Note: unless Labour's vote goes up relative to 2015, the Conservative majority will increase regardless. No prospect that large influx of ex-Ukip voters will be outnumbered by 2015 Tories going elsewhere. Lib Dems not doing well enough to inflict significant damage.
Question is, if (and I still, think it's a very big if) the Labour vote share does get somewhere close to holding up, will it be in the same places as before, or will they be building up votes in Remain-leaning areas and losing them in Leave-leaning areas? If the former, this will help limit losses. If the latter, it will exacerbate them.
With all the usual caveats, I've been canvassing in two quite different areas - my WWC area in Nottingham North (big Leave/UKIP votes) and various bits of Broxtowe (suburbia). The Labour vote seems to be mostly holding up in both (even increasing in the most university-related areas), but the UKIP->Con switch is much more obvious in Nottingham North. In other words, people who were alienated by Labour's perceived softness on immigration etc. had already left in 2015 to UKIP as a staging post, and are now moving on to the Tories.
If - a big if - that's a general pattern, then the effect will be to make strong Labour/Leave seats more marginal, while not having much effect on typical suburban marginals where the WWC/Leave vote was smaller. We might see some very odd results.
Thanks Nick. This sort of anecdata fits exactly with my readings of the polling trends.
Odd results pending, indeed.
Election night comes 5 days after my busiest week of the year. I usually book a holiday for one: will be too busy this year with electioneering locally, but hope to catch up on sleep in the days preceeding to hold out for the entire night again. Last time I fell asleep to be woken by a txt that simply read: MORLEY AND OUTWOOD!!!!
Apart from dropping a load of commitments Cameron never thought he'd have to implement, I wonder what actual vote-grabbing promises will be in the Tory manifesto?
I'm guessing: School reform, tax reform, Lords Reform, and Brexit-not-in-name-only.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
We would've done an Ireland. House prices soared under 2% interest rates rather then the 5% that prevailed in the noughties, and brought the whole system down with us as we were far too big to bail out.
In my parallel reality Ken Clarke (or his policies) would have been in charge and we would have had better regulation of mortgage lending. In other words: assume competent government in the UK.
But you said if Blair had joined the Euro.... he wasn't competent. Clearly. Good at winning elections though.
He never got a 200 majority ! St. Theresa will, we are told.
Note: unless Labour's vote goes up relative to 2015, the Conservative majority will increase regardless. No prospect that large influx of ex-Ukip voters will be outnumbered by 2015 Tories going elsewhere. Lib Dems not doing well enough to inflict significant damage.
Question is, if (and I still, think it's a very big if) the Labour vote share does get somewhere close to holding up, will it be in the same places as before, or will they be building up votes in Remain-leaning areas and losing them in Leave-leaning areas? If the former, this will help limit losses. If the latter, it will exacerbate them.
With all the usual caveats, I've been canvassing in two quite different areas - my WWC area in Nottingham North (big Leave/UKIP votes) and various bits of Broxtowe (suburbia). The Labour vote seems to be mostly holding up in both (even increasing in the most university-related areas), but the UKIP->Con switch is much more obvious in Nottingham North. In other words, people who were alienated by Labour's perceived softness on immigration etc. had already left in 2015 to UKIP as a staging post, and are now moving on to the Tories.
If - a big if - that's a general pattern, then the effect will be to make strong Labour/Leave seats more marginal, while not having much effect on typical suburban marginals where the WWC/Leave vote was smaller. We might see some very odd results.
BTW Nick, forgot to say, hope you are well.
Are you standing in Broxtowe? If so, can I say it'd be good to see someone more human as an MP there than the current incumbent.
I'd agree that I'd expect more UKIP to Con switchers than any other.
Apart from dropping a load of commitments Cameron never thought he'd have to implement, I wonder what actual vote-grabbing promises will be in the Tory manifesto?
I'm guessing: School reform, tax reform, Lords Reform, and Brexit-not-in-name-only.
Apart from dropping a load of commitments Cameron never thought he'd have to implement, I wonder what actual vote-grabbing promises will be in the Tory manifesto?
I'm guessing: School reform, tax reform, Lords Reform, and Brexit-not-in-name-only.
And I think it'll be tremendously popular.
What kind of Lords reform do you envisage?
Reduction in numbers of appointees.
Perhaps limit appointees to 10 year terms? That would actually be quite sensible as it would remove the lag that sees 100+ LD lords but only 9MPs
Apart from dropping a load of commitments Cameron never thought he'd have to implement, I wonder what actual vote-grabbing promises will be in the Tory manifesto?
I'm guessing: School reform, tax reform, Lords Reform, and Brexit-not-in-name-only.
I rage impotently now, as do you. The UK government will not increase the security threat faced by British citizens. I am surprised you think it will.
As someone who lives overseas for most of the year I don't look to the British government for my safety, it is up to the Swiss to make sure I'm safe. The same goes for the British people living in all other parts of the world, not just the EU. As Richard Nabavi pointed out last time, without a deal we fall out of the existing security cooperation structures. There is no way the government will discuss security without also having trade being discussed at the same time. Just as the EU maintains this idea of no a la carte menu, so will the government. Security is a major asset, it will be on the table. Truly I look forward to your howls of impotent rage a year from now.
Anyway, you keep repeating that same old rubbish about how the government won't put British citizens at risk, but the simple fact is they already do it by not providing security information to middle eastern governments where tens of thousands of British citizens live and work under the threat of daily terror attacks.
Withdrawing cooperation is increasing risk. The UK government will not do it. Quite why you want British citizens to face heightened exposure to danger is beyond me.
They will simply fall out of existing structures and blame it on EU inflexibility.
Honestly? You have to take the rough with the smooth. If I want to benefit from the UK government's massive expenditure on intelligence and security then I may just want to live there. I can't live in a different country and pay tax to a different government and then bitch about how unfair it is that the UK government isn't looking out for my interests. I'm prepared for this eventuality. Then again, I chose to leave the country because I was offered 6x the wages in Zurich to do what is essentially the same job. If it means I have to live under the threat of a bit more terrorism from 2019 I'll just have to deal with it.
The first charge is to defend the realm, anything beyond that is not necessary. Any citizen who has chosen to live abroad must live by standards overseas, the government has no duty beyond bringing us all back if war breaks out and getting us new passports if ours are lost or stolen.
You keep repeating that rubbish but I'm certain that security cooperation is on the table. I look forward to being vindicated a year from now and watching you impotently rage against the government for pulling security and military cooperation (NATO excepted).
I rage impotently now, as do you. The UK government will not increase the security threat faced by British citizens. I am surprised you think it will.
A security deal is interesting to the EU side so it's a card the UK can play. Mrs May completely misplayed it by issuing crude threats.
I have to say Mrs May's Brexit negotiating "strategy" baffles me. It's not just that she is a dire negotiator. She just doesn't seem to be interested. And it's very chaotic. Time will tell whether the EU side overreaches or has played their hand with huge success. What is certain is that they are clear about their goals, very focused in achieving them and have planned their approach rigorously.
The EU27 have today unanimously agreed that talks about trade cannot begin until the Brexit bill is agreed, the status of EU nationals in the UK is agreed, and the Irish border is settled. I cannot see that May could swiftly address these and keep her own party onside. It is opposition within her own party she wishes to avoid, possibly correctly as that is how most leaders get defenestrated.
UK citizens living abroad lose rights unless there is a deal. That is why a deal is necessary. The rights British citizens currently living in the UK will lose are less saveable.
We'll survive. I'll apply for a visa, pay for private healthcare. Those who can't afford it or don't qualify will go home, and vice versa.
Even with a residency deal which maintains everyone's right to reside, there is no way the UK could ever allow the ECJ to extend its jurisdiction for any reason. On going cases or cases that are brought that relate to when we were in, sure, but from 2019 any new cases will have to be heard in a UK court under domestic law with no right of appeal to the ECJ. The solution is simple, if that isn't satisfactory then they are welcome to leave. I'm under no illusion that I will be able to bring a court case against a Swiss national or company to a UK court under UK law, I don't see why an EU citizen should expect anything different.
Yep, you'll be fine. Good for you. I will be, too. Aren't we lucky we're so shielded from it all and any downsides will not affect us (except if we get caught in some kind of attack that could have been prevented if the UK had not withheld security information).
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
We would've done an Ireland. House prices soared under 2% interest rates rather then the 5% that prevailed in the noughties, and brought the whole system down with us as we were far too big to bail out.
In my parallel reality Ken Clarke (or his policies) would have been in charge and we would have had better regulation of mortgage lending. In other words: assume competent government in the UK.
But you said if Blair had joined the Euro.... he wasn't competent. Clearly. Good at winning elections though.
He never got a 200 majority ! St. Theresa will, we are told.
Anything that looks good and solid (70 and above) would be fantastic.
Apart from dropping a load of commitments Cameron never thought he'd have to implement, I wonder what actual vote-grabbing promises will be in the Tory manifesto?
I'm guessing: School reform, tax reform, Lords Reform, and Brexit-not-in-name-only.
You keep repeating that rubbish but I'm certain that security cooperation is on the table. I look forward to being vindicated a year from now and watching you impotently rage against the government for pulling security and military cooperation (NATO excepted).
I rage impotently now, as do you. The UK government will not increase the security threat faced by British citizens. I am surprised you think it will.
A security deal is interesting to the EU side so it's a card the UK can play. Mrs May completely misplayed it by issuing crude threats.
I have to say Mrs May's Brexit negotiating "strategy" baffles me. It's not just that she is a dire negotiator. She just doesn't seem to be interested. And it's very chaotic. Time will tell whether the EU side overreaches or has played their hand with huge success. What is certain is that they are clear about their goals, very focused in achieving them and have planned their approach rigorously.
The EU27 have today unanimously agreed that talks about trade cannot begin until the Brexit bill is agreed, the status of EU nationals in the UK is agreed, and the Irish border is settled. I cannot see that May could swiftly address these and keep her own party onside. It is opposition within her own party she wishes to avoid, possibly correctly as that is how most leaders get defenestrated.
She will have to refuse and so hard Brexit it is.
Or a transition arrangement from 2019, there are 2 years to agree what the Brexit bill will be and I expect the status of already resident EU nationals in the UK and UK nationals in the EU to be agreed fairly swiftly
I have to say Mrs May's Brexit negotiating "strategy" baffles me. It's not just that she is a dire negotiator. She just doesn't seem to be interested. And it's very chaotic.
Assume she's planning to drop a second referendum bombshell at some point, and that her strategy is mainly aimed at testing Brexit to destruction and it might make sense. She's marching the lemmings to the cliff edge, and wants them to be the ones to chicken out.
I rage impotently now, as do you. The UK government will not increase the security threat faced by British citizens. I am surprised you think it will.
As someone who lives overseas for most of the year I don't look to the British government for my safety, it is up to the Swiss to make sure I'm safe. The same goes for the British people living in all other parts of the world, not just the EU. As Richard Nabavi pointed out last time, without a deal we fall out of the existing security cooperation structures. There is no way the government will discuss security without also having trade being discussed at the same time. Just as the EU maintains this idea of no a la carte menu, so will the government. Security is a major asset, it will be on the table. Truly I look forward to your howls of impotent rage a year from now.
Anyway, you keep repeating that same old rubbish about how the government won't put British citizens at risk, but the simple fact is they already do it by not providing security information to middle eastern governments where tens of thousands of British citizens live and work under the threat of daily terror attacks.
Withdrawing cooperation is increasing risk. The UK government will not do it. Quite why you want British citizens to face heightened exposure to danger is beyond me.
They will simply fall out of existing structures and blame it on EU inflexibility.
Honestly? You have to take the rough with the smooth. If I want to benefit from the UK government's massive expenditure on intelligence and security then I may just want to live there. I can't live in a different country and pay tax to a different government and then bitch about how unfair it is that the UK government isn't looking out for my interests. I'm prepared for this eventuality. Then again, I chose to leave the country because I was offered 6x the wages in Zurich to do what is essentially the same job. If it means I have to live under the threat of a bit more terrorism from 2019 I'll just have to deal with it.
The first charge is to defend the realm, anything beyond that is not necessary. Any citizen who has chosen to live abroad must live by standards overseas, the government has no duty beyond bringing us all back if war breaks out and getting us new passports if ours are lost or stolen.
And the same applies to the millions of Brits holidaying in Europe and visiting for business, too. In your less willy-waving moments you may want to consider how ridiculous your position is on this.
Bottom line is, we just don't know what the Hell is going on with the polls, do we?
* The Lib Dems' attempt to win the Remain vote over may be failing, as voters conclude they're too weak to do anything useful about the situation * The tribal Labour vote may be even more sticky than we previously thought * The polls may be wrong, by as much or more than they were the last time; the supplementary questions give no suggestion that this race has any capacity to be competitive, quite the reverse, and at least in the case of Opinium we know they've been fiddling about with their methodology as well * As I suggested earlier, the Labour poll bounce may not be uniform and they could be shoring up their position in Remain-leaning/metropolitan areas (along with securing a lot of useless extra votes from grumpy Remainers in many well-to-do Tory seats in Southern England,) whilst continuing to be in difficulty in Leave-leaning/provincial areas
Labour has been in more or less continuous decline in the polls for the last year, but the line isn't perfectly flat. It wobbles about a little, as you might expect. The latest little cluster of surveys might constitute a blip. The only way we're going to know, one way or another, is when we have the result in a little less than six weeks' time.
FWIW I still don't believe that Labour is going to end this campaign doing as well or better than Ed Miliband or Gordon Brown did. If the polls are indicating such a thing come the final figures before the big day, then I would (if forced to venture an opinion) guess that the polls are getting it wrong again.
It could be that the "true" position is around 45-28. Most of not all of the polls are consistent with that.
UK citizens living abroad lose rights unless there is a deal. That is why a deal is necessary. The rights British citizens currently living in the UK will lose are less saveable.
We'll survive. I'll apply for a visa, pay for private healthcare. Those who can't afford it or don't qualify will go home, and vice versa.
Even with a residency deal which maintains everyone's right to reside, there is no way the UK could ever allow the ECJ to extend its jurisdiction for any reason. On going cases or cases that are brought that relate to when we were in, sure, but from 2019 any new cases will have to be heard in a UK court under domestic law with no right of appeal to the ECJ. The solution is simple, if that isn't satisfactory then they are welcome to leave. I'm under no illusion that I will be able to bring a court case against a Swiss national or company to a UK court under UK law, I don't see why an EU citizen should expect anything different.
Yep, you'll be fine. Good for you. I will be, too. Aren't we lucky we're so shielded from it all and any downsides will not affect us (except if we get caught in some kind of attack that could have been prevented if the UK had not withheld security information).
But I chose to come here. I made that choice. No one forced me to leave, if it was such a huge concern then I would choose to go back. People made the decision to go abroad, work and live in a foreign jurisdiction, anyone who did that without thinking of the consequences was, frankly, an idiot.
I rage impotently now, as do you. The UK government will not increase the security threat faced by British citizens. I am surprised you think it will.
As someone who lives overseas for most of the year I don't look to the British government for my safety, it is up to the Swiss to make sure I'm safe. The same goes for the British people living in all other parts of the world, not just the EU. As Richard Nabavi pointed out last time, without a deal we fall out of the existing security cooperation structures. There is no way the government will discuss security without also having trade being discussed at the same time. Just as the EU maintains this idea of no a la carte menu, so will the government. Security is a major asset, it will be on the table. Truly I look forward to your howls of impotent rage a year from now.
Anyway, you keep repeating that same old rubbish about how the government won't put British citizens at risk, but the simple fact is they already do it by not providing security information to middle eastern governments where tens of thousands of British citizens live and work under the threat of daily terror attacks.
Withdrawing cooperation is increasing risk. The UK government will not do it. Quite why you want British citizens to face heightened exposure to danger is beyond me.
They will simply fall out of existing structures and blame it on EU inflexibility.
Honestly? You have to take the rough with the smooth. If I want to benefit from the UK government's massive expenditure on intelligence and security then I may just want to live there. I can't live in a different country and pay tax to a different government and then bitch about how unfair it is that the UK government isn't looking out for my interests. I'm prepared for this eventuality. Then again, I chose to leave the country because I was offered 6x the wages in Zurich to do what is essentially the same job. If it means I have to live under the threat of a bit more terrorism from 2019 I'll just have to deal with it.
The first charge is to defend the realm, anything beyond that is not necessary. Any citizen who has chosen to live abroad must live by standards overseas, the government has no duty beyond bringing us all back if war breaks out and getting us new passports if ours are lost or stolen.
I dont think that the EU are that bothered by the threat of withdrawal of security and defence issues, unless we also withdraw from NATO too.
May's manifesto does seem to increasingly resemble Labour's '83 one.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
We would've done an Ireland. House prices soared under 2% interest rates rather then the 5% that prevailed in the noughties, and brought the whole system down with us as we were far too big to bail out.
In my parallel reality Ken Clarke (or his policies) would have been in charge and we would have had better regulation of mortgage lending. In other words: assume competent government in the UK.
I honestly don't know whether or not you're just having a laugh.
You keep repeating that rubbish but I'm certain that security cooperation is on the table. I look forward to being vindicated a year from now and watching you impotently rage against the government for pulling security and military cooperation (NATO excepted).
I rage impotently now, as do you. The UK government will not increase the security threat faced by British citizens. I am surprised you think it will.
A security deal is interesting to the EU side so it's a card the UK can play. Mrs May completely misplayed it by issuing crude threats.
I have to say Mrs May's Brexit negotiating "strategy" baffles me. It's not just that she is a dire negotiator. She just doesn't seem to be interested. And it's very chaotic. Time will tell whether the EU side overreaches or has played their hand with huge success. What is certain is that they are clear about their goals, very focused in achieving them and have planned their approach rigorously.
The EU27 have today unanimously agreed that talks about trade cannot begin until the Brexit bill is agreed, the status of EU nationals in the UK is agreed, and the Irish border is settled. I cannot see that May could swiftly address these and keep her own party onside. It is opposition within her own party she wishes to avoid, possibly correctly as that is how most leaders get defenestrated.
She will have to refuse and so hard Brexit it is.
That's possible. I speculate that she is hoping that by stalling, a head of pressure will build up for her to accede to the EU demands so we don't go over the cliff. Also possible, she is drowning and doesn't know what to do.
Just placed my first spread bet of the 2017 GE, selling the Tories at 387. I feel comfortable with this, representing, as it does, a Tory majority of 104. Even before tonight's polls, I sensed that the Tories in general and TM in particular (she was shockingly bad during parts of PMQs) had experienced a very poor week.Couple this with the disappointing GDP figures and I can see the spread price for Blue seats dipping by 10 - 12 seats. Should their support hold up however, their final seat tally instead rise by up to 20 seats, maybe even a tad more, but I consider that's much less likely than a decline from current levels.
Bottom line is, we just don't know what the Hell is going on with the polls, do we?
* The Lib Dems' attempt to win the Remain vote over may be failing, as voters conclude they're too weak to do anything useful about the situation * The tribal Labour vote may be even more sticky than we previously thought * The polls may be wrong, by as much or more than they were the last time; the supplementary questions give no suggestion that this race has any capacity to be competitive, quite the reverse, and at least in the case of Opinium we know they've been fiddling about with their methodology as well * As I suggested earlier, the Labour poll bounce may not be uniform and they could be shoring up their position in Remain-leaning/metropolitan areas (along with securing a lot of useless extra votes from grumpy Remainers in many well-to-do Tory seats in Southern England,) whilst continuing to be in difficulty in Leave-leaning/provincial areas
Labour has been in more or less continuous decline in the polls for the last year, but the line isn't perfectly flat. It wobbles about a little, as you might expect. The latest little cluster of surveys might constitute a blip. The only way we're going to know, one way or another, is when we have the result in a little less than six weeks' time.
FWIW I still don't believe that Labour is going to end this campaign doing as well or better than Ed Miliband or Gordon Brown did. If the polls are indicating such a thing come the final figures before the big day, then I would (if forced to venture an opinion) guess that the polls are getting it wrong again.
Agree with this. I can't see Labour doing as well as in 2010 or 2015 either. I was merely trying to put forward some explanation (the return of Labour Kippers), based on anecdotal evidence in an admittedly very untypical area of the country. My only quibble is that I see Labour holding up in Leave areas. Brexit is a given now. I see Lib Dems gaining from extreme Remainers, However, If pushed, I call polling fail (and MOE is not polling fail and 1 in 20 should be outliers anyway), but we will see...
UK citizens living abroad lose rights unless there is a deal. That is why a deal is necessary. The rights British citizens currently living in the UK will lose are less saveable.
We'll survive. I'll apply for a visa, pay for private healthcare. Those who can't afford it or don't qualify will go home, and vice versa.
Even with a residency deal which maintains everyone's right to reside, there is no way the UK could ever allow the ECJ to extend its jurisdiction for any reason. On going cases or cases that are brought that relate to when we were in, sure, but from 2019 any new cases will have to be heard in a UK court under domestic law with no right of appeal to the ECJ. The solution is simple, if that isn't satisfactory then they are welcome to leave. I'm under no illusion that I will be able to bring a court case against a Swiss national or company to a UK court under UK law, I don't see why an EU citizen should expect anything different.
Yep, you'll be fine. Good for you. I will be, too. Aren't we lucky we're so shielded from it all and any downsides will not affect us (except if we get caught in some kind of attack that could have been prevented if the UK had not withheld security information).
But I chose to come here. I made that choice. No one forced me to leave, if it was such a huge concern then I would choose to go back. People made the decision to go abroad, work and live in a foreign jurisdiction, anyone who did that without thinking of the consequences was, frankly, an idiot.
Yep - pensioners who saved for a holiday home in Spain and have been living there since 2005 really should have factored in the UK leaving the EU and withdrawing from security cooperation with European countries before making their purchase.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
I have to say Mrs May's Brexit negotiating "strategy" baffles me. It's not just that she is a dire negotiator. She just doesn't seem to be interested. And it's very chaotic.
Assume she's planning to drop a second referendum bombshell at some point, and that her strategy is mainly aimed at testing Brexit to destruction and it might make sense. She's marching the lemmings to the cliff edge, and wants them to be the ones to chicken out.
No, she is simply giving people what they voted for ie control of free movement, restoration of sovereignty and return of money from the EU
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
Oh Dear Crathes Public Hall is a registered charity whose constitution forbids its use for political meetings . Apparently it was booked today for a children's party in the name of a certain Mr Burnett ,
Impressed you could link the T&Cs. However if the booker did book a children's party and actually held a political event that does clearly break the terms - as well as being generally dishonest.
Considering what happened in Parliament recently, you don't think that just maybe there are bigger security concerns surrouding the PM at this GE?
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
I guess France only had colonies in every inhabited continent save Europe ... ?
And the same applies to the millions of Brits holidaying in Europe and visiting for business, too. In your less willy-waving moments you may want to consider how ridiculous your position is on this.
But millions of Brits go to Asia every year and we have almost no security apparatus in the area. We will be a third nation to the EU in 2019. Our relationship with them will be the same as it is to Thailand. It is your position that is ridiculous. On the one hand you say the EU have every right to treat Britain as a third nation, which is true, but then on the other hand you say Britain hasn't got the right to do the same. Please explain how this is a consistent position to hold. The security concerns will amount to one line on the FCO travel advice website "France has an increased threat of terrorism and we advise travellers to be vigilant at all times". Which is what they did for the Philippines (another third country with which we have no security cooperation).
By your logic we should be the world's intelligence agency and provide intelligence to everyone for free because British citizens may come to harm if we don't. As I said, the government already puts us emigrants in harm's way by not providing security information to Arab nations where there is an extremely high risk of terrorism. I don't see why it will be any different for the EU once we leave, it is a consistent position to hold. Your position is completely inconsistent.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
I guess France only had colonies in every inhabited continent save Europe ... ?
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
We beat them with Australasia.
France has New Caledonia, and French Polynesia.
There was also a French colony at Akaroa on the South Island of New Zealand.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
But overall our exports are much lower than, say, Germany or maybe even France.
I'd be genuinely shocked if Labour polled close to its 2015 result. If it does, it will show just how lucky the Tories were to be facing Corbyn. It will also indicate a much higher Labour floor than previously thought - something that might worry a few of the smarter Tories as the Brexit talks begin. Should Corbyn deliver a 30% vote, imagine what a far-lefty with half a clue and no back history of hanging out with terrorists might do against the backdrop of a botched negotiation.
I suspect that without a LibDem recovery Labour's floor is about 25%.
On the other hand Labour's ceiling might be no higher than 33%.
I'd say Labour's problem is that its voting blocks are smaller than the Conservative voting blocks:
Public sector vs Private sector Non-white vs White Young vs Old City vs Non-city
I don't think things are as rigid as that. And a bad Brexit leading to job losses, tax rises and cuts in services would be quite a gamechanger potentially. That said, I agree that 30% is way too high for this election.
Certainly there are exceptions to the norm and events change things.
But Labour have become associated as the party of 'single mothers and immigrants'.
I don't think Labour's candidate selection is going to be helpful for the future either. With most being either union officials or related to other Labour politicians Labour is going to struggle to reach out to non-Labour voting blocks.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
Yes, but mostly those were crappy bits that were left over.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
We beat them with Australasia.
France has New Caledonia, and French Polynesia.
There was also a French colony at Akaroa on the South Island of New Zealand.
Yes, France has a far larger global nautical exclusive economic zone than we do.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
We would've done an Ireland. House prices soared under 2% interest rates rather then the 5% that prevailed in the noughties, and brought the whole system down with us as we were far too big to bail out.
oooh, now there's a discussion...
The crucial thing is the collateralised debt obligation, which generated an enormous amount of tradable wealth and underpinned the whole subprime mortgage boom. In the UK the biggest CDO user for mortgages was Northern Rock and another one (Halifax?). There was discussion in the early Noughties about the wisdom of loosening legislation to allow this, but objections were swamped.
If Ken Clarke had been Chancellor and had the intelligence to notice the problem and the strength of character to prevent it, then it could have been avoided. But those are very big ifs and a lot of people who thought they were smart and strong turned out to be stupid and weak in the face of greed
(incidentally, Margin Call is on telly tomorrow, bbc2, 11pm. I'm getting dips.)
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
We beat them with Australasia.
France has New Caledonia, and French Polynesia.
There was also a French colony at Akaroa on the South Island of New Zealand.
Very true - I have been there. In which case, France has also had colonies on every continent. Maybe the Dutch have, too. Didn't they have bits of Australia for a while?
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
Portugal not in North America and Spain and France for a much shorter time than the UK
I dont think that the EU are that bothered by the threat of withdrawal of security and defence issues, unless we also withdraw from NATO too.
May's manifesto does seem to increasingly resemble Labour's '83 one.
They are extremely bothered. The furore when May suggested it in her speech was evidence enough. It makes sense too as it is the UK which provides most of the anti-terror intelligence for EU nations. Security and intelligence is a huge area where the EU is utterly reliant on two players, one of whom is not at all a team player (France) and the other is leaving. It is not an enviable position. It is also one which can and will be used to our favour, despite the squealing (or dismissiveness) of some.
Just placed my first spread bet of the 2017 GE, selling the Tories at 387. I feel comfortable with this, representing, as it does, a Tory majority of 104. Even before tonight's polls, I sensed that the Tories in general and TM in particular (she was shockingly bad during parts of PMQs) had experienced a very poor week.Couple this with the disappointing GDP figures and I can see the spread price for Blue seats dipping by 10 - 12 seats. Should their support hold up however, their final seat tally instead rise by up to 20 seats, maybe even a tad more, but I consider that's much less likely than a decline from current levels.
DYOR.
387 seats.... oops, sorry, make that a Tory majority of 124, which sounds huge to me, but at this early stage in the campaign, who can say with any confidence?
UK citizens living abroad lose rights unless there is a deal. That is why a deal is necessary. The rights British citizens currently living in the UK will lose are less saveable.
We'll survive. I'll apply for a visa, pay for private healthcare. Those who can't afford it or don't qualify will go home, and vice versa.
Even with a residency deal which maintains everyone's right to reside, there is no way the UK could ever allow the ECJ to extend its jurisdiction for any reason. On going cases or cases that are brought that relate to when we were in, sure, but from 2019 any new cases will have to be heard in a UK court under domestic law with no right of appeal to the ECJ. The solution is simple, if that isn't satisfactory then they are welcome to leave. I'm under no illusion that I will be able to bring a court case against a Swiss national or company to a UK court under UK law, I don't see why an EU citizen should expect anything different.
Yep, you'll be fine. Good for you. I will be, too. Aren't we lucky we're so shielded from it all and any downsides will not affect us (except if we get caught in some kind of attack that could have been prevented if the UK had not withheld security information).
But I chose to come here. I made that choice. No one forced me to leave, if it was such a huge concern then I would choose to go back. People made the decision to go abroad, work and live in a foreign jurisdiction, anyone who did that without thinking of the consequences was, frankly, an idiot.
Yep - pensioners who saved for a holiday home in Spain and have been living there since 2005 really should have factored in the UK leaving the EU and withdrawing from security cooperation with European countries before making their purchase.
If they've been living there since 2005 then they should already have Spanish residency and will have no issues.
Oh Dear Crathes Public Hall is a registered charity whose constitution forbids its use for political meetings . Apparently it was booked today for a children's party in the name of a certain Mr Burnett ,
@ProfChalmers: Slightly confused by folk thinking that because a hall didn't put "SATURDAY TOP SECRET PM VISIT!" online, the booking was made by deception.
I think "Constituency meeting" during an election campaign would both be honest and not particularly give away the PM's movements. "Childrens' Party" is rather less honest , except if they were self-deprecatingly referring to the infantile nature of the Conservative and Unionist Party.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
We beat them with Australasia.
France has New Caledonia, and French Polynesia.
There was also a French colony at Akaroa on the South Island of New Zealand.
Very true - I have been there. In which case, France has also had colonies on every continent. Maybe the Dutch have, too. Didn't they have bits of Australia for a while?
I don't think that the Dutch settled in Australasia, though Abel Tasman and Van Diemen both explored and landed.
It may depend on whether one includes Dutch New Guinea in Oceana.
The Germans seem to have missed out on the Americas, but had colonies on all the other continents.
And the same applies to the millions of Brits holidaying in Europe and visiting for business, too. In your less willy-waving moments you may want to consider how ridiculous your position is on this.
But millions of Brits go to Asia every year and we have almost no security apparatus in the area. We will be a third nation to the EU in 2019. Our relationship with them will be the same as it is to Thailand. It is your position that is ridiculous. On the one hand you say the EU have every right to treat Britain as a third nation, which is true, but then on the other hand you say Britain hasn't got the right to do the same. Please explain how this is a consistent position to hold. The security concerns will amount to one line on the FCO travel advice website "France has an increased threat of terrorism and we advise travellers to be vigilant at all times". Which is what they did for the Philippines (another third country with which we have no security cooperation).
By your logic we should be the world's intelligence agency and provide intelligence to everyone for free because British citizens may come to harm if we don't. As I said, the government already puts us emigrants in harm's way by not providing security information to Arab nations where there is an extremely high risk of terrorism. I don't see why it will be any different for the EU once we leave, it is a consistent position to hold. Your position is completely inconsistent.
My logic is simple and consistent: the British government will not put millions of British citizens at additional risk by withdrawing (key word that) from current security arrangements that help to keep them safe in Europe. Such arrangements do not currently exist in Asia, so British citizens do indeed travel there knowing they face potential heightened exposure to danger.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
Surely the French too, and Spain and Portugal were nearly as worldwide.
We beat them with Australasia.
France has New Caledonia, and French Polynesia.
There was also a French colony at Akaroa on the South Island of New Zealand.
I suppose technically you are correct if you include those two though James Cook was the first European to sight New Caledonia and name it and Cook also arrived in French Polynesia in 1769. The French settlement in Akaroa lasted just 2 years from 1838-1840 until the British took it over
Tony Blair used an interview on the eve of the 20th anniversary of his 1997 election landslide to admit that he has “more in common at the moment with the Lib Dems” than with Corbyn’s Labour.
Sources close to Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, confirm that he and Blair have discussed working together in future, opening the door to the prospect of a new progressive party.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
But overall our exports are much lower than, say, Germany or maybe even France.
The majority of German exports go to other EU nations as is also the case with France
Down just one percentage point is just noise/moe stuff which should therefore calm Tory nerves.The Greens' decline looks like a shocker....could this mean that Brighton Pavilion is at risk for them?
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
But overall our exports are much lower than, say, Germany or maybe even France.
The majority of German exports go to other EU nations as is also the case with France
Sure - but in terms of quantity the Germans still export more than us outside the EU. The French may too.
UK citizens living abroad lose rights unless there is a deal. That is why a deal is necessary. The rights British citizens currently living in the UK will lose are less saveable.
We'll survive. I'll apply for a visa, pay for private healthcare. Those who can't afford it or don't qualify will go home, and vice versa.
Even with a residency deal which maintains everyone's right to reside, there is no way the UK could ever allow the ECJ to extend its jurisdiction for any reason. On going cases or cases that are brought that relate to when we were in, sure, but from 2019 any new cases will have to be heard in a UK court under domestic law with no right of appeal to the ECJ. The solution is simple, if that isn't satisfactory then they are welcome to leave. I'm under no illusion that I will be able to bring a court case against a Swiss national or company to a UK court under UK law, I don't see why an EU citizen should expect anything different.
Yep, you'll be fine. Good for you. I will be, too. Aren't we lucky we're so shielded from it all and any downsides will not affect us (except if we get caught in some kind of attack that could have been prevented if the UK had not withheld security information).
But I chose to come here. I made that choice. No one forced me to leave, if it was such a huge concern then I would choose to go back. People made the decision to go abroad, work and live in a foreign jurisdiction, anyone who did that without thinking of the consequences was, frankly, an idiot.
Yep - pensioners who saved for a holiday home in Spain and have been living there since 2005 really should have factored in the UK leaving the EU and withdrawing from security cooperation with European countries before making their purchase.
If they've been living there since 2005 then they should already have Spanish residency and will have no issues.
If they haven't then they are breaking the law.
I've always kept mine up to date despite the fact that I only use the villa occasionally.
And the same applies to the millions of Brits holidaying in Europe and visiting for business, too. In your less willy-waving moments you may want to consider how ridiculous your position is on this.
But millions of Brits go to Asia every year and we have almost no security apparatus in the area. We will be a third nation to the EU in 2019. Our relationship with them will be the same as it is to Thailand. It is your position that is ridiculous. On the one hand you say the EU have every right to treat Britain as a third nation, which is true, but then on the other hand you say Britain hasn't got the right to do the same. Please explain how this is a consistent position to hold. The security concerns will amount to one line on the FCO travel advice website "France has an increased threat of terrorism and we advise travellers to be vigilant at all times". Which is what they did for the Philippines (another third country with which we have no security cooperation).
By your logic we should be the world's intelligence agency and provide intelligence to everyone for free because British citizens may come to harm if we don't. As I said, the government already puts us emigrants in harm's way by not providing security information to Arab nations where there is an extremely high risk of terrorism. I don't see why it will be any different for the EU once we leave, it is a consistent position to hold. Your position is completely inconsistent.
My logic is simple and consistent: the British government will not put millions of British citizens at additional risk by withdrawing (key word that) from current security arrangements that help to keep them safe in Europe. Such arrangements do not currently exist in Asia, so British citizens do indeed travel there knowing they face potential heightened exposure to danger.
And in future they will travel to European countries with the same knowledge. Those who live there will have to live with it or go back. That's all it means for Brits abroad. Most won't give a fuck and will continue as normal just as we would (and have done) in London for so many years of being told about the threat of terrorism.
As I said, your position is completely inconsistent and in the end it comes down what hard Brexit means in practical terms. If we fall out with no deal we also fall out of existing security agreements, if the EU want to maintain the security agreements then the government will absolutely insist it be done at the same time as trade. Therefore it is on the table, whether you like it or not.
Tony Blair used an interview on the eve of the 20th anniversary of his 1997 election landslide to admit that he has “more in common at the moment with the Lib Dems” than with Corbyn’s Labour.
Sources close to Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, confirm that he and Blair have discussed working together in future, opening the door to the prospect of a new progressive party.
And the same applies to the millions of Brits holidaying in Europe and visiting for business, too. In your less willy-waving moments you may want to consider how ridiculous your position is on this.
But millions of Brits go to Asia every year and we have almost no security apparatus in the area. We will be a third nation to the EU in 2019. Our relationship with them will be the same as it is to Thailand. It is your position that is ridiculous. On the one hand you say the EU have every right to treat Britain as a third nation, which is true, but then on the other hand you say Britain hasn't got the right to do the same. Please explain how this is a consistent position to hold. The security concerns will amount to one line on the FCO travel advice website "France has an increased threat of terrorism and we advise travellers to be vigilant at all times". Which is what they did for the Philippines (another third country with which we have no security cooperation).
By your logic we should be the world's intelligence agency and provide intelligence to everyone for free because British citizens may come to harm if we don't. As I said, the government already puts us emigrants in harm's way by not providing security information to Arab nations where there is an extremely high risk of terrorism. I don't see why it will be any different for the EU once we leave, it is a consistent position to hold. Your position is completely inconsistent.
My logic is simple and consistent: the British government will not put millions of British citizens at additional risk by withdrawing (key word that) from current security arrangements that help to keep them safe in Europe. Such arrangements do not currently exist in Asia, so British citizens do indeed travel there knowing they face potential heightened exposure to danger.
It's not a question of "withdraw" - the EU is already planning to end data sharing if the current agreements are not replaced.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
But overall our exports are much lower than, say, Germany or maybe even France.
The majority of German exports go to other EU nations as is also the case with France
Sure - but in terms of quantity the Germans still export more than us outside the EU. The French may too.
Germany has a bigger population and economy so that is irrelevant, what is relevant is that our trade is far less dependent on the EU in relative terms which was a key reason why we never joined the EEC when it first started and we never joined the Euro and we are now leaving the EU
One of Labour’s largest donors is to stand against Jeremy Corbyn in the general election, warning that he is leading the party to “annihilation at the polls”.
Michael Foster says traditional Labour voters are switching to the Conservatives because of Corbyn’s “incoherence, weakness and lack of leadership” and says they “pray every day” that he will stand down before the general election.
A Labour source said the party’s focus groups have revealed a depth of feeling against Corbyn that is unprecedented, with working-class voters seeing him as unpatriotic because he failed to sing the national anthem and because of his long-standing sympathy for the IRA.
“It’s IRA, national anthem, IRA, national anthem,” one source said. “People bring it up totally unprompted. We have never seen such a visceral response. It’s the worst we’ve ever seen.”
And the same applies to the millions of Brits holidaying in Europe and visiting for business, too. In your less willy-waving moments you may want to consider how ridiculous your position is on this.
But millions of Brits go to Asia every year and we have almost no security apparatus in the area. We will be a third nation to the EU in 2019. Our relationship with them will be the same as it is to Thailand. It is your position that is ridiculous. On the one hand you say the EU have every right to treat Britain as a third nation, which is true, but then on the other hand you say Britain hasn't got the right to do the same. Please explain how this is a consistent position to hold. The security concerns will amount to one line on the FCO travel advice website "France has an increased threat of terrorism and we advise travellers to be vigilant at all times". Which is what they did for the Philippines (another third country with which we have no security cooperation).
By your logic we should be the world's intelligence agency and provide intelligence to everyone for free because British citizens may come to harm if we don't. As I said, the government already puts us emigrants in harm's way by not providing security information to Arab nations where there is an extremely high risk of terrorism. I don't see why it will be any different for the EU once we leave, it is a consistent position to hold. Your position is completely inconsistent.
My logic is simple and consistent: the British government will not put millions of British citizens at additional risk by withdrawing (key word that) from current security arrangements that help to keep them safe in Europe. Such arrangements do not currently exist in Asia, so British citizens do indeed travel there knowing they face potential heightened exposure to danger.
It's not a question of "withdraw" - the EU is already planning to end data sharing if the current agreements are not replaced.
It is a question of "withdraw" if you are seeking to use security as a bargaining chip. I agree the UK government would never be so irresponsible. I am genuinely surprised others take a different view.
The numbers haven't changed much from the last survey earlier in the week, so it'll be interesting to see if the tables have shifted by a similarly marginal amount. The thing that puzzled me about the last set was that a clear trend in terms of differential levels of Labour support between the genders - with women being significantly more keen than men - had suddenly disappeared. Labour support had jumped amongst men, but not women, and only working age men at that. It seemed to account for the whole increase of 4% in Labour VI from the survey before that one.
I'm wondering if the new poll will have the same characteristics - and, if so, whether there's been any change in methodology of which we are not aware. Looking back at the tables for the previous YouGov, I have just realised that two extra sets of columns - the proportion of voters who say they may change their vote, and a breakdown of the responses of Christian and non-religious voters - have appeared at the end of the headline VI report. We know Opinium have been playing with their weightings. Have YouGov also done so?
One of Labour’s largest donors is to stand against Jeremy Corbyn in the general election, warning that he is leading the party to “annihilation at the polls”.
Michael Foster says traditional Labour voters are switching to the Conservatives because of Corbyn’s “incoherence, weakness and lack of leadership” and says they “pray every day” that he will stand down before the general election.
Nick, did you see my question earlier about Tory Remainers?
No, sorry, and am heading for bed so may miss it again. I know a few Tory hard Remainers ("Europe first, party second") who are switching to whoever is best placed to beat the Tories in their seats (even in Broxtowe, where AS is seen by Remainers as having said the right things and then faltered), but I'm talking in single figures - 6 or 7 people out of hundreds. I don't think there *are* that many Tory hard Remainers.
There are more Labour hard remainers, who are aware that Tim Farron is after them. But these tend to be fairly sophisticated types who are already in the habit of voting tactically, so they mainly respond in seats where the LibDems are the main challengers.
That's not news. We've been aware that Labour's poiling shows a blood bath all week.
I can't see the gap having narrowed by 7 points though, however it still leaves a good working majority, and the Conservatives haven't really started on Corbyn yet.
A Labour source said the party’s focus groups have revealed a depth of feeling against Corbyn that is unprecedented, with working-class voters seeing him as unpatriotic because he failed to sing the national anthem and because of his long-standing sympathy for the IRA.
“It’s IRA, national anthem, IRA, national anthem,” one source said. “People bring it up totally unprompted. We have never seen such a visceral response. It’s the worst we’ve ever seen.”
I have no idea what the Tories might go on in the run up to the GE.
Tony Blair used an interview on the eve of the 20th anniversary of his 1997 election landslide to admit that he has “more in common at the moment with the Lib Dems” than with Corbyn’s Labour.
Sources close to Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, confirm that he and Blair have discussed working together in future, opening the door to the prospect of a new progressive party.
A progressive party led by Farron and Blair? Oh dear. Pass the sick bucket. I can't see that going down well.
And the same applies to the millions of Brits holidaying in Europe and visiting for business, too. In your less willy-waving moments you may want to consider how ridiculous your position is on this.
But millions of Brits go to Asia every year and we have almost no security apparatus in the area. We will be a third nation to the EU in 2019. Our relationship with them will be the same as it is to Thailand. It is your position that is ridiculous. On the one hand you say the EU have every right to treat Britain as a third nation, which is true, but then on the other hand you say Britain hasn't got the right to do the same. Please explain how this is a consistent position to hold. The security concerns will amount to one line on the FCO travel advice website "France has an increased threat of terrorism and we advise travellers to be vigilant at all times". Which is what they did for the Philippines (another third country with which we have no security cooperation).
By your logic we should be the world's intelligence agency and provide intelligence to everyone for free because British citizens may come to harm if we don't. As I said, the government already puts us emigrants in harm's way by not providing security information to Arab nations where there is an extremely high risk of terrorism. I don't see why it will be any different for the EU once we leave, it is a consistent position to hold. Your position is completely inconsistent.
My logic is simple and consistent: the Britishcurrently exist in Asia, so British citizens do indeed travel there knowing they face potential heightened exposure to danger.
And in future they will travel to European countries with the same knowledge. Those who live there will have to live with it or go back. That's all it means for Brits abroad. Most won't give a fuck and will continue as normal just as we would (and have done) in London for so many years of being told about the threat of terrorism.
As I said, your position is completely inconsistent and in the end it comes down what hard Brexit means in practical terms. If we fall out with no deal we also fall out of existing security agreements, if the EU want to maintain the security agreements then the government will absolutely insist it be done at the same time as trade. Therefore it is on the table, whether you like it or not.
The British government will not make it more dangerous for British citizens to live, work and holiday in Europe, or do anything that may increase security risks at home. I am surprised you think it will. We will have to agree to disagree.
Are you standing in Broxtowe? If so, can I say it'd be good to see someone more human as an MP there than the current incumbent.
I'd agree that I'd expect more UKIP to Con switchers than any other.
Thanks, Benedict, good to "see" you again, een a while!
Selection for most seats not already held by Labour, including Broxtowe, has been shunted into next week.
Rushed selections all round are a real drawback to a surprise election 3 years early. Inevitably vetting by all parties will be superficial.
David Tredinnick was reselected last night for Bosworth for example. Should be worth a few thousand votes for the LDs, but still tricky to unseat him without tactical votes.
A Labour source said the party’s focus groups have revealed a depth of feeling against Corbyn that is unprecedented, with working-class voters seeing him as unpatriotic because he failed to sing the national anthem and because of his long-standing sympathy for the IRA.
“It’s IRA, national anthem, IRA, national anthem,” one source said. “People bring it up totally unprompted. We have never seen such a visceral response. It’s the worst we’ve ever seen.”
If there's not a PPB and a full-frontal assault on this topic on TV and the newspapers (probably in the last week of the campaign) then I shall be most surprised. Of course, one of the many unknowns is: what proportion of the public is already cognisant of these controversies (and have all the ones who care enough about Corbyn's past associations ditched Labour already?)
A Labour source said the party’s focus groups have revealed a depth of feeling against Corbyn that is unprecedented, with working-class voters seeing him as unpatriotic because he failed to sing the national anthem and because of his long-standing sympathy for the IRA.
“It’s IRA, national anthem, IRA, national anthem,” one source said. “People bring it up totally unprompted. We have never seen such a visceral response. It’s the worst we’ve ever seen.”
Completely ties in w my experience. My dad is a lifetime labour voter, not really bothered about politics, would never vote conservative, but won't vote labour either now because of Corbyn. Main reason: Corbyns a weirdo who hates the queen, doesn't sing our anthem and supports the IRA
When these YouGov numbers are finally coughed up, I'll be intrigued to see whether Labour is knocking around 30% again (as will probably be the case.)
If so, we'll be starting to see a similar pattern in a number of pollsters. The next questions are, "Where are the voter movements taking place?" and "Why?"
A couple more questions to consider, which might help us with these:
1. Does a situation in which Labour and the Lib Dems are back where they started in May 2015 look remotely plausible, given everything that has happened since - i.e. after what happened with the polls last time, and given that Labour/Corbyn still does terribly in the secondary questions, do we swallow these headline VI numbers whole or consider that there might be something wrong with them? 2. Is there anything obvious in the 2015 voter churn tables that might help us to understand what's going on? The Opinium tables look nonsensical and there aren't any for Orb, so we're going to need the YouGov splits to help us with this.
My assumption is that this polling trend might be reinforcing Labour's increasingly inefficient vote. Piling up votes where they don't need them is the only explanation when we've seen Labour doing much worse in their old heartland Leave seats....
Opinium has also consistently had Labour higher than other pollsters and may not have made as many adjustments since the last election as the likes of yougov and ICM, ORB may be similar. The final Opinium poll for the last general election had Labour on 35% and the Tories 34%, Labour were 5% too high and the Tories 3% too low http://ukgeneralelection2015.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/final-poll-from-opinium-before-election.html
Read that again! The final Opinium poll actually had the Tories 1% ahead!
The EU countries don't seem to care about security, didn't a French minister explain that deaths from terrorist attacks were really not a problem, a price worth paying for open borders. Schultz and Steinmeier are proposing Germany should disarm, and Merkel is not far behind them (did you know that part of the German military budget is used for road and rail maintenance?). I am very sure we should not backstop EU defence.
A Labour source said the party’s focus groups have revealed a depth of feeling against Corbyn that is unprecedented, with working-class voters seeing him as unpatriotic because he failed to sing the national anthem and because of his long-standing sympathy for the IRA.
“It’s IRA, national anthem, IRA, national anthem,” one source said. “People bring it up totally unprompted. We have never seen such a visceral response. It’s the worst we’ve ever seen.”
That doesn't seem to be reflected in the latest Yougov poll. I wonder who's got it wrong or if they are holding their noses and voting Labour anyway. Perhaps that's what they tell the polsters but will abstain?
A Labour source said the party’s focus groups have revealed a depth of feeling against Corbyn that is unprecedented, with working-class voters seeing him as unpatriotic because he failed to sing the national anthem and because of his long-standing sympathy for the IRA.
“It’s IRA, national anthem, IRA, national anthem,” one source said. “People bring it up totally unprompted. We have never seen such a visceral response. It’s the worst we’ve ever seen.”
If there's not a PPB and a full-frontal assault on this topic on TV and the newspapers (probably in the last week of the campaign) then I shall be most surprised. Of course, one of the many unknowns is: what proportion of the public is already cognisant of these controversies (and have all the ones who care enough about Corbyn's past associations ditched Labour already?)
Actually we do - only a minority of the public are well aware of Corbyn's links -70% are not according to YouGov
It is a question of "withdraw" if you are seeking to use security as a bargaining chip. I agree the UK government would never be so irresponsible. I am genuinely surprised others take a different view.
So just how does the EU continue to get access to UK intelligence if it is hard Brexit? We will be out of all the current security agreements except our bilateral deal with France. What apparatus or method will be used? What deal will be struck on security cooperation with the EU that the government will agree to if it is to be a hostile hard Brexit?
As I've said time and again, if the EU are stupid enough to keep using this stupid rhetoric of punishment then it will be a hostile Brexit and we will just fall out with no deal. No security cooperation, no customs deal, no trade deal, tariffs, a possible trade war and masses of paperwork for immigrants on both sides. Like you, I'm not looking to see this outcome, but you can be assured that when the time comes and the EU ask for the continuation of security cooperation, the government will get it's quid quo pro on trade.
When these YouGov numbers are finally coughed up, I'll be intrigued to see whether Labour is knocking around 30% again (as will probably be the case.)
If so, we'll be starting to see a similar pattern in a number of pollsters. The next questions are, "Where are the voter movements taking place?" and "Why?"
A couple more questions to consider, which might help us with these:
1. Does a situation in which Labour and the Lib Dems are back where they started in May 2015 look remotely plausible, given everything that has happened since - i.e. after what happened with the polls last time, and given that Labour/Corbyn still does terribly in the secondary questions, do we swallow these headline VI numbers whole or consider that there might be something wrong with them? 2. Is there anything obvious in the 2015 voter churn tables that might help us to understand what's going on? The Opinium tables look nonsensical and there aren't any for Orb, so we're going to need the YouGov splits to help us with this.
My assumption is that this polling trend might be reinforcing Labour's increasingly inefficient vote. Piling up votes where they don't need them is the only explanation when we've seen Labour doing much worse in their old heartland Leave seats....
Opinium has also consistently had Labour higher than other pollsters and may not have made as many adjustments since the last election as the likes of yougov and ICM, ORB may be similar. The final Opinium poll for the last general election had Labour on 35% and the Tories 34%, Labour were 5% too high and the Tories 3% too low http://ukgeneralelection2015.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/final-poll-from-opinium-before-election.html
Read that again! The final Opinium poll actually had the Tories 1% ahead!
The point stands though, they had Labour 3 points too high, and the Tories three points too low.
We have never, ever been at the heart of Europe. Oh! We have often said that we wanted to be, but the heart of Europe has always been the Franco-German "motor".
In a parallel universe where Blair had joined the Euro and stayed out of Iraq we would now have immense power and influence within the EU. People may even have joked that Theresa May was the Queen of Europe, instead of giving that honorary title to the German Chancellor.
No, Germany will always dominate the EU see Greece and the UK has always been the most global of the main European powers
Not in business.
The UK is the only EU nation where a majority of its exports go outside the EU and the only one to have had an Empire with colonies in every inhabited continent
It's got fewer embassies than each of the four other members of the UN Security Council and even than Germany.
But its culture of tax-dodging and hiding money law of equity has been adopted around the world, and Russian-speaking businessmen with unclear sources of wealth oligarchs dig its chancery court and its elite boarding schools.
UK citizens living abroad lose rights unless there is a deal. That is why a deal is necessary. The rights British citizens currently living in the UK will lose are less saveable.
We'll survive. I'll apply for a visa, pay for private healthcare. Those who can't afford it or don't qualify will go home, and vice versa.
Even with a residency deal which maintains everyone's right to reside, there is no way the UK could ever allow the ECJ to extend its jurisdiction for any reason. On going cases or cases that are brought that relate to when we were in, sure, but from 2019 any new cases will have to be heard in a UK court under domestic law with no right of appeal to the ECJ. The solution is simple, if that isn't satisfactory then they are welcome to leave. I'm under no illusion that I will be able to bring a court case against a Swiss national or company to a UK court under UK law, I don't see why an EU citizen should expect anything different.
Yep, you'll be fine. Good for you. I will be, too. Aren't we lucky we're so shielded from it all and any downsides will not affect us (except if we get caught in some kind of attack that could have been prevented if the UK had not withheld security information).
But I chose to come here. I made that choice. No one forced me to leave, if it was such a huge concern then I would choose to go back. People made the decision to go abroad, work and live in a foreign jurisdiction, anyone who did that without thinking of the consequences was, frankly, an idiot.
Yep - pensioners who saved for a holiday home in Spain and have been living there since 2005 really should have factored in the UK leaving the EU and withdrawing from security cooperation with European countries before making their purchase.
Yeah...just like those British people who temporarily put money into banks in Cyprus so that they could pay for the home that they had just bought there - then suddenly found that 30% of it was gone under the EU bailout deal. They should have foreseen that as well.
Life is full of risk. You cannot foresee everything and there is no point crying like a snowflake when things don't work out like you want them to.
With tactical voting , this could be interesting !
May's campaign is not going so well. Perhaps us PB Progressive Allies have had a good week.
I also have a feeling that the calm collective outlook the EU gave on Saturday might start a few to worry that Brexit would not be such a smooth sailing after all.
When these YouGov numbers are finally coughed up, I'll be intrigued to see whether Labour is knocking around 30% again (as will probably be the case.)
If so, we'll be starting to see a similar pattern in a number of pollsters. The next questions are, "Where are the voter movements taking place?" and "Why?"
A couple more questions to consider, which might help us with these:
1. Does a situation in which Labour and the Lib Dems are back where they started in May 2015 look remotely plausible, given everything that has happened since - i.e. after what happened with the polls last time, and given that Labour/Corbyn still does terribly in the secondary questions, do we swallow these headline VI numbers whole or consider that there might be something wrong with them? 2. Is there anything obvious in the 2015 voter churn tables that might help us to understand what's going on? The Opinium tables look nonsensical and there aren't any for Orb, so we're going to need the YouGov splits to help us with this.
My assumption is that this polling trend might be reinforcing Labour's increasingly inefficient vote. Piling up votes where they don't need them is the only explanation when we've seen Labour doing much worse in their old heartland Leave seats....
Opinium has also consistently had Labour higher than other pollsters and may not have made as many adjustments since the last election as the likes of yougov and ICM, ORB may be similar. The final Opinium poll for the last general election had Labour on 35% and the Tories 34%, Labour were 5% too high and the Tories 3% too low http://ukgeneralelection2015.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/final-poll-from-opinium-before-election.html
Read that again! The final Opinium poll actually had the Tories 1% ahead!
Comments
Odd results pending, indeed.
Election night comes 5 days after my busiest week of the year. I usually book a holiday for one: will be too busy this year with electioneering locally, but hope to catch up on sleep in the days preceeding to hold out for the entire night again. Last time I fell asleep to be woken by a txt that simply read: MORLEY AND OUTWOOD!!!!
Are you standing in Broxtowe? If so, can I say it'd be good to see someone more human as an MP there than the current incumbent.
I'd agree that I'd expect more UKIP to Con switchers than any other.
Perhaps limit appointees to 10 year terms? That would actually be quite sensible as it would remove the lag that sees 100+ LD lords but only 9MPs
Honestly? You have to take the rough with the smooth. If I want to benefit from the UK government's massive expenditure on intelligence and security then I may just want to live there. I can't live in a different country and pay tax to a different government and then bitch about how unfair it is that the UK government isn't looking out for my interests. I'm prepared for this eventuality. Then again, I chose to leave the country because I was offered 6x the wages in Zurich to do what is essentially the same job. If it means I have to live under the threat of a bit more terrorism from 2019 I'll just have to deal with it.
The first charge is to defend the realm, anything beyond that is not necessary. Any citizen who has chosen to live abroad must live by standards overseas, the government has no duty beyond bringing us all back if war breaks out and getting us new passports if ours are lost or stolen.
She will have to refuse and so hard Brexit it is.
'Only a 13 point lead....aaaaahhhh us PBTories are all
Dooooooooomeed!'
May's manifesto does seem to increasingly resemble Labour's '83 one.
Even before tonight's polls, I sensed that the Tories in general and TM in particular (she was shockingly bad during parts of PMQs) had experienced a very poor week.Couple this with the disappointing GDP figures and I can see the spread price for Blue seats dipping by 10 - 12 seats. Should their support hold up however, their final seat tally instead rise by up to 20 seats, maybe even a tad more, but I consider that's much less likely than a decline from current levels.
DYOR.
My only quibble is that I see Labour holding up in Leave areas. Brexit is a given now. I see Lib Dems gaining from extreme Remainers, However, If pushed, I call polling fail (and MOE is not polling fail and 1 in 20 should be outliers anyway), but we will see...
File under B for bin.
By your logic we should be the world's intelligence agency and provide intelligence to everyone for free because British citizens may come to harm if we don't. As I said, the government already puts us emigrants in harm's way by not providing security information to Arab nations where there is an extremely high risk of terrorism. I don't see why it will be any different for the EU once we leave, it is a consistent position to hold. Your position is completely inconsistent.
There was also a French colony at Akaroa on the South Island of New Zealand.
But Labour have become associated as the party of 'single mothers and immigrants'.
I don't think Labour's candidate selection is going to be helpful for the future either. With most being either union officials or related to other Labour politicians Labour is going to struggle to reach out to non-Labour voting blocks.
The crucial thing is the collateralised debt obligation, which generated an enormous amount of tradable wealth and underpinned the whole subprime mortgage boom. In the UK the biggest CDO user for mortgages was Northern Rock and another one (Halifax?). There was discussion in the early Noughties about the wisdom of loosening legislation to allow this, but objections were swamped.
If Ken Clarke had been Chancellor and had the intelligence to notice the problem and the strength of character to prevent it, then it could have been avoided. But those are very big ifs and a lot of people who thought they were smart and strong turned out to be stupid and weak in the face of greed
(incidentally, Margin Call is on telly tomorrow, bbc2, 11pm. I'm getting dips.)
Con 44 (-1) Lab 31 (+2) LD 11 (+1) UKIP 6 (-1) Grn 2 (-1)
Changes since last Wed
And yet, if these polls had come out today without last weekend's polls intervening, everyone would be more than happy. Loss aversion in action.
It may depend on whether one includes Dutch New Guinea in Oceana.
The Germans seem to have missed out on the Americas, but had colonies on all the other continents.
Sources close to Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, confirm that he and Blair have discussed working together in future, opening the door to the prospect of a new progressive party.
I've always kept mine up to date despite the fact that I only use the villa occasionally.
As I said, your position is completely inconsistent and in the end it comes down what hard Brexit means in practical terms. If we fall out with no deal we also fall out of existing security agreements, if the EU want to maintain the security agreements then the government will absolutely insist it be done at the same time as trade. Therefore it is on the table, whether you like it or not.
Selection for most seats not already held by Labour, including Broxtowe, has been shunted into next week.
Michael Foster says traditional Labour voters are switching to the Conservatives because of Corbyn’s “incoherence, weakness and lack of leadership” and says they “pray every day” that he will stand down before the general election.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/labour-donor-to-stand-against-corbyn-g9rl9hfbx
“It’s IRA, national anthem, IRA, national anthem,” one source said. “People bring it up totally unprompted. We have never seen such a visceral response. It’s the worst we’ve ever seen.”
CON 44 (-1)
LAB 31 (+2)
LD 11 (+1)
UKIP 6 (-1)
GRN 3 (=)
27th-28th April
N=1,612
The numbers haven't changed much from the last survey earlier in the week, so it'll be interesting to see if the tables have shifted by a similarly marginal amount. The thing that puzzled me about the last set was that a clear trend in terms of differential levels of Labour support between the genders - with women being significantly more keen than men - had suddenly disappeared. Labour support had jumped amongst men, but not women, and only working age men at that. It seemed to account for the whole increase of 4% in Labour VI from the survey before that one.
I'm wondering if the new poll will have the same characteristics - and, if so, whether there's been any change in methodology of which we are not aware. Looking back at the tables for the previous YouGov, I have just realised that two extra sets of columns - the proportion of voters who say they may change their vote, and a breakdown of the responses of Christian and non-religious voters - have appeared at the end of the headline VI report. We know Opinium have been playing with their weightings. Have YouGov also done so?
There are more Labour hard remainers, who are aware that Tim Farron is after them. But these tend to be fairly sophisticated types who are already in the habit of voting tactically, so they mainly respond in seats where the LibDems are the main challengers.
I can't see the gap having narrowed by 7 points though, however it still leaves a good working majority, and the Conservatives haven't really started on Corbyn yet.
I'm sorry I dont understand what I just posted
David Tredinnick was reselected last night for Bosworth for example. Should be worth a few thousand votes for the LDs, but still tricky to unseat him without tactical votes.
As I've said time and again, if the EU are stupid enough to keep using this stupid rhetoric of punishment then it will be a hostile Brexit and we will just fall out with no deal. No security cooperation, no customs deal, no trade deal, tariffs, a possible trade war and masses of paperwork for immigrants on both sides. Like you, I'm not looking to see this outcome, but you can be assured that when the time comes and the EU ask for the continuation of security cooperation, the government will get it's quid quo pro on trade.
But its culture of tax-dodging and hiding money law of equity has been adopted around the world, and Russian-speaking businessmen with unclear sources of wealth oligarchs dig its chancery court and its elite boarding schools.
Life is full of risk. You cannot foresee everything and there is no point crying like a snowflake when things don't work out like you want them to.