before Brexit.
We were never going to join the euro, or Schengen = satellite; yet we were slowly being dragged into ever closer union (as we see from the complexities of leaving) = hanger on. And of course we were going in a direction we didn't want to travel.
Hence, Brexit.
I think being inside or outside the EU will make precious little difference to our influence in Europe. We will still be its second largest economy and one of its two major military powers.
It will mean we have less influence over developing the future course of the EU, but I don't think we had very much anyway.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
If it's a complete and baseless smear, then the Electoral Commission and the police won't have much work to do before dismissing the complaint.
If as the article implies there was no actual donation why should the Electoral Commission get involved .
Broadly, the Bribery Act 2010 defines bribery as giving or receiving a financial or other advantage in connection with the "improper performance" of a position of trust, or a function that is expected to be performed impartially or in good faith. Bribery does not have to involve cash or an actual payment exchanging hands.
So we should also investigate the decision by both UKIP and the Conservatives not to contest Richmond - a whole can of worms !!!
Produce the evidence of an attempted bribe in those cases - then you do the investigation. In this case we have the prima facie evidence. Interesting that you seem to want to hush it all up.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
If it's a complete and baseless smear, then the Electoral Commission and the police won't have much work to do before dismissing the complaint.
Full leaked document has been published by OrderOrder.
Oh dear, so it has.
Sounds like the local Richmond. Greens are mightily pissed off that 'head office' told them not to stand. There's a reasonable chance the leak came from close to the author himself, given that he's produced a 30-page internal report on the issue. This needs investigating, even if it turns out there's no case to answer, it stinks.
Seems the decision by the leadership to not stand was briefed to Guardian before there had actually been a final meeting. Candidate was informed by press officer that they had told Guardian that she was standing down by press office and they would draft a statement with co-leaders.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
But are you suggesting this allegation should not be investigated as if above board there is no problem
Remember the Tories and UKIp both gave Zac an assisted place. There was no screaming over that.
The LDs won - get over it.
I accept that but I find it a little disconcerting that you just want to dismiss it as a smear when there does seem to be some truth in the allegation and it needs laying to rest.
If this had happened in a conservative seat you would want it investigating
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
If it's a complete and baseless smear, then the Electoral Commission and the police won't have much work to do before dismissing the complaint.
If as the article implies there was no actual donation why should the Electoral Commission get involved .
Broadly, the Bribery Act 2010 defines bribery as giving or receiving a financial or other advantage in connection with the "improper performance" of a position of trust, or a function that is expected to be performed impartially or in good faith. Bribery does not have to involve cash or an actual payment exchanging hands.
So we should also investigate the decision by both UKIP and the Conservatives not to contest Richmond - a whole can of worms !!!
Produce the evidence of an attempted bribe in those cases - then you do the investigation. In this case we have the prima facie evidence. Interesting that you seem to want to hush it all up.
I'm no electoral law expert, but presumably this is not an electoral bribe as defined by EC as not a bribe aimed at an actual voter or group of voters. Or is there some indirect way of linking a candidate dropping out?
I see May has had her self photographed giving a speech to troops with the lectern between two gun turrets with something drapped in a huge Union Flag on one side. The whole thing is staged on a warship. #Mayday
US President-elect Donald Trump is considering a billionaire Wall Street private equity investor who also owns the New York Jets American football franchise as his pick for his UK ambassador.
Lib Dems and dodgy donations. Who would have thunk it?
You and your arch smearer mate Staines attempting to smear the Lib Dems - shock horror .
If it is true how can it be a smear. It needs investigating
Both Staines and TC live to smear Lib Dems at every opportunity
If it's a complete and baseless smear, then the Electoral Commission and the police won't have much work to do before dismissing the complaint.
Full leaked document has been published by OrderOrder.
Oh dear, so it has.
Sounds like the local Richmond. Greens are mightily pissed off that 'head office' told them not to stand. There's a reasonable chance the leak came from close to the author himself, given that he's produced a 30-page internal report on the issue. This needs investigating, even if it turns out there's no case to answer, it stinks.
Seems the decision by the leadership to not stand was briefed to Guardian before there had actually been a final meeting. Candidate was informed by press officer that they had told Guardian that she was standing down by press office and they would draft a statement with co-leaders.
The unwritten rule seems to be that when it comes to the liberal/greeny left there is no such thing as dodgy when applied to their electoral practices. Winning is all that matters.
Comments
When I first read that I thought that Angus Provost was the name of the deceased.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/38219533
https://twitter.com/dwnews/status/806096232317915136
I mean, yes. Yes, I did. Well done me... [I did ramble about such things a few times. Can't recall quite what I said].
(I'm pretty sure I haven't actually bet on that. Bugger).
A row has broken out between Jeremy Corbyn loyalists over proposals to split the Tottenham constituency in two.
Members of the Tottenham Constituency Labour Party have written to Mr Corbyn and the party’s ruling body to say the plan risked creating a constituency of “mass deprivation”.
A source today claimed that Labour’s submission to the Boundary Commission was a clear attempt to ensure that Mr Corbyn retained his Islington seat by redrawing boundaries so that he faced the least competition.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/labour-accused-of-trying-to-save-jeremy-corbyn-s-seat-in-boundary-plan-a3413381.html
http://order-order.com/2016/12/06/green-party-offered-250000-not-stand-richmond/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4004596/WRAF-veteran-64-fined-2-500-killjoy-council-breaching-advertising-rules-flying-flag-memory-fallen-soldiers-celebrate-Christmas-GARDEN.html
I think Wehrlein's comment that he doesn't care who gets the seat suggests he may actually have gone from favourite to out of the running. It's a stupid comment to make.
Bottas may be looking good (haven't backed him directly but did back him at 21 each way for the title, now down to 15).
Incidentally, if you believe Alonso could get the gig then backing him for the title *or* Vandoorne at 67 for the title (each way for both) could make sense.
And have now cashed out for a small profit.
Thanks.
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/11/28/the-rest-of-the-eu-us-in-a-big-muddle-about-brexit/
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/806098306636140544
Mr. T, he had a rather good series about history and finance some time ago. Fascinating to hear of Spanish silver finds in South America causing huge problems due to wild inflation.
Good morning, everyone.
And I agree entirely that knowing the question asked and any info behind it is important. It's like when a political journalist talks about a cliff-edge to get a politician to use the term back for a quote.
Could be a big story if true
Er, how old is she? I find it hard to gauge 'adultness' of books (there's no sex, no strong swearing [surprisingly] but a fair helping of violence). If she reads Abercrombie or Martin, it'll be absolutely fine.
Good morning, Miss JGP.
He's a cracking writer and very entertaining but totally cavalier with facts.
Which is obviously where we will all end up.
The LDs won - get over it.
We can of course wait for the truth to come out.
One for the lawyers: is what's been suggested technically illegal? There was no candidate to induce, never mind an electorate. And although the linking of the donation to an action might be considered bribery, you could equally make the case that given that Lucas had already (IIRC) given support to the concept of a Progressive Alliance, the donor might reasonably argue that s/he was willing to support that concept but only if it was meaningful, of which the Greens' intentions in Richmond were a test - and the fact that the Greens didn't stand despite not taking the money showed that it was not an offer to make them act abnormally. It seems a very dodgy area without necessarily crossing the line.
Her role in the Leave campaign in the debates was crucial - she could make the moderate case as a European and someone who'd been involved in the EU constitution, which led to her changing her mind and heavily influencing my own wife - and yet she was overshadowed by virtually everyone else in get aftermath of the vote.
Her lack of ego (just contrast to Farage) is to her immense credit.
I prefer the term 'incentive based decision making'
In 1997 The Times urged Tories in Broxtowe to vote for Nick Palmer as he was more Eurosceptic than the Tory incumbent Jim Lester.
Theresa May tells reporters on the plane to Bahrain that she wants "a red, white and blue Brexit"
"It is about a red, white and blue Brexit that is the right Brexit, the right deal for Britain," Theresa May adds
If this had happened in a conservative seat you would want it investigating
Sounds like the local Richmond. Greens are mightily pissed off that 'head office' told them not to stand.
There's a reasonable chance the leak came from close to the author himself, given that he's produced a 30-page internal report on the issue. This needs investigating, even if it turns out there's no case to answer, it stinks.
It will mean we have less influence over developing the future course of the EU, but I don't think we had very much anyway.
https://www.cchdaily.co.uk/american-justice-story-british-accountant-us-jail
This piece on what's happening to Momentum is really alarming https://medium.com/@lauracatrionamurray/momentum-vs-inertia-e525c8f9e217#.do156mc3y … Sectarian groups cannot be allowed to destroy it.
Heart of stone etc...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/12/nine-police-forces-investigate-claims-tories-breached-election-spending-rules