Mrs May and her government loses her majority and can't pass a budget or even Brexit related legislation such as The Great Repeal Bill (sic), fun times ahead.
Oh and primus inter pares.
If they did have the results annulled in 27 seats (!) I think we'd be seeing another general election.
How do you satisfy or circumvent the FTPA?
The Conservatives place a motion of no confidence in their own government and challenge Labour to vote against - ie they do have confidence. Which would be totally weird, but would work?
Then TMay has to inform the Queen that she has lost the confidence of the Commons and Mr. Corbyn would be invited to try to form a government. He could be PM for a few days
That does not follow. It would have before the FTPA but the FTPA has rewritten all the rules.
I don't think Mike is saying that it certainly follows - just that it is a possible development.
He (correctly, I think) progresses from 'would' to 'could' when describing the unfolding of his scenario.
He says that if May engineers a Commons defeat Corbyn *would* be invited to form a government.
That does not follow.
Of course it does not follow. May could advise the monarch to ask Corbyn to form a government, yes. She won't, though. Nor will she engineer a Commons defeat.
Even if she did engineer a Commons defeat, she'd advise the Queen that it was only a technical measure and there was no chance of Corbyn winning a confidence vote, and that therefore no action should be taken for the 14(? - off the top of my head) days before a dissolution is automatic.
Hmm...s176 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 gives a time limit of 1 year from the date that the offence was committed to bring a prosecution. If we assume that the offence is a false declaration of expenses this has to have occurred shortly after the election in 2015. I seem to vaguely recall that at least 1 application was made for the extension of this time limit. Does anyone know if there have been extensions in other cases and, if so, how many?
In "exceptional circumstances" there is a power given to Magistrates to extend the period in which a prosecution can be brought to 24 months after the offence was committed. This is conditional on there having been no delay in the prosecution. Even if the maximum extensions were given prosecutions will have to have commenced by, I would guess, the beginning of June 2017. That's pretty quick for the CPS.
Yeah, it's not pleasant. Neither was last night looking back at it.
Agreed. I rarely post these days, a handful of unpleasant individuals seem to dominate most threads these days. Quite how SeanT regularly gets away with bullying and abusing posters and telling them to leave the site. Perhaps he does own half of it as he (seriously) claimed last night, it's the only logical explanation.
Mr. T, whilst there has been some grumpiness this morning (and, by all accounts, last night) I think it's something of an exaggeration to say most threads are dominated by nastiness.
Besides, if a room's cold and everyone with a torch leaves it for a warmer place, that only makes the room colder. Better to light a cliche than curse the grumpiness.
F1: I have cast my eye over the Ladbrokes' market. Nothing that really tempts. The only things I'm properly contemplating are points for Stroll or Ocon at 2.62 and 2.75 respectively. Stroll had the car for points in Australia (probably not China) but had two unlucky DNFs. Ocon has scored in both races so far, but only just. From memory, Bahrain's more like China than Australia, so Ocon would probably be the more appealing.
Tricky, though. The midfield's pretty tight.
Not betting at this stage.
Mr D, I didn't say the threads were dominated by nastiness I said most were dominated by a few nasty individuals. There is a difference. To my mind the tone has changed since Brexit, I will still have a look occasionally in case it changes. Good luck with the book by the way.
Mr. Pulpstar, if Le Pen reaches the second round, will it make much difference (to tactical voting) if she wins or is runner-up in round one?
No. Or only insofar as whoever wins the first round may be able to pump their supporters up a little bit more in the first few hours after the result comes in. But other than that, no - it won't matter in the slightest.
Hmm...s176 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 gives a time limit of 1 year from the date that the offence was committed to bring a prosecution. If we assume that the offence is a false declaration of expenses this has to have occurred shortly after the election in 2015. I seem to vaguely recall that at least 1 application was made for the extension of this time limit. Does anyone know if there have been extensions in other cases and, if so, how many?
In "exceptional circumstances" there is a power given to Magistrates to extend the period in which a prosecution can be brought to 24 months after the offence was committed. This is conditional on there having been no delay in the prosecution. Even if the maximum extensions were given prosecutions will have to have commenced by, I would guess, the beginning of June 2017. That's pretty quick for the CPS.
I believe that all the relevant authorities were given an extension of 1 year. Not sure as to precise number.
Fair enough. It's worth noting things became rather tenser around the Scottish referendum too. I think things both here and generally will gradually cool off, and that should happen more swiftly once we're out (provided the majority are ok with the deal).
Some will be unhappy whatever happens (there's not much middle ground between WTO-Leavers and the Lib Dems' Let's Stay approach). But as long as most are reasonably content, things will calm down.
I assume on of the terms and conditions of a plane ticket is that your seat is not guaranteed in the event of an over booking and that you have to get off if asked. Airplane technically right in what they did then. I'm amazed that no one took up the $1000 not to fly.
I wouldn't assume the passengers were actually offered $1000. The timeline is very carefully worded.
Hmm...s176 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 gives a time limit of 1 year from the date that the offence was committed to bring a prosecution. If we assume that the offence is a false declaration of expenses this has to have occurred shortly after the election in 2015. I seem to vaguely recall that at least 1 application was made for the extension of this time limit. Does anyone know if there have been extensions in other cases and, if so, how many?
In "exceptional circumstances" there is a power given to Magistrates to extend the period in which a prosecution can be brought to 24 months after the offence was committed. This is conditional on there having been no delay in the prosecution. Even if the maximum extensions were given prosecutions will have to have commenced by, I would guess, the beginning of June 2017. That's pretty quick for the CPS.
I believe that all the relevant authorities were given an extension of 1 year. Not sure as to precise number.
The last point is the key if there is to be any question of this undermining May's majority. I've not managed to find any internet report indicating how many extensions were granted.
I assume on of the terms and conditions of a plane ticket is that your seat is not guaranteed in the event of an over booking and that you have to get off if asked. Airplane technically right in what they did then. I'm amazed that no one took up the $1000 not to fly.
I wouldn't assume the passengers were actually offered $1000. The timeline is very carefully worded.
The eyewitness accounts state that they were offered money, and that three people actually accepted the offer. It was the fourth that caused the problem.
Edit: my mistake, no one accepted but three were involuntarily bumped:
On Sunday, Mr. Bridges said that when he arrived at the gate about 20 minutes before boarding, United had announced that the flight was overbooked; the airline was offering $400 vouchers to anyone who would give up their seat, Mr. Bridges said.
As the passengers boarded the plane, “there was no indication anything was wrong,” Mr. Bridges said.
An airline employee came on board and said United needed four people to get off, Mr. Bridges said, adding that the airline had by then increased its incentive to an $800 voucher. The airline later said that it offered up to $1,000 in compensation.
Mr. Hobart, the United spokesman, confirmed that United sought passengers willing to give up their seats with compensation but that none stepped forward.
I assume on of the terms and conditions of a plane ticket is that your seat is not guaranteed in the event of an over booking and that you have to get off if asked. Airplane technically right in what they did then. I'm amazed that no one took up the $1000 not to fly.
I wouldn't assume the passengers were actually offered $1000. The timeline is very carefully worded.
An eye-witness said someone offered to give up their seat for $1600 and the customer service manager laughed.
Then TMay has to inform the Queen that she has lost the confidence of the Commons and Mr. Corbyn would be invited to try to form a government. He could be PM for a few days
Why do you assume that he would be invited to try to form a government? I don't think there is any chance of that. He would no doubt be asked if he was in a position to form a government, but that is a different matter altogether, because the answer would be no. Since no-one else could form a government, Theresa May would stay as PM.
Why do you assume that he would be invited to try to form a government? I don't think there is any chance of that. He would no doubt be asked if he was in a position to form a government, but that is a different matter altogether, because the answer would be no. Since no-one else could form a government, Theresa May would stay as PM.
In the political vacuum that would result what would happen if George Osborne made a statement that he could form a majority government. Theresa May's power could evaporate in a flash.
On the whole, PB doesn't suffer too much. But some posters can be occasionally absolutely vile to each other. Some of it feels like bullying, whether intended or not.
Fortunately, most posters on PB stick to arguments from all points of view and are perfectly polite to each other. This makes the site a rewarding one to read. In general, I think people who resort to insults have run out of arguments. Beverley hopefully seems to have the resilience to stand up to bullying, which is what this was.
No it really wasn't. I won't treat any poster differently because they are a man or a woman whatever dumb claims Topping might make. Beverley does give as good as she gets as do the rest of the posters around here and what happened last night was no worse than the treatment many others get on here on a regular basis whether from Sean, myself or many other posters on all sides of the argument. All that has happened this morning is that Topping saw an opportunity to try and make something of it in lieu of actually making any substantive points.
So absolutely no apologies for what was said last night and certainly no intention to change behaviour simply because an opponent is female.
SeanT may be a right-wing lunatic but he is not a bully.
There are others who are though and hopefully in time they will be weeded out.
If you say so but I don't know else you could interpret the comment below from SeanT to Beverley C last night:-
"Just Go? Can we agree you're not wanted? You don't want to be on here anymore, and we think you're - allegorically - a deluded, fecally vomiting old crone who should be euthanised?
What's the prob? You go, we stay, everyone is happy. Bye bye there. Bye bye"
We all say things we regret in the heat of the moment but their are a handful of posters who resort to abuse on a daily basis.
Why do you assume that he would be invited to try to form a government? I don't think there is any chance of that. He would no doubt be asked if he was in a position to form a government, but that is a different matter altogether, because the answer would be no. Since no-one else could form a government, Theresa May would stay as PM.
In the political vacuum that would result what would happen if George Osborne made a statement that he could form a majority government. Theresa May's power could evaporate in a flash.
Then TMay has to inform the Queen that she has lost the confidence of the Commons and Mr. Corbyn would be invited to try to form a government. He could be PM for a few days
Why do you assume that he would be invited to try to form a government? I don't think there is any chance of that. He would no doubt be asked if he was in a position to form a government, but that is a different matter altogether, because the answer would be no. Since no-one else could form a government, Theresa May would stay as PM.
But he would be able to form a government . He would fail to secure an Affirmatory Vote of Confidence from the House of Commons , but a Government would already have to be in existence before such a vote could take place - in that there could be no Vote of Confidence on an Administration that had not come in to being!
I assume on of the terms and conditions of a plane ticket is that your seat is not guaranteed in the event of an over booking and that you have to get off if asked. Airplane technically right in what they did then. I'm amazed that no one took up the $1000 not to fly.
I wouldn't assume the passengers were actually offered $1000. The timeline is very carefully worded.
The eyewitness accounts state that they were offered money, and that three people actually accepted the offer. It was the fourth that caused the problem.
Edit: my mistake, no one accepted but three were involuntarily bumped:
On Sunday, Mr. Bridges said that when he arrived at the gate about 20 minutes before boarding, United had announced that the flight was overbooked; the airline was offering $400 vouchers to anyone who would give up their seat, Mr. Bridges said.
As the passengers boarded the plane, “there was no indication anything was wrong,” Mr. Bridges said.
An airline employee came on board and said United needed four people to get off, Mr. Bridges said, adding that the airline had by then increased its incentive to an $800 voucher. The airline later said that it offered up to $1,000 in compensation.
Mr. Hobart, the United spokesman, confirmed that United sought passengers willing to give up their seats with compensation but that none stepped forward.
The other point is whether it is vouchers or cash. I did take a United Airlines compensation offer once, consisting of an overnight in a grotty airport hotel, upgrade from economy to business for the next day's transatlantic flight (which was nice), and some hundreds of dollars of vouchers. My travelling companion wanted an extra day in Seattle and I was keeping him company, so that bit was OK too. The vouchers were somewhat useless as they had to be applied against the full fare. I was probably ahead by some tens of dollars, but it wasn't really worth it.
Mr. Sandpit, I read that suggestion somewhere or other, but can't imagine Vettel would welcome it. Besides, Ferrari has a history of a 1-2 approach rather than giving equal standing.
The Mercedes seat, especially with Bottas only having a one year contract, must be more appealing on that score (and Hamilton will probably retire before Vettel too).
If there are to be by-elections in the expense scandal constituencies then surely the Conservatives would use the Brixit scare tactic - that voting in Lib Dems would mean Conservatives losing their majority and making the Brexit negotiations harder to complete.
*IF* there are (about) 19 Conservative MPs under investigation and *IF* all of them are prosecuted and by-elections called then immediately the Conservatives lose their majority.
650 MPs, less 4 Sinn Fein, less 1 Speaker, less 19 pending by-elections = 636 active MPs, majority now required = 318
Conservatives have 330 MPs, less the 19 = 311. Minority of 14.
Theresa May then has two options:
1. Call a General Election to sort things out completely; or 2. Fight 19 by-elections and hope you win at least 13 of them
Obviously the risk with (2) is that if you fail to win most of them (to be fair you should win most of them) is that you end up having to do (1) anyway. So you may as well bite the bullet and get the General Election going. FTPA not withstanding, you could set out that you need a General Election to sort things out.
Afterall, in the amazing event you lost all 19 of them - even the DUP and UUP wouldn't get you to 324 (nor even adding Carswell) - you could end up with a Labour/SNP/LibDem minority government (of about 315 ish - depending on the 'SNP-independents' and the SDLP going with Labour). You could spin it that WITHOUT a general election, a risk exists that the government changes on the strength of only the votes of 19 constituencies.
If there are to be by-elections in the expense scandal constituencies then surely the Conservatives would use the Brixit scare tactic - that voting in Lib Dems would mean Conservatives losing their majority and making the Brexit negotiations harder to complete.
Alternatively May could try to call a general election at the same time as re-running the expense scandal seat elections. Would Labour MPs comply?
I have been denied boarding when already seated on a plane and waiting for take-off. The circumstances were truly exceptional (it was during the air traffic control chaos more than a decade ago). No blood was involved and while I was very grumpy about it, I deplaned without the need for force.
If I'd been more resistant, I could have gone viral.
Why do you assume that he would be invited to try to form a government? I don't think there is any chance of that. He would no doubt be asked if he was in a position to form a government, but that is a different matter altogether, because the answer would be no. Since no-one else could form a government, Theresa May would stay as PM.
In the political vacuum that would result what would happen if George Osborne made a statement that he could form a majority government. Theresa May's power could evaporate in a flash.
Not sure he could manage a ninth job.
Tory leader is the only job Osborne appears not to have shown any interest in.
Why do you assume that he would be invited to try to form a government? I don't think there is any chance of that. He would no doubt be asked if he was in a position to form a government, but that is a different matter altogether, because the answer would be no. Since no-one else could form a government, Theresa May would stay as PM.
In the political vacuum that would result what would happen if George Osborne made a statement that he could form a majority government. Theresa May's power could evaporate in a flash.
If George Osborne, or any other MP, could credibly claim to be able to command a majority, then, yes, that MP would be invited to do so.
However, there is zero chance of that in the current make-up of the Commons, for as long as Theresa May is supported by Conservative MPs.
I think people are misunderstanding the effect of a No Confidence vote. It does not automatically mean that the PM immediately stands down, and never has. The PM remains in place until someone else can take over. The first option would be to see if anyone else could command a majority in the current parliament. If not, then after 14 days an election is called. Theresa May would remain PM during this period.
The only difference compared with the situation before the FTPA is that, previously, the PM could go to Her Maj and call for an election, a call which would immediately be granted (and the existing PM would have remained in place until after the election). Now she can't do that, but after 14 days it happens automatically.
On topic, I think it's far more likely that the Tories get a big fine, and rules are amended in future.
To call multiple by-elections would require proof that the additional expenditure over-and-above the limit was material in winning the seat, and the error knowingly and deliberately made, which would be very difficult to proof and would be heavily challenged legally.
Even if *all* 12 CPS files resulted in 12 by-elections, not all are Lib Dem seats, and any Lab-Tory marginal (e.g. South Thanet, Stroud, Broxtowe, Bury North and Lincoln) would very probably be won by May, not Corbyn's Labour.
North Cornwall, Torbay, Wells and Yeovil might be at risk, but the Tories would still (just) have an overall majority even if all were lost.
I don't know about the other three seats under investigation, but, even assuming they are all Lib Dem Seats, and also lost, the worst case scenario for May is that she's down to 323 seats.
If there are to be by-elections in the expense scandal constituencies then surely the Conservatives would use the Brixit scare tactic - that voting in Lib Dems would mean Conservatives losing their majority and making the Brexit negotiations harder to complete.
Alternatively May could try to call a general election at the same time as re-running the expense scandal seat elections. Would Labour MPs comply?
On the whole, PB doesn't suffer too much. But some posters can be occasionally absolutely vile to each other. Some of it feels like bullying, whether intended or not.
Fortunately, most posters on PB stick to arguments from all points of view and are perfectly polite to each other. This makes the site a rewarding one to read. In general, I think people who resort to insults have run out of arguments. Beverley hopefully seems to have the resilience to stand up to bullying, which is what this was.
No it really wasn't. I won't treat any poster differently because they are a man or a woman whatever dumb claims Topping might make. Beverley does give as good as she gets as do the rest of the posters around here and what happened last night was no worse than the treatment many others get on here on a regular basis whether from Sean, myself or many other posters on all sides of the argument. All that has happened this morning is that Topping saw an opportunity to try and make something of it in lieu of actually making any substantive points.
So absolutely no apologies for what was said last night and certainly no intention to change behaviour simply because an opponent is female.
I am not going to respond to the rest of your comment, except to point out you mentioned treating men and women differently. I didn't.
Now she can't do that, but after 14 days it happens automatically.
If a week is a long time in politics, a lot can happen in 14 days. It would be a huge risk for May to think she could control events for that long to make it through the other side looking like a strong leader.
Good morning everyone. The saga continues in NI. Sinn Fein now demanding a new election. I assume that means they don't want one because surely even a wet and hopeless SoS like Brokenshire won't give Sinn Fein exactly what they publicly want twice in one spring.
I'm not convinced that a second election would give Sinn Fein the result they want.
Mr. Sandpit, I read that suggestion somewhere or other, but can't imagine Vettel would welcome it. Besides, Ferrari has a history of a 1-2 approach rather than giving equal standing.
The Mercedes seat, especially with Bottas only having a one year contract, must be more appealing on that score (and Hamilton will probably retire before Vettel too).
I reckon if Bottas does well this year and doesn't do any more spinning behind the safety car, Mercedes will keep him on. Can't imagine Lewis being too happy to be alongside Alonso or Ricciardo, unless he himself fancies Kimi's seat to attempt championships with three different teams?
Good morning everyone. The saga continues in NI. Sinn Fein now demanding a new election. I assume that means they don't want one because surely even a wet and hopeless SoS like Brokenshire won't give Sinn Fein exactly what they publicly want twice in one spring.
I'm not convinced that a second election would give Sinn Fein the result they want.
Which is why I'm not convinced they want one. Having said that, I have been told the SDLP is skint so they could extend their lead over them. The DUP would almost certainly make further ground. I think they might welcome the chance to finish us off. But the SoS would be mad to call an election which would be even more unpleasant and pointless than the recent one.
On topic, I think it's far more likely that the Tories get a big fine, and rules are amended in future.
To call multiple by-elections would require proof that the additional expenditure over-and-above the limit was material in winning the seat, and the error knowingly and deliberately made, which would be very difficult to proof and would be heavily challenged legally.
Even if *all* 12 CPS files resulted in 12 by-elections, not all are Lib Dem seats, and any Lab-Tory marginal (e.g. South Thanet, Stroud, Broxtowe, Bury North and Lincoln) would very probably be won by May, not Corbyn's Labour.
North Cornwall, Torbay, Wells and Yeovil might be at risk, but the Tories would still (just) have an overall majority even if all were lost.
I don't know about the other three seats under investigation, but, even assuming they are all Lib Dem Seats, and also lost, the worst case scenario for May is that she's down to 323 seats.
SeanT may be a right-wing lunatic but he is not a bully.
There are others who are though and hopefully in time they will be weeded out.
If you say so but I don't know else you could interpret the comment below from SeanT to Beverley C last night:-
"Just Go? Can we agree you're not wanted? You don't want to be on here anymore, and we think you're - allegorically - a deluded, fecally vomiting old crone who should be euthanised?
What's the prob? You go, we stay, everyone is happy. Bye bye there. Bye bye"
We all say things we regret in the heat of the moment but their are a handful of posters who resort to abuse on a daily basis.
Only a few of them are generally funny. Sean and malc, for example.
Air travel becomes an ever more unpleasant experience that is best avoided.
Indeed. I can’t say I’ve ever enjoyed the flight or the faffing about that now precedes every boarding, but it’s a necessary evil if you wish to travel any great distance so accept it.
I have been denied boarding when already seated on a plane and waiting for take-off. The circumstances were truly exceptional (it was during the air traffic control chaos more than a decade ago). No blood was involved and while I was very grumpy about it, I deplaned without the need for force.
If I'd been more resistant, I could have gone viral.
Would your reaction had been any different if the reason for offloading was that the airline sold your seat twice, and the reason for your flight was to meet with an important client?
If there are to be by-elections in the expense scandal constituencies then surely the Conservatives would use the Brixit scare tactic - that voting in Lib Dems would mean Conservatives losing their majority and making the Brexit negotiations harder to complete.
Alternatively May could try to call a general election at the same time as re-running the expense scandal seat elections. Would Labour MPs comply?
They would be mad if they did!
The implication of that post after the last 20 months is that they will!
Edit - on a more serious note, I could easily see 50 Labour MPs backing an election as the quickest and surest - maybe only - way to get rid of Corbyn. Snag is that's not enough to trigger a dissolution.
Oh and 5,000 posts in just under 5 years. Just over 2.7 a day on average.
I am not going to respond to the rest of your comment, except to point out you mentioned treating men and women differently. I didn't.
Actually no, it was Topping who made the accusation about picking on a woman. As far as I can see that was the whole basis of his complaint. If you are going to come late to an argument you might at least get your facts right.
On topic, I think it's far more likely that the Tories get a big fine, and rules are amended in future.
To call multiple by-elections would require proof that the additional expenditure over-and-above the limit was material in winning the seat, and the error knowingly and deliberately made, which would be very difficult to proof and would be heavily challenged legally.
Even if *all* 12 CPS files resulted in 12 by-elections, not all are Lib Dem seats, and any Lab-Tory marginal (e.g. South Thanet, Stroud, Broxtowe, Bury North and Lincoln) would very probably be won by May, not Corbyn's Labour.
North Cornwall, Torbay, Wells and Yeovil might be at risk, but the Tories would still (just) have an overall majority even if all were lost.
I don't know about the other three seats under investigation, but, even assuming they are all Lib Dem Seats, and also lost, the worst case scenario for May is that she's down to 323 seats.
You may be not too far off the mark in terms of likely by election results were they to be held today. However, I would doubt that any such elections would occur before Autumn 2018 - by which time the polls may look quite a bit different . Particularly if Corbyn has gone - as I expect.
Eh? We were told consumer prices would be way up from the get go.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
Eh? We were told consumer prices would be way up from the get go.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
Good morning everyone. The saga continues in NI. Sinn Fein now demanding a new election. I assume that means they don't want one because surely even a wet and hopeless SoS like Brokenshire won't give Sinn Fein exactly what they publicly want twice in one spring.
I'm not convinced that a second election would give Sinn Fein the result they want.
Which is why I'm not convinced they want one. Having said that, I have been told the SDLP is skint so they could extend their lead over them. The DUP would almost certainly make further ground. I think they might welcome the chance to finish us off. But the SoS would be mad to call an election which would be even more unpleasant and pointless than the recent one.
There are only two potential gains for Sinn Fein I could see, in East Londonderry and Upper Bann, at the expense of the SDLP. Hopefully, Unionists there would have enough sense to give transfers to the SDLP to keep out Sinn Fein.
They could easily lose a seat in Fermanagh South Tyrone, either to the DUP or SDLP, and the DUP would be almost certain to pick up the SDLP seat in Lagan Valley. Sinn Fein could also drop marginal seats in other Western constituencies, if they can't get the same turnout as before. Realistically, I think their current total of seats is very much at the top end of what they can expect to win.
Yeah, it's not pleasant. Neither was last night looking back at it.
Agreed. I rarely post these days, a handful of unpleasant individuals seem to dominate most threads these days. Quite how SeanT regularly gets away with bullying and abusing posters and telling them to leave the site. Perhaps he does own half of it as he (seriously) claimed last night, it's the only logical explanation.
Imagine he was drunk as a skunk , he does get lots of leeway but Robert did emphatically state that he owned exactly 0% of the site , merely delusions of grandeur on his part.
Eh? We were told consumer prices would be way up from the get go.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
Mr. Sandpit, the spin wasn't great but I'd be more concerned by the substantial difference between him and Hamilton on pace. The Constructors' matters too, and a very good second driver also makes the Drivers' a bit easier by acting as a rear gunner for Hamilton. Right now we have a Hamilton-Vettel duel, with Bottas and Raikkonen fighting to be the best number two driver.
If we're playing fantasy pairings, then Alonso and Hamilton at Mercedes, Vettel and Ricciardo at Ferrari, or Alonso and Ricciardo at Mercedes with Vettel and Hamilton at Ferrari would be quite intense.
I have been denied boarding when already seated on a plane and waiting for take-off. The circumstances were truly exceptional (it was during the air traffic control chaos more than a decade ago). No blood was involved and while I was very grumpy about it, I deplaned without the need for force.
If I'd been more resistant, I could have gone viral.
Would your reaction had been any different if the reason for offloading was that the airline sold your seat twice, and the reason for your flight was to meet with an important client?
One of the cardinal sins working offshore is missing your check-in for the chopper. Not only does it cost you pay, it means that, with the choppers not flying every day, your back to back on the rig may have to stay on board an extra few days until you can get out. It makes people extremely unpopular.
As a result most guys working offshore will always take an earlier plane flight to get to Aberdeen or Stavanger to make sure they don't then miss their chopper check-in. Being bumped is so common that it is not worth taking the chance on getting the last possible flight even if it means an extra overnight in a hotel before flying to the rig.
SeanT may be a right-wing lunatic but he is not a bully.
There are others who are though and hopefully in time they will be weeded out.
If you say so but I don't know else you could interpret the comment below from SeanT to Beverley C last night:-
"Just Go? Can we agree you're not wanted? You don't want to be on here anymore, and we think you're - allegorically - a deluded, fecally vomiting old crone who should be euthanised?
What's the prob? You go, we stay, everyone is happy. Bye bye there. Bye bye"
We all say things we regret in the heat of the moment but their are a handful of posters who resort to abuse on a daily basis.
Only a few of them are generally funny. Sean and malc, for example.
On topic, I think it's far more likely that the Tories get a big fine, and rules are amended in future.
To call multiple by-elections would require proof that the additional expenditure over-and-above the limit was material in winning the seat, and the error knowingly and deliberately made, which would be very difficult to proof and would be heavily challenged legally.
Even if *all* 12 CPS files resulted in 12 by-elections, not all are Lib Dem seats, and any Lab-Tory marginal (e.g. South Thanet, Stroud, Broxtowe, Bury North and Lincoln) would very probably be won by May, not Corbyn's Labour.
North Cornwall, Torbay, Wells and Yeovil might be at risk, but the Tories would still (just) have an overall majority even if all were lost.
I don't know about the other three seats under investigation, but, even assuming they are all Lib Dem Seats, and also lost, the worst case scenario for May is that she's down to 323 seats.
You may be not too far off the mark in terms of likely by election results were they to be held today. However, I would doubt that any such elections would occur before Autumn 2018 - by which time the polls may look quite a bit different . Particularly if Corbyn has gone - as I expect.
The other issue might be whether politicians would take the Ian Gibson option of resigning in a huff if their integrity is called into question or they face prosecution. That could potentially skew the results in and of itself.
Even a prosecution wouldn't necessarily unseat them unless there is a jail term attached - look at Alistair Carmichael. And the reality based on current practice regarding Reds and Oranges seems to be that candidates are more likely to be fined than jailed over his one even in the event that they are (a) prosecuted and (b) found guilty.
I have been denied boarding when already seated on a plane and waiting for take-off. The circumstances were truly exceptional (it was during the air traffic control chaos more than a decade ago). No blood was involved and while I was very grumpy about it, I deplaned without the need for force.
If I'd been more resistant, I could have gone viral.
Would your reaction had been any different if the reason for offloading was that the airline sold your seat twice, and the reason for your flight was to meet with an important client?
The reason for offloading was pretty amazing. I was travelling to Budapest, originally with Malev, and in the chaos I had been reallocated a journey with Air Austria, with a connecting flight from Vienna. I had been allowed to board and was sat with my seatbelt on, when I was told by the air stewardess that in fact there was now no connecting flight from Vienna to Budapest - they'd misread my details, they'd thought I was expecting a connecting flight to Bucharest (which was available) - and I had to get off the plane.
I protested that I was quite happy to make my way from Vienna to Budapest under my own power - it's only a shortish train journey and I was due to spend the weekend with my other half who was already out there. But no, rules were rules and I was turfed off, despite there being a seat available and my being willing to make the part of the journey that was possible to make.
SeanT may be a right-wing lunatic but he is not a bully.
There are others who are though and hopefully in time they will be weeded out.
If you say so but I don't know else you could interpret the comment below from SeanT to Beverley C last night:-
"Just Go? Can we agree you're not wanted? You don't want to be on here anymore, and we think you're - allegorically - a deluded, fecally vomiting old crone who should be euthanised?
What's the prob? You go, we stay, everyone is happy. Bye bye there. Bye bye"
We all say things we regret in the heat of the moment but their are a handful of posters who resort to abuse on a daily basis.
Sean T's comments are clearly rude and insulting but anyone who has worked in a factory in a manual job will have heard worse every day of the week.
What is truly appalling is the use of 'their' when 'there' is the correct spelling. Surely a ban is called for.
Eh? We were told consumer prices would be way up from the get go.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
Not in six months - the Leave argument was that restricting immigration would have the effect of raising wages. Clearly we aren't even nearly there yet.
It is quite remarkable that inflation is as low as 2.3%, i.e. well within target, even with the currency fluctuations. I am almost awaiting it to hit... maybe it won't.
Mr. Rabbit, I think inflation will rise more. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Mr. Evershed, when making redrafting notes (as I'm doing now) errors of apostrophes or their/there usually include the instruction to either cut off my own hands or head afterwards as punishment.
SeanT may be a right-wing lunatic but he is not a bully.
There are others who are though and hopefully in time they will be weeded out.
If you say so but I don't know else you could interpret the comment below from SeanT to Beverley C last night:-
"Just Go? Can we agree you're not wanted? You don't want to be on here anymore, and we think you're - allegorically - a deluded, fecally vomiting old crone who should be euthanised?
What's the prob? You go, we stay, everyone is happy. Bye bye there. Bye bye"
We all say things we regret in the heat of the moment but their are a handful of posters who resort to abuse on a daily basis.
Only a few of them are generally funny. Sean and malc, for example.
There was me believing I was a great political commentator , gutted.
Labour controlled this council and the parliamentary seat a mere twelve years ago. A mere seven years ago they were denying the Tories an overall majority. Now they are splitting all different ways.
Admittedly demographic change - lots of wealthy people retiring to the area - has made it more difficult for them, but given the social profiles of the four big towns, Coleford, Cinderford, Lydney and (to a lesser extent) Newent they should certainly consider it an aspirational target with the right candidate (they might have held the seat at Westminster in 2005 had they not imposed a twenty-something party blue-eyed girl via an AWS instead of letting the council leader stand).
I have been denied boarding when already seated on a plane and waiting for take-off. The circumstances were truly exceptional (it was during the air traffic control chaos more than a decade ago). No blood was involved and while I was very grumpy about it, I deplaned without the need for force.
If I'd been more resistant, I could have gone viral.
Would your reaction had been any different if the reason for offloading was that the airline sold your seat twice, and the reason for your flight was to meet with an important client?
One of the cardinal sins working offshore is missing your check-in for the chopper. Not only does it cost you pay, it means that, with the choppers not flying every day, your back to back on the rig may have to stay on board an extra few days until you can get out. It makes people extremely unpopular.
As a result most guys working offshore will always take an earlier plane flight to get to Aberdeen or Stavanger to make sure they don't then miss their chopper check-in. Being bumped is so common that it is not worth taking the chance on getting the last possible flight even if it means an extra overnight in a hotel before flying to the rig.
Yeah, I imagine that missing your chopper would make you rather unpopular with half the rig, especially the guy who gets a few days less R&R as a result of it!
To those who are commuting from elsewhere to Aberdeen it might only need a foggy morning or an unserviceable aircraft to be somewhat later than planned, let alone a situation like offloading.
Mr. Sandpit, the spin wasn't great but I'd be more concerned by the substantial difference between him and Hamilton on pace. The Constructors' matters too, and a very good second driver also makes the Drivers' a bit easier by acting as a rear gunner for Hamilton. Right now we have a Hamilton-Vettel duel, with Bottas and Raikkonen fighting to be the best number two driver.
If we're playing fantasy pairings, then Alonso and Hamilton at Mercedes, Vettel and Ricciardo at Ferrari, or Alonso and Ricciardo at Mercedes with Vettel and Hamilton at Ferrari would be quite intense.
To be fair to Bottas he was one millisecond away from the front row in China, that was a pretty good effort. Yes, a good rear gunner to your top driver is important, given that the prize money comes from the Constructors' championship.
Fantasy driver pairings are good, but I doubt if Lewis or Seb wants to see an equally capable opponent in the other car.
Eh? We were told consumer prices would be way up from the get go.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
Not in six months - the Leave argument was that restricting immigration would have the effect of raising wages. Clearly we aren't even nearly there yet.
It is quite remarkable that inflation is as low as 2.3%, i.e. well within target, even with the currency fluctuations. I am almost awaiting it to hit... maybe it won't.
Immigration was higher 6 months ago than it is now yet wages were also higher then than now.
The immigration / general pay relationship isn't as simple as you think it is.
If there are to be by-elections in the expense scandal constituencies then surely the Conservatives would use the Brixit scare tactic - that voting in Lib Dems would mean Conservatives losing their majority and making the Brexit negotiations harder to complete.
Eh? We were told consumer prices would be way up from the get go.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
Not in six months - the Leave argument was that restricting immigration would have the effect of raising wages. Clearly we aren't even nearly there yet.
It is quite remarkable that inflation is as low as 2.3%, i.e. well within target, even with the currency fluctuations. I am almost awaiting it to hit... maybe it won't.
Immigration was higher 6 months ago than it is now yet wages were also higher then than now.
The immigration / general pay relationship isn't as simple as you think it is.
I thought the ONS said there wasn't a significant change in immigration, and that it was still at ~300,000 per year?
Mr. Sandpit, F1's a game of small margins. I'm sure we all remember the results of the 2007, 2008 and 2012 titles.
I concur with you on Hamilton/Vettel, which is why I doubt Ricciardo will go to Ferrari. However, Mercedes might be more interested than the Prancing Horse.
I am not going to respond to the rest of your comment, except to point out you mentioned treating men and women differently. I didn't.
Actually no, it was Topping who made the accusation about picking on a woman. As far as I can see that was the whole basis of his complaint. If you are going to come late to an argument you might at least get your facts right.
Sorry to be tedious, but you were the one justifying your behaviour on not treating women differently from men, in response to my comment. My facts are perfectly fine, thank you very much.
Eh? We were told consumer prices would be way up from the get go.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
Not in six months - the Leave argument was that restricting immigration would have the effect of raising wages. Clearly we aren't even nearly there yet.
It is quite remarkable that inflation is as low as 2.3%, i.e. well within target, even with the currency fluctuations. I am almost awaiting it to hit... maybe it won't.
Yes, I was thinking 3-4% inflation, given the pound is 16% off against the US$ and around 9% off against the Euro in the past 12 months.
2.3% is remarkably low under the circumstances, although possibly there's some more to come as long-term corporate pricing agreements renew. The only major price hikes I've heard about were from Apple, who have almost all their product costs in US$.
Eh? We were told consumer prices would be way up from the get go.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
Not in six months - the Leave argument was that restricting immigration would have the effect of raising wages. Clearly we aren't even nearly there yet.
It is quite remarkable that inflation is as low as 2.3%, i.e. well within target, even with the currency fluctuations. I am almost awaiting it to hit... maybe it won't.
Immigration was higher 6 months ago than it is now yet wages were also higher then than now.
The immigration / general pay relationship isn't as simple as you think it is.
Wages are higher now than six months ago but sure, I didn't say anything was simple.
Restricting immigration in order to boost wages - effectively the analogue to the left-wing cause for "no" back in 1975 - is something that would only happen over time, certainly in the economy as a whole. I'm not sure we'd be able to identify it particularly in any event BUT my point was that Leave didn't say this would happen on day 1.
F1: incidentally, after two early starts, the Bahrain qualifying and race appear to both start at 4pm this time. So, pre-qualifying should be the same day as the pre-race article (although I might have to leave that until Sunday, depending how slow the markets are).
I have been denied boarding when already seated on a plane and waiting for take-off. The circumstances were truly exceptional (it was during the air traffic control chaos more than a decade ago). No blood was involved and while I was very grumpy about it, I deplaned without the need for force.
If I'd been more resistant, I could have gone viral.
Would your reaction had been any different if the reason for offloading was that the airline sold your seat twice, and the reason for your flight was to meet with an important client?
The reason for offloading was pretty amazing. I was travelling to Budapest, originally with Malev, and in the chaos I had been reallocated a journey with Air Austria, with a connecting flight from Vienna. I had been allowed to board and was sat with my seatbelt on, when I was told by the air stewardess that in fact there was now no connecting flight from Vienna to Budapest - they'd misread my details, they'd thought I was expecting a connecting flight to Bucharest (which was available) - and I had to get off the plane.
I protested that I was quite happy to make my way from Vienna to Budapest under my own power - it's only a shortish train journey and I was due to spend the weekend with my other half who was already out there. But no, rules were rules and I was turfed off, despite there being a seat available and my being willing to make the part of the journey that was possible to make.
That's a good story. I had my stag party in Bucharest, one of my friends booked a flight to Budapest instead and had to pay a rebooking fee to change it (and a round of drinks for being stupid enough to have told the group about his mistake!).
F1: incidentally, after two early starts, the Bahrain qualifying and race appear to both start at 4pm this time. So, pre-qualifying should be the same day as the pre-race article (although I might have to leave that until Sunday, depending how slow the markets are).
Correct, 4pm UK time for both qualy and race, only two hours' time difference and it's a day/night race like Abu Dhabi. Alas, it now looks like I'm not going to make it there, damn working on Sundays out here.
Whatever Corbyn's faults I don't think he has suggested that as an appropriate way forward for Hilary Benn.
Although he did of course oppose British counter-operations in the Falklands, so it could be argued in theory - given the only purpose of the Argentine invasion was to secure Galtieri in power - that he was supporting an offshoot of the regime that carried them out. However, that is a tenuous case at best.
It is incidentally one of the many ironies of the Labour left in the 1980s - they were passionately against seedy fascist juntas right up until the moment they attacked Britain or Britain's dependencies, and then suddenly changed their tune.
Mr. Sandpit, that's a shame. Be interesting to see if we have the old Bad Bahrain (with the lack of overtaking and boredom) or the Good Bahrain we saw in 2014.
Mr. T, whilst there has been some grumpiness this morning (and, by all accounts, last night) I think it's something of an exaggeration to say most threads are dominated by nastiness.
Besides, if a room's cold and everyone with a torch leaves it for a warmer place, that only makes the room colder. Better to light a cliche than curse the grumpiness.
F1: I have cast my eye over the Ladbrokes' market. Nothing that really tempts. The only things I'm properly contemplating are points for Stroll or Ocon at 2.62 and 2.75 respectively. Stroll had the car for points in Australia (probably not China) but had two unlucky DNFs. Ocon has scored in both races so far, but only just. From memory, Bahrain's more like China than Australia, so Ocon would probably be the more appealing.
Tricky, though. The midfield's pretty tight.
Not betting at this stage.
Mr D, I didn't say the threads were dominated by nastiness I said most were dominated by a few nasty individuals. There is a difference. To my mind the tone has changed since Brexit, I will still have a look occasionally in case it changes. Good luck with the book by the way.
Brexit does have a tendency to sour the mood. Many people are not yet in a place where they feel able to treat it with PBs otherwise generally light tone.
If he's not then the word has no meaning. He's always ordering people to leave the site.
Absolutely right
Everything unpleasant on this site seems to involve SeanT
I agree. Sean's comments can become unnecessarily personal, vulgar and insulting, on a site where readers will not expect to find such material. His comment to Beverley last night was revolting and totally uncalled for.
Some of the bans recently have been for reasons that to me appear trivial by comparison.
Mr. Sandpit, that's a shame. Be interesting to see if we have the old Bad Bahrain (with the lack of overtaking and boredom) or the Good Bahrain we saw in 2014.
If he's not then the word has no meaning. He's always ordering people to leave the site.
Absolutely right
Everything unpleasant on this site seems to involve SeanT
I agree. Sean's comments can become unnecessarily personal, vulgar and insulting, on a site where readers will not expect to find such material. His comment to Beverley last night was revolting and totally uncalled for.
Some of the bans recently have been for reasons that to me appear trivial by comparison.
I only worry about important stuff. This morning's major decision will be what to have for lunch.
Comments
In "exceptional circumstances" there is a power given to Magistrates to extend the period in which a prosecution can be brought to 24 months after the offence was committed. This is conditional on there having been no delay in the prosecution. Even if the maximum extensions were given prosecutions will have to have commenced by, I would guess, the beginning of June 2017. That's pretty quick for the CPS.
Fair enough. It's worth noting things became rather tenser around the Scottish referendum too. I think things both here and generally will gradually cool off, and that should happen more swiftly once we're out (provided the majority are ok with the deal).
Some will be unhappy whatever happens (there's not much middle ground between WTO-Leavers and the Lib Dems' Let's Stay approach). But as long as most are reasonably content, things will calm down.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Cyan, cheers for that.
SeanT may be a right-wing lunatic but he is not a bully.
There are others who are though and hopefully in time they will be weeded out.
Edit: my mistake, no one accepted but three were involuntarily bumped:
On Sunday, Mr. Bridges said that when he arrived at the gate about 20 minutes before boarding, United had announced that the flight was overbooked; the airline was offering $400 vouchers to anyone who would give up their seat, Mr. Bridges said.
As the passengers boarded the plane, “there was no indication anything was wrong,” Mr. Bridges said.
An airline employee came on board and said United needed four people to get off, Mr. Bridges said, adding that the airline had by then increased its incentive to an $800 voucher. The airline later said that it offered up to $1,000 in compensation.
Mr. Hobart, the United spokesman, confirmed that United sought passengers willing to give up their seats with compensation but that none stepped forward.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/business/united-flight-passenger-dragged.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
https://twitter.com/ickydesu/status/851586130147500034
So absolutely no apologies for what was said last night and certainly no intention to change behaviour simply because an opponent is female.
"Just Go? Can we agree you're not wanted? You don't want to be on here anymore, and we think you're - allegorically - a deluded, fecally vomiting old crone who should be euthanised?
What's the prob? You go, we stay, everyone is happy. Bye bye there. Bye bye"
We all say things we regret in the heat of the moment but their are a handful of posters who resort to abuse on a daily basis.
The Mercedes seat, especially with Bottas only having a one year contract, must be more appealing on that score (and Hamilton will probably retire before Vettel too).
*IF* there are (about) 19 Conservative MPs under investigation and *IF* all of them are prosecuted and by-elections called then immediately the Conservatives lose their majority.
650 MPs, less 4 Sinn Fein, less 1 Speaker, less 19 pending by-elections = 636 active MPs, majority now required = 318
Conservatives have 330 MPs, less the 19 = 311. Minority of 14.
Theresa May then has two options:
1. Call a General Election to sort things out completely; or
2. Fight 19 by-elections and hope you win at least 13 of them
Obviously the risk with (2) is that if you fail to win most of them (to be fair you should win most of them) is that you end up having to do (1) anyway. So you may as well bite the bullet and get the General Election going. FTPA not withstanding, you could set out that you need a General Election to sort things out.
Afterall, in the amazing event you lost all 19 of them - even the DUP and UUP wouldn't get you to 324 (nor even adding Carswell) - you could end up with a Labour/SNP/LibDem minority government (of about 315 ish - depending on the 'SNP-independents' and the SDLP going with Labour). You could spin it that WITHOUT a general election, a risk exists that the government changes on the strength of only the votes of 19 constituencies.
Admittedly unlikely.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39564885
A fall in air fares has offset the rampant rise in PB posters baiting each other.,,,apologies a rise in clothing & food.
If I'd been more resistant, I could have gone viral.
However, there is zero chance of that in the current make-up of the Commons, for as long as Theresa May is supported by Conservative MPs.
I think people are misunderstanding the effect of a No Confidence vote. It does not automatically mean that the PM immediately stands down, and never has. The PM remains in place until someone else can take over. The first option would be to see if anyone else could command a majority in the current parliament. If not, then after 14 days an election is called. Theresa May would remain PM during this period.
The only difference compared with the situation before the FTPA is that, previously, the PM could go to Her Maj and call for an election, a call which would immediately be granted (and the existing PM would have remained in place until after the election). Now she can't do that, but after 14 days it happens automatically.
To call multiple by-elections would require proof that the additional expenditure over-and-above the limit was material in winning the seat, and the error knowingly and deliberately made, which would be very difficult to proof and would be heavily challenged legally.
Even if *all* 12 CPS files resulted in 12 by-elections, not all are Lib Dem seats, and any Lab-Tory marginal (e.g. South Thanet, Stroud, Broxtowe, Bury North and Lincoln) would very probably be won by May, not Corbyn's Labour.
North Cornwall, Torbay, Wells and Yeovil might be at risk, but the Tories would still (just) have an overall majority even if all were lost.
I don't know about the other three seats under investigation, but, even assuming they are all Lib Dem Seats, and also lost, the worst case scenario for May is that she's down to 323 seats.
(OK Mods?)
"RF pay projection following latest inflation figures. Real pay on course to fall during first 3 months of 2017 - 6 months ahead of schedule"
https://twitter.com/resfoundation/status/851724675197673472
Edit - on a more serious note, I could easily see 50 Labour MPs backing an election as the quickest and surest - maybe only - way to get rid of Corbyn. Snag is that's not enough to trigger a dissolution.
Oh and 5,000 posts in just under 5 years. Just over 2.7 a day on average.
This can only be determined by a court case - at the European Court.
"“.... wages will be higher ....”, Statement by Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Gisela Stuart for The Sun - Vote Leave to cut VAT on fuel, 31 May 2016"
http://www.voteleavewatch.org.uk/leave_campaigners_try_to_drop_their_false_promises
They could easily lose a seat in Fermanagh South Tyrone, either to the DUP or SDLP, and the DUP would be almost certain to pick up the SDLP seat in Lagan Valley. Sinn Fein could also drop marginal seats in other Western constituencies, if they can't get the same turnout as before. Realistically, I think their current total of seats is very much at the top end of what they can expect to win.
If we're playing fantasy pairings, then Alonso and Hamilton at Mercedes, Vettel and Ricciardo at Ferrari, or Alonso and Ricciardo at Mercedes with Vettel and Hamilton at Ferrari would be quite intense.
As a result most guys working offshore will always take an earlier plane flight to get to Aberdeen or Stavanger to make sure they don't then miss their chopper check-in. Being bumped is so common that it is not worth taking the chance on getting the last possible flight even if it means an extra overnight in a hotel before flying to the rig.
https://twitter.com/David__Osland/status/851740438813954048
Even a prosecution wouldn't necessarily unseat them unless there is a jail term attached - look at Alistair Carmichael. And the reality based on current practice regarding Reds and Oranges seems to be that candidates are more likely to be fined than jailed over his one even in the event that they are (a) prosecuted and (b) found guilty.
I protested that I was quite happy to make my way from Vienna to Budapest under my own power - it's only a shortish train journey and I was due to spend the weekend with my other half who was already out there. But no, rules were rules and I was turfed off, despite there being a seat available and my being willing to make the part of the journey that was possible to make.
But in fairness they haven't done anything about their threats (yet).
What is truly appalling is the use of 'their' when 'there' is the correct spelling. Surely a ban is called for.
It is quite remarkable that inflation is as low as 2.3%, i.e. well within target, even with the currency fluctuations. I am almost awaiting it to hit... maybe it won't.
Mr. Evershed, when making redrafting notes (as I'm doing now) errors of apostrophes or their/there usually include the instruction to either cut off my own hands or head afterwards as punishment.
http://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/four-forest-of-dean-councillors-quit-labour-over-jeremy-corbyn-s-agenda/story-30261776-detail/story.html
Labour controlled this council and the parliamentary seat a mere twelve years ago. A mere seven years ago they were denying the Tories an overall majority. Now they are splitting all different ways.
Admittedly demographic change - lots of wealthy people retiring to the area - has made it more difficult for them, but given the social profiles of the four big towns, Coleford, Cinderford, Lydney and (to a lesser extent) Newent they should certainly consider it an aspirational target with the right candidate (they might have held the seat at Westminster in 2005 had they not imposed a twenty-something party blue-eyed girl via an AWS instead of letting the council leader stand).
A straw in the wind perhaps?
To those who are commuting from elsewhere to Aberdeen it might only need a foggy morning or an unserviceable aircraft to be somewhat later than planned, let alone a situation like offloading.
Fantasy driver pairings are good, but I doubt if Lewis or Seb wants to see an equally capable opponent in the other car.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-nicola-sturgeon-enjoys-highest-approval-in-scotland-1-4416172#comments-area
The immigration / general pay relationship isn't as simple as you think it is.
I concur with you on Hamilton/Vettel, which is why I doubt Ricciardo will go to Ferrari. However, Mercedes might be more interested than the Prancing Horse.
2.3% is remarkably low under the circumstances, although possibly there's some more to come as long-term corporate pricing agreements renew. The only major price hikes I've heard about were from Apple, who have almost all their product costs in US$.
Restricting immigration in order to boost wages - effectively the analogue to the left-wing cause for "no" back in 1975 - is something that would only happen over time, certainly in the economy as a whole. I'm not sure we'd be able to identify it particularly in any event BUT my point was that Leave didn't say this would happen on day 1.
SeanT may be a right-wing lunatic but he is not a bully.
If he's not then the word has no meaning. He's always ordering people to leave the site.
Alas, it now looks like I'm not going to make it there, damn working on Sundays out here.
Although he did of course oppose British counter-operations in the Falklands, so it could be argued in theory - given the only purpose of the Argentine invasion was to secure Galtieri in power - that he was supporting an offshoot of the regime that carried them out. However, that is a tenuous case at best.
It is incidentally one of the many ironies of the Labour left in the 1980s - they were passionately against seedy fascist juntas right up until the moment they attacked Britain or Britain's dependencies, and then suddenly changed their tune.
If he's not then the word has no meaning. He's always ordering people to leave the site.
Absolutely right
Everything unpleasant on this site seems to involve SeanT
Mrs C, good afternoon.
Absolutely right
Everything unpleasant on this site seems to involve SeanT
Hardly everything.
Some of the bans recently have been for reasons that to me appear trivial by comparison.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/851743717463609345