Her decision to call an early election was widely praised by the pundits as smart politics...
It probably was - or could have been.
Just that calling one without any consultation on the manifesto, or any plan on how to campaign wasn't. And if May really is as crap as she revealed herself to be during the campaign, maybe it's as well we found out before the Brexit negotiations ?
Is it possible that we're living in one of the least worst possible of all worlds ?
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
The Sunday Times said the boundary changes wouldn't pass nor would the reduction in 600 seats because they damage the DUP/Unionists in Northern Ireland.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
A reasonable article, but I think May lacks the self awareness to assess where she went wrong and why the voters rejected her. Without that she will continue to stumble on with hard Brexit and continue to damage our country and our party. Her squatting in No. 10 shames us all and she needs to go.
If May resigns, and the Tories go for a full leadership contest, I can't see how there can be either a Queens Speech or any meaningful deal with the DUP. And there has to be a QS sooner than that. For these reasons alone May hast to stick around until parliament goes into recess. And suffer the laughter and ridicule from the benches opposite for a few very painful PMQs.
Likely resignation date is the date the house breaks up for the summer?
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
No. The question is effectively answered by the discussion in the previous thread.
"I firmly believe that Theresa May has a strong sense of duty. Many would have resigned office on Friday morning but I believe that she has stayed in office out of a sense that would be letting the nation down. If she wants to serve the nation best, she will need to make some dramatic adjustments. If she is allowed the chance and she manages it, she might even find that she becomes a better Prime Minister".
Do you really believe that or are you being nice? Everything about Mrs May's character suggests a woman seething with ambition and pride and any thought that she'd accept being the shortest serving PM for over a hundred years was to be avoided at all costs.
It's an interesting header, but I really can't see May as someone with the political or personal skills to build the kind of consensus envisaged.
She has patience - but not patience with other people; it is the patience of a loner. She has a sense of duty - but is tat coupled with the judgment to realise when it is time for her to go in the interests of the nation ? As for her analytical capacity, identifying problems is one thing; solutions another.
Although we know the good of the country is not a Tory priority, if she were ever to think about trying to govern in the national interest Mrs May might:
1. Keep as far away as possible from the swivel-eyed Tory right.
2. Stop pandering to the right wing press.
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
4. Start talking about Europe as our friend, not our enemy.
We are where we are, elections are the free market at work. We have had two big votes in a year, and the public say they want out of the EU, but the manner of departure to be consensual rather than dogmatic... so be it!
"I firmly believe that Theresa May has a strong sense of duty. Many would have resigned office on Friday morning but I believe that she has stayed in office out of a sense that would be letting the nation down. If she wants to serve the nation best, she will need to make some dramatic adjustments. If she is allowed the chance and she manages it, she might even find that she becomes a better Prime Minister".
Do you really believe that or are you being nice? Everything about Mrs May's character suggests a woman seething with ambition and pride and any tought that she'd accept being the shortest serving PM for over a hundred years was never an option..
Although we know the good of the country is not a Tory priority, if she were ever to think about trying to govern in the national interest Mrs May might:
1. Keep as far away as possible from the swivel-eyed Tory right.
2. Stop pandering to the right wing press.
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
4. Start talking about Europe as our friend, not our enemy.
5. Run a mile from Donald Trump.
The logic of all of those applied from the very day she took office. And her opening words in the street outside her new short-term rental appeared to suggest that she understood. How wrong we were.
Theresa May cannot and will not be allowed to fight another election. But there has to be an orderly transition if possible. The Commons maths is enough in her favour to allow that. But she will be being told she's on borrowed time and how she uses that will determine whether she's remembered as the worst PM ever or one of the worst PMs ever.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
No. The question is effectively answered by the discussion in the previous thread.
The Guardian seems to think that the boundary changes will go through in its article today.
Both Labour and Tories have accepted the referendum result and are commited to implementing it.
And neither of them has an electoral mandate to do so.
Remedial democracy, again.
For o much sleep.
BUT /EFTA?
As long as we leave I don't care. Must have said this 40 or 50 times now
Excets. Good to know.
W out. It really stifles sensible debate when people make comments like yours, theyre not even witty
The only childish thing so far said in this exchange is "I don't care what deal we get as long as we're out". It shows that you have no idea what you voted for. Which is fine; plenty of people vote on gut feeling. Just don't try to say that you are having any kind of "sensible debate" about it.
I think isam's point is absolutely reasonable actually - for lots of people the priority is to ensure Brexit happens, but are largely indifferent about what form it takes. Moreover, they really do not want controversy about the form of Brexit to be the very thing that derails Brexit.
This is not at all dissimilar to e.g. some Scottish pro-independence voters not having strong opinions about whether Scotland should keep the pound or the monarchy after independence - even if they did have a preference, they would rather take some form of independence than none, and would be upset if the thing that prevented independence was other people unable to agree on a strategy with respect to these things. It's particularly galling if you realise that fine details can be changed in the years to come - so long as independence happens.
I get that point. In principle. But as ever it is the devil in the details. It is an emotive "cry freedom" view that of course is perfectly legitimate. But it is a false premise. These are the people who voted Leave to reclaim sovereignty but, as has been confirmed by David "Arch Brexiter" Davis, we were always sovereign, it was just that "it didn't feel like it".
So when someone says "thank god we are out of the EU and yes I'd be happy with the EEA/EFTA" it is the height of illogicality and I think an interesting topic for debate.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
It may be advisable for Conservatives to let a little water flow under the bridge before referring to anyone else's hubris.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
The Sunday Times said the boundary changes wouldn't pass nor would the reduction in 600 seats because they damage the DUP/Unionists in Northern Ireland.
Both Labour and Tories have accepted the referendum result and are commited to implementing it.
And neither of them has an electoral mandate to do so.
Remedial democracy, again.
For o much sleep.
BUT /EFTA?
As long as we leave I don't care. Must have said this 40 or 50 times now
Excets. Good to know.
W out. It really stifles sensible debate when people make comments like yours, theyre not even witty
The only childish thing so far said in this exchange is "I don't care what deal we get as long as we're out". It shows that you have no idea what you voted for. Which is fine; plenty of people vote on gut feeling. Just don't try to say that you are having any kind of "sensible debate" about it.
I think isam's point is absolutely reasonable actually - for lots of people the priority is to ensure Brexit happens, but are largely indifferent about what form it takes. Moreover, they really do not want controversy about the form of Brexit to be the very thing that derails Brexit.
This is not at all dissimilar to e.g. some Scottish pro-independence voters not having strong opinions about whether Scotland should keep the pound or the monarchy after independence - even if they did have a preference, they would rather take some form of independence than none, and would be upset if the thing that prevented independence was other people unable to agree on a strategy with respect to these things. It's particularly galling if you realise that fine details can be changed in the years to come - so long as independence happens.
I get that point. In principle. But as ever it is the devil in the details. It is an emotive "cry freedom" view that of course is perfectly legitimate. But it is a false premise. These are the people who voted Leave to reclaim sovereignty but, as has been confirmed by David "Arch Brexiter" Davis, we were always sovereign, it was just that "it didn't feel like it".
So when someone says "thank god we are out of the EU and yes I'd be happy with the EEA/EFTA" it is the height of illogicality and I think an interesting topic for debate.
At a time when people are desperately trying to twist us out of leaving, any form of leaving is Ok with me. The terms of our relationship with the EU afterwards are not set in stone forever by the first deal, and can/will constantly change. What is important to me is that we leave.
Can't they write it on Nick Timothy's hide instead to save time?
Is it wrong to be really, really, enjoying the Tories squirming after their arrogance over the past months?
The only constraint is that your enjoyment must not surpass the level displayed by PB Tories as they foretold a future with only 100 Labour MPs and LibDems needing a second MP to have a leadership election.
Just watched a video of Kwarteng giving an interview in C4, he's just so smooth and confident. It's the complete opposite of Theresa. No nervousness, he's clearly been well briefed and he is flexible enough to answer the questions being asked. He also says that we'd only leave the single market to stop free movement and he gets the point across that Labour have the same view, one of the only politicians on our side to make that point.
He deserves a shot at the top job, we need to have a full leadership election and I hope he gets serious backing for it from some of the old guard who's time has clearly passed.
Theresa May cannot and will not be allowed to fight another election. But there has to be an orderly transition if possible. The Commons maths is enough in her favour to allow that. But she will be being told she's on borrowed time and how she uses that will determine whether she's remembered as the worst PM ever or one of the worst PMs ever.
Although we know the good of the country is not a Tory priority, if she were ever to think about trying to govern in the national interest Mrs May might:
1. Keep as far away as possible from the swivel-eyed Tory right.
2. Stop pandering to the right wing press.
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
4. Start talking about Europe as our friend, not our enemy.
5. Run a mile from Donald Trump.
6 Plead with David Cameron to come back as an MP and immediately take the Chiltern Hundreds?
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
The Sunday Times said the boundary changes wouldn't pass nor would the reduction in 600 seats because they damage the DUP/Unionists in Northern Ireland.
What about 650 seats ?
The next review will:
- start again, with a projected finish date probably in 2020 - use up-to-date (the current) registration data - have a target of 650 seats - have more flexible criteria, either a return to the old +/- 10% or/and to the old discretion to breach the limits for good community reasons
All of this will produce an outcome where the majority of existing seats are merely tweaked, rather than trashed. The only significant changes will be to Wales, the IOW (split), and a few areas with outlier electoral change.
Just watched a video of Kwarteng giving an interview in C4, he's just so smooth and confident. It's the complete opposite of Theresa. No nervousness, he's clearly been well briefed and he is flexible enough to answer the questions being asked. He also says that we'd only leave the single market to stop free movement and he gets the point across that Labour have the same view, one of the only politicians on our side to make that point.
He deserves a shot at the top job, we need to have a full leadership election and I hope he gets serious backing for it from some of the old guard who's time has clearly passed.
Both Labour and Tories have accepted the referendum result and are commited to implementing it.
And neither of them has an electoral mandate to do so.
Remedial democracy, again.
For o much sleep.
BUT /EFTA?
As long as we leave I don't care. Must have said this 40 or 50 times now
Excets. Good to know.
W out. It really stifles sensible debate when people make comments like yours, theyre not even witty
The it.
I think isam's point is absolutely reasonable actually - for lots of people the priority is to ensure Brexit happens, but are largely indifferent about what form it takes. Moreover, they really do not want controversy about the form of Brexit to be the very thing that derails Brexit.
This is not at all dissimilar to e.g. some Scottish pro-independence voters not having strong opinions about whether Scotland should keep the pound or the monarchy after independence - even if they did have a preference, they would rather take some form of independence than none, and would be upset if the thing that prevented independence was other people unable to agree on a strategy with respect to these things. It's particularly galling if you realise that fine details can be changed in the years to come - so long as independence happens.
I get that point. In principle. But as ever it is the devil in the details. It is an emotive "cry freedom" view that of course is perfectly legitimate. But it is a false premise. These are the people who voted Leave to reclaim sovereignty but, as has been confirmed by David "Arch Brexiter" Davis, we were always sovereign, it was just that "it didn't feel like it".
So when someone says "thank god we are out of the EU and yes I'd be happy with the EEA/EFTA" it is the height of illogicality and I think an interesting topic for debate.
At a time when people are desperately trying to twist us out of leaving, any form of leaving is Ok with me. The terms of our relationship with the EU afterwards are not set in stone forever by the first deal, and can/will constantly change. What is important to me is that we leave.
Neither of the major political parties is trying to twist us out of leaving.
So although I really don't want to rehash those pre-Ref debates, given that EEA/EFTA would be fine, given that we were always sovereign while in the EU, what is it about the EU that you don't actually like?
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
Thing is that I bet even if there was not the seat reduction, the normal update of the 650 seat boundaries is probably going to do something similar because of the changing demographics in the province. The DUP are screwed.
In contrast to John McDonnell Keir Starmer is making Labour look like a serious government in waiting. He's pointed out the obvious which is that if you want a sensible deal with the EU you don't insult them and you keep your negotiating position as fluid as possible.
He's starting to sound like a real contender. A man for our times. None of the dogmatism and soundbites that turned off so many at the last election
Can't they write it on Nick Timothy's hide instead to save time?
Is it wrong to be really, really, enjoying the Tories squirming after their arrogance over the past months?
The only constraint is that your enjoyment must not surpass the level displayed by PB Tories as they foretold a future with only 100 Labour MPs and LibDems needing a second MP to have a leadership election.
Right upto 10pm on Thursday. After that, for the next hour, the exit poll was wrong.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
Actually the Tories are helped a little. SF not taking those 9 seats makes the practical majority required 296 (against 322 now) and the Tories would therefore be able to govern alone with more comfort.
The delay with the DUP is detail and poker. Both have no interest is seeing corbyn in and both know this but a considerable chicken and egg situation is present as both circle for who an as yet theoretical corbyn led govt would be worse for.
Much of what the DUP woukd like at local level is driven by the local Assembly being there to make use of it. Its in sinn fein boycott. The government will sign cheques but preferably not unless the Assembly is up and running. The starting point therefore fir the government is that no cash flows until then. Part of the surround is how to get the show at Stormont running again. This means telling Sinn Fein that their boycott is out of road.
The second hitch is detail. There are a number of down the list DUP requests plus one or two top list issues which have national implications that are still in discussions. Sone of the national level issues may well be changes the government is going to make anyway from previous manifesto ideas that tanked. The down the lists though are smaller but possibly sensitive.
Can't they write it on Nick Timothy's hide instead to save time?
Is it wrong to be really, really, enjoying the Tories squirming after their arrogance over the past months?
The only constraint is that your enjoyment must not surpass the level displayed by PB Tories as they foretold a future with only 100 Labour MPs and LibDems needing a second MP to have a leadership election.
Right upto 10pm on Thursday. After that, for the next hour, the exit poll was wrong.
Can't they write it on Nick Timothy's hide instead to save time?
Is it wrong to be really, really, enjoying the Tories squirming after their arrogance over the past months?
The only constraint is that your enjoyment must not surpass the level displayed by PB Tories as they foretold a future with only 100 Labour MPs and LibDems needing a second MP to have a leadership election.
Thank you. I will maintain those boundaries.
These numbers are ridiculously tight aren't they? However I wonder if the Tories think they can bluff it out. There were several key votes in the past 2 years when I thought the Gvt might lose and they never did (were they defeated on anything except EU ref purdah and Sunday trading?) In practice getting every opposition MP marshalled against them just didn't happen for whatever reason, and it was hard not to be impressed by the discipline on the Tory side (both in Commons and Lords - how they got that individual vote registration cutoff through the Lords I have no idea.) If the Tory whipping operation remains as slick and Labour divisions are still present, they may be able to get more through than they expect.
Just watched a video of Kwarteng giving an interview in C4, he's just so smooth and confident. It's the complete opposite of Theresa. No nervousness, he's clearly been well briefed and he is flexible enough to answer the questions being asked. He also says that we'd only leave the single market to stop free movement and he gets the point across that Labour have the same view, one of the only politicians on our side to make that point.
He deserves a shot at the top job, we need to have a full leadership election and I hope he gets serious backing for it from some of the old guard who's time has clearly passed.
I agree, I like him.
Like you said on the previous thread, even though it shouldn't be an issue, it does also disarm one of the biggest smear tactics used by the left which is a bonus.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
Thing is that I bet even if there was not the seat reduction, the normal update of the 650 seat boundaries is probably going to do something similar because of the changing demographics in the province. The DUP are screwed.
The more seats there are, the less bias you get, and the more the balance of seats is likely to reflect the overall balance of the population, which is still tilted towards the unionists. Meanwhile, for them, the longer the current boundaries stick around, the better.
In contrast to John McDonnell Keir Starmer is making Labour look like a serious government in waiting. He's pointed out the obvious which is that if you want a sensible deal with the EU you don't insult them and you keep your negotiating position as fluid as possible.
He's starting to sound like a real contender. A man for our times. None of the dogmatism and soundbites that turned off so many at the last election
But as of Thursday, he's not a contender for Labour's leadership because they are confirmed as a party of the far left.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
The Sunday Times said the boundary changes wouldn't pass nor would the reduction in 600 seats because they damage the DUP/Unionists in Northern Ireland.
What about 650 seats ?
The next review will:
- start again, with a projected finish date probably in 2020 - use up-to-date (the current) registration data - have a target of 650 seats - have more flexible criteria, either a return to the old +/- 10% or/and to the old discretion to breach the limits for good community reasons
All of this will produce an outcome where the majority of existing seats are merely tweaked, rather than trashed. The only significant changes will be to Wales, the IOW (split), and a few areas with outlier electoral change.
Current registration data will be much more favourable to Labour, surely.
I get that point. In principle. But as ever it is the devil in the details. It is an emotive "cry freedom" view that of course is perfectly legitimate. But it is a false premise. These are the people who voted Leave to reclaim sovereignty but, as has been confirmed by David "Arch Brexiter" Davis, we were always sovereign, it was just that "it didn't feel like it".
So when someone says "thank god we are out of the EU and yes I'd be happy with the EEA/EFTA" it is the height of illogicality and I think an interesting topic for debate.
There is nothing illogical about it at all. The scope and range of the influence of any of the EFTA institutions upon us is absolutely miniscule compared to the EU. No one is suggesting we should cut ourselves off from the world. What we are saying is that our interactions with our countries should be bound by strictly limited treaties from which we can withdraw if we chose, not by self perpetuating and self governing institutions which influence almost every aspects of our lives.
Only the most fanatical Europhiles like yourself fail to see the difference.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
Actually the Tories are helped a little. SF not taking those 9 seats makes the practical majority required 296 (against 322 now) and the Tories would therefore be able to govern alone with more comfort.
SF can change its policy at the drop of a hat though, especially a bowler hat.
Both Labour and Tories have accepted the referendum result and are commited to implementing it.
And neither of them has an electoral mandate to do so.
Remedial democracy, again.
For o much sleep.
BUT /EFTA?
As long as we leave I don't care. Must have said this 40 or 50 times now
Excets. Good to know.
W out. It really stifles sensible debate when people make comments like yours, theyre not even witty
The it.
I think isam's point is absolutely reasonable actually - for lots of people the priority is to ensure Brexit happens, but are largely indifferent about what form it takes. Moreover, they really do not want controversy about the form of Brexit to be the very thing that derails Brexit.
.
".
.
s important to me is that we leave.
Neither of the major political parties is trying to twist us out of leaving.
So although I really don't want to rehash those pre-Ref debates, given that EEA/EFTA would be fine, given that we were always sovereign while in the EU, what is it about the EU that you didn't actually like?
It is amazing that even though I am restraining myself beyond all known measure in my responses to you, you still keep digging and digging, it must have been going on for years now.
The debate that you stepped into, between ScottP and I, was based on his assertion that no party had a mandate for Brexit, so it might not happen.
As I have said, maybe two dozen times now, I am happy for the current govt, whoever it may be, we have had a couple since you started hammering on about it, to negotiate the deal however they like, hard/soft/EFTA/EEA whatever. These things aren't set in stone and can and will change over time. I would like to leave completely but I am not self important enough to think that matters or stupid enough to think that's how it works.
Why do you give a fuck what I think anyway?! I dont care what you do
Both Labour and Tories have accepted the referendum result and are commited to implementing it.
And neither of them has an electoral mandate to do so.
Remedial democracy, again.
For o much sleep.
BUT /EFTA?
As long as we leave I don't care. Must have said this 40 or 50 times now
Excets. Good to know.
W out. It really stifles sensible debate when people make comments like yours, theyre not even witty
about it.
I think isam's point is absolutely reasonable actually - for lots of people the priority is to ensure Brexit happens, but are largely indifferent about what form it takes. Moreover, they really do not want controversy about the form of Brexit to be the very thing that derails Brexit.
This is not at all dissimilar to e.g. some Scottish pro-independence voters not having strong opinions about whether Scotland should keep the pound or the monarchy after independence - even if they did have a preference, they would rather take some form of independence than none, and would be upset if the thing that prevented independence was other people unable to agree on a strategy with respect to these things. It's particularly galling if you realise that fine details can be changed in the years to come - so long as independence happens.
I get that point. In principle. But as ever it is the devil in the details. It is an emotive "cry freedom" view that of course is perfectly legitimate. But it is a false premise. These are the people who voted Leave to reclaim sovereignty but, as has been confirmed by David "Arch Brexiter" Davis, we were always sovereign, it was just that "it didn't feel like it".
So when someone says "thank god we are out of the EU and yes I'd be happy with the EEA/EFTA" it is the height of illogicality and I think an interesting topic for debate.
At a time when people are desperately trying to twist us out of leaving, any form of leaving is Ok with me. The terms of our relationship with the EU afterwards are not set in stone forever by the first deal, and can/will constantly change. What is important to me is that we leave.
Why if you have no preference as to what leaving means? It's not a haunted house that you have to get out of because it spooks you.
Can't they write it on Nick Timothy's hide instead to save time?
Is it wrong to be really, really, enjoying the Tories squirming after their arrogance over the past months?
The only constraint is that your enjoyment must not surpass the level displayed by PB Tories as they foretold a future with only 100 Labour MPs and LibDems needing a second MP to have a leadership election.
Thank you. I will maintain those boundaries.
These numbers are ridiculously tight aren't they? However I wonder if the Tories think they can bluff it out. There were several key votes in the past 2 years when I thought the Gvt might lose and they never did (were they defeated on anything except EU ref purdah and Sunday trading?) In practice getting every opposition MP marshalled against them just didn't happen for whatever reason, and it was hard not to be impressed by the discipline on the Tory side (both in Commons and Lords - how they got that individual vote registration cutoff through the Lords I have no idea.) If the Tory whipping operation remains as slick and Labour divisions are still present, they may be able to get more through than they expect.
Older PB'ers will remember the 1970s with its fierce whipping, huge pressure on the gentleman's agreement basis of the pairing system, MPs being discharged from hospital and wheeled through the lobbies on trolleys, etc., and general difficulty for MPs needing to turn up relentlessly regardless of their health or diary, unable to take holidays or travel for personal reasons, hanging around in corridors and tea rooms late at night always waiting for the division bell....
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
The former says to me that she read (but perhaps misunderstood) that Brexit analysis book by the bloke who thought Remainers were Anywheres and Leavers were Somewheres.
In contrast to John McDonnell Keir Starmer is making Labour look like a serious government in waiting. He's pointed out the obvious which is that if you want a sensible deal with the EU you don't insult them and you keep your negotiating position as fluid as possible.
He's starting to sound like a real contender. A man for our times. None of the dogmatism and soundbites that turned off so many at the last election
Just watched a video of Kwarteng giving an interview in C4, he's just so smooth and confident. It's the complete opposite of Theresa. No nervousness, he's clearly been well briefed and he is flexible enough to answer the questions being asked. He also says that we'd only leave the single market to stop free movement and he gets the point across that Labour have the same view, one of the only politicians on our side to make that point.
He deserves a shot at the top job, we need to have a full leadership election and I hope he gets serious backing for it from some of the old guard who's time has clearly passed.
I agree, I like him.
Kwarteng is not even in the Cabinet, is a Eurosceptic rightwinger but too intellectual to take on Corbyn we need a charismatic populist like Boris or someone with balls like Davidson, Corbyn has been able to get away with too much for too long. Kwarteng should be in the cabinet certainly but is not the leader needed now
Just watched a video of Kwarteng giving an interview in C4, he's just so smooth and confident. It's the complete opposite of Theresa. No nervousness, he's clearly been well briefed and he is flexible enough to answer the questions being asked. He also says that we'd only leave the single market to stop free movement and he gets the point across that Labour have the same view, one of the only politicians on our side to make that point.
He deserves a shot at the top job, we need to have a full leadership election and I hope he gets serious backing for it from some of the old guard who's time has clearly passed.
He's a good tip for the next Con LOTO but could the Tories really promote someone from the backbenches, to party leader AND Prime Minister?
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
Theresa May cannot and will not be allowed to fight another election. But there has to be an orderly transition if possible. The Commons maths is enough in her favour to allow that. But she will be being told she's on borrowed time and how she uses that will determine whether she's remembered as the worst PM ever or one of the worst PMs ever.
Although we know the good of the country is not a Tory priority, if she were ever to think about trying to govern in the national interest Mrs May might:
1. Keep as far away as possible from the swivel-eyed Tory right.
2. Stop pandering to the right wing press.
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
4. Start talking about Europe as our friend, not our enemy.
5. Run a mile from Donald Trump.
6 Plead with David Cameron to come back as an MP and immediately take the Chiltern Hundreds?
Theresa could step down and Dave could contest the ensuing Maidenhead by-election. For everyone in Britain, seeing Dave stride up to the Downing Street podium would only be coupled with a feeling of blessed relief. After a bit of chillaxing with the DUP he'd have them eating out of his hands, and sunshine would rule the day once more.
Just watched a video of Kwarteng giving an interview in C4, he's just so smooth and confident. It's the complete opposite of Theresa. No nervousness, he's clearly been well briefed and he is flexible enough to answer the questions being asked. He also says that we'd only leave the single market to stop free movement and he gets the point across that Labour have the same view, one of the only politicians on our side to make that point.
He deserves a shot at the top job, we need to have a full leadership election and I hope he gets serious backing for it from some of the old guard who's time has clearly passed.
I agree, I like him.
I first met him about 16 years ago when I was a Tory Council leader and he was a recent graduate. He impressed me then and I felt sure he was destined for great things.
But he's been in Parliament for 7 years now and hasn't really advanced. He's a year older than Blair when he became leader of Labour. Only 2 years younger than Cameron when he became PM.
I just have no idea why he isn't in the Cabinet - there must be a reason.... he's seriously posh of course...
"I firmly believe that Theresa May has a strong sense of duty. Many would have resigned office on Friday morning but I believe that she has stayed in office out of a sense that would be letting the nation down. If she wants to serve the nation best, she will need to make some dramatic adjustments. If she is allowed the chance and she manages it, she might even find that she becomes a better Prime Minister".
Do you really believe that or are you being nice? Everything about Mrs May's character suggests a woman seething with ambition and pride and any tought that she'd accept being the shortest serving PM for over a hundred years was never an option..
Both Labour and Tories have accepted the referendum result and are commited to implementing it.
And neither of them has an electoral mandate to do so.
Remedial democracy, again.
For o much sleep.
BUT /EFTA?
As long as we leave I don't care. Must have said this 40 or 50 times now
Excets. Good to know.
W out. It really stifles sensible debate when people make comments like yours, theyre not even witty
about it.
I think isam's point is absolutely reasonable actually - for lots of people the priority is to ensure Brexit happens, but are largely indifferent about what form it takes. Moreover, they really do not want controversy about the form of Brexit to be the very thing that derails Brexit.
This is not at all dissimilar to e.g. some Scottish pro-independence voters not having strong opinions about whether Scotland should keep the pound or the monarchy after independence - even if they did have a preference, they would rather take some form of independence than none, and would be upset if the thing that prevented independence was other people unable to agree on a strategy with respect to these things. It's particularly galling if you realise that fine details can be changed in the years to come - so long as independence happens.
I get that point. In principle. But as ever it is the devil in the details. It is an emotive "cry freedom" view that of course is perfectly legitimate. But it is a false premise. These are the people who voted Leave to reclaim sovereignty but, as has been confirmed by David "Arch Brexiter" Davis, we were always sovereign, it was just that "it didn't feel like it".
So when someone says "thank god we are out of the EU and yes I'd be happy with the EEA/EFTA" it is the height of illogicality and I think an interesting topic for debate.
At a time when people are desperately trying to twist us out of leaving, any form of leaving is Ok with me. The terms of our relationship with the EU afterwards are not set in stone forever by the first deal, and can/will constantly change. What is important to me is that we leave.
Why if you have no preference as to what leaving means? It's not a haunted house that you have to get out of because it spooks you.
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
Actually the Tories are helped a little. SF not taking those 9 seats makes the practical majority required 296 (against 322 now) and the Tories would therefore be able to govern alone with more comfort.
SF can change its policy at the drop of a hat though, especially a bowler hat.
Corbo might allow them to take their seats without swearing allegiance to her Maj as part of a a SF-Lab pact.
"I firmly believe that Theresa May has a strong sense of duty. Many would have resigned office on Friday morning but I believe that she has stayed in office out of a sense that would be letting the nation down. If she wants to serve the nation best, she will need to make some dramatic adjustments. If she is allowed the chance and she manages it, she might even find that she becomes a better Prime Minister".
Do you really believe that or are you being nice? Everything about Mrs May's character suggests a woman seething with ambition and pride and any thought that she'd accept being the shortest serving PM for over a hundred years was to be avoided at all costs.
I can't help but feel a reflexive pity as May has come to very much physically resemble my mother in the last few months of her life when dementia & physical frailty kicked in. Then I remember my mum didn't choose to be there while May has, so the pity lessens.
Although we know the good of the country is not a Tory priority, if she were ever to think about trying to govern in the national interest Mrs May might:
1. Keep as far away as possible from the swivel-eyed Tory right.
2. Stop pandering to the right wing press.
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
4. Start talking about Europe as our friend, not our enemy.
5. Run a mile from Donald Trump.
Why stop there? Why not abolish the Conservative Party and give up contesting elections for good?
Alastair - good article. Agree May has abilities. But emoting, communicating, seeming, empathising, engaging - these are not those. Her big problem, in a televisual age, is that she is stiff, dull, awkward, cold, 'head rather than heart' - there's no warmth. She cannot fight the next election as PM. I think her best hope for a good place in history is to see us through a decent Brexit and then resign on health grounds. She's a big net negative right now. The Tories are nothing if not ruthless with loser leaders. And this one's a dud.
In contrast to John McDonnell Keir Starmer is making Labour look like a serious government in waiting. He's pointed out the obvious which is that if you want a sensible deal with the EU you don't insult them and you keep your negotiating position as fluid as possible.
He's starting to sound like a real contender. A man for our times. None of the dogmatism and soundbites that turned off so many at the last election
But as of Thursday, he's not a contender for Labour's leadership because they are confirmed as a party of the far left.
There are no contenders now, and unlikely to be any for a while.
Both Labour and Tories have accepted the referendum result and are commited to implementing it.
And neither of them has an electoral mandate to do so.
Remedial democracy, again.
For o much sleep.
BUT /EFTA?
As long as we leave I don't care. Must have said this 40 or 50 times now
Excets. Good to know.
W out. It really stifles sensible debate when people make comments like yours, theyre not even witty
The it.
I think isam's point is absolutely reasonable actually - for lots of people the priority is to ensure Brexit happens, but are largely indifferent about what form it takes. Moreover, they really do not want controversy about the form of Brexit to be the very thing that derails Brexit.
.
".
.
s important to me is that we leave.
Neither of the major political parties is trying to twist us out of leaving.
So although I really don't want to rehash those pre-Ref debates, given that EEA/EFTA would be fine, given that we were always sovereign while in the EU, what is it about the EU that you didn't actually like?
It is amazing that even though I am restraining myself beyond all known measure in my responses to you, you still keep digging and digging, it must have been going on for years now.
The debate that you stepped into, between ScottP and I, was based on his assertion that no party had a mandate for Brexit, so it might not happen.
As I have said, maybe two dozen times now, I am happy for the current govt, whoever it may be, we have had a couple since you started hammering on about it, to negotiate the deal however they like, hard/soft/EFTA/EEA whatever. These things aren't set in stone and can and will change over time. I would like to leave completely but I am not self important enough to think that matters or stupid enough to think that's how it works.
Why do you give a fuck what I think anyway?! I dont care what you do
I care Sam because it gives me an insight into the mind of a Brexiter and indeed it has done just that. Plus why should you get a free pass on your illogicality?
If you don't want to be challenged or engaged on what you write on an internet discussion board...don't write it.
Can't they write it on Nick Timothy's hide instead to save time?
Is it wrong to be really, really, enjoying the Tories squirming after their arrogance over the past months?
The only constraint is that your enjoyment must not surpass the level displayed by PB Tories as they foretold a future with only 100 Labour MPs and LibDems needing a second MP to have a leadership election.
Right upto 10pm on Thursday. After that, for the next hour, the exit poll was wrong.
Whereas now its the election that was wrong!
To be fair, Nick Palmer did claim after the 2015 result that the polls were right and the election result was wrong.
Both Labour and Tories have accepted the referendum result and are commited to implementing it.
And neither of them has an electoral mandate to do so.
Remedial democracy, again.
For o much sleep.
BUT /EFTA?
As long as we leave I don't care. Must have said this 40 or 50 times now
Excets. Good to know.
W out. It really stifles sensible debate when people make comments like yours, theyre not even witty
The it.
I think isam's point is absolutely reasonable actually - for lots of people the priority is to ensure Brexit happens, but are largely indifferent about what form it takes. Moreover, they really do not want controversy about the form of Brexit to be the very thing that derails Brexit.
.
".
.
s important to me is that we leave.
Neither of the major political parties is trying to twist us out of leaving.
So although I really don't want to rehash those pre-Ref debates, given that EEA/EFTA would be fine, given that we were always sovereign while in the EU, what is it about the EU that you didn't actually like?
It is amazing that even though I am restraining myself beyond all known measure in my responses to you, you still keep digging and digging, it must have been going on for years now.
The debate that you stepped into, between ScottP and I, was based on his assertion that no party had a mandate for Brexit, so it might not happen.
As I have said, maybe two dozen times now, I am happy for the current govt, whoever it may be, we have had a couple since you started hammering on about it, to negotiate the deal however they like, hard/soft/EFTA/EEA whatever. These things aren't set in stone and can and will change over time. I would like to leave completely but I am not self important enough to think that matters or stupid enough to think that's how it works.
Why do you give a fuck what I think anyway?! I dont care what you do
Alastair is absolutely right that Theresa May has a strong sense of duty. He is also absolutely right that, in the rush by commentators who a few weeks ago were praising her to the hilt to go to the opposite extreme, her good qualities are being forgotten. She was, after all, an excellent Home Secretary, as we were reminded only just over a week ago with the demonstration, alas in tragic in circumstances, of just how well prepared the police were for dealing with a a terrorist attack.
But, we are seeing the Peter Principle applying in spades. Even if we weren't, politics is an unforgiving game, and the fact is that she has screwed up catastrophically. Even that might not be terminal were it not for the fact that she didn't need to do anything at all. She has to go, the only question yet to be decided is when.
Just watched a video of Kwarteng giving an interview in C4, he's just so smooth and confident. It's the complete opposite of Theresa. No nervousness, he's clearly been well briefed and he is flexible enough to answer the questions being asked. He also says that we'd only leave the single market to stop free movement and he gets the point across that Labour have the same view, one of the only politicians on our side to make that point.
He deserves a shot at the top job, we need to have a full leadership election and I hope he gets serious backing for it from some of the old guard who's time has clearly passed.
I agree, I like him.
I first met him about 16 years ago when I was a Tory Council leader and he was a recent graduate. He impressed me then and I felt sure he was destined for great things.
But he's been in Parliament for 7 years now and hasn't really advanced. He's a year older than Blair when he became leader of Labour. Only 2 years younger than Cameron when he became PM.
I just have no idea why he isn't in the Cabinet - there must be a reason.... he's seriously posh of course...
In doing quick research on him, I just found a potential reason why he might have chosen a more 'academic' political career. Apparently he's dating Amber Rudd.....
The delay with the DUP is detail and poker. Both have no interest is seeing corbyn in and both know this but a considerable chicken and egg situation is present as both circle for who an as yet theoretical corbyn led govt would be worse for.
Much of what the DUP woukd like at local level is driven by the local Assembly being there to make use of it. Its in sinn fein boycott. The government will sign cheques but preferably not unless the Assembly is up and running. The starting point therefore fir the government is that no cash flows until then. Part of the surround is how to get the show at Stormont running again. This means telling Sinn Fein that their boycott is out of road.
The second hitch is detail. There are a number of down the list DUP requests plus one or two top list issues which have national implications that are still in discussions. Sone of the national level issues may well be changes the government is going to make anyway from previous manifesto ideas that tanked. The down the lists though are smaller but possibly sensitive.
Theresa May cannot and will not be allowed to fight another election. But there has to be an orderly transition if possible. The Commons maths is enough in her favour to allow that. But she will be being told she's on borrowed time and how she uses that will determine whether she's remembered as the worst PM ever or one of the worst PMs ever.
Although we know the good of the country is not a Tory priority, if she were ever to think about trying to govern in the national interest Mrs May might:
1. Keep as far away as possible from the swivel-eyed Tory right.
2. Stop pandering to the right wing press.
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
4. Start talking about Europe as our friend, not our enemy.
5. Run a mile from Donald Trump.
6 Plead with David Cameron to come back as an MP and immediately take the Chiltern Hundreds?
Theresa could step down and Dave could contest the ensuing Maidenhead by-election. For everyone in Britain, seeing Dave stride up to the Downing Street podium would only be coupled with a feeling of blessed relief. After a bit of chillaxing with the DUP he'd have them eating out of his hands, and sunshine would rule the day once more.
He would still have Corbyn and a resurgent Farage led UKIP to contend with
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
The Sunday Times said the boundary changes wouldn't pass nor would the reduction in 600 seats because they damage the DUP/Unionists in Northern Ireland.
What about 650 seats ?
The next review will:
- start again, with a projected finish date probably in 2020 - use up-to-date (the current) registration data - have a target of 650 seats - have more flexible criteria, either a return to the old +/- 10% or/and to the old discretion to breach the limits for good community reasons
All of this will produce an outcome where the majority of existing seats are merely tweaked, rather than trashed. The only significant changes will be to Wales, the IOW (split), and a few areas with outlier electoral change.
Current registration data will be much more favourable to Labour, surely.
The biggest single issue is the immediate impact of IER, and the extent to which you believe its first year removed genuine entries from the register, and not just outdated or illegitimate ones.
In terms of adjustment for population changes, London tends to gain (look at the size of East and West Ham for example), but the northern Labour cities tend to lose. Wales loses. The Home Counties tend to gain.
I doubt the impact is as huge as the Conservatives had previously estimated, but expect that they still stand to gain a few seats from a revised 650-seat review.
I get that point. In principle. But as ever it is the devil in the details. It is an emotive "cry freedom" view that of course is perfectly legitimate. But it is a false premise. These are the people who voted Leave to reclaim sovereignty but, as has been confirmed by David "Arch Brexiter" Davis, we were always sovereign, it was just that "it didn't feel like it".
So when someone says "thank god we are out of the EU and yes I'd be happy with the EEA/EFTA" it is the height of illogicality and I think an interesting topic for debate.
There is nothing illogical about it at all. The scope and range of the influence of any of the EFTA institutions upon us is absolutely miniscule compared to the EU. No one is suggesting we should cut ourselves off from the world. What we are saying is that our interactions with our countries should be bound by strictly limited treaties from which we can withdraw if we chose, not by self perpetuating and self governing institutions which influence almost every aspects of our lives.
Only the most fanatical Europhiles like yourself fail to see the difference.
I wouldn't have me down as a fanatical Europhile. To the naked eye, EEA/EFTA is the same as the EU. You can bleat about the nuances of the EFTA Court vs the ECJ (and do you think there will be greater or less convergence between the two ahead?) and scweam and scweam that we don't understand, but, Richard, you are wrong and you know it.
We have always been sovereign, you want to sign us up to a convention which is substantially the same as the one you have just voted to leave, and all you can do is flail around wishing it wasn't so.
In contrast to John McDonnell Keir Starmer is making Labour look like a serious government in waiting. He's pointed out the obvious which is that if you want a sensible deal with the EU you don't insult them and you keep your negotiating position as fluid as possible.
He's starting to sound like a real contender. A man for our times. None of the dogmatism and soundbites that turned off so many at the last election
But as of Thursday, he's not a contender for Labour's leadership because they are confirmed as a party of the far left.
There are no contenders now, and unlikely to be any for a while.
Exactly. Is Jeremy Corbyn's the least likely political career ever?
I think there are three elements of Brexit which will be changed by Labour amendments to the Queens Speech. I believe these will have majority support in the House.
1. To unilaterally give residence rights to EU nationals and not use them as a bargaining chip.
2. To drop the target of less than 100,000 net immigrants that was only in the manifesto to attract UKIP voters.
3. To drop the idea that" no deal is better than a bad deal." This is only useful in a negotiation in the sense that a threat to shoot yourself in the head if you don't get your own way is useful.
Alastair is absolutely right that Theresa May has a strong sense of duty. He is also absolutely right that, in the rush by commentators who a few weeks ago were praising her to the hilt to go to the opposite extreme, her good qualities are being forgotten. She was, after all, an excellent Home Secretary, as we were reminded only just over a week ago with the demonstration, alas in tragic in circumstances, of just how well prepared the police were for dealing with a a terrorist attack.
But, we are seeing the Peter Principle applying in spades. Even if we weren't, politics is an unforgiving game, and the fact is that she has screwed up catastrophically. Even that might not be terminal were it not for the fact that she didn't need to do anything at all. She has to go, the only question yet to be decided is when.
Theresa May cannot and will not be allowed to fight another election. But there has to be an orderly transition if possible. The Commons maths is enough in her favour to allow that. But she will be being told she's on borrowed time and how she uses that will determine whether she's remembered as the worst PM ever or one of the worst PMs ever.
Although we know the good of the country is not a Tory priority, if she were ever to think about trying to govern in the national interest Mrs May might:
1. Keep as far away as possible from the swivel-eyed Tory right.
2. Stop pandering to the right wing press.
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
4. Start talking about Europe as our friend, not our enemy.
5. Run a mile from Donald Trump.
6 Plead with David Cameron to come back as an MP and immediately take the Chiltern Hundreds?
Theresa could step down and Dave could contest the ensuing Maidenhead by-election. For everyone in Britain, seeing Dave stride up to the Downing Street podium would only be coupled with a feeling of blessed relief. After a bit of chillaxing with the DUP he'd have them eating out of his hands, and sunshine would rule the day once more.
He would still have Corbyn and a resurgent Farage led UKIP to contend with
A question which no one seems able to answer is: will the 2018 constituency boundaries be implemented given the new parliamentary arithmetic? Will it get through the Commons?. Because if it does get through, and an election can be put off until then, Labour may well find its curent hubris to be premature.
Actually the Tories are helped a little. SF not taking those 9 seats makes the practical majority required 296 (against 322 now) and the Tories would therefore be able to govern alone with more comfort.
SF can change its policy at the drop of a hat though, especially a bowler hat.
The SNP declaring they'd vote on foxhunting in E&W 2015 is evidence of that.
I think SF would dance with Corbyn, and he'd be willing to dance with them.
Comments
It probably was - or could have been.
Just that calling one without any consultation on the manifesto, or any plan on how to campaign wasn't. And if May really is as crap as she revealed herself to be during the campaign, maybe it's as well we found out before the Brexit negotiations ?
Is it possible that we're living in one of the least worst possible of all worlds ?
https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/874225962287857664
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/874242891396374533
Likely resignation date is the date the house breaks up for the summer?
Corbyn came second and wants to be PM.
Pay attention.
Do you really believe that or are you being nice? Everything about Mrs May's character suggests a woman seething with ambition and pride and any thought that she'd accept being the shortest serving PM for over a hundred years was to be avoided at all costs.
Is it wrong to be really, really, enjoying the Tories squirming after their arrogance over the past months?
She has patience - but not patience with other people; it is the patience of a loner.
She has a sense of duty - but is tat coupled with the judgment to realise when it is time for her to go in the interests of the nation ?
As for her analytical capacity, identifying problems is one thing; solutions another.
1. Keep as far away as possible from the swivel-eyed Tory right.
2. Stop pandering to the right wing press.
3. Apologise for her citizens of nowhere and saboteur sabre rattling.
4. Start talking about Europe as our friend, not our enemy.
5. Run a mile from Donald Trump.
So when someone says "thank god we are out of the EU and yes I'd be happy with the EEA/EFTA" it is the height of illogicality and I think an interesting topic for debate.
Maybe, there is a simpler explanation. She just likes the trappings of power.
He deserves a shot at the top job, we need to have a full leadership election and I hope he gets serious backing for it from some of the old guard who's time has clearly passed.
- start again, with a projected finish date probably in 2020
- use up-to-date (the current) registration data
- have a target of 650 seats
- have more flexible criteria, either a return to the old +/- 10% or/and to the old discretion to breach the limits for good community reasons
All of this will produce an outcome where the majority of existing seats are merely tweaked, rather than trashed. The only significant changes will be to Wales, the IOW (split), and a few areas with outlier electoral change.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/there-are-two-crucial-things-we-need-to-make-this-a-sane-brexit-a3562946.html?amp
So although I really don't want to rehash those pre-Ref debates, given that EEA/EFTA would be fine, given that we were always sovereign while in the EU, what is it about the EU that you don't actually like?
He's starting to sound like a real contender. A man for our times. None of the dogmatism and soundbites that turned off so many at the last election
Much of what the DUP woukd like at local level is driven by the local Assembly being there to make use of it. Its in sinn fein boycott. The government will sign cheques but preferably not unless the Assembly is up and running. The starting point therefore fir the government is that no cash flows until then. Part of the surround is how to get the show at Stormont running again. This means telling Sinn Fein that their boycott is out of road.
The second hitch is detail. There are a number of down the list DUP requests plus one or two top list issues which have national implications that are still in discussions. Sone of the national level issues may well be changes the government is going to make anyway from previous manifesto ideas that tanked. The down the lists though are smaller but possibly sensitive.
Most big list issues are agreed.
These numbers are ridiculously tight aren't they? However I wonder if the Tories think they can bluff it out. There were several key votes in the past 2 years when I thought the Gvt might lose and they never did (were they defeated on anything except EU ref purdah and Sunday trading?) In practice getting every opposition MP marshalled against them just didn't happen for whatever reason, and it was hard not to be impressed by the discipline on the Tory side (both in Commons and Lords - how they got that individual vote registration cutoff through the Lords I have no idea.) If the Tory whipping operation remains as slick and Labour divisions are still present, they may be able to get more through than they expect.
Only the most fanatical Europhiles like yourself fail to see the difference.
The debate that you stepped into, between ScottP and I, was based on his assertion that no party had a mandate for Brexit, so it might not happen.
As I have said, maybe two dozen times now, I am happy for the current govt, whoever it may be, we have had a couple since you started hammering on about it, to negotiate the deal however they like, hard/soft/EFTA/EEA whatever. These things aren't set in stone and can and will change over time. I would like to leave completely but I am not self important enough to think that matters or stupid enough to think that's how it works.
Why do you give a fuck what I think anyway?! I dont care what you do
But he's been in Parliament for 7 years now and hasn't really advanced. He's a year older than Blair when he became leader of Labour. Only 2 years younger than Cameron when he became PM.
I just have no idea why he isn't in the Cabinet - there must be a reason.... he's seriously posh of course...
If you don't want to be challenged or engaged on what you write on an internet discussion board...don't write it.
But, we are seeing the Peter Principle applying in spades. Even if we weren't, politics is an unforgiving game, and the fact is that she has screwed up catastrophically. Even that might not be terminal were it not for the fact that she didn't need to do anything at all. She has to go, the only question yet to be decided is when.
In terms of adjustment for population changes, London tends to gain (look at the size of East and West Ham for example), but the northern Labour cities tend to lose. Wales loses. The Home Counties tend to gain.
I doubt the impact is as huge as the Conservatives had previously estimated, but expect that they still stand to gain a few seats from a revised 650-seat review.
We have always been sovereign, you want to sign us up to a convention which is substantially the same as the one you have just voted to leave, and all you can do is flail around wishing it wasn't so.
https://twitter.com/RaeEarl/status/874230104271998977
I thought May would resign as Cameron did, humiliated and sulking, she might just be made of sterner stuff.
1. To unilaterally give residence rights to EU nationals and not use them as a bargaining chip.
2. To drop the target of less than 100,000 net immigrants that was only in the manifesto to attract UKIP voters.
3. To drop the idea that" no deal is better than a bad deal." This is only useful in a negotiation in the sense that a threat to shoot yourself in the head if you don't get your own way is useful.
I think SF would dance with Corbyn, and he'd be willing to dance with them.
That'd be even more controversial than the DUP.