Very good first day thanks to UnTemps Pour Tout and Buveur D'Air, I opened an account with Paddys and got 10/1 the double Altior and Douvan, I guess I should lay some off.
Might Bite, Tombstone and Cause of Causes for me today, win singles, e/w treble.
Max bet on friday Native River, put it in a double with Dandridge in the last.
Yeah but we're going to have a yacht - that will show them.
If you look at the evidence, having a "royal yacht" is very effective at bolstering trade links. It's better at persuading individual businessmen to sign deals .
An interesting answer and one that probably reveals a broader disconnect in what people understand by 'trade deals'. Your language suggests that you simply mean trade, which of course we are perfectly free to pursue within the EU. Free trade agreements are something very different and are the stuff of diplomacy.
There's isn't a disconnect. I think I was pretty clear that it is helpful with trade, not with trade agreements. I didn't see Johnson's original comments, but I'm sure he didn't get into the specifics.
The words 'after Brexit' imply that all of this trade promotion is something that needs to wait until we've left the EU.
Very good first day thanks to UnTemps Pour Tout and Buveur D'Air, I opened an account with Paddys and got 10/1 the double Altior and Douvan, I guess I should lay some off.
Might Bite, Tombstone and Cause of Causes for me today, win singles, e/w treble.
Max bet on friday Native River, put it in a double with Dandridge in the last.
Be lucky
Have you strayed here from Nagbetting.com by mistake?
Mr. Patrick, not a horse punter myself (have tried occasionally but it seems not for me), but there's no ban on people tipping on non-political matters.
And a damned good thing too. Who can forget* one heroic tip** on the Spanish Granx Prix last year?
*Nobody, because I won't shut up about it.
**Although this has been overshadowed, I also had a quite good 8 winner on Ricciardo in the same race.
Very good first day thanks to UnTemps Pour Tout and Buveur D'Air, I opened an account with Paddys and got 10/1 the double Altior and Douvan, I guess I should lay some off.
Might Bite, Tombstone and Cause of Causes for me today, win singles, e/w treble.
Max bet on friday Native River, put it in a double with Dandridge in the last.
Be lucky
Have you strayed here from Nagbetting.com by mistake?
Saw others commenting on Cheltenham, this is a betting site after all
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
It's interesting: the PVV platform is not really about the EU at all. Sure, it's in there, but with more than half of PVV supporters saying they support Euro membership, it's really all about the "clash of civilizations", and Wilders is very much in the Bannon mold.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
If a monarch is to have a royal yacht it should be classy and have some heritage. It should not rival or be capable of being compared with any of Phillip Green or Roman Abramovich's yachts.
Royal Yacht Britannia filled the bill but it is hard to think what else might.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
Does that include the monarchs of land locked countries?
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet electoral toxicity.
But surely the whole point of Indyref2 is that Scotland is being "forced out of the EU against its will"?
Yep but the other option is to willingly leave both the EU and the rUK at the same time instead.. Unless Scotland find a way to stop Spain vetoing any approach
I love the way leaverit's going to be all about high politics - how far the Brexiters piss off Europe with their demands for cake and the facility to eat it.
We actually have a Remainer, May, leading the UK negotiations not a Brexiter even if they also form part of the team
May is no longer a remainer. And just like Corbyn, I'm not convinced she ever was. May just blows in the political wind. I doubt she's had an original thought in her life.
The country are no longer Remainers after 17 million voted Leave so by definition the Prime Minister cannot now be a Remainer but she is not a hard-core Brexiteer in the Farage, IDS, Fox or Bone mould either
Could questioning.
At the moment her main battle is to force the Remoaners to accept they have lost, once the negotiations start the hardline Brexiteers will end up equally disappointed
Some will, the hardcore are unpleasable, but her rhetoric has been too strongly to the hard position for her to roll back from.
She has said she will take the UK out of the single market and control free movement which she will do but she is not going to block up the Channel Tunnel and end all immigration from the EU and refuse to make any contributions to the EU during the negotiations either
She certainly will not block off the Chunnel. We will need continuing high rates of immigration well into the next decade if government assumptions about tax and spend are going to get anywhere close to being correct.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
If a monarch is to have a royal yacht it should be classy and have some heritage. It should not rival or be capable of being compared with any of Phillip Green or Roman Abramovich's yachts.
Royal Yacht Britannia filled the bill but it is hard to think what else might.
I don't think anyone will know for sure until tomorrow morning
When do they close polls and start counting ?
8pm UK time, with an exit poll pretty much immediately. (Although I would caution that the Spanish exit polls were completely wrong.)
It is being manually counted, so we won't begin to get real numbers until 10 or 11pm. I have no spreadsheet on Dutch provinces to guide late night Betfair-ing.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
Does that include the monarchs of land locked countries?
It's interesting: the PVV platform is not really about the EU at all. Sure, it's in there, but with more than half of PVV supporters saying they support Euro membership, it's really all about the "clash of civilizations", and Wilders is very much in the Bannon mold.
Some politicians think bigger and longer term than others. They are in a strategic place. Most are in a tactical space. Some of the really big underlying trends are not nice and make for an uncomfortable discussion in progressive circles. The accommodation of Islamism despite its utter incompatibility with any liberal agenda is a good example.
Murdo Fraser 100,000 signatures in 1 day. The map is fascinating too... https://t.co/MZslNTbKly
"Another Scottish independence referendum should not be allowed to happen We in Scotland are fed up of persecution by the SNP leader who is solely intent on getting independence at any cost. As a result, Scotland is suffering hugely
My wife and I have just signed it . The response within Scotland is quite surprising and may be another indicator that Nicola has made her first big mistake, probably pushed into it by Salmond
"We in Scotland are fed up of persecution by the SNP leader" says Big_G_NorthWales and his wife.
Lol
Why lol - you do show a remarkable ignorance. My wife is a Scot with a lineage of generations so probably more so than you
Humourless, prickly yoons, always with the blood and soil stuff.
If you insult my wife with an ignorant comment you can expect to get it back in spades
I also have a Scottish wife.
I think the Scots take it personally that we so easily steal their women....
Murdo Fraser 100,000 signatures in 1 day. The map is fascinating too... https://t.co/MZslNTbKly
"Another Scottish independence referendum should not be allowed to happen We in Scotland are fed up of persecution by the SNP leader who is solely intent on getting independence at any cost. As a result, Scotland is suffering hugely
My wife and I have just signed it . The response within Scotland is quite surprising and may be another indicator that Nicola has made her first big mistake, probably pushed into it by Salmond
"We in Scotland are fed up of persecution by the SNP leader" says Big_G_NorthWales and his wife.
Lol
Why lol - you do show a remarkable ignorance. My wife is a Scot with a lineage of generations so probably more so than you
Humourless, prickly yoons, always with the blood and soil stuff.
If you insult my wife with an ignorant comment you can expect to get it back in spades
I also have a Scottish wife.
I think the Scots take it personally that we so easily steal their women....
It's interesting: the PVV platform is not really about the EU at all. Sure, it's in there, but with more than half of PVV supporters saying they support Euro membership, it's really all about the "clash of civilizations", and Wilders is very much in the Bannon mold.
If Le Pen were elected she would just be Kaczynski with nukes and the EU would deal with her in the same way. The French establishment would all be working against her. The idea that the whole project could be brought down by a single Western European populist getting elected are overblown.
Some politicians think bigger and longer term than others. They are in a strategic place. Most are in a tactical space. Some of the really big underlying trends are not nice and make for an uncomfortable discussion in progressive circles. The accommodation of Islamism despite its utter incompatibility with any liberal agenda is a good example.
Accommodation of Islamism != seizing Qurans from people's homes.
On topic, knocking on doors is fine but it's far from a sufficient strategy. No party was a keen on pavement politics as the Lib Dems and look what happened to them. Sure, at the margins, it might have saved one or two MPs - but that's one or two out of 50. In a crisis, a solid, positive local profile is like an effective ship safety system with pumps, bulkheads and water-tight doors - but if there's enough damage, you're still going down. The primary concern should be 'don't hit the bloody iceberg in the first place'.
In fact, the whole problem with the pavement politics strategy, for the Lib Dems as well as for Corbyn, is that it's essentially one that focuses on the individual and diminishes the party brand. That's fine when the brand itself is soft, warm and fuzzy but it also means that it's a lot easier to trash the brand if it doesn't have strong perceptions attached to it in the first place.
One other example, however, of the multiplier effect. I was talking to a Scottish contractor at work the other day who has knowledge of Scottish Labour and mentioned a case of a Labour MP in what had always been a safe Scottish Labour seat taking the timing of the general election as a good opportunity to go on holiday for two weeks while parliament was sitting. Naturally, with such an attitude, previous constituency groundwork had been near-enough non-existent. When he came back, a week from polling day, he asked his agent how things were going. "You've lost", came the reply. That's how you end up with 30%+ swings.
Agreed. I used to help out in nearly every Parliamentary by-election (was expected of MPs and I was glad to), and got very tired of finding that the dearly departed who had triggered the by-election had done no voter ID whatsoever, so the contact rate was zero. I suggested that the PLP should have a standing rule requiring sitting MPs to get up to at least a 40% contact rate or face deselection. Wasn't a popular idea.
But it's also true that the personal touch only helps up to a point and if the core image is undermined you're stuffed whatever you do, at General Election level. You can defy the trend at local by-elections - people don't necessarily mind voting for any old party label for the borough council if they happen to admire the candidate (cf. the much-loved Communist GP who used to win his council seat in Nottingham despite a total absence of party organisation or support). That's why the LibDems shouldn't get too carried away by success in local by-elections - it's better than losing and shows they're not entirely toxic, but doesn't tell us much about GE prospects.
@BBCPhilipSim: Asked about policy on full EU membership Mr Russell says "we will set out our position in advance of the choice so it is an informed choice" pic.twitter.com/qmIQ9GE3Kf
@BBCPhilipSim: Mike Russell says there will be "absolute clarity" on ScotGov's position towards EU membership by the time of indyref2; asks for "patience".
So the SNP want 2 years to tell us whether they want to be in the EU, or not.
Numpties
But surely the whole point of Indyref2 is that Scotland is being "forced out of the EU against its will"?
Yep but the other option is to willingly leave both the EU and the rUK at the same time instead.. Unless Scotland find a way to stop Spain vetoing any approach
I love the way leaver unionists cling to Spain like a liferaft. If Germany and France and the rest of the EU want this to happen, Spain will be bought off. However, it's going to be all about high politics - how far the Brexiters piss off Europe with their demands for cake and the facility to eat it.
I'm not a unionist as someone up north noticing the very different amount of money available north and south of the border I am equally happy for either Scotland to leave or for Scotland's special treatment due to funding formulas to stop..
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
Does that include the monarchs of land locked countries?
If they have a lake to float it on, why not? It goes along with owning palaces, stables, art collections and the like. As David Evershed points out the royal yacht doesn't need to be flash, or even that big. It just needs to have a saloon or deck that can hold up to one hundred people and it needs class.
It's interesting: the PVV platform is not really about the EU at all. Sure, it's in there, but with more than half of PVV supporters saying they support Euro membership, it's really all about the "clash of civilizations", and Wilders is very much in the Bannon mold.
Some politicians think bigger and longer term than others. They are in a strategic place. Most are in a tactical space. Some of the really big underlying trends are not nice and make for an uncomfortable discussion in progressive circles. The accommodation of Islamism despite its utter incompatibility with any liberal agenda is a good example.
Oddly perhaps Islam is ‘liberal’ in some places and many Islamic countries were and are very tolerant of other cultures and religions.
On topic, knocking on doors is fine but it's far from a sufficient strategy. No party was a keen on pavement politics as the Lib Dems and look what happened to them. Sure, at the margins, it might have saved one or two MPs - but that's one or two out of 50. In a crisis, a solid, positive local profile is like an effective ship safety system with pumps, bulkheads and water-tight doors - but if there's enough damage, you're still going down. The primary concern should be 'don't hit the bloody iceberg in the first place'.
In fact, the whole problem with the pavement politics strategy, for the Lib Dems as well as for Corbyn, is that it's essentially one that focuses on the individual and diminishes the party brand. That's fine when the brand itself is soft, warm and fuzzy but it also means that it's a lot easier to trash the brand if it doesn't have strong perceptions attached to it in the first place.
One other example, however, of the multiplier effect. I was talking to a Scottish contractor at work the other day who has knowledge of Scottish Labour and mentioned a case of a Labour MP in what had always been a safe Scottish Labour seat taking the timing of the general election as a good opportunity to go on holiday for two weeks while parliament was sitting. Naturally, with such an attitude, previous constituency groundwork had been near-enough non-existent. When he came back, a week from polling day, he asked his agent how things were going. "You've lost", came the reply. That's how you end up with 30%+ swings.
I suggested that the PLP should have a standing rule requiring sitting MPs to get up to at least a 40% contact rate or face deselection. Wasn't a popular idea.
Sounds not unreasonable, though I guess part of the fear might be ending up like in America, where reportedly huge chunks of time are given over to party activities (albeit usually fundraising) rather than actual governance?
If I was in the SNP then I'd think the logical next step is to be fully treasonous hypocrites and suggest to the Spanish that if they back Scotland, they'd back Spain's claims on Gibraltar.
Silly me, I forgot the special looking glass that means higher Scottish employment is the fault of incompetent Holyrood, and lower the responsibility of wise Westminster.
The SNP should be making their campaign about guaranteed Eea membership, with a further referendum to decide on rejoining the EU at a later date should they become independent. That keeps leaver Yessers on board while also offering a closer relationship to Europe for remainder Noers.
For currency, a Scottish pound (pegged to British pound) is the only answer (economics irrelevant here, it's politically sellable). To win this referendum the SNP need to make promises that absolutely cannot be shot down by Westminster, Spain etc.
Also why do we assume economics alone will do in for the SNP when they clearly didn't carry the day over Brexit?
The SNP should be making their campaign about guaranteed Eea membership, with a further referendum to decide on rejoining the EU at a later date should they become independent. That keeps leaver Yessers on board while also offering a closer relationship to Europe for remainder Noers.
For currency, a Scottish pound (pegged to British pound) is the only answer (economics irrelevant here, it's politically sellable). To win this referendum the SNP need to make promises that absolutely cannot be shot down by Westminster, Spain etc.
Also why do we assume economics alone will do in for the SNP when they clearly didn't carry the day over Brexit?
The Uk was a contributor to the UK, Scotland is currently a receiver from the UK so there is no clear £350m figure to stick on buses.
Also at the last referendum, oil was the great comfort blanket but that is no longer there.
Also EEA still has the effect of imposing boundaries between rUK and Scotland. We would be leaving a single market that is much more important to us to join a single market that is much less important and in which we would have no say.
Silly me, I forgot the special looking glass that means higher Scottish employment is the fault of incompetent Holyrood, and lower the responsibility of wise Westminster.
The worst thing about indyref2 is that we now have to suffer (at least) another two years of you proving daily that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
Silly me, I forgot the special looking glass that means higher Scottish employment is the fault of incompetent Holyrood, and lower the responsibility of wise Westminster.
Well that's a circular argument as it's always trumpeted the opposite way by the SNP.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
If a monarch is to have a royal yacht it should be classy and have some heritage. It should not rival or be capable of being compared with any of Phillip Green or Roman Abramovich's yachts.
Royal Yacht Britannia filled the bill but it is hard to think what else might.
If almost anyone else did it, it would be bling.
If the UK does it, it will not be bling. We don't do bling: we do class and style.
Could be an interesting one, given IIRC there was that ridiculous case last year where an estranged daughter left out of a will was awarded significant amounts by the courts despite explicit instructions from the mother.
Three animal charities have won a case at the Supreme Court against a woman cut out of her mother's will.
Pavement politics is crucial in that you get to learn what people think. You will VERY rarely make enough difference at the doors to win elections you were losing but you can work out whether other messages are working or not. It's also good in tight local fights because the ground game tells your supporters (and others) that you mean business.
Lazy politicians deserve to lose support is another thing.
The SNP should be making their campaign about guaranteed Eea membership, with a further referendum to decide on rejoining the EU at a later date should they become independent. That keeps leaver Yessers on board while also offering a closer relationship to Europe for remainder Noers.
For currency, a Scottish pound (pegged to British pound) is the only answer (economics irrelevant here, it's politically sellable). To win this referendum the SNP need to make promises that absolutely cannot be shot down by Westminster, Spain etc.
Also why do we assume economics alone will do in for the SNP when they clearly didn't carry the day over Brexit?
Who says the economics didn't carry the day on Brexit?
The Vote Leave side hit a home run by turning the economics into their selling point.
Leavers: The EU costs us £350mn a week. Remainers: You forgot about the rebate it only costs us £250mn a week.
Leave inclined Swing Voters: The EU costs us money.
Downthread: I think David Davis is very far from stupid.
He may be stubborn, too ideologically wedded, grudge-bearing, and able to make bad calls (most of which is related to his 2008 civil liberties flounce) but he is not stupid.
I expect him to be a tough negotiator and well on top of his brief. The question is whether he can be fleet-of-foot, and exercise tactical flexibility.
Silly me, I forgot the special looking glass that means higher Scottish employment is the fault of incompetent Holyrood, and lower the responsibility of wise Westminster.
Well that's a circular argument as it's always trumpeted the opposite way by the SNP.
Since I highlighted the Scottish employment figures in relation to the unending whine from Unionists about EssEnPee referendum uncertainty damaging the Scottish economy, you should probably direct your point to the person suggesting these figures might be a union dividend.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
If a monarch is to have a royal yacht it should be classy and have some heritage. It should not rival or be capable of being compared with any of Phillip Green or Roman Abramovich's yachts.
Royal Yacht Britannia filled the bill but it is hard to think what else might.
If almost anyone else did it, it would be bling.
If the UK does it, it will not be bling. We don't do bling: we do class and style.
It's one of our biggest soft power assets.
It's well worth going around HMY Britannia at Leith. They got the perfect sweet spot between luxury, a family holiday home, a showboat and a working ship. It's a world apart from the yachts you get to see at the boat show yet alone the piccies of the billionaires' glitzy palaces.
Silly me, I forgot the special looking glass that means higher Scottish employment is the fault of incompetent Holyrood, and lower the responsibility of wise Westminster.
Well that's a circular argument as it's always trumpeted the opposite way by the SNP.
Since I highlighted the Scottish employment figures in relation to the unending whine from Unionists about EssEnPee referendum uncertainty damaging the Scottish economy, you should probably direct your point to the person suggesting these figures might be a union dividend.
The figures are good because Scotland are in the Union, they could be even better if the SNP stopped whining about referendums.
Silly me, I forgot the special looking glass that means higher Scottish employment is the fault of incompetent Holyrood, and lower the responsibility of wise Westminster.
The worst thing about indyref2 is that we now have to suffer (at least) another two years of you proving daily that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
You can always use the widget. Personally I manage to ignore the really tedious rightwing bores all by myself, unless they specifically address me of course.
Could be an interesting one, given IIRC there was that ridiculous case last year where an estranged daughter left out of a will was awarded significant amounts by the courts despite explicit instructions from the mother.
Three animal charities have won a case at the Supreme Court against a woman cut out of her mother's will.
Pavement politics is crucial in that you get to learn what people think. You will VERY rarely make enough difference at the doors to win elections you were losing but you can work out whether other messages are working or not. It's also good in tight local fights because the ground game tells your supporters (and others) that you mean business.
Lazy politicians deserve to lose support is another thing.
If that is the case, Corbyn clearly does not do much of it. If he did, he would know that he is a major liability.
Pavement politics is crucial in that you get to learn what people think. You will VERY rarely make enough difference at the doors to win elections you were losing but you can work out whether other messages are working or not. It's also good in tight local fights because the ground game tells your supporters (and others) that you mean business.
Lazy politicians deserve to lose support is another thing.
If that is the case, Corbyn clearly does not do much of it. If he did, he would know that he is a major liability.
Or does he pound the pavement only in his own areas where he isn't a liability? Giving a false impression?
Could be an interesting one, given IIRC there was that ridiculous case last year where an estranged daughter left out of a will was awarded significant amounts by the courts despite explicit instructions from the mother.
Three animal charities have won a case at the Supreme Court against a woman cut out of her mother's will.
Thats the law. We should repeal the 75 Act if we don't like the law. The courts weren't making things up they enforced the law passed by Parliament.
I didn't say they were - I disliked the outcome in that case, but if that is the law it is what it is, I don't blame judges for following the law. I will just be curious, as a layperson, what the differences were in setting aside the wishes of the deceased in that case but not this one.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
If a monarch is to have a royal yacht it should be classy and have some heritage. It should not rival or be capable of being compared with any of Phillip Green or Roman Abramovich's yachts.
Royal Yacht Britannia filled the bill but it is hard to think what else might.
If almost anyone else did it, it would be bling.
If the UK does it, it will not be bling. We don't do bling: we do class and style.
It's one of our biggest soft power assets.
It's well worth going around HMY Britannia at Leith. They got the perfect sweet spot between luxury, a family holiday home, a showboat and a working ship. It's a world apart from the yachts you get to see at the boat show yet alone the piccies of the billionaires' glitzy palaces.
That's why I think the UK should build and design (and probably fund it too) not China or another overseas investor.
It needs to be much more Jaguar or Bentley than Maserati or Ferrari, and 100% British.
Could be an interesting one, given IIRC there was that ridiculous case last year where an estranged daughter left out of a will was awarded significant amounts by the courts despite explicit instructions from the mother.
Three animal charities have won a case at the Supreme Court against a woman cut out of her mother's will.
Thats the law. We should repeal the 75 Act if we don't like the law. The courts weren't making things up they enforced the law passed by Parliament.
The Supreme Court has changed the law on the basis for calculation of the 1975 Act as it had been understood by the Court of Appeal. The judicial move in favour of widening the remit of the Act has now been constrained.
1. Knocking doors and delivering leaflets to build up the reputation of a local MP/councillor in between elections is a quite effective approach especially when you need to distract the electorate from the limitations of a national leader plumbing the depths of unpopularity.
2. In terms of "The search for the answers to Labour's woes", Yougov have another poll out of Labour party members: "Would X make a good or poor leader of the Labour Party if Jeremy Corbyn were to stand down" Net scores: Starmer +32 Lewis +24 Rayner +9 Jarvis +6 McDonnell +5 Umunna +4 Long Bailey +1 Nandy -2 Ashworth -6 Watson -22 Abbott -43
Silly me, I forgot the special looking glass that means higher Scottish employment is the fault of incompetent Holyrood, and lower the responsibility of wise Westminster.
The worst thing about indyref2 is that we now have to suffer (at least) another two years of you proving daily that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
You can always use the widget. Personally I manage to ignore the really tedious rightwing bores all by myself, unless they specifically address me of course.
Downthread: I think David Davis is very far from stupid.
He may be stubborn, too ideologically wedded, grudge-bearing, and able to make bad calls (most of which is related to his 2008 civil liberties flounce) but he is not stupid.
I expect him to be a tough negotiator and well on top of his brief. The question is whether he can be fleet-of-foot, and exercise tactical flexibility.
He'll be a terrible negotiator because he's "stubborn, too ideologically wedded, grudge-bearing, and able to make bad calls"
Also why do we assume economics alone will do in for the SNP when they clearly didn't carry the day over Brexit?
The scale is very different for starters. Scotland receives a lot of money from the UK. UK trade is a very big part of Scotland's "international" trade. Scotland would have a huge deficit outside of the UK, around £4,000 per person in full time employment.
So the economic arguments against Brexit apply ten fold with regards to Scottish independence.
Also why do we assume economics alone will do in for the SNP when they clearly didn't carry the day over Brexit?
The scale is very different for starters. Scotland receives a lot of money from the UK. UK trade is a very big part of Scotland's "international" trade. Scotland would have a huge deficit outside of the UK, around £4,000 per person in full time employment.
So the economic arguments against Brexit apply ten fold with regards to Scottish independence.
Probably true - not all unions are as significant as one another - but the message may be harder to sell this time even so.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
If a monarch is to have a royal yacht it should be classy and have some heritage. It should not rival or be capable of being compared with any of Phillip Green or Roman Abramovich's yachts.
Royal Yacht Britannia filled the bill but it is hard to think what else might.
If almost anyone else did it, it would be bling.
If the UK does it, it will not be bling. We don't do bling: we do class and style.
It's one of our biggest soft power assets.
It's well worth going around HMY Britannia at Leith. They got the perfect sweet spot between luxury, a family holiday home, a showboat and a working ship. It's a world apart from the yachts you get to see at the boat show yet alone the piccies of the billionaires' glitzy palaces.
That's why I think the UK should build and design (and probably fund it too) not China or another overseas investor.
It needs to be much more Jaguar or Bentley than Maserati or Ferrari, and 100% British.
Probably true - not all unions are as significant as one another - but the message may be harder to sell this time even so.
Well we could point to how wrong the Scottish government was about oil last time round, when they assumed that $110 was essentially a floor, and even had the chutzpah to claim that was a pessimistic assumption.
I look forward to seeing the economic case this time around, it should be a damn good laugh.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
If a monarch is to have a royal yacht it should be classy and have some heritage. It should not rival or be capable of being compared with any of Phillip Green or Roman Abramovich's yachts.
Royal Yacht Britannia filled the bill but it is hard to think what else might.
HM the Q could co-opt an otherwise useless aircraft carrier. Chopper all the CIPs* directly onbaord. And there's no disguising when the British are in port.
Downthread: I think David Davis is very far from stupid.
He may be stubborn, too ideologically wedded, grudge-bearing, and able to make bad calls (most of which is related to his 2008 civil liberties flounce) but he is not stupid.
I expect him to be a tough negotiator and well on top of his brief. The question is whether he can be fleet-of-foot, and exercise tactical flexibility.
He'll be a terrible negotiator because he's "stubborn, too ideologically wedded, grudge-bearing, and able to make bad calls"
Though as he's got the gig, I hope I'm wrong.
But I think he's also shown other more positive signs - realism, tempered statements, and good knowledge of his brief.
The SNP minister in charge of employment has blamed Brexit for Scotland performing worse than the rest of the UK on jobs and growth.
Commenting on statistics which show unemployment rose by 11,000 in the last quarter to 5.1 per cent, Jamie Hepburn said: “The Brexit vote caused significant economic uncertainty, threatening our economic recovery and the stability of our jobs market.”
"I know a miscarriage of justice when I smell one": Jonathan Goldberg QC and Freddie Forsyth on 'Marine A' Alexander Blackman @AliBunkallSKYhttps://t.co/jH8RbApGK9
1. Knocking doors and delivering leaflets to build up the reputation of a local MP/councillor in between elections is a quite effective approach especially when you need to distract the electorate from the limitations of a national leader plumbing the depths of unpopularity.
2. In terms of "The search for the answers to Labour's woes", Yougov have another poll out of Labour party members: "Would X make a good or poor leader of the Labour Party if Jeremy Corbyn were to stand down" Net scores: Starmer +32 Lewis +24 Rayner +9 Jarvis +6 McDonnell +5 Umunna +4 Long Bailey +1 Nandy -2 Ashworth -6 Watson -22 Abbott -43
I reckon she is the one off that list that CCHQ would be most worried about facing. Talks sense, comes across well, young, female...what am I saying? This is the Labour membership we are talking about!
Downthread: I think David Davis is very far from stupid.
He may be stubborn, too ideologically wedded, grudge-bearing, and able to make bad calls (most of which is related to his 2008 civil liberties flounce) but he is not stupid.
I expect him to be a tough negotiator and well on top of his brief. The question is whether he can be fleet-of-foot, and exercise tactical flexibility.
He'll be a terrible negotiator because he's "stubborn, too ideologically wedded, grudge-bearing, and able to make bad calls"
Though as he's got the gig, I hope I'm wrong.
But I think he's also shown other more positive signs - realism, tempered statements, and good knowledge of his brief.
I am hoping he can impress.
I too believe Davis has grown in his job. Boris has been good copy and not a disaster. I presume Fox is being kept apart from sharp instruments - like pens or pencils....
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
Does that include the monarchs of land locked countries?
If they have a lake to float it on, why not? It goes along with owning palaces, stables, art collections and the like. As David Evershed points out the royal yacht doesn't need to be flash, or even that big. It just needs to have a saloon or deck that can hold up to one hundred people and it needs class.
The SNP minister in charge of employment has blamed Brexit for Scotland performing worse than the rest of the UK on jobs and growth.
Commenting on statistics which show unemployment rose by 11,000 in the last quarter to 5.1 per cent, Jamie Hepburn said: “The Brexit vote caused significant economic uncertainty, threatening our economic recovery and the stability of our jobs market.”
David Davis says govt has not done economic assessment of impact of not reaching Brexit deal.
Then how can they say it's better than reaching a bad deal? The man's an idiot.
You've only just realised he's an idiot ?
David Davis says "it's not possible to calculate" the economic cost of leaving the Customs Union without a Brexit deal.
David Davis asked whether leaving the EU without a Brexit deal would be a bad thing: "We cannot quantify the outcome."
He adds: "It's not as frightening as some people say". Oh good.
You're being unfair to DD. He's actually coming over as extremely sensible, by far the most grown-up of the Brexiteers. This is a great and welcome surprise to me. He's also keeping the tone business-like, which is very good.
On the specific point, of course no deal is preferable to a bad deal, that's a simple statement of the obvious. A bad deal might, for example, be one where our EU friends insisted on a humoungous payment for nothing very much. Would we sign a deal where we had to fork out £50bn and still didn't get barrier-free access to the Single Market? Of course not.
The SNP minister in charge of employment has blamed Brexit for Scotland performing worse than the rest of the UK on jobs and growth.
Commenting on statistics which show unemployment rose by 11,000 in the last quarter to 5.1 per cent, Jamie Hepburn said: “The Brexit vote caused significant economic uncertainty, threatening our economic recovery and the stability of our jobs market.”
Silly me, I forgot the special looking glass that means higher Scottish employment is the fault of incompetent Holyrood, and lower the responsibility of wise Westminster.
Well that's a circular argument as it's always trumpeted the opposite way by the SNP.
Since I highlighted the Scottish employment figures in relation to the unending whine from Unionists about EssEnPee referendum uncertainty damaging the Scottish economy, you should probably direct your point to the person suggesting these figures might be a union dividend.
I assumed he was having a wee joke to see if someone bit.
Pavement politics is crucial in that you get to learn what people think. You will VERY rarely make enough difference at the doors to win elections you were losing but you can work out whether other messages are working or not. It's also good in tight local fights because the ground game tells your supporters (and others) that you mean business.
Lazy politicians deserve to lose support is another thing.
If that is the case, Corbyn clearly does not do much of it. If he did, he would know that he is a major liability.
I don't think he's so removed from reality that he doesn't know. The scary thing is that means he doesn't really care.
“We didn’t create this mess, the clever d*cks at CCHQ [Conservative Campaign Headquarters] did, and I don’t see their professional reputations being trashed in the media.”
The initial c*ck-ups, ‘strategy’ and ineptitude with regard to this issue that has so negatively impacted our: lives, standing in our communities, standing amongst colleagues, families and our regard for particular parts of the Party centrally, and were all of CCHQ’s making…need to stop.”
There's a really interesting coordinated counter-attack by Team Trump against the liberal MSM.
Tucker and Hannity threw accusations against NBC big boys last night re the Pussygate tape. They said NBC top brass tried to influence the election - and NBC refused to comment. NBC let's not forget paid Chelsea $600k for a few puff pieces.
It's fascinating to watch - Fox is now squishing the other cable channels - and even networks. More watched Trump's congressional speech on Fox than ABC.
Could be an interesting one, given IIRC there was that ridiculous case last year where an estranged daughter left out of a will was awarded significant amounts by the courts despite explicit instructions from the mother.
Three animal charities have won a case at the Supreme Court against a woman cut out of her mother's will.
Thats the law. We should repeal the 75 Act if we don't like the law. The courts weren't making things up they enforced the law passed by Parliament.
I didn't say they were - I disliked the outcome in that case, but if that is the law it is what it is, I don't blame judges for following the law. I will just be curious, as a layperson, what the differences were in setting aside the wishes of the deceased in that case but not this one.
This is a travesty of a case in my opinion. The 1975 act was to stop dependant family being cut out. Healthy adult children that have no contact with their parents should not count.
I'd be interested to see how costs are awarded? Will it all come out of the estate. Or will the daughter have to pay?
Comments
Might Bite, Tombstone and Cause of Causes for me today, win singles, e/w treble.
Max bet on friday Native River, put it in a double with Dandridge in the last.
Be lucky
https://youtu.be/ma2Tbkk8lZc
'Scottish unemployment falls by 16,000
The Scottish jobless rate is now 4.7%, which matches the figure for the whole of the UK.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) data also showed that employment north of the border increased by 16,000 to 2,608,000.
It now stands at 73.7% - below the UK average of 74.6%.
The claimant count fell by 1,300 in February to 75,000.'
http://tinyurl.com/j8lwa7e
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/841953332671451136
And a damned good thing too. Who can forget* one heroic tip** on the Spanish Granx Prix last year?
*Nobody, because I won't shut up about it.
**Although this has been overshadowed, I also had a quite good 8 winner on Ricciardo in the same race.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
－－－
For the reasons I stated. Of course she SHOULD be interested and she is damaging the country by not reaching out to get a good deal with the EU
Royal Yacht Britannia filled the bill but it is hard to think what else might.
It is being manually counted, so we won't begin to get real numbers until 10 or 11pm. I have no spreadsheet on Dutch provinces to guide late night Betfair-ing.
But it's also true that the personal touch only helps up to a point and if the core image is undermined you're stuffed whatever you do, at General Election level. You can defy the trend at local by-elections - people don't necessarily mind voting for any old party label for the borough council if they happen to admire the candidate (cf. the much-loved Communist GP who used to win his council seat in Nottingham despite a total absence of party organisation or support). That's why the LibDems shouldn't get too carried away by success in local by-elections - it's better than losing and shows they're not entirely toxic, but doesn't tell us much about GE prospects.
Oddly perhaps Islam is ‘liberal’ in some places and many Islamic countries were and are very tolerant of other cultures and religions.
For currency, a Scottish pound (pegged to British pound) is the only answer (economics irrelevant here, it's politically sellable). To win this referendum the SNP need to make promises that absolutely cannot be shot down by Westminster, Spain etc.
Also why do we assume economics alone will do in for the SNP when they clearly didn't carry the day over Brexit?
man manager?
gramme nana?
Also at the last referendum, oil was the great comfort blanket but that is no longer there.
Also EEA still has the effect of imposing boundaries between rUK and Scotland. We would be leaving a single market that is much more important to us to join a single market that is much less important and in which we would have no say.
Mark White
BREAKING - Court of Appeal quashes murder conviction against Royal Marine Alexander Blackman. Conviction reduced to manslaughter
If the UK does it, it will not be bling. We don't do bling: we do class and style.
It's one of our biggest soft power assets.
Three animal charities have won a case at the Supreme Court against a woman cut out of her mother's will.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39278921
Lazy politicians deserve to lose support is another thing.
The Vote Leave side hit a home run by turning the economics into their selling point.
Leavers: The EU costs us £350mn a week.
Remainers: You forgot about the rebate it only costs us £250mn a week.
Leave inclined Swing Voters: The EU costs us money.
He may be stubborn, too ideologically wedded, grudge-bearing, and able to make bad calls (most of which is related to his 2008 civil liberties flounce) but he is not stupid.
I expect him to be a tough negotiator and well on top of his brief. The question is whether he can be fleet-of-foot, and exercise tactical flexibility.
Personally I manage to ignore the really tedious rightwing bores all by myself, unless they specifically address me of course.
It needs to be much more Jaguar or Bentley than Maserati or Ferrari, and 100% British.
1. Knocking doors and delivering leaflets to build up the reputation of a local MP/councillor in between elections is a quite effective approach especially when you need to distract the electorate from the limitations of a national leader plumbing the depths of unpopularity.
2. In terms of "The search for the answers to Labour's woes", Yougov have another poll out of Labour party members:
"Would X make a good or poor leader of the Labour Party if Jeremy Corbyn were to stand down"
Net scores:
Starmer +32
Lewis +24
Rayner +9
Jarvis +6
McDonnell +5
Umunna +4
Long Bailey +1
Nandy -2
Ashworth -6
Watson -22
Abbott -43
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ahgsjavm5a/TimesResults_170310_LabourMembers_Website.pdf
You Nats have such sparkling personalities.
Though as he's got the gig, I hope I'm wrong.
So the economic arguments against Brexit apply ten fold with regards to Scottish independence.
I look forward to seeing the economic case this time around, it should be a damn good laugh.
*Commercially Important People
I am hoping he can impress.
Commenting on statistics which show unemployment rose by 11,000 in the last quarter to 5.1 per cent, Jamie Hepburn said: “The Brexit vote caused significant economic uncertainty, threatening our economic recovery and the stability of our jobs market.”
http://www.scottishconservatives.com/2017/01/now-snp-blames-its-rising-unemployment-figures-on-brexit/
"I know a miscarriage of justice when I smell one": Jonathan Goldberg QC and Freddie Forsyth on 'Marine A' Alexander Blackman @AliBunkallSKY https://t.co/jH8RbApGK9
I reckon she is the one off that list that CCHQ would be most worried about facing. Talks sense, comes across well, young, female...what am I saying? This is the Labour membership we are talking about!
https://twitter.com/Sneekyboy/status/841964966487986176
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/14/liam-fox-backs-campaign-new-britannia-saying-would-love-trade/
A personal statement in relation to the 2015 General Election expenses allegation made against me. https://t.co/PBfXpcARxA
On the specific point, of course no deal is preferable to a bad deal, that's a simple statement of the obvious. A bad deal might, for example, be one where our EU friends insisted on a humoungous payment for nothing very much. Would we sign a deal where we had to fork out £50bn and still didn't get barrier-free access to the Single Market? Of course not.
Labourlist is quoting approval ratings for the leaders from the same poll, but the datasets available on the YG website don't have them.
“We didn’t create this mess, the clever d*cks at CCHQ [Conservative Campaign Headquarters] did, and I don’t see their professional reputations being trashed in the media.”
The initial c*ck-ups, ‘strategy’ and ineptitude with regard to this issue that has so negatively impacted our: lives, standing in our communities, standing amongst colleagues, families and our regard for particular parts of the Party centrally, and were all of CCHQ’s making…need to stop.”
http://thelincolnite.co.uk/2017/03/lincoln-mp-karl-mccartney-accuses-party-officials-of-dodging-blame-in-battle-bus-expenses-row/
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/03/15/scottish-independence-voting-intention-no-57-yes-4/
Tucker and Hannity threw accusations against NBC big boys last night re the Pussygate tape. They said NBC top brass tried to influence the election - and NBC refused to comment. NBC let's not forget paid Chelsea $600k for a few puff pieces.
It's fascinating to watch - Fox is now squishing the other cable channels - and even networks. More watched Trump's congressional speech on Fox than ABC.
The whole dynamic is shifting.
I'd be interested to see how costs are awarded? Will it all come out of the estate. Or will the daughter have to pay?