Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
The Left do not have the existential crisis which hit the Right in 1997. Then some right of centre voters were totally disenfranchised - those who came to be UKIP voters, and all the left of centre parties ganged up on the Conservatives with the intention of killing them outright.
The lack of self-awareness with the Lib Dems never ceases to amaze me. The informal carve-up that never was whereby the Lib Dems were effectively given a free run at formerly and now safe Conservative seats will not be forgotten by us Conservatives.
Hague thought the 2010 Coalition was suicidal for the LDs and told Fionn that on the evening of the pact. So did I for that matter although I thought reducing them to 30 seats would be Nivarnah.
So, it might take three election cycles for the left to sort themselves out. But they will do. The test of the right will be to use that 13 to 15 years to embed reform so the next Blair is less able to wreak havoc than the last one.
Those who are not of a Conservative disposition might choke on their cornflakes but the election of Blair led to the most extremist hard left government this country has ever had to face.
Seriously? I think Mr Attlee might have something to say about that.
So might Heath, Churchill, Macmillan and Wilson. Remember the Prices and Incomes Board, Marketing Boards, National Economic Plan, exchange controls or 83-98% top tax rates?
Prices and Incomes boards are something I hadn't really heard of until recently. What an incredible thing to have. Enoch wasn't pleased...
@DecrepitJohnL - The left has won most of the policy argument inside Labour, that is a Corbyn achievement. The party is well to the left of where someone like me would want it, but I accept that. The problem Labour has is that its policies are utterly irrelevant: no-one is listening to anything it says because of who its leader is. Corbyn brings too much baggage and seems utterly alien to most voters, and has absolutely no interest in engaging beyond his comfort zone. He and the people who surround him guarantee that Labour will not get a hearing. It is incumbent on the left to find a better leader. The idea that anyone inside the PLP who opposed Corbyn's leadership is a Red Tory and a Blairite is ridiculous.
Anyway, that's it from me for a while, need to get my shit together for Zurich. The moving people are coming today and we've got almost nothing ready for them.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
There is, of course, a way back to power for the left. Drop the transgender toilet / SJW stuff and re-embrace the direct concerns of the poor. Desire power and stop trying to be a movement. Court the deplorable vote and mean it. They'd have to swallow some policy positions that the SJW crowd will gag on - but the alternative is to remain lost and irrelevant.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
Indeed. I also think the OBR and Bank are going to have a fair amount of egg on their faces by the end of the year, Markit noted an uptick in capital expenditure (or as the ONS calls it, gross capital formation) and a drop off in consumer demand and surmised that it is because of weak sterling and overseas demand for semi-manufactured and intermediate goods. If that is the pattern for 2017 anywhere between 2% and 2.5% GDP growth is on the cards, even with a slowdown in the housing market.
Fabian thinks Labour should ally with the SNP? Remind me, what was the Tory smear about Labour being in someone's pocket at the last election?
Don't smears have to be untrue?
Were the Conservatives in Nick Clegg's pocket between 2010 and 2015 ?
If the Lib Dems had chosen to play that game, they would have been.
The problems with using that imagery as a campaign are that (1) by 2015, experience had shown the Lib Dems to be generally unwilling to play the sort of games that the SNP were threatening to; something which tied into the respective philosophies of the parties and which, hence, had electoral traction; (2) in 2010, it wasn't a viable threat because the public liked Clegg; having Cameron in his pocket might well have been seen as a positive; and (3) in 2015, even if Clegg personally and the Lib Dems as a party were unpopular, the notion of them as a moderating influence might still have been a net vote-winner - indeed, that was a major part of their campaign, and parties rarely use campaigning material that might be considered a smear against them.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce.
Wishful thinking. The stronger the UK's perceived position among the Brexiteers, the stronger the political pressure to demand and expect the impossible. It makes it more likely that negotiations will come to an impasse.
@rkrkrk - the NEC decides the rules of the Labour party. All it will take is for Unite to change its position on Corbyn and the current impasse there will end and an anti-Corbyn majority will exist, with no hope of it being altered. At that point, the hard left has lost.
Right... but that doesn't necessarily mean Corbyn goes does it?
Seems to me that Corbyn is in power until membership decide they prefer an alternative. The anti-Corbyn faction need to find a way to win a membership election. My feeling remains that they went far too soon with Owen Smith.
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Big issue will be finding a sensible candidate, they have NONE at present so will need to be new blood.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce.
Wishful thinking. The stronger the UK's perceived position among the Brexiteers, the stronger the political pressure to demand and expect the impossible. It makes it more likely that negotiations will come to an impasse.
@rkrkrk - the NEC decides the rules of the Labour party. All it will take is for Unite to change its position on Corbyn and the current impasse there will end and an anti-Corbyn majority will exist, with no hope of it being altered. At that point, the hard left has lost.
Right... but that doesn't necessarily mean Corbyn goes does it?
Seems to me that Corbyn is in power until membership decide they prefer an alternative. The anti-Corbyn faction need to find a way to win a membership election. My feeling remains that they went far too soon with Owen Smith.
Indeed. They needed a proper set of 'bad' election results
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce.
Wishful thinking. The stronger the UK's perceived position among the Brexiteers, the stronger the political pressure to demand and expect the impossible. It makes it more likely that negotiations will come to an impasse.
You accusing someone else of wishful thinking. Quite glorious.
Mr. rkrkrk, just finished the initial pass at a couple of family trees for inclusion with the print edition. I suspect this is the case, but you just meant Penmere/Esden, yes?
Yes that's right. I think as line of succession is important to plot it would be a big help to be able to check back to as a reference.
I love the way people are still blithely quoting opinion polls left right and centre as though the last year or two hadnt happened.
The polls over the last two years were broadly right and in some cases, virtually spot on. Cherry-picking the exceptions is as big an error as cherry-picking a poll for any other reason.
And as MD has pointed out, it's usually been the left that's been overstated when there has been an error (though it's notable that the exception to that historic trend is, I think, 1983, and that also Boris was overstated vs Ken in 2012, suggesting that unpopular Labour candidates might outperform their polling when that polling is itself weak).
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the Tory right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich. The Tories will not be able to help stuffing their own and their plas pockets at the expense of the masses.
Will probably have to be over two pages. It's not very deep, but William and Stephen losing about 7 siblings between them makes it quite wide (and I'd prefer, if possible, to put the main Penmere branch and Esden lines on the same page).
I think you could have helpfully inserted an 'only slightly' there.
True, for practical purposes, the figures are identical. All the same, that's hardly healthy given that Labour's current support base must have had virtually all the traditional swing voters already scraped from it.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
Not a good start to 2017 for Osborne and his Private Fraser routine.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce.
Wishful thinking. The stronger the UK's perceived position among the Brexiteers, the stronger the political pressure to demand and expect the impossible. It makes it more likely that negotiations will come to an impasse.
You accusing someone else of wishful thinking. Quite glorious.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
Not a good start to 2017 for Osborne and his Private Fraser routine.
"We're doomed, I tell yer....."
Ozzy would argue, with much legitimacy, that these are the fruits of his legacy.
@rkrkrk - the NEC decides the rules of the Labour party. All it will take is for Unite to change its position on Corbyn and the current impasse there will end and an anti-Corbyn majority will exist, with no hope of it being altered. At that point, the hard left has lost.
Right... but that doesn't necessarily mean Corbyn goes does it?
Seems to me that Corbyn is in power until membership decide they prefer an alternative. The anti-Corbyn faction need to find a way to win a membership election. My feeling remains that they went far too soon with Owen Smith.
In any other party, Corbyn would have been toast well before the leadership challenge. After the Shad Cab resignations and the PLP VoNC, a leadership election had to be launched otherwise the tension between the leader and the PLP would have continued unabated for a year. The problems were (1) that the challenger was Smith, who was rubbish, and (2) that the membership were still in self-indulgent mode. The PLP (and other, better, potential leaders) have responsibility for (1) but their challenge still had to be made all the same.
@rkrkrk- It is true that Corbyn might choose to hang on in opposition to the NEC and the people that fund the Labour party. If he chose to do that, however, ways will be found to remove him. He could become isolated very quickly.
Someone at ladbrokes has the April 1st Joke up early, Carlotta will be in raptures........... Next Scottish First Minister British Ruth Davidson 6/1 Stewart Hosie 10/1 Humza Yousaf 10/1 Shona Robison 10/1 Angus Robertson 12/1 Mhairi Black 12/1 John Swinney 12/1 Derek Mackay 12/1 Michael Matheson 12/1 Alex Salmond 20/1 Keith Brown 25/1 Kezia Dugdale 33/1
@rkrkrk - the NEC decides the rules of the Labour party. All it will take is for Unite to change its position on Corbyn and the current impasse there will end and an anti-Corbyn majority will exist, with no hope of it being altered. At that point, the hard left has lost.
Right... but that doesn't necessarily mean Corbyn goes does it?
Seems to me that Corbyn is in power until membership decide they prefer an alternative. The anti-Corbyn faction need to find a way to win a membership election. My feeling remains that they went far too soon with Owen Smith.
Indeed. They needed a proper set of 'bad' election results
I wonder whether May 2018 might be the trigger. At that point, the Brexit talks will probably be well underway but nowhere near conclusion and in all likelihood looking very difficult, making the distraction of a snap GE very difficult to hold. However, if Corbyn remains as poor as he is, the Tories would likely make gains in the local elections which, unlike this year, will contain the big Met councils where lots of marginals and Tory targets exist. That will feel a lot closer to home than the loss of seats this year in the shires or Scotland, neither of which contain many Labour constituencies.
The Left do not have the existential crisis which hit the Right in 1997. Then some right of centre voters were totally disenfranchised - those who came to be UKIP voters, and all the left of centre parties ganged up on the Conservatives with the intention of killing them outright.
The lack of self-awareness with the Lib Dems never ceases to amaze me. The informal carve-up that never was whereby the Lib Dems were effectively given a free run at formerly and now safe Conservative seats will not be forgotten by us Conservatives.
Hague thought the 2010 Coalition was suicidal for the LDs and told Fionn that on the evening of the pact. So did I for that matter although I thought reducing them to 30 seats would be Nivarnah.
So, it might take three election cycles for the left to sort themselves out. But they will do. The test of the right will be to use that 13 to 15 years to embed reform so the next Blair is less able to wreak havoc than the last one.
Those who are not of a Conservative disposition might choke on their cornflakes but the election of Blair led to the most extremist hard left government this country has ever had to face.
Seriously? I think Mr Attlee might have something to say about that.
So might Heath, Churchill, Macmillan and Wilson. Remember the Prices and Incomes Board, Marketing Boards, National Economic Plan, exchange controls or 83-98% top tax rates?
In terms of absolute position, very true. Indeed, the policies for most of Thatcher's premiership, were well to the left of those of Blair. However, I'm not sure that absolute position is the best measure alone. Some account - probably a greater degree of the comparison - has to be about direction of travel. On that basis, none of the four you mention made a substantial shift in the nation's direction. Heath wanted to but failed; the rest just tweaked (unless you count Churchill in wartime, which really was a near-command state).
I think the pendulum swung too far towards a 100% publicly-owned economy - including OTT nationalisation - then went too far away from it, led by the Sons of Thatcher. Many people outside politics disapprove of the scale of 'de-regulation', and the discontent may explain some of the shift in the EU vote between 1975 and 2016. But few parties challenge it.
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the Tory right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich. The Tories will not be able to help stuffing their own and their plas pockets at the expense of the masses.
At some point, yes, the Tories will become tired, will factionalise, indulge excessively in internal politics and will start to suffer more from scandal. These things happen to all governments that have been in a long time and which face (or believe they face) weak oppositions.
However, 10 years after taking office isn't necessarily too long a time to continue to advance. In your own neck of the woods, the SNP was and is still doing that (Holyrood apart), a decade after 2007.
@rkrkrk - the NEC decides the rules of the Labour party. All it will take is for Unite to change its position on Corbyn and the current impasse there will end and an anti-Corbyn majority will exist, with no hope of it being altered. At that point, the hard left has lost.
Right... but that doesn't necessarily mean Corbyn goes does it?
Seems to me that Corbyn is in power until membership decide they prefer an alternative. The anti-Corbyn faction need to find a way to win a membership election. My feeling remains that they went far too soon with Owen Smith.
In any other party, Corbyn would have been toast well before the leadership challenge. After the Shad Cab resignations and the PLP VoNC, a leadership election had to be launched otherwise the tension between the leader and the PLP would have continued unabated for a year. The problems were (1) that the challenger was Smith, who was rubbish, and (2) that the membership were still in self-indulgent mode. The PLP (and other, better, potential leaders) have responsibility for (1) but their challenge still had to be made all the same.
Not sure I agree that the challenge had to be made.
I think the Smith challenge has made it harder to remove Corbyn. Totally played to the narrative that it was an undemocratic coup against JC - especially with the ludicrous attempts to keep him off the ballot.
If they'd waited until 2017/18 they could say... We gave him a decent chance. Theyd also be dealing with a more favourable electorate...
We know the older members views are steadily shifting against Corbyn. But also I suspect the newer members may prove to be less likely to renew.
The Left do not have the existential crisis which hit the Right in 1997. Then some right of centre voters were totally disenfranchised - those who came to be UKIP voters, and all the left of centre parties ganged up on the Conservatives with the intention of killing them outright.
The lack of self-awareness with the Lib Dems never ceases to amaze me. The informal carve-up that never was whereby the Lib Dems were effectively given a free run at formerly and now safe Conservative seats will not be forgotten by us Conservatives.
Hague thought the 2010 Coalition was suicidal for the LDs and told Fionn that on the evening of the pact. So did I for that matter although I thought reducing them to 30 seats would be Nivarnah.
So, it might take three election cycles for the left to sort themselves out. But they will do. The test of the right will be to use that 13 to 15 years to embed reform so the next Blair is less able to wreak havoc than the last one.
Those who are not of a Conservative disposition might choke on their cornflakes but the election of Blair led to the most extremist hard left government this country has ever had to face.
Seriously? I think Mr Attlee might have something to say about that.
So might Heath, Churchill, Macmillan and Wilson. Remember the Prices and Incomes Board, Marketing Boards, National Economic Plan, exchange controls or 83-98% top tax rates?
In terms of absolute position, very true. Indeed, the policies for most of Thatcher's premiership, were well to the left of those of Blair. However, I'm not sure that absolute position is the best measure alone. Some account - probably a greater degree of the comparison - has to be about direction of travel. On that basis, none of the four you mention made a substantial shift in the nation's direction. Heath wanted to but failed; the rest just tweaked (unless you count Churchill in wartime, which really was a near-command state).
I think the pendulum swung too far towards a 100% publicly-owned economy - including OTT nationalisation - then went too far away from it, led by the Sons of Thatcher. Many people outside politics disapprove of the scale of 'de-regulation', and the discontent may explain some of the shift in the EU vote between 1975 and 2016. But few parties challenge it.
I think that's a false dichotomy. You don't have to have either publicly-owned companies or Phillip Green style asset stripping and constant foreign buy outs. You need a Government that is energetic in its support of fundamental British interests and comes down hard on the more feral excesses of the British economy.
I think that May replacing Dave as PM effectively resets the clock on the Tories' time in power. New PM, cabinet, faces, policies, priorities. It all feels a bit new.
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Big issue will be finding a sensible candidate, they have NONE at present so will need to be new blood.
At this point I think sensible = non-bonkers. Surely Lab has at least a couple of those.
We'd still be inside of the same institutions, so the situation wouldn't be that much different than now. Things may change down the line as the deal becomes apparent, but I thought we were told to expect an immediate impact when A50 is invoked.
We'd still be inside of the same institutions, so the situation wouldn't be that much different than now. Things may change down the line as the deal becomes apparent, but I thought we were told to expect an immediate impact when A50 is invoked.
Remains £350m...
"Prime Minister David Cameron yesterday set out the details of the UK-EU deal in the House of Commons. He argued that the referendum would be “a straight democratic decision… Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is not on the ballot paper.” He went on to say that “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.”
We'd still be inside of the same institutions, so the situation wouldn't be that much different than now. Things may change down the line as the deal becomes apparent, but I thought we were told to expect an immediate impact when A50 is invoked.
Remains £350m...
"Prime Minister David Cameron yesterday set out the details of the UK-EU deal in the House of Commons. He argued that the referendum would be “a straight democratic decision… Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is not on the ballot paper.” He went on to say that “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.”
@RobD - an immediate triggering of A50 the day after a result that caught many by surprise would undoubtedly have been a big problem for the UK (and the EU). Thankfully, Cameron and Osborne were lying. It is now clear that in and of itself the triggering of A50 is not the issue - it's what happens next. With a devalued pound, relatively strong growth in the US and an uptick in much of Europe, it's no big surprise that manufacturing has had a good end to the year. The trick will be maintaining that once the detailed Brexit negotiating begins. If the pound stays low, that will be a help. Those calling for higher interest rates should bear this in mind.
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the Tory right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich. The Tories will not be able to help stuffing their own and their plas pockets at the expense of the masses.
At some point, yes, the Tories will become tired, will factionalise, indulge excessively in internal politics and will start to suffer more from scandal. These things happen to all governments that have been in a long time and which face (or believe they face) weak oppositions.
However, 10 years after taking office isn't necessarily too long a time to continue to advance. In your own neck of the woods, the SNP was and is still doing that (Holyrood apart), a decade after 2007.
It does indeed have a similar meme except there is no opposition party in England to stop the Tories. Labour seem to be following the sub regional office disaster policy they had in Scotland , believing it is fine to have no policies or principles whatsoever as long as you repeat SNP Bad ad infinitum. It is working just as well in England, so they will be happy.
I think that May replacing Dave as PM effectively resets the clock on the Tories' time in power. New PM, cabinet, faces, policies, priorities. It all feels a bit new.
Patrick, pity it is just another dithering fake that has replaced him.
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Big issue will be finding a sensible candidate, they have NONE at present so will need to be new blood.
At this point I think sensible = non-bonkers. Surely Lab has at least a couple of those.
I do not see any about Topping , can you name anyone that has a clue , has suggested anything remotely sensible , has a backbone , principles , etc.
Morning everyone, and happy new year. I have a digital break over xmas, but back at my desk now and looking forward to some interesting politics over next twelve months.
We'd still be inside of the same institutions, so the situation wouldn't be that much different than now. Things may change down the line as the deal becomes apparent, but I thought we were told to expect an immediate impact when A50 is invoked.
Remains £350m...
"Prime Minister David Cameron yesterday set out the details of the UK-EU deal in the House of Commons. He argued that the referendum would be “a straight democratic decision… Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is not on the ballot paper.” He went on to say that “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.”
Dave lied - no doubt about it. I do think it would have been irresponsible to trigger and then resign though. Basically waste important planning time whilst a leadership election was ongoing...
Morning everyone, and happy new year. I have a digital break over xmas, but back at my desk now and looking forward to some interesting politics over next twelve months.
In today's Telegraph Charles Moore reckons the 11 Supreme Court judges are currently split 7 to 4 in favour of parliamentary legislation to trigger Article 50. Is there any betting on this particular score?
Genuinely how does he know ?
The sc judges seem like the last people to go leaking to the press to me.
There are a lot of people involved in the iterative process by which their judgments are drafted and revised seeking a consensus so it is not impossible that there is a leak but I have my doubts.
Since Russian, ahem, "oligarchs" started throwing big money at the Chancery Division, many judges have become very sussed about marketing. This legal case is all part of the presentation, and the same can be said about Charles Moore's article. "Justified delay" because it's all ever so difficult. As if deciding on the legal merits of the idea that "only parliament can repeal what parliament enacted" actually is.
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Big issue will be finding a sensible candidate, they have NONE at present so will need to be new blood.
At this point I think sensible = non-bonkers. Surely Lab has at least a couple of those.
You could always start a list...
.....hmmmmmm.......
.....urrrrr.......
........ummmmmmm.....
......pfffffff....
.....right......
Get back to us then, when you've been able to make a start.
We'd still be inside of the same institutions, so the situation wouldn't be that much different than now. Things may change down the line as the deal becomes apparent, but I thought we were told to expect an immediate impact when A50 is invoked.
Remains £350m...
"Prime Minister David Cameron yesterday set out the details of the UK-EU deal in the House of Commons. He argued that the referendum would be “a straight democratic decision… Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is not on the ballot paper.” He went on to say that “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.”
I think that May replacing Dave as PM effectively resets the clock on the Tories' time in power. New PM, cabinet, faces, policies, priorities. It all feels a bit new.
The Left do not have the existential crisis which hit the Right in 1997. Then some right of centre voters were totally disenfranchised - those who came to be UKIP voters, and all the left of centre parties ganged up on the Conservatives with the intention of killing them outright.
The lack of self-awareness with the Lib Dems never ceases to amaze me. The informal carve-up that never was whereby the Lib Dems were effectively given a free run at formerly and now safe Conservative seats will not be forgotten by us Conservatives.
Hague thought the 2010 Coalition was suicidal for the LDs and told Fionn that on the evening of the pact. So did I for that matter although I thought reducing them to 30 seats would be Nivarnah.
So, it might take three election cycles for the left to sort themselves out. But they will do. The test of the right will be to use that 13 to 15 years to embed reform so the next Blair is less able to wreak havoc than the last one.
Those who are not of a Conservative disposition might choke on their cornflakes but the election of Blair led to the most extremist hard left government this country has ever had to face.
Seriously? I think Mr Attlee might have something to say about that.
So might Heath, Churchill, Macmillan and Wilson. Remember the Prices and Incomes Board, Marketing Boards, National Economic Plan, exchange controls or 83-98% top tax rates?
I think the pendulum swung too far towards a 100% publicly-owned economy - including OTT nationalisation - then went too far away from it, led by the Sons of Thatcher. Many people outside politics disapprove of the scale of 'de-regulation', and the discontent may explain some of the shift in the EU vote between 1975 and 2016. But few parties challenge it.
I think that's a false dichotomy. You don't have to have either publicly-owned companies or Phillip Green style asset stripping and constant foreign buy outs. You need a Government that is energetic in its support of fundamental British interests and comes down hard on the more feral excesses of the British economy.
For sure that will never be a Tory one as they are experts at the excesses.
The problem with @NickPalmer's prescription is that the electorate has made up its mind about the Labour leader and there is nothing that he can say or do that will change that. He is what he was on the day he took the reins: unelectable and, therefore, irrelevant to the national discourse. That makes the party as a whole irrelevant. The way back for Labour is long and hard, but it is doable. However, the process will not begin before the unions pull the trigger on Jeremy. There is still some time to wait for that to happen, but happen it will.
At least Nick Palmer mentioned policy. The problem for the anyone-but-Jezza wing of the Labour Party is that they are, so far as we can tell from the last two or three leadership elections, philosophically bankrupt. As Nick says, it is hard to win support for a policy vacuum. Vote Labour and win a microwave failed for Ed Miliband.
That was true back in 2015 but now we're in a new world where "don't do anything massively retarded" is a seriously under-represented policy position. Competent centrist managerialism only looks like a policy vacuum when everybody else is agreeing with it too.
@rkrkrk - the NEC decides the rules of the Labour party. All it will take is for Unite to change its position on Corbyn and the current impasse there will end and an anti-Corbyn majority will exist, with no hope of it being altered. At that point, the hard left has lost.
Right... but that doesn't necessarily mean Corbyn goes does it?
Seems to me that Corbyn is in power until membership decide they prefer an alternative. The anti-Corbyn faction need to find a way to win a membership election. My feeling remains that they went far too soon with Owen Smith.
In any other party, Corbyn would have been toast well before the leadership challenge. After the Shad Cab resignations and the PLP VoNC, a leadership election had to be launched otherwise the tension between the leader and the PLP would have continued unabated for a year. The problems were (1) that the challenger was Smith, who was rubbish, and (2) that the membership were still in self-indulgent mode. The PLP (and other, better, potential leaders) have responsibility for (1) but their challenge still had to be made all the same.
Not sure I agree that the challenge had to be made.
I think the Smith challenge has made it harder to remove Corbyn. Totally played to the narrative that it was an undemocratic coup against JC - especially with the ludicrous attempts to keep him off the ballot.
If they'd waited until 2017/18 they could say... We gave him a decent chance. Theyd also be dealing with a more favourable electorate...
We know the older members views are steadily shifting against Corbyn. But also I suspect the newer members may prove to be less likely to renew.
I'd completely agree that the challenge was extremely badly handled. However, once the VoNC was held and carried so clearly, and once Corbyn refused to go after that vote, Labour would have looked absurd had none of the 170+ MPs stepped up.
But yes, the attempt to keep him off should never have been attempted and had it been then all Corbyn's leading critics should have distanced themselves as far as possible from it. Further, the challenge should have been announced within two or three days of Corbyn's refusal to go; faffing about firstly on whether anyone was to stand and then on who it was lost momentum. And finally, Smith was the wrong choice. Eagle would have been better but others would have been better still.
I agree that there might have been a case for waiting although in reality it's not a good one: the public's views were clear enough, Corbyn will continue to do damage in between and there was/is the risk of a general election between last summer and the next.
Slightly surprising there isn't a more clear SNP replacement for her.
I guess that's (a) because it is some time off and (b) other party figures are at Westminster not Holyrood.
Yes I cannot see any great replacement at this point in time, many are competent etc but don't stand out as exceptional. They are lucky that they do have time given the lack of opposition.
The Left do not have the existential crisis which hit the Right in 1997. Then some right of centre voters were totally disenfranchised - those who came to be UKIP voters, and all the left of centre parties ganged up on the Conservatives with the intention of killing them outright.
The lack of self-awareness with the Lib Dems never ceases to amaze me. The informal carve-up that never was whereby the Lib Dems were effectively given a free run at formerly and now safe Conservative seats will not be forgotten by us Conservatives.
Hague thought the 2010 Coalition was suicidal for the LDs and told Fionn that on the evening of the pact. So did I for that matter although I thought reducing them to 30 seats would be Nivarnah.
So, it might take three election cycles for the left to sort themselves out. But they will do. The test of the right will be to use that 13 to 15 years to embed reform so the next Blair is less able to wreak havoc than the last one.
Those who are not of a Conservative disposition might choke on their cornflakes but the election of Blair led to the most extremist hard left government this country has ever had to face.
Seriously? I think Mr Attlee might have something to say about that.
So might Heath, Churchill, Macmillan and Wilson. Remember the Prices and Incomes Board, Marketing Boards, National Economic Plan, exchange controls or 83-98% top tax rates?
I think the pendulum swung too far towards a 100% publicly-owned economy - including OTT nationalisation - then went too far away from it, led by the Sons of Thatcher. Many people outside politics disapprove of the scale of 'de-regulation', and the discontent may explain some of the shift in the EU vote between 1975 and 2016. But few parties challenge it.
I think that's a false dichotomy. You don't have to have either publicly-owned companies or Phillip Green style asset stripping and constant foreign buy outs. You need a Government that is energetic in its support of fundamental British interests and comes down hard on the more feral excesses of the British economy.
For sure that will never be a Tory one as they are experts at the excesses.
They are far too comfortable in many cases with some of the excesses, yes. But I don't believe it's a universal view.
Dithering fake Hmm....Yes and No in my view. May is certainly doing a splendid job of saying absolutely nothing about Brexit. Nobody yet knows if this is because she has nothing to say or is forced to keep mum until negotiations get started. Either way we're set for a Q1 A50 and kick-off. With maybe a vote pretty soon if the supreme court uphold the view that she needs one. Fake? I don't see it. A bit authoritarian, matronly, illiberal? Yes. But not really fake. She comes across as she is. Vicar's daughter. Bit stiff. Decent. Dull. Determined. Way less political than Dave and Ozzy. I quite like her. At least she has putting respecting our vote at the heart of her premiership.
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Big issue will be finding a sensible candidate, they have NONE at present so will need to be new blood.
At this point I think sensible = non-bonkers. Surely Lab has at least a couple of those.
You could always start a list...
.....hmmmmmm.......
.....urrrrr.......
........ummmmmmm.....
......pfffffff....
.....right......
Get back to us then, when you've been able to make a start.
Morning everyone, and happy new year. I have a digital break over xmas, but back at my desk now and looking forward to some interesting politics over next twelve months.
Back to work, back to PB?
PB today. Work tomorrow. Today will be spent dealing with all the post-xmas bills and so on :-(
I think that May replacing Dave as PM effectively resets the clock on the Tories' time in power. New PM, cabinet, faces, policies, priorities. It all feels a bit new.
Just like when Gordon Brown replaced Tony...
Or much closer to home, when Major replaced Maggie.
Nick Palmer was spot on in saying that Labour has no policies in the minds of the voters. I have more than a passing interest in politics, but I'm fairly stumped about what Labour has said since May 2015. There was nuclear subs without nuclear missiles. That was a doozy. Then there was something about armed police having to get written permission in triplicate before they could shoot bullets - and that decision then being supported before pulling the trigger by several committees, including a health and safety assessment to make sure no-one was going to get hurt. (I may be a little hazy on this one. But then, so are the voters.)
The only other thing of note from Labour was a Referendum campaign where the Leader said of course he was going to vote to stay in the massively underwhelming EU, with his fingers crossed behind his back.
Oh yes, and something from Corbyn about the delights of unlimited immigration. The voters might have heard that one.
The Left do not have the existential crisis which hit the Right in 1997. Then some right of centre voters were totally disenfranchised - those who came to be UKIP voters, and all the left of centre parties ganged up on the Conservatives with the intention of killing them outright.
The lack of self-awareness with the Lib Dems never ceases to amaze me. The informal carve-up that never was whereby the Lib Dems were effectively given a free run at formerly and now safe Conservative seats will not be forgotten by us Conservatives.
Hague thought the 2010 Coalition was suicidal for the LDs and told Fionn that on the evening of the pact. So did I for that matter although I thought reducing them to 30 seats would be Nivarnah.
So, it might take three election cycles for the left to sort themselves out. But they will do. The test of the right will be to use that 13 to 15 years to embed reform so the next Blair is less able to wreak havoc than the last one.
Those who are not of a Conservative disposition might choke on their cornflakes but the election of Blair led to the most extremist hard left government this country has ever had to face.
Seriously? I think Mr Attlee might have something to say about that.
So might Heath, Churchill, Macmillan and Wilson. Remember the Prices and Incomes Board, Marketing Boards, National Economic Plan, exchange controls or 83-98% top tax rates?
I think that's a false dichotomy. You don't have to have either publicly-owned companies or Phillip Green style asset stripping and constant foreign buy outs. You need a Government that is energetic in its support of fundamental British interests and comes down hard on the more feral excesses of the British economy.
For sure that will never be a Tory one as they are experts at the excesses.
They are far too comfortable in many cases with some of the excesses, yes. But I don't believe it's a universal view.
If they were as tough on the tax cheats, their chums excesses etc as they are on people on benefits you could see the point. The fact that they blame everything on benefits claimants whilst assisting tax cheats etc says it all.
@rkrkrk - the NEC decides the rules of the Labour party. All it will take is for Unite to change its position on Corbyn and the current impasse there will end and an anti-Corbyn majority will exist, with no hope of it being altered. At that point, the hard left has lost.
Right... but that doesn't necessarily mean Corbyn goes does it?
Seems to me that Corbyn is in power until membership decide they prefer an alternative. The anti-Corbyn faction need to find a way to win a membership election. My feeling remains that they went far too soon with Owen Smith.
but their challenge still had to be made all the same.
Not sure I agree that the challenge had to be made.
I think the Smith challenge has made it harder to remove Corbyn. Totally played to the narrative that it was an undemocratic coup against JC - especially with the ludicrous attempts to keep him off the ballot.
If they'd waited until 2017/18 they could say... We gave him a decent chance. Theyd also be dealing with a more favourable electorate...
We know the older members views are steadily shifting against Corbyn. But also I suspect the newer members may prove to be less likely to renew.
I'd completely agree that the challenge was extremely badly handled. However, once the VoNC was held and carried so clearly, and once Corbyn refused to go after that vote, Labour would have looked absurd had none of the 170+ MPs stepped up.
But yes, the attempt to keep him off should never have been attempted and had it been then all Corbyn's leading critics should have distanced themselves as far as possible from it. Further, the challenge should have been announced within two or three days of Corbyn's refusal to go; faffing about firstly on whether anyone was to stand and then on who it was lost momentum. And finally, Smith was the wrong choice. Eagle would have been better but others would have been better still.
I agree that there might have been a case for waiting although in reality it's not a good one: the public's views were clear enough, Corbyn will continue to do damage in between and there was/is the risk of a general election between last summer and the next.
Yes I agree with that.
To me... Corbyn clinging on after a VoNC was not especially unpredictable. He is right to see this as a once in a lifetime opportunity and was also clearly right that the membership still supported him. But I can see why MPs thought differently - even now I doubt they really understand his world view.
The ideal Corbyn challenger is probably a woman, solid left wing credentials, has worked outside politics and a great communicator. Possibly also not from London.
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the TorySNP right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Mr. P, got to say I think the Le Pen and Merkel bets are very unlikely to come off. Unsure how the Dutch system works. Can see Wilders getting plenty of seats, unsure if that'd be enough for him to be PM.
Corbyn was challenged because Labour MPs were concerned that following Cameron's resignation there was every chance a general election would be called by the end of 2016 and Labour would be wiped out. That was (and is) a very reasonable concern. Eagle was not the choice because she voted for the Iraq war. That in and of itself guaranteed her defeat.
This is what I wrote on PB just after Corbyn was re-elected. I think it is still pretty much right, though I would no longer put Owen Jones in the Corbyn come what may camp.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
Still think that we are going to be looking at 1% growth in real terms this year? We may be very close to that in Q1. There is a surprising amount of momentum in the UK economy coming into the year. Better growth in the EZ will undoubtedly help.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the TorySNP right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich.
Fixed it for you.....
Only a myopic right wing junta Tory could try to say the SNP are right wing, you will have much more wailing and gnashing of teeth as your chums remain friendless in Scotland going forward.
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Big issue will be finding a sensible candidate, they have NONE at present so will need to be new blood.
At this point I think sensible = non-bonkers. Surely Lab has at least a couple of those.
I do not see any about Topping , can you name anyone that has a clue , has suggested anything remotely sensible , has a backbone , principles , etc.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
The Labour leadership has strong views on policy, like unilateral disarmament, but the bulk of the party doesn't want to publicise these views to the electorate.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
Still think that we are going to be looking at 1% growth in real terms this year? We may be very close to that in Q1. There is a surprising amount of momentum in the UK economy coming into the year. Better growth in the EZ will undoubtedly help.
If the EZ is growing with, presumably our general trade helping this along, and we make life for our traders harder, who does that hurt more?
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
Given that that is clearly not what it meant you are a self-confessed complete imbecile of the highest order.
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Big issue will be finding a sensible candidate, they have NONE at present so will need to be new blood.
At this point I think sensible = non-bonkers. Surely Lab has at least a couple of those.
I do not see any about Topping , can you name anyone that has a clue , has suggested anything remotely sensible , has a backbone , principles , etc.
So we must look to a known unknown. Someone from some kind of public institution, think tank, etc who will emerge. Time is tight I grant you.
Hard to see them changing if Scotland is anything to go by. They seem to have a death wish, supporting the Tories and going against good policies just because the SNP introduce them is just killing what little is left. They seem bereft of any common sense or political ideals whatsoever other than saying the voters are stupid but will realise one day. Instead of challenging for government they are struggling to be the 3rd party in Scotland , surely the ignomy of the Lib Dumbs beating them in elections will finally shake of their stupidity. They just do not seem to learn and cannot get over the fact that they are crap.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
Still think that we are going to be looking at 1% growth in real terms this year? We may be very close to that in Q1. There is a surprising amount of momentum in the UK economy coming into the year. Better growth in the EZ will undoubtedly help.
That must be 3% growth in the first three quarters followed by minus 2% in the fourth quarter - equals 1% growth for 2017. QED
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
Given that that is clearly not what it meant you are a self-confessed complete imbecile of the highest order.
So if you say to your kids "You can rightly expect that if we are all still alive on Christmas Day you will get the presents on your list"... then you leave home on Christmas morning before they wake up having spent all the money on booze, that wouldn't be telling a lie?
Oh the lengths people will go to not to concede defeat. It used to be something to be ashamed of, being a bad sport.
The Labour leadership has strong views on policy, like unilateral disarmament, but the bulk of the party doesn't want to publicise these views to the electorate.
Usual stupid fudge where they pretend to be against them but then vote for them and say they will only give them up when everybody else does. Shows lack of principles, backbone etc and explains why they are where they are. In Scotland they even abstain / vote against their own policies if the SNP approve of them.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
Given that that is clearly not what it meant you are a self-confessed complete imbecile of the highest order.
So if you say to your kids "You can rightly expect that if we are all still alive on Christmas Day you will get the presents on your list"... then you leave home on Christmas morning before they wake up, that wouldn't be telling a lie?
Oh the lengths people will go to not to concede defeat. It used to be something to be ashamed of, being a bad sport.
A revealing analogy. Do you take the British people for small children believing in Father Christmas?
Stick to the oeuvre of Enoch Powell. You might even learn a thing or two about lying.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
I'm amazed that Leavers are in a frightful huff over this. During the campaign, Dave's intention of invoking Article 50 at once was unanimously derided as a threat with the added consequence of scuppering Britain's negotiating position. And we now know that it would have been subject to no end of legal challenges. The Leavers should be doffing their caps to Dave, in gratitude of his change of heart.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
Still think that we are going to be looking at 1% growth in real terms this year? We may be very close to that in Q1. There is a surprising amount of momentum in the UK economy coming into the year. Better growth in the EZ will undoubtedly help.
That must be 3% growth in the first three quarters followed by minus 2% in the fourth quarter - equals 1% growth for 2017. QED
Think that would still work out more than 1% for the year. But yes, I do agree with Robert that there is a risk of a slow down by the end of 2017. I am just not persuaded it will necessarily be particularly severe, particularly if the EZ starts to increase demand.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
Given that that is clearly not what it meant you are a self-confessed complete imbecile of the highest order.
So if you say to your kids "You can rightly expect that if we are all still alive on Christmas Day you will get the presents on your list"... then you leave home on Christmas morning before they wake up, that wouldn't be telling a lie?
Oh the lengths people will go to not to concede defeat. It used to be something to be ashamed of, being a bad sport.
A revealing analogy. Do you take the British people for small children believing in Father Christmas?
Stick to the oeuvre of Enoch Powell. You might even learn a thing or two about lying.
A fictional anti-FN film set for release next month may have an effect on voting in the French presidential election. The heroine seems to be more comparable to Marion Maréchal-Le Pen than Marine. There is likely to be some "culture" on the FN side too. Step forward Michel Houellebecq?
The real-life Marion - incarnating Marianne for some markets - may get to play a big role. Ou le burkini, ou la Marion?
The FN campaign won't be a carbon copy of Trump's. Sexism doesn't function the same way in France as in the US. For one thing, the actual concept of "sexism" hardly exists there.
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
Still think that we are going to be looking at 1% growth in real terms this year? We may be very close to that in Q1. There is a surprising amount of momentum in the UK economy coming into the year. Better growth in the EZ will undoubtedly help.
If the EZ is growing with, presumably our general trade helping this along, and we make life for our traders harder, who does that hurt more?
Not an easy question to answer. We run a massive trade deficit with the EU and are better with the rest of the world. If EU/UK trade was reduced this might, in theory, reduce our trade deficit and create a net increase in demand for domestic producers. I personally think this would only have been true when the EZ was persistently growing more slowly than the UK (as it has over the last several years) giving their producers better opportunities every year than our own producers were getting in return. If the EZ starts to grow at a rate closer to the UK any net gain will be very marginal at best.
An expanding UK market, however, may well encourage the EU to agree a free trade agreement. Expanding EU demand should also encourage our negotiators to prioritise free trade.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
@DecrepitJohnL - The left has won most of the policy argument inside Labour, that is a Corbyn achievement. The party is well to the left of where someone like me would want it, but I accept that. The problem Labour has is that its policies are utterly irrelevant: no-one is listening to anything it says because of who its leader is. Corbyn brings too much baggage and seems utterly alien to most voters, and has absolutely no interest in engaging beyond his comfort zone. He and the people who surround him guarantee that Labour will not get a hearing. It is incumbent on the left to find a better leader. The idea that anyone inside the PLP who opposed Corbyn's leadership is a Red Tory and a Blairite is ridiculous.
That's why the centre-right is mistaken to oppose making it easier to ensure a left-wing candidate can contest a future election. If it appears that the PLP will block any left-wing candidate (and vague assurances are not enough - I am not especially cynical about politicians but vagueness is not an option here), then Corbyn will think it his duty to stay on, regardless of personal comfort or wishes. For him even to consider stepping down at some point, it needs to be clear that it's possible for the left to compete for the succession.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
Given that that is clearly not what it meant you are a self-confessed complete imbecile of the highest order.
So if you say to your kids "You can rightly expect that if we are all still alive on Christmas Day you will get the presents on your list"... then you leave home on Christmas morning before they wake up, that wouldn't be telling a lie?
Oh the lengths people will go to not to concede defeat. It used to be something to be ashamed of, being a bad sport.
A revealing analogy. Do you take the British people for small children believing in Father Christmas?
Stick to the oeuvre of Enoch Powell. You might even learn a thing or two about lying.
Not really that revealing. I never mentioned Father Christmas .. a revealing misinterpretation on your part.
You lost the referendum, then the leader of your side broke his word. Hard to take, but try some dignity x
Julian the Apostate ultimately failed in both his religious/social and military objectives. But he's generally viewed sympathetically, partly due to his character and his earlier successes. (He also won the best civil war victory in history, when the emperor became fatally ill and named Julian his successor before a battle was fought).
Cameron won a shock majority against Labour, created the first coalition since the War (which was far more stable than many expected), and won the campaign to keep Scotland in the UK.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
The complaint is that, as PM he said this
"Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is not on the ballot paper.” He went on to say that “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away"
Yet his disciples are now doing everything they can to delay A50/get a 2nd referendum.
Comments
http://www.enochpowell.net/fr-28.html
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
Now I really must be going.
The problems with using that imagery as a campaign are that (1) by 2015, experience had shown the Lib Dems to be generally unwilling to play the sort of games that the SNP were threatening to; something which tied into the respective philosophies of the parties and which, hence, had electoral traction; (2) in 2010, it wasn't a viable threat because the public liked Clegg; having Cameron in his pocket might well have been seen as a positive; and (3) in 2015, even if Clegg personally and the Lib Dems as a party were unpopular, the notion of them as a moderating influence might still have been a net vote-winner - indeed, that was a major part of their campaign, and parties rarely use campaigning material that might be considered a smear against them.
Seems to me that Corbyn is in power until membership decide they prefer an alternative. The anti-Corbyn faction need to find a way to win a membership election. My feeling remains that they went far too soon with Owen Smith.
And as MD has pointed out, it's usually been the left that's been overstated when there has been an error (though it's notable that the exception to that historic trend is, I think, 1983, and that also Boris was overstated vs Ken in 2012, suggesting that unpopular Labour candidates might outperform their polling when that polling is itself weak).
Will probably have to be over two pages. It's not very deep, but William and Stephen losing about 7 siblings between them makes it quite wide (and I'd prefer, if possible, to put the main Penmere branch and Esden lines on the same page).
"We're doomed, I tell yer....."
[ducks]
Next Scottish First Minister British
Ruth Davidson
6/1
Stewart Hosie
10/1
Humza Yousaf
10/1
Shona Robison
10/1
Angus Robertson
12/1
Mhairi Black
12/1
John Swinney
12/1
Derek Mackay
12/1
Michael Matheson
12/1
Alex Salmond
20/1
Keith Brown
25/1
Kezia Dugdale
33/1
Hear that KLAXON
However, 10 years after taking office isn't necessarily too long a time to continue to advance. In your own neck of the woods, the SNP was and is still doing that (Holyrood apart), a decade after 2007.
Slightly surprising there isn't a more clear SNP replacement for her.
I guess that's (a) because it is some time off and (b) other party figures are at Westminster not Holyrood.
I think the Smith challenge has made it harder to remove Corbyn. Totally played to the narrative that it was an undemocratic coup against JC - especially with the ludicrous attempts to keep him off the ballot.
If they'd waited until 2017/18 they could say... We gave him a decent chance. Theyd also be dealing with a more favourable electorate...
We know the older members views are steadily shifting against Corbyn. But also I suspect the newer members may prove to be less likely to renew.
"Prime Minister David Cameron yesterday set out the details of the UK-EU deal in the House of Commons. He argued that the referendum would be “a straight democratic decision… Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is not on the ballot paper.” He went on to say that “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.”
http://openeurope.org.uk/daily-shakeup/cameron-government-would-promptly-trigger-article-50-in-the-event-of-a-leave-vote/
Unless there is money to be made.
It is working just as well in England, so they will be happy.
I do think it would have been irresponsible to trigger and then resign though. Basically waste important planning time whilst a leadership election was ongoing...
.....hmmmmmm.......
.....urrrrr.......
........ummmmmmm.....
......pfffffff....
.....right......
Get back to us then, when you've been able to make a start.
NO 2nd renegotiation
NO 2nd referendum
NO delay in triggering A50
So what are they talking about, these Lammyites?
Just like when Gordon Brown replaced Tony...
But yes, the attempt to keep him off should never have been attempted and had it been then all Corbyn's leading critics should have distanced themselves as far as possible from it. Further, the challenge should have been announced within two or three days of Corbyn's refusal to go; faffing about firstly on whether anyone was to stand and then on who it was lost momentum. And finally, Smith was the wrong choice. Eagle would have been better but others would have been better still.
I agree that there might have been a case for waiting although in reality it's not a good one: the public's views were clear enough, Corbyn will continue to do damage in between and there was/is the risk of a general election between last summer and the next.
Hmm....Yes and No in my view.
May is certainly doing a splendid job of saying absolutely nothing about Brexit. Nobody yet knows if this is because she has nothing to say or is forced to keep mum until negotiations get started. Either way we're set for a Q1 A50 and kick-off. With maybe a vote pretty soon if the supreme court uphold the view that she needs one.
Fake? I don't see it. A bit authoritarian, matronly, illiberal? Yes. But not really fake. She comes across as she is. Vicar's daughter. Bit stiff. Decent. Dull. Determined. Way less political than Dave and Ozzy. I quite like her. At least she has putting respecting our vote at the heart of her premiership.
The only other thing of note from Labour was a Referendum campaign where the Leader said of course he was going to vote to stay in the massively underwhelming EU, with his fingers crossed behind his back.
Oh yes, and something from Corbyn about the delights of unlimited immigration. The voters might have heard that one.
To me... Corbyn clinging on after a VoNC was not especially unpredictable. He is right to see this as a once in a lifetime opportunity and was also clearly right that the membership still supported him. But I can see why MPs thought differently - even now I doubt they really understand his world view.
The ideal Corbyn challenger is probably a woman, solid left wing credentials, has worked outside politics and a great communicator. Possibly also not from London.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
This is what I wrote on PB just after Corbyn was re-elected. I think it is still pretty much right, though I would no longer put Owen Jones in the Corbyn come what may camp.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/09/25/joff-wild-says-the-key-to-a-labour-moderate-fightback-is-understanding-the-corbyn-tribes/
So we must look to a known unknown. Someone from some kind of public institution, think tank, etc who will emerge. Time is tight I grant you.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/the-10-maddest-things-done-by-students-this-year/19141
I hadn't heard of a couple of these horrors, and winced when reminded of others.
Oh the lengths people will go to not to concede defeat. It used to be something to be ashamed of, being a bad sport.
Stick to the oeuvre of Enoch Powell. You might even learn a thing or two about lying.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Apart of course from the PMI numbers, which are despite our still being full members of the crippling, failed institutions of the EU...
The real-life Marion - incarnating Marianne for some markets - may get to play a big role. Ou le burkini, ou la Marion?
The FN campaign won't be a carbon copy of Trump's. Sexism doesn't function the same way in France as in the US. For one thing, the actual concept of "sexism" hardly exists there.
An expanding UK market, however, may well encourage the EU to agree a free trade agreement. Expanding EU demand should also encourage our negotiators to prioritise free trade.
So another lie.
You lost the referendum, then the leader of your side broke his word. Hard to take, but try some dignity x
Julian the Apostate ultimately failed in both his religious/social and military objectives. But he's generally viewed sympathetically, partly due to his character and his earlier successes. (He also won the best civil war victory in history, when the emperor became fatally ill and named Julian his successor before a battle was fought).
Cameron won a shock majority against Labour, created the first coalition since the War (which was far more stable than many expected), and won the campaign to keep Scotland in the UK.
"Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is not on the ballot paper.” He went on to say that “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away"
Yet his disciples are now doing everything they can to delay A50/get a 2nd referendum.
Be a good sport, bad losers are very un British