Hi, I'm DC Squires, WMP FGM expert. For clarity @WMPolice WILL prosecute parents or cutters if in the child's best interests. #FGMletstalk
So... if it is not in the child's best interests to prosecute then the FGM goes unchallenged?
Unbelievable!
When is it in the child's interest to get mutilated?
And why is it treated differently to any other sexual abuse of a child by their family?
Didn't we learn with 1,400 children abused in Rotherham what happens when we ignore abuse for "cultural reasons"?
It may conceivably not be in the child's best interest to prosecute. But it is in the best interests of countless hundreds of other Muslim baby girls that this abhorrent practice be stampede out wherever it rears its ugly head.
What gets the back of many Leavers up I am sure, is the endless attempts to overturn BrExit in the same way as people would object if the losing voters at a General Election tried to overturn the result.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with the results of a plebiscite, but to respect the democratic mandate given by the voters, and then campaign for something new to happen going forward, be it election a different party at the next GE, or to rejoin the EU, or join the EEA, nothing wrong with that at all. What is wrong is to try by every legal wheeze and dodge to overturn the choice the voters made before it even happens.
The Labour wins a GE the Tories dont run off to court and trying to prove that they won really and it was all a terrible mistake. Labour takes office and Tories start to campaign to get elected at the next election.
I understand why you have described the result as a moral disaster. While I share your concerns about xenophobia etc I find I cannot describe the result of a referendum in a democratic country such as Britain as a moral disaster, though it may turn out to be an economic one. Whatever my own feelings I found it a good thing that so many people who had not previously voted decided to vote. Voter engagement is a good thing. Those who didn't manage to engage the voters to agree with them need to ask some hard questions of themselves.
While one can deplore how immigration and immigrants are discussed I think it is also a democratic disaster and - if you want to talk in these terms - a moral disaster - not to take account of people's views on subjects as important as immigration. It is not something which is or should be off limits as a subject for political debate.
I agree that it is a shame that too many Leavers in government are not willing to listen to sensible advice. This does not bode well. Still, this is my country and I want it to do well for mine and my childrens' sake. Nothing I say or write matters. Still, I have spent my working life trying to find solutions for problems caused by others so I'm not tremendously fond of people standing on the side saying what a mess it all is rather than trying to help.
A point I have made a few times here. As of now, Leavers can't make Brexit work while Remainers don't want to. Leavers have never accepted Brexit has consequences and are incapable of dealing with those consequences because they don't think they exist. Theresa May is an honorary member of that category for slightly different reasons. She has never explained why the issues she had with leaving the EU are no longer there. Remainers think the project is a bad one, not of their own making, and don't see why they should get involved, especially when they are going be blamed for any downsides anyway.
It's a bum situation to be in. I suppose it could change.
"She has never explained why the issues she had with leaving the EU are no longer there."
Exactly. Was it her not-for-the-public speech to Goldman Sachs , where she explained the perils of leaving the EU ?
One explanation: It suits her politically as she can be the PM.
When Aids first started spreading often through shared needles they quickly discovered that draconian punishments had no effect. Advertising campaigns free needles free condoms and education worked much better.
I have a friend who is working on a documentary about it at the moment. It's at a very early stage but I've talked to her about it and it's much more complicated than just locking them up.
Young girls are already being sent abroad. The point of health checks - particularly if coupled with strict liability - is that they make it clear that this will be uncovered. The authorities will not be dependant on girls complaining about it or having to give evidence against their parents. Plus it gives the authorities a chance to stop it happening to others in the family. Courts can remove passports, for instance. Parents lose control of their children.
Education is necessary but it is not sufficient. Those who do this (women) - with a razor - with no pain relief know how painful it is. They don't need to be told that. They know that sometimes girls die. They know what it means for their sex lives and childbirth. They believe that it is necessary to be "clean". It is hard to change that mentality just through some education and it may take a very long time. This is being done by people who are often born and educated here and have lived here a long time. And in the meanwhile girls are suffering horribly. So there needs to be a reset of the mentality. A shock is needed. A price has to be paid so as to get it across that it is cruel and dangerous and a crime and, above all, that it will not be tolerated. Prosecutions, the loss of control over children will help change the cultural mentality rather more rapidly than any number of posters.
Aids is not analogous. That was a public health problem and all parties - the users and the state - had a common interest in stopping its spread. What you describe was a sensible pragmatic solution which worked.
FGM has been a crime in the UK for a long time now. It is still going on and no-one has been successfully prosecuted. Making a law has not worked. So something else is needed. What I have proposed gets round a lot of the problems with the existing law e.g. having to prove who did it, forcing a child to give evidence against her parents etc. Rather than just emote about it we need to take action because I simply am not prepared to accept that in 21st century Britain we permit such barbaric crimes to be perpetrated against young girls and babies because we're worried about religious or cultural sensitivities. The interests of the girls comes first.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
In these febrile times people will not allow for him to be anything other than hero or villain. Truth is I think he was a decent enough PM who wasn't up to the greatest challenge he faced and failed as a result, but to hear people now you'd think he had no positives, which is nonsense. I've seen elected conservatives publicly scoff when opponents quote something cameron said to criticise them, when a year earlier they'd have been bootlicking in all probability.
Cameron did something very important for the Conservative Party: he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life. I did not like his polices on welfare, and how austerity was implemented. But what he did with the modernisation of the Conservative Party was a great thing. When you look at the direction of the GOP, and the British Conservative Party you have to be thankful for what he did. Right now because of the mess Labour's in Britain is currently a one-party state. We'll obviously have to wait and see what Brexit brings, but so far the government could be far more radical and right-wing than it actually is. When I look at what Trump is doing I'm honestly very happy that things are more 'normal' here. If anything Trump has made me even more anti-Corbyn than I was before. I don't want a political revolution where everything is radically turned over. Liberal Democracy is not perfect, but it is much better than any of the alternatives that I have seen so far.
That's right before Cameron there had never been a leader of the Conservatives who was female or Jewish or foreign born or from a 'down market' background.
On thread - this has to be just about the best constituencies for Corbyn's brand of Labour outside London (along with, perhaps, one or two in Brighton and Bristol). Students, Muslims and Chorlton-types all in one constituency. I know a fella - in his forties - who lives here who actually owns and sometimes wears a 'Jeremy Corbyn for Prime Minister' t-shirt.
I understand why you have described the result as a moral disaster. While I share your concerns about xenophobia etc I find I cannot describe the result of a referendum in a democratic country such as Britain as a moral disaster, though it may turn out to be an economic one. Whatever my own feelings I found it a good thing that so many people who had not previously voted decided to vote. Voter engagement is a good thing. Those who didn't manage to engage the voters to agree with them need to ask some hard questions of themselves.
While one can deplore how immigration and immigrants are discussed I think it is also a democratic disaster and - if you want to talk in these terms - a moral disaster - not to take account of people's views on subjects as important as immigration. It is not something which is or should be off limits as a subject for political debate.
I agree that it is a shame that too many Leavers in government are not willing to listen to sensible advice. This does not bode well. Still, this is my country and I want it to do well for mine and my childrens' sake. Nothing I say or write matters. Still, I have spent my working life trying to find solutions for problems caused by others so I'm not tremendously fond of people standing on the side saying what a mess it all is rather than trying to help.
A point I have made a few times here. As of now, Leavers can't make Brexit work while Remainers don't want to. Leavers have never accepted Brexit has consequences and are incapable of dealing with those consequences because they don't think they exist. Theresa May is an honorary member of that category for slightly different reasons. She has never explained why the issues she had with leaving the EU are no longer there. Remainers think the project is a bad one, not of their own making, and don't see why they should get involved, especially when they are going be blamed for any downsides anyway.
It's a bum situation to be in. I suppose it could change.
"She has never explained why the issues she had with leaving the EU are no longer there."
Exactly. Was it her not-for-the-public speech to Goldman Sachs , where she explained the perils of leaving the EU ?
One explanation: It suits her politically as she can be the PM.
Perhaps she's simply more of an egotist that we thought. She wants to roll the dice with even higher stakes than Cameron did just so she can go down as the woman who did what they said couldn't be done.
Miss Cyclefree, I said "The Merchants" as in Chaucer below...
And it is a brilliant choice.
So we have:-
- The Millers - The Merchants - The Franks (as per Mr Meeks below and in honour of his previous name. Plus it is v close the Franklins so I hope he will forgive me and it has a certain European feel to it so rather comme il faut, I feel).
There we go.
If only Brexit turns out to be that easy.....
What about the Brexiteer categories?
- The Faragiste Firestarters: Those whose primary goal is simply the destruction of the EU and couldn't care less what else gets destroyed in the process. - The Hannanite Hypocrites: Those who are happy to give away sovereignty as long as it's to people who are white and speak English. - The Duncan Smith Dunces: Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.
Don't forget the Old Families: that care for an protect their people and have been appalled by the behaviour of the country's leaders for a generation.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
It's because he spent years pretending he only wanted to stay in the EU if it was reformed, and then having failed to achieve any reform, went full Meeks.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
In these febrile times people will not allow for him to be anything other than hero or villain. Truth is I think he was a decent enough PM who wasn't up to the greatest challenge he faced and failed as a result, but to hear people now you'd think he had no positives, which is nonsense. I've seen elected conservatives publicly scoff when opponents quote something cameron said to criticise them, when a year earlier they'd have been bootlicking in all probability.
Cameron did something very important for the Conservative Party: he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life. I did not like his polices on welfare, and how austerity was implemented. But what he did with the modernisation of the Conservative Party was a great thing. When you look at the direction of the GOP, and the British Conservative Party you have to be thankful for what he did. Right now because of the mess Labour's in Britain is currently a one-party state. We'll obviously have to wait and see what Brexit brings, but so far the government could be far more radical and right-wing than it actually is. When I look at what Trump is doing I'm honestly very happy that things are more 'normal' here. If anything Trump has made me even more anti-Corbyn than I was before. I don't want a political revolution where everything is radically turned over. Liberal Democracy is not perfect, but it is much better than any of the alternatives that I have seen so far.
That's right before Cameron there had never been a leader of the Conservatives who was female or Jewish or foreign born or from a 'down market' background.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
I am not a Conservative, but maybe it is because he said he would stay on and implement the result, and trigger article 50 immediately.
When someone makes promises such as that then breaks them and runs away, I guess people go off them
Its not just that. It's the fact he was so arrogant. The Remain campaign he ran was taking is all for fools trying to pretend he got an amazing deal from the E.U. lying about project fear "ww3 because Brexit" ffs then he gave gongs to Remain campaign leaders which just epitomised his out of touchness. Basically he was always a twat but we beared him because he won elections.
Leavers have never accepted Brexit has consequences and are incapable of dealing with those consequences because they don't think they exist.
That's debatable.
The difference, as I see it, is that Leavers often see that there are two sides to each change. Remainers seem to only ever perceive a negative.
The constant hysteria about the movement of sterling was a prime example.
Yes, it adds to costs of foreign travel and imports as a negative - but it also invites domestic and inward bound tourism, along with providing a boost to exports as a positive.
This applies to many of the areas under discussion.
There is an almost constant struggle to get people to see both sides.
Hi, I'm DC Squires, WMP FGM expert. For clarity @WMPolice WILL prosecute parents or cutters if in the child's best interests. #FGMletstalk
So... if it is not in the child's best interests to prosecute then the FGM goes unchallenged?
Unbelievable!
When is it in the child's interest to get mutilated?
And why is it treated differently to any other sexual abuse of a child by their family?
Didn't we learn with 1,400 children abused in Rotherham what happens when we ignore abuse for "cultural reasons"?
It may conceivably not be in the child's best interest to prosecute. But it is in the best interests of countless hundreds of other Muslim baby girls that this abhorrent practice be stampede out wherever it rears its ugly head.
FGM is not a specifically Muslim thing. It is practiced amongst Christian groups from certain parts of East Africa. So I think it is more a cultural than a strictly religious issue, though the two may be intertwined to a certain extent for some groups.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
They used Cameron to get what they wanted - Brexit. Once the Tories won the election it was odds-on that we would leave the EU. If any of the Tory turncoats that campaigned for Leave took the place of Cameron in GE15, Ed Milliband would now be PM with a comfortable majority and this country would have a brighter and more prosperous future. The scum (as that is what they really are) used Cameron and dumped him at the first chance.
Miss Cyclefree, I said "The Merchants" as in Chaucer below...
And it is a brilliant choice.
So we have:-
- The Millers - The Merchants - The Franks (as per Mr Meeks below and in honour of his previous name. Plus it is v close the Franklins so I hope he will forgive me and it has a certain European feel to it so rather comme il faut, I feel).
There we go.
If only Brexit turns out to be that easy.....
What about the Brexiteer categories?
- The Faragiste Firestarters: Those whose primary goal is simply the destruction of the EU and couldn't care less what else gets destroyed in the process. - The Hannanite Hypocrites: Those who are happy to give away sovereignty as long as it's to people who are white and speak English. - The Duncan Smith Dunces: Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.
Don't forget the Old Families: that care for an protect their people and have been appalled by the behaviour of the country's leaders for a generation.
Ah yes, the Possessive Patricians who don't want to share 'their' people.
Agree entirely. A worrying symptom born of the insane idea that children can be considered adherents of a religion "a Muslim child" "a Jewish child" "A Christian child" etc.
If children wish to be religious, let them choose to become so at age 18.
+1
I was confirmed at 14. There's nothing odd about being a Christian child.
Hi, I'm DC Squires, WMP FGM expert. For clarity @WMPolice WILL prosecute parents or cutters if in the child's best interests. #FGMletstalk
So... if it is not in the child's best interests to prosecute then the FGM goes unchallenged?
Unbelievable!
When is it in the child's interest to get mutilated?
And why is it treated differently to any other sexual abuse of a child by their family?
Didn't we learn with 1,400 children abused in Rotherham what happens when we ignore abuse for "cultural reasons"?
It may conceivably not be in the child's best interest to prosecute. But it is in the best interests of countless hundreds of other Muslim baby girls that this abhorrent practice be stampede out wherever it rears its ugly head.
FGM is not a specifically Muslim thing. It is practiced amongst Christian groups from certain parts of East Africa. So I think it is more a cultural than a strictly religious issue, though the two may be intertwined to a certain extent for some groups.
Well this is very interesting, and touches on something I've been wondering for some time - would the Islamic region of the world be just as culturally backward if some other religion had got there instead? Does Islam make the Middle East (and surrounding area) backward, or does the Middle East make Islam backward? Your point suggests perhaps the latter.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
They used Cameron to get what they wanted - Brexit. Once the Tories won the election it was odds-on that we would leave the EU. If any of the Tory turncoats that campaigned for Leave took the place of Cameron in GE15, Ed Milliband would now be PM with a comfortable majority and this country would have a brighter and more prosperous future. The scum (as that is what they really are) used Cameron and dumped him at the first chance.
It is these people that are the true traitors!
Yes, I think it's unlikely that many of those who campaigned for Leave would have been able to deliver a Conservative majority. Perhaps Boris would have been able as the last I read he had quite good approval numbers.
What a stupid thing to say. Brexit is going to happen in some form and any responsible adult Remainer is trying to optimise the way in which it happens. Unless you intend to migrate permanently to Hungary (and I am surprised you can live comfortably with the idea even of having a holiday home there, given their new migrants-in-shipping-containers policy) you need to grow up and do the same. The attitude that you and your "group" are too fine and fastidious to engage with the awful working man and his dreary lower-class stabs at political thought really paid off in the referendum itself, didn't it? The first thing you need to take on board is that Brexit is YOUR fault; Leave didn't win the referendum, you lost it. At the moment you sound like an Ingerland supporter complaining that the exit from the Euros last year was Iceland's fault. If you and your "group" (eeeurgh at the term) had for one second got off your refined, self regarding arses and gone out and campaigned in real life instead of keeping yourselves at a safe distance from the smelly horrible prloes by twatting about on the internet, perhaps things might have gone differently?
Snap! The point I was making. If Brexit is all the fault of Remainers, why would they want to get involved? (If anything bad happens, Leavers will blame it on Remainers or the wilfulness of the EU, because the basic decision to Leave coujldn't have any consquences as far as they are concerned)
I did vote Remain and I do actually believe in making the best of any situation. Therefore I think people like me should try to make things better than they would otherwise be, even if worse than before. It's not particularly rewarding, particularly when our motives are being questioned and anything that is worse than before will be blamed on us anyway.
Major is certainly a big beast, but as a well known EU remainer, isn't this a case of Dog Bites Man?
But, it's thanks to Major that we now have Brexit. He negotiated the opt-out from the Euro, and set us on a trajectory that took us ever further from the Eurozone.
Ms. Apocalypse, he claimed he'd campaign to leave if he didn't get what he wanted.
His deal was risible, yet he campaigned to remain. That didn't win him much respect.
That's true. But did anyone really believe that an establishment Conservative like David Cameron was going to ever campaign for Leave?
Boris Johnson ring a bell?
I don't think a PM breaking explicit promises can be explained away by "We all knew he was lying". A PM should not allow a referendum on an issue that he is prepared to resign over if the vote goes against him or her, very poor judgement
Rather than just emote about it we need to take action because I simply am not prepared to accept that in 21st century Britain we permit such barbaric crimes to be perpetrated against young girls and babies because we're worried about religious or cultural sensitivities. The interests of the girls comes first.
Absolutely.
Just so we are clear here. It is estimated that there are 137,000 women in the UK suffering from FGM based on figures half a decade old. It is estimated that 1.5% of ALL women giving birth in the UK since 2008 have FGM.
Last year 8600+ cases were ASSESSED by medical staff in the UK. 8600+ real cases made it to a doctor and were examined. How many cases do you think happened and never got to a doctor. 8600+ mutilations and zero prosecutions.
Agree entirely. A worrying symptom born of the insane idea that children can be considered adherents of a religion "a Muslim child" "a Jewish child" "A Christian child" etc.
If children wish to be religious, let them choose to become so at age 18.
+1
I was confirmed at 14. There's nothing odd about being a Christian child.
What gets the back of many Leavers up I am sure, is the endless attempts to overturn BrExit in the same way as people would object if the losing voters at a General Election tried to overturn the result.
But that's bollocks. A manufactured grievance by the Brexiteers.
They campaigned for UK Parliamentary sovereignty.
The court case confirmed Parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers cried betrayal.
The Lords are implementing parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers threaten to abolish them.
At no point since the vote has the result been in question, overturned, reversed, or ignored.
And the Brexiteers whine ever more loudly with every passing day.
Miss Cyclefree, I said "The Merchants" as in Chaucer below...
And it is a brilliant choice.
So we have:-
- The Millers - The Merchants - The Franks (as per Mr Meeks below and in honour of his previous name. Plus it is v close the Franklins so I hope he will forgive me and it has a certain European feel to it so rather comme il faut, I feel).
There we go.
If only Brexit turns out to be that easy.....
What about the Brexiteer categories?
- The Faragiste Firestarters: Those whose primary goal is simply the destruction of the EU and couldn't care less what else gets destroyed in the process. - The Hannanite Hypocrites: Those who are happy to give away sovereignty as long as it's to people who are white and speak English. - The Duncan Smith Dunces: Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.
Don't forget the Old Families: that care for an protect their people and have been appalled by the behaviour of the country's leaders for a generation.
Ah yes, the Possessive Patricians who don't want to share 'their' people.
We can't "share" anyone or anything. We don't own them.
We just look out for our people's interests as we always have. It's a duty and a privilege to do so.
I agree with him entirely in that bit. There will be people seeking to undermine or prevent Brexit through underhand means because they cannot democratically manage it, but those pursuing the democratic path to Brexit are not helped by people not feeling able to express concern or offer their thoughts, even critical ones. I am sure all reasonable people would agree, and so even if they think Major a deluded has been about the worthiness of Brexit or what needs to happen now, we can overcome his points rather than think he and those like him should shut up.
Yesterday I spent some time asking Leavers to contemplate why Remainers weren't changing their minds. Responses divided between:
1) But we keep telling you that you're wrong, what more can we do? 2) We don't care what Remainers think, we've won our referendum and that's that. 3) Remainers have the temerity not to change their minds and it's their fault.
The brittle way in which Leavers respond to every concern expressed makes it most unlikely that the country will pull together behind Brexit. If Britain remains divided, Brexit will almost inevitably fail. Yet Leavers show no interest in addressing this.
Most odd.
Your own, as you have admitted deliberately provocative, attitude may not have encouraged a thoughtful response in fairness, but I think it is fair to say too many respond too negatively and hostilely to any expressed concern.
Some remainers are clearly, I would argue, not interested in being reached out to, which hardly helps heal division, but the greater burden would need to fall on we the victors I think.
Delete "greater" and replace with "sole". If you want to make this work, you'd better start thinking fast how. So far not a single major Leaver figure has made any meaningful attempt to bring Remainers into the fold.
About half the Parliamentary Conservative Party has been brought on board.
I don't know how I could bring you on board. You loathe Brexit, and you loathe the people who voted for it.
I wonder what strategy will be adopted by Labour for the timing of the Gorton by election? Will it be a quick call ie 4 weeks to make it more difficult for the other parties to get their act together ? Or will they choose local election on May when the opposition patries will be sperading their resources to other contests?
Off topic: Thistlecrack to have an extra scan before gold cup.
Whoever backed at 989 on Betfair must be smiling at this news, has bought him in to be matched at 7 apparently. I'm not involved in the gold cup yet but hopefully he can run if he is fit, horses are fickle beasts.
Agree entirely. A worrying symptom born of the insane idea that children can be considered adherents of a religion "a Muslim child" "a Jewish child" "A Christian child" etc.
If children wish to be religious, let them choose to become so at age 18.
+1
I was confirmed at 14. There's nothing odd about being a Christian child.
What gets the back of many Leavers up I am sure, is the endless attempts to overturn BrExit in the same way as people would object if the losing voters at a General Election tried to overturn the result.
But that's bollocks. A manufactured grievance by the Brexiteers.
They campaigned for UK Parliamentary sovereignty.
The court case confirmed Parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers cried betrayal.
The Lords are implementing parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers threaten to abolish them.
At no point since the vote has the result been in question, overturned, reversed, or ignored.
And the Brexiteers whine ever more loudly with every passing day.
It the way you tell it that makes it so funny.
If there was no doubt about BrExit happening then Blair, Mandelson, Major, Hesseltine and all the usual suspects wouldn't waste their time campaigning for just that.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
I am not a Conservative, but maybe it is because he said he would stay on and implement the result, and trigger article 50 immediately.
When someone makes promises such as that then breaks them and runs away, I guess people go off them
I always knew that Cameron would never do that. Losing such a referendum meant that it was always likely he was going to resign.
But I noticed people turning against Cameron even during the campaign.
With Cameron, I think it was his condescension. Whether consciously or not, he always gave off the air of effortless superiority and the impression that he was right, so when people disagreed they were wrong. That was fine with his supporters as long as it was Labour he was patronising. when it came to gay marriage, for example, that was less fine, but OK because it was after all a very minor issue and one fought wholly in Parliament. With this referendum, on a totemic issue, he basically declared war on and insulted his core vote by saying that they were racist and insular and incompetent. For some reason, having seen him dish this out to their rivals, they weren't too happy when he turned it on them.
I also agree re the referendum. I knew one of him or Salmond would have to resign in 2014 and so it proved. I knew one of him or Johnson (with Gove) would be finished after the referendum. We got two of those - I'm just waiting for Boris to do something insane so we have the set.
Ms. Apocalypse, he claimed he'd campaign to leave if he didn't get what he wanted.
His deal was risible, yet he campaigned to remain. That didn't win him much respect.
That's true. But did anyone really believe that an establishment Conservative like David Cameron was going to ever campaign for Leave?
Boris Johnson ring a bell?
I don't think a PM breaking explicit promises can be explained away by "We all knew he was lying". A PM should not allow a referendum on an issue that he is prepared to resign over if the vote goes against him or her, very poor judgement
Re Boris that's true. Although Cameron and Boris were in different positions. Cameron was PM so was more likely to lean to the status quo. While Boris was an establishment Conservative he also had a special interest in creating a circumstance which gave him the chance to become PM. Brexit was that chance (although Michael Gove came in and ruined it all for him). On Cameron resigning: I think he actually had very little choice but to resign. I also think Cameron made that promise because he didn't think that Leave would win.
What gets the back of many Leavers up I am sure, is the endless attempts to overturn BrExit in the same way as people would object if the losing voters at a General Election tried to overturn the result.
But that's bollocks. A manufactured grievance by the Brexiteers.
They campaigned for UK Parliamentary sovereignty.
The court case confirmed Parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers cried betrayal.
The Lords are implementing parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers threaten to abolish them.
At no point since the vote has the result been in question, overturned, reversed, or ignored.
And the Brexiteers whine ever more loudly with every passing day.
No, that's bollocks, and you know it.
The referendum wasn't about parliamentary sovereignty. It was about whether or not we are in the EU. It wasn't a sudden outpouring of enthusiasm for Westminster politicians, it was a rejection of Brussels politicians. It wasn't voters wanting Westminster to have the power to hand their power back to Brussels again.
And Gina Miller didn't bring the court case to confirm parliamentary sovereignty. She brought it to try to derail Brexit. Much as Tony Blair has called upon people to 'rise up' against Brexit. You can see why Brexiters are expecting their victory to be frustrated.
Off topic: Thistlecrack to have an extra scan before gold cup.
Whoever backed at 989 on Betfair must be smiling at this news, has bought him in to be matched at 7 apparently. I'm not involved in the gold cup yet but hopefully he can run if he is fit, horses are fickle beasts.
Leavers have never accepted Brexit has consequences and are incapable of dealing with those consequences because they don't think they exist.
That's debatable.
The difference, as I see it, is that Leavers often see that there are two sides to each change. Remainers seem to only ever perceive a negative.
The constant hysteria about the movement of sterling was a prime example.
Yes, it adds to costs of foreign travel and imports as a negative - but it also invites domestic and inward bound tourism, along with providing a boost to exports as a positive.
This applies to many of the areas under discussion.
There is an almost constant struggle to get people to see both sides.
Fair enough, There are a number of two sided coins. The fall in the value of the pound is something that happened, which we can't do anything about. I am really talking about the compromises we will need to make with the EU, with third party countries about immigration, trade, standards, security, about corporate welfare for car companies, about the constitution of the UK, about welfare and taxes when the taxbase shrinks and so on.
Major is certainly a big beast, but as a well known EU remainer, isn't this a case of Dog Bites Man?
But, it's thanks to Major that we now have Brexit. He negotiated the opt-out from the Euro, and set us on a trajectory that took us ever further from the Eurozone.
Had Major not done that, the Euro would surely have collapsed in utter ruin in 2008 and we would be in the ninth year of a Europe wide war. It was nearly destroyed by AIB and Anglo-Irish, for goodness sakes.
Let us thank God for Major and Brown, who whatever their faults spared us all that.
FGM has been a crime in the UK for a long time now. It is still going on and no-one has been successfully prosecuted. Making a law has not worked. So something else is needed. What I have proposed gets round a lot of the problems with the existing law e.g. having to prove who did it, forcing a child to give evidence against her parents etc.
If a girl is discovered to have FGM then prosecute her parents. Who else could permit it?
There is already a precedent for such an approach. When a car is caught by a speed-camera a notice is sent to the legal owner saying, in effect, this is your car so unless you say otherwise we are going to prosecute you.
If the parents are saying it was nothing to do with them then let them name whoever was responsible.
So... if it is not in the child's best interests to prosecute then the FGM goes unchallenged?
Unbelievable!
When is it in the child's interest to get mutilated?
And why is it treated differently to any other sexual abuse of a child by their family?
Didn't we learn with 1,400 children abused in Rotherham what happens when we ignore abuse for "cultural reasons"?
It may conceivably not be in the child's best interest to prosecute. But it is in the best interests of countless hundreds of other Muslim baby girls that this abhorrent practice be stampede out wherever it rears its ugly head.
FGM is not a specifically Muslim thing. It is practiced amongst Christian groups from certain parts of East Africa. So I think it is more a cultural than a strictly religious issue, though the two may be intertwined to a certain extent for some groups.
Well this is very interesting, and touches on something I've been wondering for some time - would the Islamic region of the world be just as culturally backward if some other religion had got there instead? Does Islam make the Middle East (and surrounding area) backward, or does the Middle East make Islam backward? Your point suggests perhaps the latter.
That is a very very big question. I would tend to the former view, at least based on my readings of Middle Eastern experts like Bernard Lewis. Very crudely: if you look at the Middle East and Western Europe/USA, the regions where there has been growth, invention, technological and scientific development, as well as cultural and philosophical developments have tended to be ones where Christianity was the main religion rather than Islam. While both religions had or have aspirations to be a complete manual for life - Christianity has, not for a long time at least, had the sort of hold and control over all aspects of life that Islam appears to have. And even that doesn't explain it because even when Christianity was dominant in Western societies cultural expression flourished - think of all the art/literature/music/sculpture/architecture inspired by Christianity.
It's also worth remembering that the Middle East had religions there long before Islam arrived. Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Judaism. Islam is the Johnny-come-lately of religions there and to this day there are Christian communities and others just about hanging on.
I don't think there is a simple answer to this. The Middle East is a very diverse and fascinating place. And its history is very varied. I would love to travel through it but that is a distant dream now, sadly
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
I am not a Conservative, but maybe it is because he said he would stay on and implement the result, and trigger article 50 immediately.
When someone makes promises such as that then breaks them and runs away, I guess people go off them
I always knew that Cameron would never do that. Losing such a referendum meant that it was always likely he was going to resign.
But I noticed people turning against Cameron even during the campaign.
With Cameron, I think it was his condescension. Whether consciously or not, he always gave off the air of effortless superiority and the impression that he was right, so when people disagreed they were wrong. That was fine with his supporters as long as it was Labour he was patronising. when it came to gay marriage, for example, that was less fine, but OK because it was after all a very minor issue and one fought wholly in Parliament. With this referendum, on a totemic issue, he basically declared war on and insulted his core vote by saying that they were racist and insular and incompetent. For some reason, having seen him dish this out to their rivals, they weren't too happy when he turned it on them.
I also agree re the referendum. I knew one of him or Salmond would have to resign in 2014 and so it proved. I knew one of him or Johnson (with Gove) would be finished after the referendum. We got two of those - I'm just waiting for Boris to do something insane so we have the set.
Yes Cameron did have that air of superiority that May actually doesn't have. I think that's one of the reasons why she's much more popular with Labour voters/non-Conservatives.
I do remember Gay marriage causing a bit of stir among some grassroots Conservatives. Also in the end quite a few Tory MPs ended up voting against it.
Boris has been quiet for sometime now. I haven't heard many gaffes from him at all recently. Though I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't last that long as FO.
What gets the back of many Leavers up I am sure, is the endless attempts to overturn BrExit in the same way as people would object if the losing voters at a General Election tried to overturn the result.
But that's bollocks. A manufactured grievance by the Brexiteers.
They campaigned for UK Parliamentary sovereignty.
The court case confirmed Parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers cried betrayal.
The Lords are implementing parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers threaten to abolish them.
At no point since the vote has the result been in question, overturned, reversed, or ignored.
And the Brexiteers whine ever more loudly with every passing day.
Absolutely garbage. I said all along on here that I was glad the court's decided Parliament had to have its say. I also said that Miller was being utterly dishonest in claiming she wasn't trying to stop Brexit. And she has proved that. The people voted for Brexit and our MPs have voted for it as well. Any claim now that Miller is trying to do anything other than thwart the will of both the people and the Commons us simply dishonest.
Major is certainly a big beast, but as a well known EU remainer, isn't this a case of Dog Bites Man?
But, it's thanks to Major that we now have Brexit. He negotiated the opt-out from the Euro, and set us on a trajectory that took us ever further from the Eurozone.
It was an option of an opt-out from the Euro.
At the time it was suspected of being for political reasons only and that Britain's membership of the ERM would lead inevitably to adopting the Euro.
Then came Black Wednesday.
Even after that Major's stated policy was that Britain wouldn't join the Euro by 1997 - which of course wasn't possible because there was no chance of it coming into use by then.
I can't remember what the 1997 Conservative manifesto said about adopting the Euro.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
They used Cameron to get what they wanted - Brexit. Once the Tories won the election it was odds-on that we would leave the EU. If any of the Tory turncoats that campaigned for Leave took the place of Cameron in GE15, Ed Milliband would now be PM with a comfortable majority and this country would have a brighter and more prosperous future. The scum (as that is what they really are) used Cameron and dumped him at the first chance.
It is these people that are the true traitors!
Tories who wanted to leave the EU and took advantage of Camerons folly aren't scum or traitors. They took a perfectly reasonable position and were from the outset working against all the odds because of the way Cameron framed the question in the referendum. Vote remain or the world will end tomorrow!
If there is a traitor here it David Cameron himself. He was willing to risk everything for his own political survival, including plunging the fate of the country he claims to love so much in to massive consitutional uncertainty. There should have been some preperation for a leave vote. There should have been a strategy to work through all the alternatives to EU membership methodically. There should have been a white paper. Consultation. There should have been a strategy to engage the devolved nations. He didn't want this because he didn't want any hint that leave could ever be a credible option. As his strategy completely and spectacularly failed, it is a case of winner takes all. His epic, historic failure and incompetence is what has led to all this division and hatred. We don't know how this will all work out, but my instinct is that Brexit will be a disaster (albeit one that I accept is the consequence of a democratic decision) that will overshadow everything else, including everything Cameron did while in power.
Nice to see such a meeting of minds in the aftermath of EUref. We should probably rebrand as the Disunited Kingdom.
Meanwhile, out here in the boonies, the world revolves about its axis, the catkins are out, and Winter slumbering in the open air, wears on his smiling face a dream of Spring.
Major is certainly a big beast, but as a well known EU remainer, isn't this a case of Dog Bites Man?
But, it's thanks to Major that we now have Brexit. He negotiated the opt-out from the Euro, and set us on a trajectory that took us ever further from the Eurozone.
It was an option of an opt-out from the Euro.
At the time it was suspected of being for political reasons only and that Britain's membership of the ERM would lead inevitably to adopting the Euro.
Then came Black Wednesday.
Even after that Major's stated policy was that Britain wouldn't join the Euro by 1997 - which of course wasn't possible because there was no chance of it coming into use by then.
I can't remember what the 1997 Conservative manifesto said about adopting the Euro.
Effectively, veto. But because it was not quite fashionable to say that, it was disguised by saying they would negotiate better terms of entry before making a final decision on going in or not (sound familiar)?
In many ways, it was much the best of the 1997 manifestoes. But then I suppose what they said was more or less irrelevant by the time they published it so they could afford to say anything.
FGM has been a crime in the UK for a long time now. It is still going on and no-one has been successfully prosecuted. Making a law has not worked. So something else is needed. What I have proposed gets round a lot of the problems with the existing law e.g. having to prove who did it, forcing a child to give evidence against her parents etc.
If a girl is discovered to have FGM then prosecute her parents. Who else could permit it?
There is already a precedent for such an approach. When a car is caught by a speed-camera a notice is sent to the legal owner saying, in effect, this is your car so unless you say otherwise we are going to prosecute you.
If the parents are saying it was nothing to do with them then let them name whoever was responsible.
That's exactly why making it an offence of strict liability works. The parents are responsible for the child. FGM is not going to happen unless the parents arrange it. So prosecute them. The only evidence needed is that the child has been cut. No need for evidence about who did it and when. If they want a reduced sentence then they can name others involved. But the parents must be held responsible. And they need to lose control over their other girls. The balance of risk for them needs to shift. At the moment parents can do this and there is, as far as I can see, zero risk of being caught let alone anything worse. That needs to change - and fast.
Miss Cyclefree, I said "The Merchants" as in Chaucer below...
And it is a brilliant choice.
So we have:-
- The Millers - The Merchants - The Franks (as per Mr Meeks below and in honour of his previous name. Plus it is v close the Franklins so I hope he will forgive me and it has a certain European feel to it so rather comme il faut, I feel).
There we go.
If only Brexit turns out to be that easy.....
What about the Brexiteer categories?
- The Faragiste Firestarters: Those whose primary goal is simply the destruction of the EU and couldn't care less what else gets destroyed in the process. - The Hannanite Hypocrites: Those who are happy to give away sovereignty as long as it's to people who are white and speak English. - The Duncan Smith Dunces: Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.
Telling that there is no positive category, unlike for the remainers above.
That's because William is a classic bigot. Unwilling to see any good in his opponents and wanting merely to see them utterly destroyed. To him Leavers are the Untermensch, unworthy of any respect at all.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
They used Cameron to get what they wanted - Brexit. Once the Tories won the election it was odds-on that we would leave the EU. If any of the Tory turncoats that campaigned for Leave took the place of Cameron in GE15, Ed Milliband would now be PM with a comfortable majority and this country would have a brighter and more prosperous future. The scum (as that is what they really are) used Cameron and dumped him at the first chance.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
In these febrile times people will not allow for him to be anything other than hero or villain. Truth is I think he was a decent enough PM who wasn't up to the greatest challenge he faced and failed as a result, but to hear people now you'd think he had no positives, which is nonsense. I've seen elected conservatives publicly scoff when opponents quote something cameron said to criticise them, when a year earlier they'd have been bootlicking in all probability.
Cameron did something very important for the Conservative Party: he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life. I did not like his polices on welfare, and how austerity was implemented. But what he did with the modernisation of the Conservative Party was a great thing. When you look at the direction of the GOP, and the British Conservative Party you have to be thankful for what he did. Right now because of the mess Labour's in Britain is currently a one-party state. We'll obviously have to wait and see what Brexit brings, but so far the government could be far more radical and right-wing than it actually is. When I look at what Trump is doing I'm honestly very happy that things are more 'normal' here. If anything Trump has made me even more anti-Corbyn than I was before. I don't want a political revolution where everything is radically turned over. Liberal Democracy is not perfect, but it is much better than any of the alternatives that I have seen so far.
That's right before Cameron there had never been a leader of the Conservatives who was female or Jewish or foreign born or from a 'down market' background.
I didn't say that.
You said:
' he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life '
which suggests that before Cameron the Conservative party wasn't open to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life.
I'd actually say that Cameron with his 'A-lists' and 'jobs for the (posh) boys' might well have narrowed opportunities in the Conservative party.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
In these febrile times people will not allow for him to be anything other than hero or villain. Truth is I think he was a decent enough PM who wasn't up to the greatest challenge he faced and failed as a result, but to hear people now you'd think he had no positives, which is nonsense. I've seen elected conservatives publicly scoff when opponents quote something cameron said to criticise them, when a year earlier they'd have been bootlicking in all probability.
Cameron did something very important for the Conservative Party: he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life. I did not like his polices on welfare, and how austerity was implemented. But what he did with the modernisation of the Conservative Party was a great thing. When you look at the direction of the GOP, and the British Conservative Party you have to be thankful for what he did. Right now because of the mess Labour's in Britain is currently a one-party state. We'll obviously have to wait and see what Brexit brings, but so far the government could be far more radical and right-wing than it actually is. When I look at what Trump is doing I'm honestly very happy that things are more 'normal' here. If anything Trump has made me even more anti-Corbyn than I was before. I don't want a political revolution where everything is radically turned over. Liberal Democracy is not perfect, but it is much better than any of the alternatives that I have seen so far.
That's right before Cameron there had never been a leader of the Conservatives who was female or Jewish or foreign born or from a 'down market' background.
I didn't say that.
You said:
' he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life '
which suggests that before Cameron the Conservative party wasn't open to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life.
I'd actually say that Cameron with his 'A-lists' and 'jobs for the (posh) boys' might well have narrowed opportunities in the Conservative party.
Major is certainly a big beast, but as a well known EU remainer, isn't this a case of Dog Bites Man?
But, it's thanks to Major that we now have Brexit. He negotiated the opt-out from the Euro, and set us on a trajectory that took us ever further from the Eurozone.
I think Major achieved far more in establishing a two-tier EU than Cameron did.
Major is certainly a big beast, but as a well known EU remainer, isn't this a case of Dog Bites Man?
But, it's thanks to Major that we now have Brexit. He negotiated the opt-out from the Euro, and set us on a trajectory that took us ever further from the Eurozone.
It was an option of an opt-out from the Euro.
At the time it was suspected of being for political reasons only and that Britain's membership of the ERM would lead inevitably to adopting the Euro.
Then came Black Wednesday.
Even after that Major's stated policy was that Britain wouldn't join the Euro by 1997 - which of course wasn't possible because there was no chance of it coming into use by then.
I can't remember what the 1997 Conservative manifesto said about adopting the Euro.
Wait and see was the official Tory line but scores of Tory candidates put out leaflets saying they would oppose the Euro and keep the £. Major's intervention today looks coordinated with Blair's just over a week ago, both are now closer to the LDs on Brexit than the leaders of their own parties
When Mrs C asked Mr. Isam about circumcision I don't think she was asking for volunteers...
Whilst male circumcision is not as life destroying as FGM, I cannot think of any reason to inflict it on a healthy baby boy and sometimes it goes horribly wrong.
Basically cutting bits off your kids for purely cultural reasons should be outlawed.
The Greens ought to be fancying their chances in this new by-election.
If any party other than Labour win Gorton then Jeremy Corbyn will be out of office the following morning even if Macdonnell has to shoot him. It is the ninth safest seat Labour have, FFS. Surely you are not suggesting they will have a worse result in 2020 than the Liberal Democrats did in 2015?
What gets the back of many Leavers up I am sure, is the endless attempts to overturn BrExit in the same way as people would object if the losing voters at a General Election tried to overturn the result.
But that's bollocks. A manufactured grievance by the Brexiteers.
They campaigned for UK Parliamentary sovereignty.
The court case confirmed Parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers cried betrayal.
The Lords are implementing parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers threaten to abolish them.
At no point since the vote has the result been in question, overturned, reversed, or ignored.
And the Brexiteers whine ever more loudly with every passing day.
No, that's bollocks, and you know it.
The referendum wasn't about parliamentary sovereignty. It was about whether or not we are in the EU. It wasn't a sudden outpouring of enthusiasm for Westminster politicians, it was a rejection of Brussels politicians. It wasn't voters wanting Westminster to have the power to hand their power back to Brussels again.
And Gina Miller didn't bring the court case to confirm parliamentary sovereignty. She brought it to try to derail Brexit. Much as Tony Blair has called upon people to 'rise up' against Brexit. You can see why Brexiters are expecting their victory to be frustrated.
The referendum was actually about mass migration and whether the UK could control it if necessary (Parliamentary sovereignty) or whether we needed to beseech Brussels to apply their "emergency brake" if they felt like. Any entity that cannot control its own borders is a province, not a state. Our Euro "partners" could have won the referendum with a minor concession enabling the UK to reduce migration while we caught up with the business of building sufficient homes, schools and hospitals. Instead they dug their heals in and got the answer they deserved. The problem with "Freedom of Movement" is that its effects are felt differentially all over the EU but the rule is applied remorselessly at the centre because they are driven by legalism rather than practical politics.
The Greens ought to be fancying their chances in this new by-election.
I reckon they will struggle to be in the top 3, they have really struggled post 2015 and although a sizeable student vote may help, it depends when the vote takes place (during break or exams it will not help them). My feeling is they will be lucky to hold their deposit with the LDs pushing very hard for a strong second.
' he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life '
which suggests that before Cameron the Conservative party wasn't open to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life.
I'd actually say that Cameron with his 'A-lists' and 'jobs for the (posh) boys' might well have narrowed opportunities in the Conservative party.
No, it suggests that Conservative Party wasn't all that diverse prior to Cameron's leadership. Which it wasn't. There was a reason why you've had William Hague do things like go to Notting Hill Carnival when was leader. There's a reason why you've had John Major talk about appealing to ethnic minorities. Part of the modernisation process was attempting to make the Conservative Party more appealing to demographics which by and large didn't vote Conservative. The whole A List thing especially was about making the Conservative Party appear to be a more inclusive party.
Miss Cyclefree, I said "The Merchants" as in Chaucer below...
And it is a brilliant choice.
So we have:-
- The Millers - The Merchants - The Franks (as per Mr Meeks below and in honour of his previous name. Plus it is v close the Franklins so I hope he will forgive me and it has a certain European feel to it so rather comme il faut, I feel).
There we go.
If only Brexit turns out to be that easy.....
What about the Brexiteer categories?
- The Faragiste Firestarters: Those whose primary goal is simply the destruction of the EU and couldn't care less what else gets destroyed in the process. - The Hannanite Hypocrites: Those who are happy to give away sovereignty as long as it's to people who are white and speak English. - The Duncan Smith Dunces: Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.
Don't forget the Old Families: that care for an protect their people and have been appalled by the behaviour of the country's leaders for a generation.
Ah yes, the Possessive Patricians who don't want to share 'their' people.
We can't "share" anyone or anything. We don't own them.
We just look out for our people's interests as we always have. It's a duty and a privilege to do so.
That was what I loved about Cameron's anecdote about the Downing Street policeman tugging his forelock and thanking Cameron for letting him marry the man he loved. The template for that story would be one of Cameron's grandfather's under keepers thanking the squire for installing an indoor privy in his tied cottage.
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
Has he become so disliked because he campaigned for Remain? It seemed pretty unlikely that he was going to campaign for Leave back in May 2015.
I wonder how years down the line May will be remembered by PBers? So far she hasn't been that radical of a PM (which I think is a good thing).
They used Cameron to get what they wanted - Brexit. Once the Tories won the election it was odds-on that we would leave the EU. If any of the Tory turncoats that campaigned for Leave took the place of Cameron in GE15, Ed Milliband would now be PM with a comfortable majority and this country would have a brighter and more prosperous future. The scum (as that is what they really are) used Cameron and dumped him at the first chance.
It is these people that are the true traitors!
Tories who wanted to leave the EU and took advantage of Camerons folly aren't scum or traitors. They took a perfectly reasonable position and were from the outset working against all the odds because of the way Cameron framed the question in the referendum. Vote remain or the world will end tomorrow!
If there is a traitor here it David Cameron himself. He was willing to risk everything for his own political survival, including plunging the fate of the country he claims to love so much in to massive consitutional uncertainty. There should have been some preperation for a leave vote. There should have been a strategy to work through all the alternatives to EU membership methodically. There should have been a white paper. Consultation. There should have been a strategy to engage the devolved nations. He didn't want this because he didn't want any hint that leave could ever be a credible option. As his strategy completely and spectacularly failed, it is a case of winner takes all. His epic, historic failure and incompetence is what has led to all this division and hatred. We don't know how this will all work out, but my instinct is that Brexit will be a disaster (albeit one that I accept is the consequence of a democratic decision) that will overshadow everything else, including everything Cameron did while in power.
I strongly support Brexit. But, I respect the honesty of those who say we would be better off sacrificing our independence to be part of a much more powerful European State. It's like being a medium-rank power adjoining the Roman Empire, and debating whether or not to join it.
I have little time for the argument that we should be part of the EU while constantly fighting to frustrate the will of its core members to create the single State which they desire.
The Greens ought to be fancying their chances in this new by-election.
If any party other than Labour win Gorton then Jeremy Corbyn will be out of office the following morning even if Macdonnell has to shoot him. It is the ninth safest seat Labour have, FFS. Surely you are not suggesting they will have a worse result in 2020 than the Liberal Democrats did in 2015?
Or do you just mean they might do quite well?
I don't think anything can remove Corbyn, the membership love him too much. I don't think the Greens can win, but who knows what might happen if supporters of other parties want to get rid of Labour and voting Green is the only way to do it.
The Greens ought to be fancying their chances in this new by-election.
If any party other than Labour win Gorton then Jeremy Corbyn will be out of office the following morning even if Macdonnell has to shoot him. It is the ninth safest seat Labour have, FFS. Surely you are not suggesting they will have a worse result in 2020 than the Liberal Democrats did in 2015?
Or do you just mean they might do quite well?
Andy JS is a genuine expert. Worth listening to. But, yes Jezza will be shot if they lose. Speaking to Labour today, there hold no dears about Gorton and they won;t work it if on local election day in May.
The Greens ought to be fancying their chances in this new by-election.
If any party other than Labour win Gorton then Jeremy Corbyn will be out of office the following morning even if Macdonnell has to shoot him. It is the ninth safest seat Labour have, FFS. Surely you are not suggesting they will have a worse result in 2020 than the Liberal Democrats did in 2015?
Or do you just mean they might do quite well?
Andy JS is a genuine expert. Worth listening to. But, yes Jezza will be shot if they lose. Speaking to Labour today, there hold no dears about Gorton and they won;t work it if on local election day in May.
The Greens ought to be fancying their chances in this new by-election.
If any party other than Labour win Gorton then Jeremy Corbyn will be out of office the following morning even if Macdonnell has to shoot him. It is the ninth safest seat Labour have, FFS. Surely you are not suggesting they will have a worse result in 2020 than the Liberal Democrats did in 2015?
Or do you just mean they might do quite well?
Andy JS is a genuine expert. Worth listening to. But, yes Jezza will be shot if they lose. Speaking to Labour today, there hold no dears about Gorton and they won;t work it if on local election day in May.
That is a very very big question. I would tend to the former view, at least based on my readings of Middle Eastern experts like Bernard Lewis. Very crudely: if you look at the Middle East and Western Europe/USA, the regions where there has been growth, invention, technological and scientific development, as well as cultural and philosophical developments have tended to be ones where Christianity was the main religion rather than Islam. While both religions had or have aspirations to be a complete manual for life - Christianity has, not for a long time at least, had the sort of hold and control over all aspects of life that Islam appears to have. And even that doesn't explain it because even when Christianity was dominant in Western societies cultural expression flourished - think of all the art/literature/music/sculpture/architecture inspired by Christianity.
It's also worth remembering that the Middle East had religions there long before Islam arrived. Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Judaism. Islam is the Johnny-come-lately of religions there and to this day there are Christian communities and others just about hanging on.
I don't think there is a simple answer to this. The Middle East is a very diverse and fascinating place. And its history is very varied. I would love to travel through it but that is a distant dream now, sadly
Mm - interesting. There are ultra-conservative Christian sects too, of course - the Amish and the Plymouth Brethren, for example, both also characterised by an aversion to modernity, unnecessarily strange facial hair and the uglification of their women. And also believing rather too earnestly in God, of course. But in Christian countries, these have for a long time been well outside the mainstream (though I don't suppose puritan England was much fun.). I guess if Christian countries were more dominated by the likes of the Amish things might be rather different. I wonder why this has not been the case - why it is Islamic countries rather than Christian countries who are culturally dominated by the extreme sects of their religion. As far as I dunerstand religion (which is not much) there is no reason why Islam should be the one dominated by fervent believers and Christianity by those paying lip service. But maybe there is.
Nice to see such a meeting of minds in the aftermath of EUref. We should probably rebrand as the Disunited Kingdom.
Meanwhile, out here in the boonies, the world revolves about its axis, the catkins are out, and Winter slumbering in the open air, wears on his smiling face a dream of Spring.
Evening, Mr M.
Our little Cockapoo Freddie is now in residence. I'm not getting an awful lot of work (or even PB) done during the early puppy days, but my girlfriend is very kindly taking the evening shifts when she gets home from work. The Southern Boonies are similarly revolving on their normal exist despite the rumblings in London and Copeland!
Agree entirely. A worrying symptom born of the insane idea that children can be considered adherents of a religion "a Muslim child" "a Jewish child" "A Christian child" etc.
If children wish to be religious, let them choose to become so at age 18.
+1
I was confirmed at 14. There's nothing odd about being a Christian child.
It would be ok to be a communist child I think
That would be much more respectable.
A communist child would be one whose parents both worked full time, left him with state carers and were forbidden from bringing him up as part of their religion I guess
It's odd how so many Conservatives dislike David Cameron these days. Back in 2015 he was a hero on here.
In these febrile times people will not allow for him to be anything other than hero or villain. Truth is I think he was a decent enough PM who wasn't up to the greatest challenge he faced and failed as a result, but to hear people now you'd think he had no positives, which is nonsense. I've seen elected conservatives publicly scoff when opponents quote something cameron said to criticise them, when a year earlier they'd have been bootlicking in all probability.
Cameron did something very important for the Conservative Party: he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life. I did not like his polices on welfare, and how austerity was implemented. But what he did with the modernisation of the Conservative Party was a great thing. When you look at the direction of the GOP, and the British Conservative Party you have to be thankful for what he did. Right now because of the mess Labour's in Britain is currently a one-party state. We'll obviously have to wait and see what Brexit brings, but so far the government could be far more radical and right-wing than it actually is. When I look at what Trump is doing I'm honestly very happy that things are more 'normal' here. If anything Trump has made me even more anti-Corbyn than I was before. I don't want a political revolution where everything is radically turned over. Liberal Democracy is not perfect, but it is much better than any of the alternatives that I have seen so far.
That's right before Cameron there had never been a leader of the Conservatives who was female or Jewish or foreign born or from a 'down market' background.
I didn't say that.
You said:
' he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life '
which suggests that before Cameron the Conservative party wasn't open to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life.
I'd actually say that Cameron with his 'A-lists' and 'jobs for the (posh) boys' might well have narrowed opportunities in the Conservative party.
Agreed.
Mrs May was a reformer well before Cameron. She brings in a whole new demographic that the Poshos never could...
The Greens ought to be fancying their chances in this new by-election.
If any party other than Labour win Gorton then Jeremy Corbyn will be out of office the following morning even if Macdonnell has to shoot him. It is the ninth safest seat Labour have, FFS. Surely you are not suggesting they will have a worse result in 2020 than the Liberal Democrats did in 2015?
Or do you just mean they might do quite well?
I don't think anything can remove Corbyn, the membership love him too much. I don't think the Greens can win, but who knows what might happen if supporters of other parties want to get rid of Labour and voting Green is the only way to do it.
Corbyn wouldn't quit even if if they lost Gorton (which they won't). It's not so much about the membership as it is about him. Anyone with any common decency and sense of shame would have quit after Copeland. Corbyn has neither.
Johnny Major making a play to be the next leader of the Labour party today.The Liberal Elite have been out in force over the last week.
I would actually respect them if they just got their bollocks out and said fuck it lets start a party called "The Metropolitan Liberal Elite"
Slogan: We Know Best
very good, and what the Centre of politics needs. Tony's Cronies: Major, Hesletine, Ken Clarke, Clegg, Ashdown, Dave and Gideon and Tone himself. Homogenous to a man.
I guess I'm someone who struggles to see how Brexit will be a disaster.
Since the vote (notwithstanding the uncertainty) we've had long-term investments announced or confirmed in the UK by a number of technology giants, and international consultancies. Banks have confirmed they will move as few jobs as they need to, and no more, many of which were under threat from automation anyway. HSBC have said, for instance, it might go from 44,000 to 43,000 jobs and they continue to plan the relocate of their global HQ to Birmingham. A majority of firms have stated that our legal system, language, regulatory regime, global reach and access to talent are far more important to them than geopolitics, and the economy has continued to grow robustly. We've had interest expressed - or trade deals mooted - with India, China, Brazil, the US, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea.
It is true to say that Brexit is bound to increase non-tariff boundaries between ourselves and the EU - that's what it means - but I don't see this as a long-term problem. The single market was very far from complete in services and digital tech, when it was hugely in the UK's interest for it to be so, which is why it featured so highly in Cameron's renegotiation objectives, and I expect the impact of formally withdrawing from this to be rather less extreme than often mooted. And I expect free trade in goods to be maintained along with a high degree of UK-EU security cooperation.
The UK will continue to be an extremely affluent country, and one of the world's top 10 economies, well into the 2050s.
I accept others may believe leaving an economic and political union of 500 million people on our doorstep is a fatal mistake, I just don't agree: I think we are much better placed to make the most of the world's opportunities with independent economic and political flexibility outside the EU.
I think we just have different choices. Not many nations have that luxury. We do.
Johnny Major making a play to be the next leader of the Labour party today.The Liberal Elite have been out in force over the last week.
I would actually respect them if they just got their bollocks out and said fuck it lets start a party called "The Metropolitan Liberal Elite"
Slogan: We Know Best
very good, and what the Centre of politics needs. Tony's Cronies: Major, Hesletine, Ken Clarke, Clegg, Ashdown, Dave and Gideon and Tone himself. Homogenous to a man.
Take it in turns to be leader Athenian Democracy style?
Of course, being primates, a hierarchy will form.. Tone in charge, Dave occasionally challenging him for alpha male status, Clegg and Ken doing the teas...
Nice to see such a meeting of minds in the aftermath of EUref. We should probably rebrand as the Disunited Kingdom.
Meanwhile, out here in the boonies, the world revolves about its axis, the catkins are out, and Winter slumbering in the open air, wears on his smiling face a dream of Spring.
Evening, Mr M.
Our little Cockapoo Freddie is now in residence. I'm not getting an awful lot of work (or even PB) done during the early puppy days, but my girlfriend is very kindly taking the evening shifts when she gets home from work. The Southern Boonies are similarly revolving on their normal exist despite the rumblings in London and Copeland!
Bless. I have two Yorkipoos (I may have mentioned this previously!). All the poodle crosses are lovely, but I'm particularly fond of the Cocker spaniel and Yorkshire terrier flavours. Freddie will delight you for years, I'm sure.
The world looks a lot rosier when one is in love, on the threshold of Spring, with the prospect of a glorious Summer.
Ahem. Sorry, just rhapsodizing. What I meant to say was: Brexit means Brexit. I think we at least can all agree on that.
Johnny Major making a play to be the next leader of the Labour party today.The Liberal Elite have been out in force over the last week.
I would actually respect them if they just got their bollocks out and said fuck it lets start a party called "The Metropolitan Liberal Elite"
Slogan: We Know Best
very good, and what the Centre of politics needs. Tony's Cronies: Major, Hesletine, Ken Clarke, Clegg, Ashdown, Dave and Gideon and Tone himself. Homogenous to a man.
Take it in turns to be leader Athenian Democracy style?
Of course, being primates, a hierarchy will form.. Tone in charge, Dave occasionally challenging him for alpha male status, Clegg and Ken doing the teas...
I guess I'm someone who struggles to see how Brexit will be a disaster.
Since the vote (notwithstanding the uncertainty) we've had long-term investments announced or confirmed in the UK by a number of technology giants, and international consultancies. Banks have confirmed they will move as few jobs as they need to, and no more, many of which were under threat from automation anyway. HSBC have said, for instance, it might go from 44,000 to 43,000 jobs and they continue to plan the relocate of their global HQ to Birmingham. A majority of firms have stated that our legal system, language, regulatory regime, global reach and access to talent are far more important to them than geopolitics, and the economy has continued to grow robustly. We've had interest expressed - or trade deals mooted - with India, China, Brazil, the US, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea.
It is true to say that Brexit is bound to increase non-tariff boundaries between ourselves and the EU - that's what it means - but I don't see this as a long-term problem. The single market was very far from complete in services and digital tech, when it was hugely in the UK's interest for it to be so, which is why it featured so highly in Cameron's renegotiation objectives, and I expect the impact of formally withdrawing from this to be rather less extreme than often mooted. And I expect free trade in goods to be maintained along with a high degree of UK-EU security cooperation.
The UK will continue to be an extremely affluent country, and one of the world's top 10 economies, well into the 2050s.
I accept others may believe leaving an economic and political union of 500 million people on our doorstep is a fatal mistake, I just don't agree: I think we are much better placed to make the most of the world's opportunities with independent economic and political flexibility outside the EU.
I think we just have different choices. Not many nations have that luxury. We do.
Ireland is set to benefit from Australian companies seeking access to the EU after Brexit, Australia’s foreign minister has said.
“Many Australian firms have accessed the EU via Britain. With the uncertainty surrounding what a post-Brexit Britain will look like, I believe Australian firms will look to Ireland to fulfil that role,” she said.
“Ireland has a very attractive business environment, low corporate tax rates, [a good] lifestyle and there is the connection between Australia and Ireland.
She described Ireland as an “obvious partner” to do business within the EU. “Ireland is superbly positioned to attract that kind of engagement from Australian business. I see this as a great opportunity of how we, Australia and Ireland, can take advantage of what has occurred in Brexit.”
At least Julie took the time to smarten Boris up a bit.
Mm - interesting. There are ultra-conservative Christian sects too, of course - the Amish and the Plymouth Brethren, for example, both also characterised by an aversion to modernity, unnecessarily strange facial hair and the uglification of their women. And also believing rather too earnestly in God, of course. But in Christian countries, these have for a long time been well outside the mainstream (though I don't suppose puritan England was much fun.). I guess if Christian countries were more dominated by the likes of the Amish things might be rather different. I wonder why this has not been the case - why it is Islamic countries rather than Christian countries who are culturally dominated by the extreme sects of their religion. As far as I dunerstand religion (which is not much) there is no reason why Islam should be the one dominated by fervent believers and Christianity by those paying lip service. But maybe there is.
I think one reason may be that Christianity has been very vigorously challenged, both by groups within it - think of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation - and by secular forces e.g. the French revolution, as well as by wars within and between states. While Christianity has to a very significant extent been at the heart of much of Western European development on very many fronts, it has never had an easy ride. There have always been challenges and challengers.
As far as I know, Islam spread with conquest and has always (?) been linked to political power. Whether the failure of secularism meant that Islam became much more entrenched or it was the presence of Islam which meant that secularism didn't gain a hold, I don't know.
Someone once commented that Christianity held within itself the seeds of the challenges to it. Maybe that doesn't apply in Islam. Again, I simply don't know.
Maybe it's also an element of luck: if, say, the more moderate branches of Islam (the Ahmadis, say) were living in Saudi Arabia and had the benefit of all that lovely oil money, it would be their version that was being taught in madrassas round the world and not the extreme versions.
Ireland is set to benefit from Australian companies seeking access to the EU after Brexit, Australia’s foreign minister has said.
“Many Australian firms have accessed the EU via Britain. With the uncertainty surrounding what a post-Brexit Britain will look like, I believe Australian firms will look to Ireland to fulfil that role,” she said.
“Ireland has a very attractive business environment, low corporate tax rates, [a good] lifestyle and there is the connection between Australia and Ireland.
She described Ireland as an “obvious partner” to do business within the EU. “Ireland is superbly positioned to attract that kind of engagement from Australian business. I see this as a great opportunity of how we, Australia and Ireland, can take advantage of what has occurred in Brexit.”
At least Julie took the time to smarten Boris up a bit.
oh yeah because the Irish economy is about the size of New Zealands but without the upside
Johnny Major making a play to be the next leader of the Labour party today.The Liberal Elite have been out in force over the last week.
He could hardly make a worse mess of it than the current encumbrance incumbent and is only about three years older. Moreover he has experience of leading a government and of taking a pro-European party and turning it into a hard-right Euroscpetic fringe group. Finally, he's from a humble background and has had sex with junior colleagues promoted way beyond their capabilities.
Yes, I could see how he's a good fit as a replacement for Corbyn.
Johnny Major making a play to be the next leader of the Labour party today.The Liberal Elite have been out in force over the last week.
He could hardly make a worse mess of it than the current encumbrance incumbent and is only about three years older. Moreover he has experience of leading a government and of taking a pro-European party and turning it into a hard-right Euroscpetic fringe group. Finally, he's from a humble background and has had sex with junior colleagues promoted way beyond their capabilities.
Yes, I could see how he's a good fit as a replacement for Corbyn.
Ireland is set to benefit from Australian companies seeking access to the EU after Brexit, Australia’s foreign minister has said.
“Many Australian firms have accessed the EU via Britain. With the uncertainty surrounding what a post-Brexit Britain will look like, I believe Australian firms will look to Ireland to fulfil that role,” she said.
“Ireland has a very attractive business environment, low corporate tax rates, [a good] lifestyle and there is the connection between Australia and Ireland.
She described Ireland as an “obvious partner” to do business within the EU. “Ireland is superbly positioned to attract that kind of engagement from Australian business. I see this as a great opportunity of how we, Australia and Ireland, can take advantage of what has occurred in Brexit.”
At least Julie took the time to smarten Boris up a bit.
oh yeah because the Irish economy is about the size of New Zealands but without the upside
The Irish are currently contemplating the fact that 88% of their energy comes from/via the UK.
I understand why you have described the result as a moral disaster. While I share your concerns about xenophobia etc I find I cannot describe the result of a referendum in a democratic country such as Britain as a moral disaster, though it may turn out to be an economic one. Whatever my own feelings I found it a good thing that so many people who had not previously voted decided to vote. Voter engagement is a good thing. Those who didn't manage to engage the voters to agree with them need to ask some hard questions of themselves.
While one can deplore how immigration and immigrants are discussed I think it is also a democratic disaster and - if you want to talk in these terms - a moral disaster - not to take account of people's views on subjects as important as immigration. It is not something which is or should be off limits as a subject for political debate.
I agree that it is a shame that too many Leavers in government are not willing to listen to sensible advice. This does not bode well. Still, this is my country and I want it to do well for mine and my childrens' sake. Nothing I say or write matters. Still, I have spent my working life trying to find solutions for problems caused by others so I'm not tremendously fond of people standing on the side saying what a mess it all is rather than trying to help.
A point I have made a few times here. As of now, Leavers can't make Brexit work while Remainers don't want to. Leavers have never accepted Brexit has consequences and are incapable of dealing with those consequences because they don't think they exist. Theresa May is an honorary member of that category for slightly different reasons. She has never explained why the issues she had with leaving the EU are no longer there. Remainers think the project is a bad one, not of their own making, and don't see why they should get involved, especially when they are going be blamed for any downsides anyway.
It's a bum situation to be in. I suppose it could change.
I'd change it slightly: Leavers can't make Brexit work if many Remainers don't want to.
@bbclaurak: Rees Mogg - 'it was a craven and defeatist speech from a bitter man' - Peace reigns in the Tory movement tonight....
Good example of how TV journalism has morphed into snarky egotism. Privately, I entirely share Laura K's enjoyment, so it's not that I object to the message. But why is she tweeting her private feelings? Indeed, why does she have an official BBC Twitter account to vent on? She's a reporter - let her report neutrally what's said and let the audience snark if they want to.
Comments
His deal was risible, yet he campaigned to remain. That didn't win him much respect.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with the results of a plebiscite, but to respect the democratic mandate given by the voters, and then campaign for something new to happen going forward, be it election a different party at the next GE, or to rejoin the EU, or join the EEA, nothing wrong with that at all. What is wrong is to try by every legal wheeze and dodge to overturn the choice the voters made before it even happens.
The Labour wins a GE the Tories dont run off to court and trying to prove that they won really and it was all a terrible mistake. Labour takes office and Tories start to campaign to get elected at the next election.
Exactly. Was it her not-for-the-public speech to Goldman Sachs , where she explained the perils of leaving the EU ?
One explanation: It suits her politically as she can be the PM.
Education is necessary but it is not sufficient. Those who do this (women) - with a razor - with no pain relief know how painful it is. They don't need to be told that. They know that sometimes girls die. They know what it means for their sex lives and childbirth. They believe that it is necessary to be "clean". It is hard to change that mentality just through some education and it may take a very long time. This is being done by people who are often born and educated here and have lived here a long time. And in the meanwhile girls are suffering horribly. So there needs to be a reset of the mentality. A shock is needed. A price has to be paid so as to get it across that it is cruel and dangerous and a crime and, above all, that it will not be tolerated. Prosecutions, the loss of control over children will help change the cultural mentality rather more rapidly than any number of posters.
Aids is not analogous. That was a public health problem and all parties - the users and the state - had a common interest in stopping its spread. What you describe was a sensible pragmatic solution which worked.
FGM has been a crime in the UK for a long time now. It is still going on and no-one has been successfully prosecuted. Making a law has not worked. So something else is needed. What I have proposed gets round a lot of the problems with the existing law e.g. having to prove who did it, forcing a child to give evidence against her parents etc. Rather than just emote about it we need to take action because I simply am not prepared to accept that in 21st century Britain we permit such barbaric crimes to be perpetrated against young girls and babies because we're worried about religious or cultural sensitivities. The interests of the girls comes first.
The difference, as I see it, is that Leavers often see that there are two sides to each change. Remainers seem to only ever perceive a negative.
The constant hysteria about the movement of sterling was a prime example.
Yes, it adds to costs of foreign travel and imports as a negative - but it also invites domestic and inward bound tourism, along with providing a boost to exports as a positive.
This applies to many of the areas under discussion.
There is an almost constant struggle to get people to see both sides.
It is these people that are the true traitors!
I did vote Remain and I do actually believe in making the best of any situation. Therefore I think people like me should try to make things better than they would otherwise be, even if worse than before. It's not particularly rewarding, particularly when our motives are being questioned and anything that is worse than before will be blamed on us anyway.
I don't think a PM breaking explicit promises can be explained away by "We all knew he was lying". A PM should not allow a referendum on an issue that he is prepared to resign over if the vote goes against him or her, very poor judgement
Just so we are clear here. It is estimated that there are 137,000 women in the UK suffering from FGM based on figures half a decade old. It is estimated that 1.5% of ALL women giving birth in the UK since 2008 have FGM.
https://www.city.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/282388/FGM-statistics-final-report-21-07-15-released-text.pdf
Last year 8600+ cases were ASSESSED by medical staff in the UK. 8600+ real cases made it to a doctor and were examined. How many cases do you think happened and never got to a doctor. 8600+ mutilations and zero prosecutions.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-case-per-hour-uk-nhs-circumcision-a7564571.html
Or did he really think Obama spent 8 years f***ing it all up in royal fashion because of ideology or something?
They campaigned for UK Parliamentary sovereignty.
The court case confirmed Parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers cried betrayal.
The Lords are implementing parliamentary sovereignty, while the Brexiteers threaten to abolish them.
At no point since the vote has the result been in question, overturned, reversed, or ignored.
And the Brexiteers whine ever more loudly with every passing day.
We just look out for our people's interests as we always have. It's a duty and a privilege to do so.
I don't know how I could bring you on board. You loathe Brexit, and you loathe the people who voted for it.
Will it be a quick call ie 4 weeks to make it more difficult for the other parties to get their act together ?
Or will they choose local election on May when the opposition patries will be sperading their resources to other contests?
Whoever backed at 989 on Betfair must be smiling at this news, has bought him in to be matched at 7 apparently.
I'm not involved in the gold cup yet but hopefully he can run if he is fit, horses are fickle beasts.
@Scott_P Yr bet might come back from the grave
If there was no doubt about BrExit happening then Blair, Mandelson, Major, Hesseltine and all the usual suspects wouldn't waste their time campaigning for just that.
I also agree re the referendum. I knew one of him or Salmond would have to resign in 2014 and so it proved. I knew one of him or Johnson (with Gove) would be finished after the referendum. We got two of those - I'm just waiting for Boris to do something insane so we have the set.
On Cameron resigning: I think he actually had very little choice but to resign. I also think Cameron made that promise because he didn't think that Leave would win.
Funny thing is, a lot of people believed him - to the extent of disbelieving him when he changed tack and said how awful it would be.
The referendum wasn't about parliamentary sovereignty. It was about whether or not we are in the EU. It wasn't a sudden outpouring of enthusiasm for Westminster politicians, it was a rejection of Brussels politicians. It wasn't voters wanting Westminster to have the power to hand their power back to Brussels again.
And Gina Miller didn't bring the court case to confirm parliamentary sovereignty. She brought it to try to derail Brexit. Much as Tony Blair has called upon people to 'rise up' against Brexit. You can see why Brexiters are expecting their victory to be frustrated.
Let us thank God for Major and Brown, who whatever their faults spared us all that.
There is already a precedent for such an approach. When a car is caught by a speed-camera a notice is sent to the legal owner saying, in effect, this is your car so unless you say otherwise we are going to prosecute you.
If the parents are saying it was nothing to do with them then let them name whoever was responsible.
It's also worth remembering that the Middle East had religions there long before Islam arrived. Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Judaism. Islam is the Johnny-come-lately of religions there and to this day there are Christian communities and others just about hanging on.
I don't think there is a simple answer to this. The Middle East is a very diverse and fascinating place. And its history is very varied. I would love to travel through it but that is a distant dream now, sadly
I do remember Gay marriage causing a bit of stir among some grassroots Conservatives. Also in the end quite a few Tory MPs ended up voting against it.
Boris has been quiet for sometime now. I haven't heard many gaffes from him at all recently. Though I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't last that long as FO.
At the time it was suspected of being for political reasons only and that Britain's membership of the ERM would lead inevitably to adopting the Euro.
Then came Black Wednesday.
Even after that Major's stated policy was that Britain wouldn't join the Euro by 1997 - which of course wasn't possible because there was no chance of it coming into use by then.
I can't remember what the 1997 Conservative manifesto said about adopting the Euro.
If there is a traitor here it David Cameron himself. He was willing to risk everything for his own political survival, including plunging the fate of the country he claims to love so much in to massive consitutional uncertainty. There should have been some preperation for a leave vote. There should have been a strategy to work through all the alternatives to EU membership methodically. There should have been a white paper. Consultation. There should have been a strategy to engage the devolved nations. He didn't want this because he didn't want any hint that leave could ever be a credible option. As his strategy completely and spectacularly failed, it is a case of winner takes all. His epic, historic failure and incompetence is what has led to all this division and hatred. We don't know how this will all work out, but my instinct is that Brexit will be a disaster (albeit one that I accept is the consequence of a democratic decision) that will overshadow everything else, including everything Cameron did while in power.
Nice to see such a meeting of minds in the aftermath of EUref. We should probably rebrand as the Disunited Kingdom.
Meanwhile, out here in the boonies, the world revolves about its axis, the catkins are out, and Winter slumbering in the open air, wears on his smiling face a dream of Spring.
Full manifesto is here:
http://politicsresources.net/area/uk/man/con97.htm#eu
In many ways, it was much the best of the 1997 manifestoes. But then I suppose what they said was more or less irrelevant by the time they published it so they could afford to say anything.
How is that ground game going Mr Murali?
' he opened the party up to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life '
which suggests that before Cameron the Conservative party wasn't open to individuals from many different backgrounds and walks of life.
I'd actually say that Cameron with his 'A-lists' and 'jobs for the (posh) boys' might well have narrowed opportunities in the Conservative party.
Unfortunately for him, it wasn't enough.
Or do you just mean they might do quite well?
I have little time for the argument that we should be part of the EU while constantly fighting to frustrate the will of its core members to create the single State which they desire.
Slogan: We Know Best
Our little Cockapoo Freddie is now in residence. I'm not getting an awful lot of work (or even PB) done during the early puppy days, but my girlfriend is very kindly taking the evening shifts when she gets home from work. The Southern Boonies are similarly revolving on their normal exist despite the rumblings in London and Copeland!
https://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1920/communism-family.htm
Mrs May was a reformer well before Cameron. She brings in a whole new demographic that the Poshos never could...
reminds me of his spitting image puppet. Scaremongering too. We were going to fall into massive depression on June 24th. Didn't happen.
Since the vote (notwithstanding the uncertainty) we've had long-term investments announced or confirmed in the UK by a number of technology giants, and international consultancies. Banks have confirmed they will move as few jobs as they need to, and no more, many of which were under threat from automation anyway. HSBC have said, for instance, it might go from 44,000 to 43,000 jobs and they continue to plan the relocate of their global HQ to Birmingham. A majority of firms have stated that our legal system, language, regulatory regime, global reach and access to talent are far more important to them than geopolitics, and the economy has continued to grow robustly. We've had interest expressed - or trade deals mooted - with India, China, Brazil, the US, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea.
It is true to say that Brexit is bound to increase non-tariff boundaries between ourselves and the EU - that's what it means - but I don't see this as a long-term problem. The single market was very far from complete in services and digital tech, when it was hugely in the UK's interest for it to be so, which is why it featured so highly in Cameron's renegotiation objectives, and I expect the impact of formally withdrawing from this to be rather less extreme than often mooted. And I expect free trade in goods to be maintained along with a high degree of UK-EU security cooperation.
The UK will continue to be an extremely affluent country, and one of the world's top 10 economies, well into the 2050s.
I accept others may believe leaving an economic and political union of 500 million people on our doorstep is a fatal mistake, I just don't agree: I think we are much better placed to make the most of the world's opportunities with independent economic and political flexibility outside the EU.
I think we just have different choices. Not many nations have that luxury. We do.
Of course, being primates, a hierarchy will form.. Tone in charge, Dave occasionally challenging him for alpha male status, Clegg and Ken doing the teas...
The world looks a lot rosier when one is in love, on the threshold of Spring, with the prospect of a glorious Summer.
Ahem. Sorry, just rhapsodizing. What I meant to say was: Brexit means Brexit. I think we at least can all agree on that.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ireland-can-benefit-from-brexit-says-australian-foreign-minister-1.2988051
Ireland is set to benefit from Australian companies seeking access to the EU after Brexit, Australia’s foreign minister has said.
“Many Australian firms have accessed the EU via Britain. With the uncertainty surrounding what a post-Brexit Britain will look like, I believe Australian firms will look to Ireland to fulfil that role,” she said.
“Ireland has a very attractive business environment, low corporate tax rates, [a good] lifestyle and there is the connection between Australia and Ireland.
She described Ireland as an “obvious partner” to do business within the EU. “Ireland is superbly positioned to attract that kind of engagement from Australian business. I see this as a great opportunity of how we, Australia and Ireland, can take advantage of what has occurred in Brexit.”
At least Julie took the time to smarten Boris up a bit.
encumbranceincumbent and is only about three years older. Moreover he has experience of leading a government and of taking a pro-European party and turning it into a hard-right Euroscpetic fringe group. Finally, he's from a humble background and has had sex with junior colleagues promoted way beyond their capabilities.Yes, I could see how he's a good fit as a replacement for Corbyn.