I wrote a thread in September suggesting that Osborne might be the answer to Brexit; I was thinking on a good cop, bad cop, basis.
Thing is: I'm not sure he could work under May's strategic direction, and he's not done much to repair trust with the Party.
I agree on both points, but the first one should, I think, trump all other considerations. Osborne would be ideal in the role of re-building trust with the EU27, and he'd also be ideal in keeping good relations with the US, and with China and India.
My point, though, is not so much that he should be appointed but that Boris is proving too much of a liability. He should be replaced, if not by Osborne, then by someone else.
I remember the by election programme that evening very well. On the same day Labour lost Hamilton to Winnie Ewing of the SNP and Leicester South West to the Tories on a very big swing. Sir Edward Boyle was the Tory representative on the BBC TV panel. Labour's small majority in November 1967 was actually still slightly bigger than the margin it had achieved in 1959 and 1955 - which might suggest that the seat had already begun to drift away from the Tories in demographic terms.
We start from here on the day Brexit. We then start selling Scotch whisky to India and China at zero % tariff.
Err, tariffs are imposed by the importing country!
True, there is a case for the UK declaring unilateral free trade (i.e. not imposing any tariffs on any imports whatsoever) but I suspect very difficult to do politically.
And if the Europeans turn round and say "thanks very much for not putting tariffs on our goods, but we'll be slapping 25% tariffs on you"?
We reciprocate but are now free to zero rate beyond Europe if we choose.
This is where the trade balance comes into play. We are a better customer than they are.
It's almost as if some can't comprehend that we have a massive trade deficit.
Apparently we aren't allowed to operate preferential trade as an independent nation yet that is the entire argument for the EU.
We are in a world of complex, integrated trade deals, associations, and interrelated commercial relations.
And that, without stepping back into the ring for some more sparring, is why leaving the EU is so misconceived.
That is true but it is unravelling.
The US is withdrawing and so are we. The perception is that the deals have turned sour and had negative side effects.
I read the mood as one where similarly minded and similarly wealthy nations are now looking to set up a new club without the downsides.
A club of like-minded nations you say? Coming together to determine mutually agreed rules of trade between themselves you say?
We start from here on the day Brexit. We then start selling Scotch whisky to India and China at zero % tariff.
Err, tariffs are imposed by the importing country!
True, there is a case for the UK declaring unilateral free trade (i.e. not imposing any tariffs on any imports whatsoever) but I suspect very difficult to do politically.
And if the Europeans turn round and say "thanks very much for not putting tariffs on our goods, but we'll be slapping 25% tariffs on you"?
We reciprocate but are now free to zero rate beyond Europe if we choose.
This is where the trade balance comes into play. We are a better customer than they are.
It's almost as if some can't comprehend that we have a massive trade deficit.
Apparently we aren't allowed to operate preferential trade as an independent nation yet that is the entire argument for the EU.
We are in a world of complex, integrated trade deals, associations, and interrelated commercial relations.
And that, without stepping back into the ring for some more sparring, is why leaving the EU is so misconceived.
That is true but it is unravelling.
The US is withdrawing and so are we. The perception is that the deals have turned sour and had negative side effects.
I read the mood as one where similarly minded and similarly wealthy nations are now looking to set up a new club without the downsides.
A club of like-minded nations you say? Coming together to determine mutually agreed rules of trade between themselves you say?
...
Like the EU used to be.
The problems have arisen with the imperfect designs of;
a) The Euro zone b) Freedom of Movement and the absence of a common immigration and Asylum policy; c) The mythical Single Market.
All three have either pulled together in haste or poorly adapted with expansion. The inability to adjust when problems become evident is one of the most significant downsides of the EU.
I think Osborne will be content with those numbers. A huge net 'wrong', but only an MoE change over 2015.
Does Osbo care? Is he really that bothered about remaining an MP? If so, he has an odd way of going about winning a selection contest.
(That said, as someone who might well be running at least one selection contest, I can see that his capacity to fundraise would be a net positive).
Monetarily no, Osborne's not only earning vastly more than backbench MPs but significantly more than May too and in fact he is even outearning his old boss Cameron on the lecture circuit
I don't know why he doesn't just stand down. Perhaps he's waiting for May to stumble and then to ride to the government's rescue but that seems like wishful thinking. Perhaps he's also waiting to see whether the new boundaries will be implemented. Either way, he'll need to make a call fairly soon - probably within a year.
He was positioning himself as (as he would see it) the rational alternative to Boris as Foreign Secretary only a few months ago.
Perhaps he's concluded he isn't going anywhere. He's not going to be Chancellor again, and he's too disliked to become party leader/PM.
So, barring a black swan, what else is there for him in politics?
Theresa May should sack Boris and appoint Osborne in his place. Boris does seem to irritate our EU friends to a quite damaging degree, and that is not going to be at all helpful in the negotiations.
Osborne irritates the British public to a quite damaging degree...
Yes, the Gogglebox crowd had a pop at him when it was announced he was getting the Editor's job....
I think Osborne will be content with those numbers. A huge net 'wrong', but only an MoE change over 2015.
Does Osbo care? Is he really that bothered about remaining an MP? If so, he has an odd way of going about winning a selection contest.
(That said, as someone who might well be running at least one selection contest, I can see that his capacity to fundraise would be a net positive).
Monetarily no, Osborne's not only earning vastly more than backbench MPs but significantly more than May too and in fact he is even outearning his old boss Cameron on the lecture circuit
I don't know why he doesn't just stand down. Perhaps he's waiting for May to stumble and then to ride to the government's rescue but that seems like wishful thinking. Perhaps he's also waiting to see whether the new boundaries will be implemented. Either way, he'll need to make a call fairly soon - probably within a year.
He was positioning himself as (as he would see it) the rational alternative to Boris as Foreign Secretary only a few months ago.
Perhaps he's concluded he isn't going anywhere. He's not going to be Chancellor again, and he's too disliked to become party leader/PM.
So, barring a black swan, what else is there for him in politics?
Theresa May should sack Boris and appoint Osborne in his place. Boris does seem to irritate our EU friends to a quite damaging degree, and that is not going to be at all helpful in the negotiations.
Osborne irritates the British public to a quite damaging degree...
Yes, the Gogglebox crowd had a pop at him when it was announced he was getting the Editor's job....
Never underestimate the gogglebox opinions, they had Ed pegged as a loser well in advance of the GE.
I wrote a thread in September suggesting that Osborne might be the answer to Brexit; I was thinking on a good cop, bad cop, basis.
Thing is: I'm not sure he could work under May's strategic direction, and he's not done much to repair trust with the Party.
I agree on both points, but the first one should, I think, trump all other considerations. Osborne would be ideal in the role of re-building trust with the EU27, and he'd also be ideal in keeping good relations with the US, and with China and India.
My point, though, is not so much that he should be appointed but that Boris is proving too much of a liability. He should be replaced, if not by Osborne, then by someone else.
I haven't been bowled over by Boris.
Then again, I don't know what he's been up to behind the scenes.
Armchair Corbynista showing their complete lack of interest in anything other than leadership contests?
'"About 60 per cent of these people joined to take part in the 2016 leadership election and immediately went into arrears," the report said.
"The other 40 per cent joined to take part in the 2015 leadership election and didn’t renew their membership after the first year.”'
So yes, Corbynites leaving after a year or two rather than old-school members getting pissed off.
I didn't quite understand the arrears comment. Are they saying that people ticked to join the party, in order to vote in the contest, and then never paid any subs (or at least paid the first month and then not again)?
At one point we were told Labour was making serious money from all the new members.
Presumably yes, they paid the first installment, voted, and didn't pay another penny.
I'm sure there are plenty of people who signed up to get a vote and are still members on paper but don't consider themselves to be members or have any intention of renewing.
Well the 60% who joined in 2016 to take part in the leadership election were not allowed to vote, so one can understand them being pissed off with the Labour Party moving the goalposts to disallow newer members from voting.
I think Osborne will be content with those numbers. A huge net 'wrong', but only an MoE change over 2015.
Does Osbo care? Is he really that bothered about remaining an MP? If so, he has an odd way of going about winning a selection contest.
(That said, as someone who might well be running at least one selection contest, I can see that his capacity to fundraise would be a net positive).
Monetarily no, Osborne's not only earning vastly more than backbench MPs but significantly more than May too and in fact he is even outearning his old boss Cameron on the lecture circuit
I don't know why he doesn't just stand down. Perhaps he's waiting for May to stumble and then to ride to the government's rescue but that seems like wishful thinking. Perhaps he's also waiting to see whether the new boundaries will be implemented. Either way, he'll need to make a call fairly soon - probably within a year.
He was positioning himself as (as he would see it) the rational alternative to Boris as Foreign Secretary only a few months ago.
Perhaps he's concluded he isn't going anywhere. He's not going to be Chancellor again, and he's too disliked to become party leader/PM.
So, barring a black swan, what else is there for him in politics?
Theresa May should sack Boris and appoint Osborne in his place. Boris does seem to irritate our EU friends to a quite damaging degree, and that is not going to be at all helpful in the negotiations.
Osborne irritates the British public to a quite damaging degree...
Yes, the Gogglebox crowd had a pop at him when it was announced he was getting the Editor's job....
Never underestimate the gogglebox opinions, they had Ed pegged as a loser well in advance of the GE.
Though Ed's bank balance is nowhere near as big as George's is now
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
I wrote a thread in September suggesting that Osborne might be the answer to Brexit; I was thinking on a good cop, bad cop, basis.
Thing is: I'm not sure he could work under May's strategic direction, and he's not done much to repair trust with the Party.
I agree on both points, but the first one should, I think, trump all other considerations. Osborne would be ideal in the role of re-building trust with the EU27, and he'd also be ideal in keeping good relations with the US, and with China and India.
My point, though, is not so much that he should be appointed but that Boris is proving too much of a liability. He should be replaced, if not by Osborne, then by someone else.
Boris has a much better relationship with the Trump administration than Osborne could, given the latter's backing of Remain and thinly disguised cheering for Hillary
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
The most noticable difference the early days of Brexit will make is the complexity of the forms we will have to fill in. This morning I received something which is known as a W-8BEN-E which I understand relates to a small investment I have in the US. It is 10 pages long and a flavour can be seen from question 1 under the title 'status'.
"Are you a non participating FFI including a limited FFI or an FFI related to a reporting IGA FFI other than a deemed compliant FFI participating FFI or exempt beneficial owner?"
Imagine the 'Leavers' of Clackton Hartlipool and Stoke who require aids such as 'open other end' on the bottom of milk-bottles grappling with FORMS like this?
Because once we are on our own this is going to be the norm. Years of non bureaucratic existance will be over. It'll be like dealing with the US every day
You have to fill in a W-8BEN-E as a private investor? Really? What kind of stuff are you investing in that get caught by the US FATCA regulations?
I don't even know what the investment is. Possibly a unit trust or even just a part of a unit trust? It's so ridiculous and difficult i'm going to call them up and tell them to sell it whatever it is. It's driving me mad!
I get the same forms for my US taxes. Insane bureaucracy. America is famous for it.
You could just about do your own self-employed UK tax forms, with half a brain and Google to help.
Impossible with America. You have to use an accountant, who will cost you folding money. I wonder if there is some freemasonic deal between accountants, the IRS and the American Treasury.
Yes, but you are at least earning in the US ?
What's (most) ridiculous about their system is that they claim universal tax jurisdiction. The only other nations that do so, as far as I'm aware, are Eritrea and North Korea. They also have the fairly unusual* system of citizenship base tax...
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
Once we leave the EU we need someone to sell Britain and Boris is the ideal man for that, he should stay
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
It is not the Boris factor which will decide how good a deal, if any, we get from the EU but the concessions May is prepared to make on EU migration to the UK and contributions to the EU budget
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
This is interesting: "If all goes well, the 27 believe, two years could suffice for the completion of the Article 50 deal and a sketch of the future relationship in a political declaration. That would fit the wording of Article 50, which says the Union should write the withdrawal agreement “taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union”. The details of the future relationship could then be negotiated during the transitional phase, after Britain leaves the EU."
Sort of feels like that'll be where we might get to, with a transitional arrangement covering the interim, which I reckon could be quite long (3-6 years), during which the permanent FTA is resolved, and businesses adjust.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Nicky Morgan?
He said talented.
She did wonders for school standards.
A real pity that her and Gove are on the backbenches and not in the cabinet as Justice and Education Secretaries
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
Considering all the pointless fuss after an idle tweet from Donald Trump led a lot of people who should know better to claim he was trying to pick our ambassador to the US, I'm not sure sacking the Foreign Secretary because some EU leaders don't like him sends out a very good signal.
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
Considering all the pointless fuss after an idle tweet from Donald Trump led a lot of people who should know better to claim he was trying to pick our ambassador to the US, I'm not sure sacking the Foreign Secretary because some EU leaders don't like him sends out a very good signal.
It would be like Churchill sacking Monty in 1944, just because the Germans don't like him
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
It is not the Boris factor which will decide how good a deal, if any, we get from the EU but the concessions May is prepared to make on EU migration to the UK and contributions to the EU budget
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Nicky Morgan?
He said talented.
She did wonders for school standards.
A real pity that her and Gove are on the backbenches and not in the cabinet as Justice and Education Secretaries
This is interesting: "If all goes well, the 27 believe, two years could suffice for the completion of the Article 50 deal and a sketch of the future relationship in a political declaration. That would fit the wording of Article 50, which says the Union should write the withdrawal agreement “taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union”. The details of the future relationship could then be negotiated during the transitional phase, after Britain leaves the EU."
Sort of feels like that'll be where we might get to, with a transitional arrangement covering the interim, which I reckon could be quite long (3-6 years), during which the permanent FTA is resolved, and businesses adjust.
Yes, if all goes well, that is what will happen. But both sides have (quite rightly IMO) said that any transitional deal can't be put in place until we have agreement on the broad outline of the final deal. In other words, if the transitional period is for giving time to work out the detail and to put in place any new administrative structures, that's fine, but it can't a fudge for avoiding having to reach agreement on the final deal.
Considering all the pointless fuss after an idle tweet from Donald Trump led a lot of people who should know better to claim he was trying to pick our ambassador to the US, I'm not sure sacking the Foreign Secretary because some EU leaders don't like him sends out a very good signal.
It would send out the signal that we are not hostile to the EU27. Sounds a pretty good signal to me, given that we're trying to reach an amicable and mutually-beneficial deal with them.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
It is not the Boris factor which will decide how good a deal, if any, we get from the EU but the concessions May is prepared to make on EU migration to the UK and contributions to the EU budget
Considering all the pointless fuss after an idle tweet from Donald Trump led a lot of people who should know better to claim he was trying to pick our ambassador to the US, I'm not sure sacking the Foreign Secretary because some EU leaders don't like him sends out a very good signal.
It would send out the signal that we are not hostile to the EU27. Sounds a pretty good signal to me.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
That's quite remarkable when you consider that something like 10% of the country's population was in France.
Just because the babies were all born in Iceland, it doesn't mean that they were all conceived there.
They're all cousins anyway
All the kids in Iceland have an app on their phone which when you bump phones with another person it tells you if you are too closely related to get it on or not.
Introduce that to Norfolk and everyone would be celibate.
Considering all the pointless fuss after an idle tweet from Donald Trump led a lot of people who should know better to claim he was trying to pick our ambassador to the US, I'm not sure sacking the Foreign Secretary because some EU leaders don't like him sends out a very good signal.
It would send out the signal that we are not hostile to the EU27. Sounds a pretty good signal to me.
We already did that by picking a Remainer as PM
That's not how they see it, and in any case they think she is in thrall to the loons. Whether their view is right or wrong is irrelevant, of course, what matters is the political impact of it.
In any case, I can see that the unique Boris style might be somewhat perplexing to staid Swedes and excitable Frenchmen.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
It's easy to hold the coalition together before you actually do anything. The tricky part is going to be selling the inevitable compromises that will follow all the brinksmanship and Tough Stands. That's the point where the tabloids will start screaming about sell-outs and ambitious politicians will want to start implying that she's bollocksed it up and they'd have done a better job. She'll want the leading Brexit people tied tightly to whatever she ends up coming up with, so they can't accuse her of betrayal.
BETTING... Betway have an interesting bet which is 4/11 for any non-Belgian to win the Tour of Flanders on Sunday. The only Belgian with a realistic chance is Greg van Avermaet who has just flogged himself to oblivion to win E3 Harelbeke and Gent-Wevelgem this week. The Tour of Flanders is the toughest race on the tour so effectively betting that GvA can't win it at 4/11 is great value as he cannot have fully recovered.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
Considering all the pointless fuss after an idle tweet from Donald Trump led a lot of people who should know better to claim he was trying to pick our ambassador to the US, I'm not sure sacking the Foreign Secretary because some EU leaders don't like him sends out a very good signal.
It would send out the signal that we are not hostile to the EU27. Sounds a pretty good signal to me.
We already did that by picking a Remainer as PM
That's not how they see it, and in any case they think she in in thrall to the loons. Whether their view is right or wrong is irrelevant, of course, what matters is the political impact of it.
In any case, I can see that the unique Boris style might be somewhat perplexing to staid Swedes and excitable Frenchmen.
As I said it is the concessions May will have to make on EU migration and EU budget contributions that will determine whether or not we get a trade deal of some form, not what post Boris has in the Cabinet. May also has to think beyond and Boris is ideally placed to sell post Brexit Britain to the rest of the world, including Trumps USA
According to The Times in a leaked letter to an SDLP MP, David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, wrote: “If a majority of the people of Northern Ireland were ever to vote to become part of a united Ireland the UK Government will honour its commitment to enable that to happen.”
He added: “In that event, Northern Ireland would be in a position of becoming part of an existing EU member state, rather than seeking to join the EU as a new independent state.”
At least he is not advocating the breakup of the UK as a result of Brexit....
According to The Times in a leaked letter to an SDLP MP, David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, wrote: “If a majority of the people of Northern Ireland were ever to vote to become part of a united Ireland the UK Government will honour its commitment to enable that to happen.”
He added: “In that event, Northern Ireland would be in a position of becoming part of an existing EU member state, rather than seeking to join the EU as a new independent state.”
At least he is not advocating the breakup of the UK as a result of Brexit....
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
The Continuity Cameron Army/Team Osborne/The Provisional Wing of The One Nation Army aren't going anywhere or defecting.
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
The Continuity Cameron Army/Team Osborne/The Provisional Wing of The One Nation Army aren't going anywhere or defecting.
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
has the London Evening Standard imploded so quickly that he needs to go back to the day job?
Considering all the pointless fuss after an idle tweet from Donald Trump led a lot of people who should know better to claim he was trying to pick our ambassador to the US, I'm not sure sacking the Foreign Secretary because some EU leaders don't like him sends out a very good signal.
It would send out the signal that we are not hostile to the EU27. Sounds a pretty good signal to me.
We already did that by picking a Remainer as PM
That's not how they see it, and in any case they think she is in thrall to the loons. Whether their view is right or wrong is irrelevant, of course, what matters is the political impact of it.
In any case, I can see that the unique Boris style might be somewhat perplexing to staid Swedes and excitable Frenchmen.
"To be fair to May’s government, many of its senior figures are gradually getting the message. But not all of them. When Boris Johnson said in November that the idea of free movement being a founding principle of the EU was “a total myth” and “bollocks”, he was not only factually wrong but also offensive. The Foreign Secretary was at it again in January, when President François Hollande said that Britain’s Brexit deal would have to be worse than membership. Johnson quipped that Hollande wanted “to administer punishment beatings to anyone who wishes to escape, rather in the manner of some World War Two movie” – humour that did not travel well."
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
It's easy to hold the coalition together before you actually do anything. The tricky part is going to be selling the inevitable compromises that will follow all the brinksmanship and Tough Stands. That's the point where the tabloids will start screaming about sell-outs and ambitious politicians will want to start implying that she's bollocksed it up and they'd have done a better job. She'll want the leading Brexit people tied tightly to whatever she ends up coming up with, so they can't accuse her of betrayal.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
The Continuity Cameron Army/Team Osborne/The Provisional Wing of The One Nation Army aren't going anywhere or defecting.
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
The Continuity Cameron Army/Team Osborne/The Provisional Wing of The One Nation Army aren't going anywhere or defecting.
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
has the London Evening Standard imploded so quickly that he needs to go back to the day job?
In the next few years The Standard is going to become the greatest, bigly newspaper in the world.
The Daily Mail has told critics of its front page which pictured Theresa May and Nicola Sturgeon and asked "who won Legs-it" to "get a life!"
"Is there a rule that says political coverage must be dull or has a po-faced BBC and left-wing commentariat, so obsessed by the Daily Mail, lost all sense of humour… and proportion?"
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
The Continuity Cameron Army/Team Osborne/The Provisional Wing of The One Nation Army aren't going anywhere or defecting.
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
Nicky Morgan probably isn't going anywhere along with the rest of the Cameroon wing, but surely you have to accept that Osborne has chosen to go.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
The Continuity Cameron Army/Team Osborne/The Provisional Wing of The One Nation Army aren't going anywhere or defecting.
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
has the London Evening Standard imploded so quickly that he needs to go back to the day job?
In the next few years The Standard is going to become the greatest, bigly newspaper in the world.
chortle
after two years of Osbone it will aspire to be fish and chip wrappings
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
The Continuity Cameron Army/Team Osborne/The Provisional Wing of The One Nation Army aren't going anywhere or defecting.
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
Nicky Morgan probably isn't going anywhere along with the rest of the Cameroon wing, but surely you have to accept that Osborne has chosen to go.
I notice the guardian brought out the red flashing live coverage section for this critical story of leg-gate. On the other hand sky are doing some great grown up journalism over the battle for mosul.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if May sacked Boris in a reshuffle before long. By all accounts, she only appointed him in the first place because she felt to "unify the party" she needed to get one of the top Leavers in post, and she found Michael Gove too beyond the pale. But the party is unified now and she is incredibly popular with the Brexit wing of her party, so job done, no need to keep a Foreign Secretary who only ever drops the government into hot water.
That said, looking down the Cabinet list, I'm not sure who else would be a suitable FS. Possibly Michael Fallon?
Rudd, Hammond, Hunt or Fallon could do it.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
I can think of one talented former Cabinet member currently on the backbenches who could do it, but: a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Ken Clarke or Nicky Morgan?
She is contemplating quitting the Tories.
After this story was published Ms Morgan said it was "total rubbish & deliberate mischief making. No 'hint' given whatsoeve
Didn't Carswell say he was '100% UKIP' or something like that around a week ago? Which is not to say that Morgan is contemplating quitting, but no politician would ever be honest about it if they were.
The Continuity Cameron Army/Team Osborne/The Provisional Wing of The One Nation Army aren't going anywhere or defecting.
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
Nicky Morgan probably isn't going anywhere along with the rest of the Cameroon wing, but surely you have to accept that Osborne has chosen to go.
I wonder why this passage from the book I am currently reading (Cognitive Surplus, Clay Shirky) made me immediately think of Trump:
"because external enemies are such spurs to group solidarity, some groups will anoint paranoid leaders because such people are expert at identifying external threats, thus generating pleasurable group solidarity even when the threats aren't real."
It explains a lot about why 'fake news' stories can go viral - the sense of being an insider on the scoop and playing your communal part in spreading it.
Much as we tut tut at politicians having 2 jobs it has to be admitted until Brexit the HoC had become a bit of a talking shop with so many real powers devolved to Brussels. Osborne's stance will be less justifiable in the years to come.
There's speculation in this week's New Scientist that one of Putin's main reasons for allegedly helping to engineer the election of Trump may have been his and his party's climate change denial. A major drive towards the development and use of renewable energy sources and energy conservation could have spelt disaster for a Russian economy dependent on exports of gas and oil, so it is very much in Russia's interest to sabotage any moves in this direction. And, of course, Russia is a country that may actually benefit from a warming climate.
Full border control Full maritime rights Full completion by 2019 No divorce payment No European jurisdiction or impediment WTO seat and free to trade wherever
Full border control Full maritime rights Full completion by 2019 No divorce payment No European jurisdiction or impediment WTO seat and free to trade wherever
We start from here on the day Brexit. We then start selling Scotch whisky to India and China at zero % tariff.
Err, tariffs are imposed by the importing country!
True, there is a case for the UK declaring unilateral free trade (i.e. not imposing any tariffs on any imports whatsoever) but I suspect very difficult to do politically.
And if the Europeans turn round and say "thanks very much for not putting tariffs on our goods, but we'll be slapping 25% tariffs on you"?
We reciprocate but are now free to zero rate beyond Europe if we choose.
This is where the trade balance comes into play. We are a better customer than they are.
It's almost as if some can't comprehend that we have a massive trade deficit.
Apparently we aren't allowed to operate preferential trade as an independent nation yet that is the entire argument for the EU.
We are in a world of complex, integrated trade deals, associations, and interrelated commercial relations.
And that, without stepping back into the ring for some more sparring, is why leaving the EU is so misconceived.
That is true but it is unravelling.
The US is withdrawing and so are we. The perception is that the deals have turned sour and had negative side effects.
I read the mood as one where similarly minded and similarly wealthy nations are now looking to set up a new club without the downsides.
A club of like-minded nations you say? Coming together to determine mutually agreed rules of trade between themselves you say?
...
If there were no further treaties after the SEA, I would be the most Europhile poster here. I'd make young William Glenn look like Bill Cash.
Full border control Full maritime rights Full completion by 2019 No divorce payment No European jurisdiction or impediment WTO seat and free to trade wherever
And what, if we don't get all six - we don't leave?
Typical Guardian, an unusual cricketer appears on the scene and instead of singing his praises for bowling something unusual, they complain about cricketing terminology:
There's speculation in this week's New Scientist that one of Putin's main reasons for allegedly helping to engineer the election of Trump may have been his and his party's climate change denial. A major drive towards the development and use of renewable energy sources and energy conservation could have spelt disaster for a Russian economy dependent on exports of gas and oil, so it is very much in Russia's interest to sabotage any moves in this direction. And, of course, Russia is a country that may actually benefit from a warming climate.
That's an interesting angle. The energy and anti-sanctions wishes of the Russians are well known; the climate change denial one is less mentioned (although makes sense given Russia's only being kept anywhere near afloat by energy exports).
Musk must be a target for Russia now in so many ways ...
Also: to think what Russia might have been with decent leadership.
Typical Guardian, an unusual cricketer appears on the scene and instead of singing his praises for bowling something unusual, they complain about cricketing terminology:
Another example of The Guardian covering the most important issues of the day...who could forget the Thomas the Tank Engine is a racist and a sexist..as of course we can all be trans-racial nowadays.
There's speculation in this week's New Scientist that one of Putin's main reasons for allegedly helping to engineer the election of Trump may have been his and his party's climate change denial. A major drive towards the development and use of renewable energy sources and energy conservation could have spelt disaster for a Russian economy dependent on exports of gas and oil, so it is very much in Russia's interest to sabotage any moves in this direction. And, of course, Russia is a country that may actually benefit from a warming climate.
That's an interesting angle. The energy and anti-sanctions wishes of the Russians are well known; the climate change denial one is less mentioned (although makes sense given Russia's only being kept anywhere near afloat by energy exports).
Musk must be a target for Russia now in so many ways ...
Also: to think what Russia might have been with decent leadership.
There is scarcely a point in Russian history, except maybe the mid 18th century, when that last remark wouldn't have been pertinent!
Edit: my chronology is out there - should have said the late 18th century.
Typical Guardian, an unusual cricketer appears on the scene and instead of singing his praises for bowling something unusual, they complain about cricketing terminology:
Perhaps the Guardian would like to do some polling* in China to see the level of offence taken by the Chinese at a cricketing term (what's cricket?, 99% ask) - rather than assume the enormous slight they perceive.
"What do you mean, the Chinese don't take offence? Well, THEY BLOODY WELL SHOULD! "Authoritarian bastards....
Typical Guardian, an unusual cricketer appears on the scene and instead of singing his praises for bowling something unusual, they complain about cricketing terminology:
Perhaps the Guardian would like to do some polling* in China to see the level of offence taken by the Chinese at a cricketing term (what's cricket?, 99% ask) - rather than assume the enormous slight they perceive.
"What do you mean, the Chinese don't take offence? Well, THEY BLOODY WELL SHOULD! "Authoritarian bastards....
*Obviously, I jest. The Guardian has no money....
Its the classic, I am offended on behalf of those people over there that should be offended at what you said.
Typical Guardian, an unusual cricketer appears on the scene and instead of singing his praises for bowling something unusual, they complain about cricketing terminology:
Another example of The Guardian covering the most important issues of the day...who could forget the Thomas the Tank Engine is a racist and a sexist..as of course we can all be trans-racial nowadays.
In his defence, Thomas claimed he was trains-racial....
Typical Guardian, an unusual cricketer appears on the scene and instead of singing his praises for bowling something unusual, they complain about cricketing terminology:
That's actually quite interesting though. I only knew the history of the Chinaman ball being about the Chinese looking West Indian. It's funny that it seems to have originated in Yorkshire
Full border control Full maritime rights Full completion by 2019 No divorce payment No European jurisdiction or impediment WTO seat and free to trade wherever
And what, if we don't get all six - we don't leave?
If we don't get all six Labour will abstain on the final Commons vote.
There's speculation in this week's New Scientist that one of Putin's main reasons for allegedly helping to engineer the election of Trump may have been his and his party's climate change denial. A major drive towards the development and use of renewable energy sources and energy conservation could have spelt disaster for a Russian economy dependent on exports of gas and oil, so it is very much in Russia's interest to sabotage any moves in this direction. And, of course, Russia is a country that may actually benefit from a warming climate.
That's an interesting angle. The energy and anti-sanctions wishes of the Russians are well known; the climate change denial one is less mentioned (although makes sense given Russia's only being kept anywhere near afloat by energy exports).
Musk must be a target for Russia now in so many ways ...
Also: to think what Russia might have been with decent leadership.
There is scarcely a point in Russian history, except maybe the mid 18th century, when that last remark wouldn't have been pertinent!
Edit: my chronology is out there - should have said the late 18th century.
Also the early 18th century, under Peter I, and - to a lesser extent, because they had nothing like the power that Catherine and Peter did - the Witte/Stolypin regimes of the late 19th / early 20th century.
Typical Guardian, an unusual cricketer appears on the scene and instead of singing his praises for bowling something unusual, they complain about cricketing terminology:
Another example of The Guardian covering the most important issues of the day...who could forget the Thomas the Tank Engine is a racist and a sexist..as of course we can all be trans-racial nowadays.
In his defence, Thomas claimed he was trains-racial....
Full border control Full maritime rights Full completion by 2019 No divorce payment No European jurisdiction or impediment WTO seat and free to trade wherever
And what, if we don't get all six - we don't leave?
Typical Guardian, an unusual cricketer appears on the scene and instead of singing his praises for bowling something unusual, they complain about cricketing terminology:
Another example of The Guardian covering the most important issues of the day...who could forget the Thomas the Tank Engine is a racist and a sexist..as of course we can all be trans-racial nowadays.
In his defence, Thomas claimed he was trains-racial....
Comments
My point, though, is not so much that he should be appointed but that Boris is proving too much of a liability. He should be replaced, if not by Osborne, then by someone else.
The problems have arisen with the imperfect designs of;
a) The Euro zone
b) Freedom of Movement and the absence of a common immigration and Asylum policy;
c) The mythical Single Market.
All three have either pulled together in haste or poorly adapted with expansion. The inability to adjust when problems become evident is one of the most significant downsides of the EU.
http://labourlist.org/2017/03/gorton-by-election-to-be-held-on-4th-may/
LukeSandy. May the 4th be with you!https://twitter.com/BraidenHT/status/846694655450398720
Then again, I don't know what he's been up to behind the scenes.
More
#BrexitEve. No Santa but thousands of old men will be emptying their sacks. Prob over the #legsit pic.
And there a few more junior ministers who could too, but it'd be a big promotion.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2017/583130/IPOL_IDA(2017)583130_EN.pdf
Boris is, rightly or wrongly, the focus of bad-feeling between the EU27 and the UK. Sacking him would be symbolic, ironically rather in the same way as Theresa May's sacking of Osborne last year was.
What's (most) ridiculous about their system is that they claim universal tax jurisdiction. The only other nations that do so, as far as I'm aware, are Eritrea and North Korea.
They also have the fairly unusual* system of citizenship base tax...
*
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Individual_taxation_systems.png#/media/File:Individual_taxation_systems.png
a) I don't think Boris needs to be replaced
b) My suggestion would rile people here up something rotten
Sort of feels like that'll be where we might get to, with a transitional arrangement covering the interim, which I reckon could be quite long (3-6 years), during which the permanent FTA is resolved, and businesses adjust.
A real pity that her and Gove are on the backbenches and not in the cabinet as Justice and Education Secretaries
Your lack of GRAMMAR school education is showing.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/top-tory-mp-nicky-morgan-10113237
Banks and losing against Carswell would make an election night by itself.
https://twitter.com/lowles_nick/status/846287386782945280
In any case, I can see that the unique Boris style might be somewhat perplexing to staid Swedes and excitable Frenchmen.
No stay for costs ordered.
Reason for refusal: Hopkins' application for permission to appeal left too late.
Judge says permission would have been refused anyway.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-northern-ireland-can-rejoin-eu-reunification-david-davis-stormont-a7653346.html
Trust me.
We know George will need us when he becomes Tory leader in the not too distant future.
Hopkins' application for permission to appeal two days too late:
"the order in this case was sealed two days before her application to me"
"There comes a point when the lower court no longer has jurisdiction over the case."
Judge refusing Hopkins' appeal permission application.
message. But not all of them. When Boris Johnson said in November that the idea of free
movement being a founding principle of the EU was “a total myth” and “bollocks”, he was
not only factually wrong but also offensive. The Foreign Secretary was at it again in
January, when President François Hollande said that Britain’s Brexit deal would have to be
worse than membership. Johnson quipped that Hollande wanted “to administer punishment
beatings to anyone who wishes to escape, rather in the manner of some World War Two
movie” – humour that did not travel well."
I laughed.
"Is there a rule that says political coverage must be dull or has a po-faced BBC and left-wing commentariat, so obsessed by the Daily Mail, lost all sense of humour… and proportion?"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39421279
after two years of Osbone it will aspire to be fish and chip wrappings
Cheney: Russian Cyberattack On Election Could Be Viewed As ‘Act Of War’
There’s “no doubt” Putin “tried to interfere with our fundamental democratic process,” the former vice president says.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/cheney-russian-hacking-war_us_58d9d67be4b00f68a5ca35ef?section=politics
Of course, we don't know if her lawyers forgot to ask for permission at the substantive hearing, or if she failed to give them instructions to.
Looks like nobody wants to go to Frankfurt
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/finanzen/fonds-mehr/frankfurt-ist-nicht-attraktiv-fuer-londons-banker-14946313.html
"because external enemies are such spurs to group solidarity, some groups will anoint paranoid leaders because such people are expert at identifying external threats, thus generating pleasurable group solidarity even when the threats aren't real."
It explains a lot about why 'fake news' stories can go viral - the sense of being an insider on the scoop and playing your communal part in spreading it.
Full border control
Full maritime rights
Full completion by 2019
No divorce payment
No European jurisdiction or impediment
WTO seat and free to trade wherever
http://m.slashdot.org/story/324219
PS Free the Plato One! Attica!
https://tinyurl.com/lumtuqh
Musk must be a target for Russia now in so many ways ...
Also: to think what Russia might have been with decent leadership.
Edit: my chronology is out there - should have said the late 18th century.
"What do you mean, the Chinese don't take offence? Well, THEY BLOODY WELL SHOULD! "Authoritarian bastards....
*Obviously, I jest. The Guardian has no money....