politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Queen’s Speech timing: the product of what Lynton would ca

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Queen’s Speech timing: the product of what Lynton would call the “coalition of chaos”

It is extraordinary to reflect that just a week ago this morning all looked set for a certain CON victory with the betting being on a majority of about 80 seats. Everything seemed set for TMay win a workable Commons majority and a victory in her own right.

Read the full story here

JosiasJessop

Thirst?

JosiasJessop

"Once a perception of competence is lost it could be mighty difficult to win back."

It's hard to think of a politician who lost a perception of competence and regained it whilst in position.

Corbyn appears to have gained a perception of competence amongst the Labour party, but only amongst people who never thought he was competent in the first place.

Icarus

JosiasJessop said:

"Once a perception of competence is lost it could be mighty difficult to win back."

It's hard to think of a politician who lost a perception of competence and regained it whilst in position.

Corbyn appears to have gained a perception of competence amongst the Labour party, but only amongst people who never thought he was competent in the first place.

Churchill?

JosiasJessop

Icarus said:

JosiasJessop said:

"Once a perception of competence is lost it could be mighty difficult to win back."

It's hard to think of a politician who lost a perception of competence and regained it whilst in position.

Corbyn appears to have gained a perception of competence amongst the Labour party, but only amongst people who never thought he was competent in the first place.

Churchill?

P'haps. But as with many things, Churchill might be an exception.

JackW

@icarus - Vince, Jo or AN Other ?

IanB2

Fourth

IanB2

Yes, the Tories are now buying each day in office for two days of future opposition.

Nigelb

A very interesting report into a high rise cladding fire in Australia:
http://www.mfb.vic.gov.au/Media/docs/Post_Incident_Analysis_for_Lacrosse_Docklands_-_25_11_2014 - FINAL-dd61c4b2-61f6-42ed-9411-803cc23e6acc-0.PDF

Aluminium cladding panels with a non fire resistant polyethylene core were the problem.

SquareRoot

IanB2 said:

Yes, the Tories are now buying each day in office for two days of future opposition.

Even if that was true, if it keeps Corbyn and Mc Donnell out, its worth it

SquareRoot

I don't believe every commons vote is going to be on a knife edge either, but we will see.

JosiasJessop

Off-topic:

Whilst browsing, I've just come across a newly-published book by Captain Johnny Mercer:
https://www.panmacmillan.com/authors/johnny-mercer/we-were-warriors

On checking, it is the same Johnny Mercer.

JosiasJessop

Nigelb said:

A very interesting report into a high rise cladding fire in Australia:
http://www.mfb.vic.gov.au/Media/docs/Post_Incident_Analysis_for_Lacrosse_Docklands_-_25_11_2014 - FINAL-dd61c4b2-61f6-42ed-9411-803cc23e6acc-0.PDF

Aluminium cladding panels with a non fire resistant polyethylene core were the problem.

Yesterday morning I linked to an article where the manufacturer of some tiles (unsure if it is the same type) was asking people *not* to use the tiles due to the fire risk.

Edit:
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/cladding-supplier-seeks-call-time-on-flammable-panels-used-on-address-621272.html

Casino_Royale

SquareRoot said:

I don't believe every commons vote is going to be on a knife edge either, but we will see.

The Tories passed votes on welfare reform on 322-325 votes in favour during 2015, despite having only 330 MPs.

That was very impressive whipping.

Third reading, another example: http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2015-10-27&number=98

Party Majority (Aye) Minority (No) Both Turnout
Con 317 (+2 tell) 0 0 96.7%
DUP 0 6 0 75.0%
Green 0 1 0 100.0%
Ind 0 2 0 100.0%
Lab 0 209 (+2 tell) 0 91.3%
LDem 0 5 0 62.5%
PC 0 3 0 100.0%
SDLP 0 2 0 66.7%
SNP 0 55 0 100.0%
UUP 0 2 0 100.0%
Total: 317 285 0 94.2%

foxinsoxuk

IanB2 said:

Yes, the Tories are now buying each day in office for two days of future opposition.

I don't see May having the negotiating skill to manage a minority government for very long at all, even in ideal circumstances, and these are far from ideal.

freetochoose

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

SquareRoot

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

Yes, the Tories are now buying each day in office for two days of future opposition.

I don't see May having the negotiating skill to manage a minority government for very long at all, even in ideal circumstances, and these are far from ideal.

wish on...

RochdalePioneers

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

logical_song

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

Yes, the Tories are now buying each day in office for two days of future opposition.

I don't see May having the negotiating skill to manage a minority government for very long at all, even in ideal circumstances, and these are far from ideal.

How are her negotiations going with the DUP I wonder. It will be interesting to see how much she has to give them.

DavidL

Brexit apart this Parliament will almost certainly have a very light legislative framework. I don't see it getting to Scottish standards where a minority government brought forward no legislation (other than a required budget) for over a year but it may not be far off.

The tasks to be undertaken in respect of the Reform Bill are huge. Our law has become increasingly entangled with EU law over 40 years and removing the references to EU institutions, replacing or effectively enacting directly applicable legislation from Europe with UK legislation and deciding what our framework is to be for things like competition law, agriculture and fishing is going to keep Parliament very busy. In some areas we are likely to need a holding position until the nature of our relationship with the EU post Brexit is determined.

The temptation might be to break the legislation into a dozen or more parts dealing with different areas but it is going to be some of the most complicated legislation this country has ever seen. A further temptation would be to seek to consolidate or even simplify this thicket of laws. Consolidation would be extremely attractive but a huge amount of work. Simplification is likely to prove too difficult in the current timeframe.

At the end of this process our Parliament will have a substantially increased scope of legislative competence. My guess is that this will prove to be the excuse for abandoning the cut in the number of MPs, a price that DUP are probably going to want paid anyway.

SquareRoot

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

The wishful thinking of the left doesn't make any of this guff true. Personally I don't want a deal with the DUP at all, better IMHO to soldier on as a minority Govt., but it does keep the awfulness of Corbyn and McDonnell out of range..

JosiasJessop

Nigelb said:

A very interesting report into a high rise cladding fire in Australia:
http://www.mfb.vic.gov.au/Media/docs/Post_Incident_Analysis_for_Lacrosse_Docklands_-_25_11_2014 - FINAL-dd61c4b2-61f6-42ed-9411-803cc23e6acc-0.PDF

Aluminium cladding panels with a non fire resistant polyethylene core were the problem.

Some interesting points in that report. The building was fitted with sprinklers, but with only a limited amount of water (it outperformed expectations). The flames travelled from the ignition site on the 8th floor to the 21st floor in ten or fifteen minutes, and penetrated the internal rooms on each floor. The fire also originated away from the wind direction, taking flames and heat away from the building.

CarlottaVance

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

Who do you suggest?

freetochoose

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

When you say "for the good of everyone" what do you mean?

And who should replace her?

IanB2

DavidL said:

Brexit apart this Parliament will almost certainly have a very light legislative framework. I don't see it getting to Scottish standards where a minority government brought forward no legislation (other than a required budget) for over a year but it may not be far off.

The tasks to be undertaken in respect of the Reform Bill are huge. Our law has become increasingly entangled with EU law over 40 years and removing the references to EU institutions, replacing or effectively enacting directly applicable legislation from Europe with UK legislation and deciding what our framework is to be for things like competition law, agriculture and fishing is going to keep Parliament very busy. In some areas we are likely to need a holding position until the nature of our relationship with the EU post Brexit is determined.

The temptation might be to break the legislation into a dozen or more parts dealing with different areas but it is going to be some of the most complicated legislation this country has ever seen. A further temptation would be to seek to consolidate or even simplify this thicket of laws. Consolidation would be extremely attractive but a huge amount of work. Simplification is likely to prove too difficult in the current timeframe.

At the end of this process our Parliament will have a substantially increased scope of legislative competence. My guess is that this will prove to be the excuse for abandoning the cut in the number of MPs, a price that DUP are probably going to want paid anyway.

The boundary review is effectively as good as dead already.

The DUP, as a minor partly normally irrelevant to parliamentary proceedings, are potentially the swing voters that would decide many of the votes that come before the Commons. That gives them great influence, which I think they would enjoy. In their position I would need to be offered a lot to sell that influence by agreeing in advance to provide the government with ongoing support.

RochdalePioneers

SquareRoot said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

The wishful thinking of the left doesn't make any of this guff true. Personally I don't want a deal with the DUP at all, better IMHO to soldier on as a minority Govt., but it does keep the awfulness of Corbyn and McDonnell out of range..

"Guff"?
1. Her own side widely attacking the DUP deal in principle
2. Her own side widely attacking the way she's tried to negotiate it - announcing a deal before its done so that she can't back down
3. The UK's ability to negotiate Brexit already attacked - by the civil service. As a negotiator I find the idea of sending her to negotiate to buy some milk from Tesco quite funny, never mind Brexit
4. We know the DUP are anti-austerity.

I didn't say Corbyn should be PM. A total collapse of the government leading to him kissing the ring is rather unlikely. But for the good of the country and the Tory Party she is a liability, a national embarrassment and needs to be put out to pasture.

felix

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

freetochoose

felix said:

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

Yep, dreadful. While these twerps squabble and pontificate 99% of us get on with our lives.

Its why there won't be an election in years, its one big yawn to the electorate.

SquareRoot

RochdalePioneers said:

SquareRoot said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

The wishful thinking of the left doesn't make any of this guff true. Personally I don't want a deal with the DUP at all, better IMHO to soldier on as a minority Govt., but it does keep the awfulness of Corbyn and McDonnell out of range..

"Guff"?
1. Her own side widely attacking the DUP deal in principle
2. Her own side widely attacking the way she's tried to negotiate it - announcing a deal before its done so that she can't back down
3. The UK's ability to negotiate Brexit already attacked - by the civil service. As a negotiator I find the idea of sending her to negotiate to buy some milk from Tesco quite funny, never mind Brexit
4. We know the DUP are anti-austerity.

I didn't say Corbyn should be PM. A total collapse of the government leading to him kissing the ring is rather unlikely. But for the good of the country and the Tory Party she is a liability, a national embarrassment and needs to be put out to pasture.

As I said guff. Natiuonal embarrassment.. pffft

Alistair

freetochoose said:

felix said:

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

Yep, dreadful. While these twerps squabble and pontificate 99% of us get on with our lives.

Its why there won't be an election in years, its one big yawn to the electorate.

Turnout was up nationally.

JosiasJessop

felix said:

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

And we - the Great British Public - are responsible for the lamentable quality of our politicians. Instead of looking at candidates and voting for which we think offers the best option for the country, we vote blindly on a vague party loyalty, or for which one bribes us best.

We get politicians who don't do the best for the country because we're more concerned about what'll do best for *us*, where *us* is one person, or an immediate family.

Yes, there are problems with politics itself: e.g. selection processes. But we get the politicians we deserve.

rcs1000

DavidL said:

Brexit apart this Parliament will almost certainly have a very light legislative framework. I don't see it getting to Scottish standards where a minority government brought forward no legislation (other than a required budget) for over a year but it may not be far off.

The tasks to be undertaken in respect of the Reform Bill are huge. Our law has become increasingly entangled with EU law over 40 years and removing the references to EU institutions, replacing or effectively enacting directly applicable legislation from Europe with UK legislation and deciding what our framework is to be for things like competition law, agriculture and fishing is going to keep Parliament very busy. In some areas we are likely to need a holding position until the nature of our relationship with the EU post Brexit is determined.

The temptation might be to break the legislation into a dozen or more parts dealing with different areas but it is going to be some of the most complicated legislation this country has ever seen. A further temptation would be to seek to consolidate or even simplify this thicket of laws. Consolidation would be extremely attractive but a huge amount of work. Simplification is likely to prove too difficult in the current timeframe.

At the end of this process our Parliament will have a substantially increased scope of legislative competence. My guess is that this will prove to be the excuse for abandoning the cut in the number of MPs, a price that DUP are probably going to want paid anyway.

I've always felt that the cut to 600 MPs was an error anyway. Not least because any reduction disproportionately benefits the "big two" at the expense of smaller parties and independents.

I also feel the 5% band is too tight, and think you are more likely to get constituencies able to represent proper entities at the 10% (or even 15%) level. The alternative is that you see towns chopped into funny shaped bits in a bid for foolish consistency.

DavidL

Hammond is doing the Mansion House speech tonight. Bet he was not giving the content too much thought prior to June 8th. He is going to argue for a "pragmatic" or soft Brexit focussed on the economy: http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/hammond-to-make-public-case-for-brexit-that-protects-economy/ar-BBCGNe6?li=BBoPRmx&ocid=iehp

I think that is wise.

PeterC

RochdalePioneers said:

SquareRoot said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

The wishful thinking of the left doesn't make any of this guff true. Personally I don't want a deal with the DUP at all, better IMHO to soldier on as a minority Govt., but it does keep the awfulness of Corbyn and McDonnell out of range..

"Guff"?
1. Her own side widely attacking the DUP deal in principle
2. Her own side widely attacking the way she's tried to negotiate it - announcing a deal before its done so that she can't back down
3. The UK's ability to negotiate Brexit already attacked - by the civil service. As a negotiator I find the idea of sending her to negotiate to buy some milk from Tesco quite funny, never mind Brexit
4. We know the DUP are anti-austerity.

I didn't say Corbyn should be PM. A total collapse of the government leading to him kissing the ring is rather unlikely. But for the good of the country and the Tory Party she is a liability, a national embarrassment and needs to be put out to pasture.

She surely will be gone fairly soon. But that does not mean she must go this instant. Rushed decisions can be wrong decisions: Right now a leadership election could become a Boris coronation. There ought to be a better outcome than that and the party needs to take time to think that through.

freetochoose

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Sean_F

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

For the good of everyone, I think she has to remain PM for the time being.

Another leadership election would be dreadfully self-indulgent, right now.

IanB2

Sean_F said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

For the good of everyone, I think she has to remain PM for the time being.

Another leadership election would be dreadfully self-indulgent, right now.

I still think she will go in the summer. She absolutely has to get the QS through and some sort of deal patched up to do so. So what she says and does now doesn't really give much of a clue as to her future intentions. Yes, she always wanted to be PM and may not give it up easily. On the other hand, she has already written her obituary and may not want to face a long period as lame duck.

DavidL

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

Brexit apart this Parliament will almost certainly have a very light legislative framework. I don't see it getting to Scottish standards where a minority government brought forward no legislation (other than a required budget) for over a year but it may not be far off.

The tasks to be undertaken in respect of the Reform Bill are huge. Our law has become increasingly entangled with EU law over 40 years and removing the references to EU institutions, replacing or effectively enacting directly applicable legislation from Europe with UK legislation and deciding what our framework is to be for things like competition law, agriculture and fishing is going to keep Parliament very busy. In some areas we are likely to need a holding position until the nature of our relationship with the EU post Brexit is determined.

The temptation might be to break the legislation into a dozen or more parts dealing with different areas but it is going to be some of the most complicated legislation this country has ever seen. A further temptation would be to seek to consolidate or even simplify this thicket of laws. Consolidation would be extremely attractive but a huge amount of work. Simplification is likely to prove too difficult in the current timeframe.

At the end of this process our Parliament will have a substantially increased scope of legislative competence. My guess is that this will prove to be the excuse for abandoning the cut in the number of MPs, a price that DUP are probably going to want paid anyway.

I've always felt that the cut to 600 MPs was an error anyway. Not least because any reduction disproportionately benefits the "big two" at the expense of smaller parties and independents.

I also feel the 5% band is too tight, and think you are more likely to get constituencies able to represent proper entities at the 10% (or even 15%) level. The alternative is that you see towns chopped into funny shaped bits in a bid for foolish consistency.

I don't get very excited about the "natural" shape of constituencies and think that there are good reasons for trying to ensure that everyone's vote is worth roughly the same but I take your point about benefiting the big 2.

The justification for this was the expenses scandal. That really seems ancient history now and having failed to deliver it through 2 Parliaments it seems to me to be not worth the candle. It is more urgent to get boundaries that accurately reflect where people live now.

rcs1000

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

Brexit apart this Parliament will almost certainly have a very light legislative framework. I don't see it getting to Scottish standards where a minority government brought forward no legislation (other than a required budget) for over a year but it may not be far off.

The tasks to be undertaken in respect of the Reform Bill are huge. Our law has become increasingly entangled with EU law over 40 years and removing the references to EU institutions, replacing or effectively enacting directly applicable legislation from Europe with UK legislation and deciding what our framework is to be for things like competition law, agriculture and fishing is going to keep Parliament very busy. In some areas we are likely to need a holding position until the nature of our relationship with the EU post Brexit is determined.

The temptation might be to break the legislation into a dozen or more parts dealing with different areas but it is going to be some of the most complicated legislation this country has ever seen. A further temptation would be to seek to consolidate or even simplify this thicket of laws. Consolidation would be extremely attractive but a huge amount of work. Simplification is likely to prove too difficult in the current timeframe.

At the end of this process our Parliament will have a substantially increased scope of legislative competence. My guess is that this will prove to be the excuse for abandoning the cut in the number of MPs, a price that DUP are probably going to want paid anyway.

I've always felt that the cut to 600 MPs was an error anyway. Not least because any reduction disproportionately benefits the "big two" at the expense of smaller parties and independents.

I also feel the 5% band is too tight, and think you are more likely to get constituencies able to represent proper entities at the 10% (or even 15%) level. The alternative is that you see towns chopped into funny shaped bits in a bid for foolish consistency.

I don't get very excited about the "natural" shape of constituencies and think that there are good reasons for trying to ensure that everyone's vote is worth roughly the same but I take your point about benefiting the big 2.

The justification for this was the expenses scandal. That really seems ancient history now and having failed to deliver it through 2 Parliaments it seems to me to be not worth the candle. It is more urgent to get boundaries that accurately reflect where people live now.

Agreed. I would also suggest that we make constituency changes more frequent and smaller. Perhaps as frequently as every five years, and we simply move wards between constituencies as required to maintain relatively equal sizes.

Sean_F

IanB2 said:

Sean_F said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

For the good of everyone, I think she has to remain PM for the time being.

Another leadership election would be dreadfully self-indulgent, right now.

I still think she will go in the summer. She absolutely has to get the QS through and some sort of deal patched up to do so. So what she says and does now doesn't really give much of a clue as to her future intentions. Yes, she always wanted to be PM and may not give it up easily. On the other hand, she has already written her obituary and may not want to face a long period as lame duck.

I expect she would have been quite relieved to resign, but it would be a dereliction of duty, IMHO.

Monksfield

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

Brexit apart this Parliament will almost certainly have a very light legislative framework. I don't see it getting to Scottish standards where a minority government brought forward no legislation (other than a required budget) for over a year but it may not be far off.

The tasks to be undertaken in respect of the Reform Bill are huge. Our law has become increasingly entangled with EU law over 40 years and removing the references to EU institutions, replacing or effectively enacting directly applicable legislation from Europe with UK legislation and deciding what our framework is to be for things like competition law, agriculture and fishing is going to keep Parliament very busy. In some areas we are likely to need a holding position until the nature of our relationship with the EU post Brexit is determined.

The temptation might be to break the legislation into a dozen or more parts dealing with different areas but it is going to be some of the most complicated legislation this country has ever seen. A further temptation would be to seek to consolidate or even simplify this thicket of laws. Consolidation would be extremely attractive but a huge amount of work. Simplification is likely to prove too difficult in the current timeframe.

At the end of this process our Parliament will have a substantially increased scope of legislative competence. My guess is that this will prove to be the excuse for abandoning the cut in the number of MPs, a price that DUP are probably going to want paid anyway.

I've always felt that the cut to 600 MPs was an error anyway. Not least because any reduction disproportionately benefits the "big two" at the expense of smaller parties and independents.

I also feel the 5% band is too tight, and think you are more likely to get constituencies able to represent proper entities at the 10% (or even 15%) level. The alternative is that you see towns chopped into funny shaped bits in a bid for foolish consistency.

I don't get very excited about the "natural" shape of constituencies and think that there are good reasons for trying to ensure that everyone's vote is worth roughly the same but I take your point about benefiting the big 2.

The justification for this was the expenses scandal. That really seems ancient history now and having failed to deliver it through 2 Parliaments it seems to me to be not worth the candle. It is more urgent to get boundaries that accurately reflect where people live now.

It is more urgent to look at how we get better representation of different view points into Parliament. If ever a system has withered on the vine, it is FPTP. It is failing us all.

MonikerDiCanio

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

It's said that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. To my surprise May has survived, she's now in the happy situation of being underestimated while her opponent, Corbyn, is overestimated.

logical_song

Alistair said:

freetochoose said:

felix said:

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

Yep, dreadful. While these twerps squabble and pontificate 99% of us get on with our lives.

Its why there won't be an election in years, its one big yawn to the electorate.

Turnout was up nationally.

... and apparently another election in the Autumn would be popular.

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects Jun 13
On another general election this autumn:

Support: 43%
Oppose: 38%

(via @YouGov / 09 - 10 Jun)

Sean_F

logical_song said:

Alistair said:

freetochoose said:

felix said:

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

Yep, dreadful. While these twerps squabble and pontificate 99% of us get on with our lives.

Its why there won't be an election in years, its one big yawn to the electorate.

Turnout was up nationally.

... and apparently another election in the Autumn would be popular.

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects Jun 13
On another general election this autumn:

Support: 43%
Oppose: 38%

(via @YouGov / 09 - 10 Jun)

Public opinion is very changeable. I think they would react badly to anything that smacked of seeking political advantage.

SirNorfolkPassmore

JosiasJessop said:

"Once a perception of competence is lost it could be mighty difficult to win back."

It's hard to think of a politician who lost a perception of competence and regained it whilst in position.

Corbyn appears to have gained a perception of competence amongst the Labour party, but only amongst people who never thought he was competent in the first place.

Bill Clinton? He had a very shaky start to his Presidency indeed, and a more precipitous decline in ratings than Trump (i.e. from a much higher starting point, he fell to where Trump is now in a short period).

But he turned it around, a little bit before the mid-terms and a lot after as he was deemed to manage cohabitation with the Republicans very well, and to be the adult in the room. He then enjoyed very high ratings through the rest of his Presidency, despite scandal.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Pretty pleased. Backed Swinson at 3.5 on the 12th, for next Lib Dem leader, then the hedge I set up and forgot about was matched on Betfair at 1.3 yesterday [only remembered when I logged on today to make a lay at 1.59].

I do wonder if Farron's attitude or views towards homosexuality would have been questioned so much had he been of a different religion.

Monksfield

On the Grenfell tragedy, the apparent delays in the implementation of, or indeed blatant failure to, finalise and implement safety recommendations identified following previous incidents is beginning to look like yet another manifestation of the view that is popular with some in this country that all regulation is unaffordable 'red tape'. There is an unacceptable closeness between some politicians and the industries they regulate.

OchEye

According to Radio Scotland: Seems it is the Treasury that's baulking at the agreement with the DUP. All to do with the Barnett formula. Eg. For every extra pound spent on NI, £2 will have to go to Wales, and £5 to Scotland.

Nigelb

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

A very interesting report into a high rise cladding fire in Australia:
http://www.mfb.vic.gov.au/Media/docs/Post_Incident_Analysis_for_Lacrosse_Docklands_-_25_11_2014 - FINAL-dd61c4b2-61f6-42ed-9411-803cc23e6acc-0.PDF

Aluminium cladding panels with a non fire resistant polyethylene core were the problem.

Some interesting points in that report. The building was fitted with sprinklers, but with only a limited amount of water (it outperformed expectations). The flames travelled from the ignition site on the 8th floor to the 21st floor in ten or fifteen minutes, and penetrated the internal rooms on each floor. The fire also originated away from the wind direction, taking flames and heat away from the building.

The sprinkler system did prevent the spread of the fire internally (and they also got lucky with the wind direction). It's not a panacea - and it's quite possible that casualties were prevented in this case only because the system performed above expectations.

Also of note - there were two separate stairwells, as required by Australian building regulations, and a building wide alarm system designed to ensure phased evacuation.

Looking at the pictures, it doesn't seem that the building was fully cladded, and the panels which burned stood perpendicular to the face of the building providing a screen between residents balconies.
The later test results on the panels showed them displaying virtually no fire resistance.

PVC rainwater pipes also provided a means of fire spreading, and the fire stops at pipe joints failed to work as designed.

The alarming thing is that this type of panel seems to be in widespread use (presumably as it's a cheaper, and possibly lighter option than fire resistant ones), and the estimated cost of replacement for a similar building (this one was 20 storeys) around £10m...

Nigelb

MonikerDiCanio said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

It's said that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. To my surprise May has survived, she's now in the happy situation of being underestimated while her opponent, Corbyn, is overestimated.

I think you might be overestimating her.

rkrkrk

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Actually I think state funded research has given civilisation many great advances.

If you think politicians don't matter or are all equally bad - you should try living somewhere where they really are utterly corrupt and you can't get anything done because of it.

Icarus

JackW said:

@icarus - Vince, Jo or AN Other ?

Have had 2 messages suggesting that I should stand. But one was from a Labour Party member and what do they know about selecting good leaders.

My heart would have said Clegg, so probably a blessing in disguise that he lost his seat.
I will have to listen to what the candidates say over the summer. Leaning towards Swinson.

Nigelb

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Pretty pleased. Backed Swinson at 3.5 on the 12th, for next Lib Dem leader, then the hedge I set up and forgot about was matched on Betfair at 1.3 yesterday [only remembered when I logged on today to make a lay at 1.59].

I do wonder if Farron's attitude or views towards homosexuality would have been questioned so much had he been of a different religion.

Morning, Mr. D.
As I said yesterday, I think they would. Had he been leader of a different party then probably not.

IanB2

MonikerDiCanio said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

It's said that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. To my surprise May has survived, she's now in the happy situation of being underestimated while her opponent, Corbyn, is overestimated.

The real life evidence for that saying is rather thin, though? Especially in politics. Death by a thousand cuts is closer to the truth of it.

Nigelb

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

MaxPB

logical_song said:

Alistair said:

freetochoose said:

felix said:

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

Yep, dreadful. While these twerps squabble and pontificate 99% of us get on with our lives.

Its why there won't be an election in years, its one big yawn to the electorate.

Turnout was up nationally.

... and apparently another election in the Autumn would be popular.

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects Jun 13
On another general election this autumn:

Support: 43%
Oppose: 38%

(via @YouGov / 09 - 10 Jun)

That mirrors Lab vs Con voting intention. If the Tories dumped May and brought in a new leader with a promise to spend £350m per week on the NHS and tough action in buy to let that would change as Labour's​position would not be as strong. Most Tory members I know want to see Brexit through to completion before we call an election. It's a big enough milestone and we'll have a new leader by then.

JosiasJessop

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

A very interesting report into a high rise cladding fire in Australia:
http://www.mfb.vic.gov.au/Media/docs/Post_Incident_Analysis_for_Lacrosse_Docklands_-_25_11_2014 - FINAL-dd61c4b2-61f6-42ed-9411-803cc23e6acc-0.PDF

Aluminium cladding panels with a non fire resistant polyethylene core were the problem.

Some interesting points in that report. The building was fitted with sprinklers, but with only a limited amount of water (it outperformed expectations). The flames travelled from the ignition site on the 8th floor to the 21st floor in ten or fifteen minutes, and penetrated the internal rooms on each floor. The fire also originated away from the wind direction, taking flames and heat away from the building.

The sprinkler system did prevent the spread of the fire internally (and they also got lucky with the wind direction). It's not a panacea - and it's quite possible that casualties were prevented in this case only because the system performed above expectations.

Also of note - there were two separate stairwells, as required by Australian building regulations, and a building wide alarm system designed to ensure phased evacuation.

Looking at the pictures, it doesn't seem that the building was fully cladded, and the panels which burned stood perpendicular to the face of the building providing a screen between residents balconies.
The later test results on the panels showed them displaying virtually no fire resistance.

PVC rainwater pipes also provided a means of fire spreading, and the fire stops at pipe joints failed to work as designed.

The alarming thing is that this type of panel seems to be in widespread use (presumably as it's a cheaper, and possibly lighter option than fire resistant ones), and the estimated cost of replacement for a similar building (this one was 20 storeys) around £10m...

As ever, it's important to look at the system as a whole: not just the fireproofness of the cladding, but how it attaches to the building and how other items such as services may behave in a fire.

According to some reports, there is a gap between the concrete building shell and the new cladding, which acted as a chimney for heat and gasses. If this is a case, it is far more than just poor material choice, but poor design.

Environmental regulations may play a part: such cladding can help act as insulation. Unfortunately one of the best and cheapest insulators we have, asbestos, turned out to have some rather negative side-effects ...

freetochoose

rkrkrk said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Actually I think state funded research has given civilisation many great advances.

If you think politicians don't matter or are all equally bad - you should try living somewhere where they really are utterly corrupt and you can't get anything done because of it.

State funded is a misconception, they simply distribute money collected from citizens. Handing out other people's money is easy.

And of course we're extraordinarily lucky to live in a democracy, but there's a reason we say that all political careers end in failure.

Sean_F

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

Warfare is a great driver of technological change, medical research, and innovation.

Roger

RochdalePioneers said:

SquareRoot said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

The wishful thinking of the left doesn't make any of this guff true. Personally I don't want a deal with the DUP at all, better IMHO to soldier on as a minority Govt., but it does keep the awfulness of Corbyn and McDonnell out of range..

"Guff"?
1. Her own side widely attacking the DUP deal in principle
2. Her own side widely attacking the way she's tried to negotiate it - announcing a deal before its done so that she can't back down
3. The UK's ability to negotiate Brexit already attacked - by the civil service. As a negotiator I find the idea of sending her to negotiate to buy some milk from Tesco quite funny, never mind Brexit
4. We know the DUP are anti-austerity.

I didn't say Corbyn should be PM. A total collapse of the government leading to him kissing the ring is rather unlikely. But for the good of the country and the Tory Party she is a liability, a national embarrassment and needs to be put out to pasture.

The worst outcome at this moment would be a Corbyn administration. We need a period of calm and that wont be achieved with Corbyn Abbott Long Bailey and McDonnell. In the relatively near future they might get their act together but they're not there yet.

The likely outcome of May leaving is Boris as PM and incalculable short and long term damage and internal strife. Having him negotiating Brexit would all but lead to civil war. No one least of all Labour supporters can want that when they're in such a strong position.

What we have at the moment is an impotent government. What could be better? A period of calm without opportunistic and narcississtic leaders screwing us up.

freetochoose

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

No, civilisation exists because of architects, painters or scientists. Brunel and Pasteur for example made a far more positive contribution than any politician.

rcs1000

Sean_F said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

Warfare is a great driver of technological change, medical research, and innovation.

And without knowledge of war (which requires central government) there would be much less great literature, and art.

Nigelb

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

A very interesting report into a high rise cladding fire in Australia:
http://www.mfb.vic.gov.au/Media/docs/Post_Incident_Analysis_for_Lacrosse_Docklands_-_25_11_2014 - FINAL-dd61c4b2-61f6-42ed-9411-803cc23e6acc-0.PDF

Aluminium cladding panels with a non fire resistant polyethylene core were the problem.

Some interesting points in that report. The building was fitted with sprinklers, but with only a limited amount of water (it outperformed expectations). The flames travelled from the ignition site on the 8th floor to the 21st floor in ten or fifteen minutes, and penetrated the internal rooms on each floor. The fire also originated away from the wind direction, taking flames and heat away from the building.

The sprinkler system did prevent the spread of the fire internally (and they also got lucky with the wind direction). It's not a panacea - and it's quite possible that casualties were prevented in this case only because the system performed above expectations.

Also of note - there were two separate stairwells, as required by Australian building regulations, and a building wide alarm system designed to ensure phased evacuation.

Looking at the pictures, it doesn't seem that the building was fully cladded, and the panels which burned stood perpendicular to the face of the building providing a screen between residents balconies.
The later test results on the panels showed them displaying virtually no fire resistance.

PVC rainwater pipes also provided a means of fire spreading, and the fire stops at pipe joints failed to work as designed.

The alarming thing is that this type of panel seems to be in widespread use (presumably as it's a cheaper, and possibly lighter option than fire resistant ones), and the estimated cost of replacement for a similar building (this one was 20 storeys) around £10m...

As ever, it's important to look at the system as a whole: not just the fireproofness of the cladding, but how it attaches to the building and how other items such as services may behave in a fire.

According to some reports, there is a gap between the concrete building shell and the new cladding, which acted as a chimney for heat and gasses. If this is a case, it is far more than just poor material choice, but poor design. ...

I think the gap is inevitable by design - the cladding has to fit onto a supporting structure, which necessarily leaves a gap. It seems to be most dangerous when the gap is uninterrupted vertically, and good systems design horizontal breaks at each floor level.
Even so, looking at the flammability of the particular panels in the Australian incident, I doubt that good design would prevent the fire spread in all cases - rather than just slowing it a bit.

MonikerDiCanio

IanB2 said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

It's said that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. To my surprise May has survived, she's now in the happy situation of being underestimated while her opponent, Corbyn, is overestimated.

The real life evidence for that saying is rather thin, though? Especially in politics. Death by a thousand cuts is closer to the truth of it.

People only really learn from their mistakes. May will have learnt much from her dismal showing over the past month. I'm optimistic about her future performance.

Nigelb

freetochoose said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

No, civilisation exists because of architects, painters or scientists. Brunel and Pasteur for example made a far more positive contribution than any politician.

Which came first, writing or government ?
Quite clearly government - and the first writing was developed to keep government records.

IanB2

MonikerDiCanio said:

IanB2 said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

It's said that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. To my surprise May has survived, she's now in the happy situation of being underestimated while her opponent, Corbyn, is overestimated.

The real life evidence for that saying is rather thin, though? Especially in politics. Death by a thousand cuts is closer to the truth of it.

People only really learn from their mistakes. May will have learnt much from her dismal showing over the past month. I'm optimistic about her future performance.

Whether she learns or not (and the evidence of personal learning also appears to be rather thin), she'll never live down her reputation as the PM who threw away her majority. Cf. Blair, Brown, Cameron. Once a PM makes a big mistake, history draws a thick black line under their biography.

Roger

MonikerDiCanio said:

IanB2 said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

RochdalePioneers said:

freetochoose said:

If I were a Labour supporter I wouldn't get too excited, the Conservatives realise they've messed up big time and will now do everything to avoid an election for 5 years. Good thing too, we're all sick of voting.

The Tories may remain in office, but not in power. That they can't even present a Queens Speech tells you everything you need to know about how much power they have. That Zombie has utterly screwed up the negotiation for a confidence and supply deal tells you everything you need to know about how the Brexit talks will go.

For the good of everyone she should not remain PM.

It's said that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. To my surprise May has survived, she's now in the happy situation of being underestimated while her opponent, Corbyn, is overestimated.

The real life evidence for that saying is rather thin, though? Especially in politics. Death by a thousand cuts is closer to the truth of it.

People only really learn from their mistakes. May will have learnt much from her dismal showing over the past month. I'm optimistic about her future performance.

It's the way you tell 'em!

Scott_P

@AidanKerrTweets: An opinion poll on indyref2 has been published as the Scottish Government enters its seventh day of reflection:

@davieclegg: NEW Survation poll:
Should Nicola Sturgeon withdraw her demand for indyref2?
Yes- 60%
No- 27%
DK- 13%
Full detail and more in Daily Record

IanB2

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

No, civilisation exists because of architects, painters or scientists. Brunel and Pasteur for example made a far more positive contribution than any politician.

Which came first, writing or government ?
Quite clearly government - and the first writing was developed to keep government records.

Civilisation clearly needs a political environment in which it can flourish. One only has to look back to the last century to see how the wrong sort of politicians can make a society uncivilised very quickly indeed.

freetochoose

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

No, civilisation exists because of architects, painters or scientists. Brunel and Pasteur for example made a far more positive contribution than any politician.

Which came first, writing or government ?
Quite clearly government - and the first writing was developed to keep government records.

Different issue. You are entitled to your view, mine is that we have far too many politicians and bureaucrats, 1000s in the UK alone, and nowhere near enough innovators and wealth creators. The country is drowning in debt because of inept and feckless govt, not because of architects, painters or scientists.

JosiasJessop

Nigelb said:

I think the gap is inevitable by design - the cladding has to fit onto a supporting structure, which necessarily leaves a gap. It seems to be most dangerous when the gap is uninterrupted vertically, and good systems design horizontal breaks at each floor level.
Even so, looking at the flammability of the particular panels in the Australian incident, I doubt that good design would prevent the fire spread in all cases - rather than just slowing it a bit.

Yeah, the uninterrupted gap is what I meant.

ISTR there are fire regulations for rows of houses: the walls between individual houses have to be fire resistant, and have to continue to the roof (in Victorian times, attics were often relatively undivided and acted as channels for fire to spread from house to house). This is designed to delay fire spreading from house to house.

I've no idea what the regulations for high rises are, but it'd be good if they were designed as 'independent' units as well: a fire in one should not be able to easily spread from one to another. With old-style concrete towerblocks that is probably quite easy to do due to concrete's fire resistance. This cladding appears to have screwed that up.

Sean_F

rcs1000 said:

Sean_F said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

Warfare is a great driver of technological change, medical research, and innovation.

And without knowledge of war (which requires central government) there would be much less great literature, and art.

Rereading The War of the Worlds, it occurred to me that within 50 years, a Western army would have Kerb-stomped the Martians.

CarlottaVance

Alex Salmond has had some sad family news - but 96 is a jolly good innings:

https://twitter.com/AlexSalmond/status/875238496277073922

IanB2

freetochoose said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

No, civilisation exists because of architects, painters or scientists. Brunel and Pasteur for example made a far more positive contribution than any politician.

Which came first, writing or government ?
Quite clearly government - and the first writing was developed to keep government records.

Different issue. You are entitled to your view, mine is that we have far too many politicians and bureaucrats, 1000s in the UK alone, and nowhere near enough innovators and wealth creators. The country is drowning in debt because of inept and feckless govt, not because of architects, painters or scientists.

There is the minor problem of personal debt and corporate debt, also at exceptionally high levels in the Uk. The politicians behave like everyone else, but their mistakes are more wide reaching.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/jamieross7/status/875250612237197312

freetochoose

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

Nigelb said:

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

Well he was simply wrong.
Civilisation itself only exists thanks to the development of government. Expecting politicians to be architects, painters or scientists is rather missing the point.

No, civilisation exists because of architects, painters or scientists. Brunel and Pasteur for example made a far more positive contribution than any politician.

Which came first, writing or government ?
Quite clearly government - and the first writing was developed to keep government records.

Different issue. You are entitled to your view, mine is that we have far too many politicians and bureaucrats, 1000s in the UK alone, and nowhere near enough innovators and wealth creators. The country is drowning in debt because of inept and feckless govt, not because of architects, painters or scientists.

There is the minor problem of personal debt and corporate debt, also at exceptionally high levels in the Uk. The politicians behave like everyone else, but their mistakes are more wide reaching.

Correct, but if my neighbour borrows from Wonga I don't have to pay his debt.

Slackbladder

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/jamieross7/status/875250612237197312

Poor old Nikki, what a shame...

CarlottaVance

Slackbladder said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/jamieross7/status/875250612237197312

Poor old Nikki, what a shame...

Alex is looking for a new job........

CD13

Mr Monksfied,

I'm no fan of politicians but they do vary in their knowledge of the intricacies of risk assessment. I think it's The Sun leads with the headline that "They were told it was safe". To be fair, nothing is totally safe, so there's never an absolute demarcation line. Generally, for all politicians, it's always a balancing act between gold-plating and cost. They like regulations as it gives them something to use (and often to hide behind). Asbestos hung on for a long time, despite it's known but variable toxicity. It was cheap and effective.

One thing most politicians have in common is an overwhelming confidence in their own abilities, especially those that become ministers. And this 'excellent' judgement doesn't need to be tempered by any particular scientific expertise. There are exceptions, of course. This isn't a party political point, as all parties are guilty of it. Labour will make the most of this without seeing the plank in their own eye.

I'm no expert on building materials, and I'm making only a general point. It's always a difficult problem to explain science to someone with no scientific knowledge, and even harder if they've got a little.

MonikerDiCanio

Scott_P said:

@AidanKerrTweets: An opinion poll on indyref2 has been published as the Scottish Government enters its seventh day of reflection:

@davieclegg: NEW Survation poll:
Should Nicola Sturgeon withdraw her demand for indyref2?
Yes- 60%
No- 27%
DK- 13%
Full detail and more in Daily Record

The penny has finally dropped.

Peter_the_Punter

IanB2 said:

Yes, the Tories are now buying each day in office for two days of future opposition.

That's a brilliant formulation, so much more elegant than what I have been stumbling to say for days.

Scott_P

@PolhomeEditor: SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford: "Any referendum, if it does take place." Reverse ferret klaxon! #GMS

Apparently the cunning plan is this.

IndyRef2 is gone. Dead and buried.

Long live Scotref!

This is not an Indy ref. It's a Brexit ref. The question being, should Scotland be Independent...

It's GENIUS!!!!

HYUFD

Despite winning a majority of only 3 in October 1974 Labour held office for 5 years showing that there is no inevitability about an early election in the next few months. Plus Corbyn is no Thatcher even if he were to win. However the Tories may be able to hold on if they just hold their voteshare at the next general election. For example in 1987 Thatcher got 42% against Kinnock and in 1992 Major got 41% against Kinnock, that shows that if voters have not voted for a party leader once, as that 42% did not vote for Corbyn this time, there is no guarantee they will in 5 years time either. Coincidentally the Tory voteshare May got this time? 42% ie exactly the same as Thatcher got in 1987

OchEye

Looks like many people are beginning to organise May's Leaving Party for the end of June:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/theresa-may-spoof-leaving-drinks-has-over-50k-attendees-1-4475396

nichomar

MaxPB said:

logical_song said:

Alistair said:

freetochoose said:

felix said:

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

Yep, dreadful. While these twerps squabble and pontificate 99% of us get on with our lives.

Its why there won't be an election in years, its one big yawn to the electorate.

Turnout was up nationally.

... and apparently another election in the Autumn would be popular.

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects Jun 13
On another general election this autumn:

Support: 43%
Oppose: 38%

(via @YouGov / 09 - 10 Jun)

That mirrors Lab vs Con voting intention. If the Tories dumped May and brought in a new leader with a promise to spend £350m per week on the NHS and tough action in buy to let that would change as Labour's​position would not be as strong. Most Tory members I know want to see Brexit through to completion before we call an election. It's a big enough milestone and we'll have a new leader by then.

Milestone or millstone!

Peter_the_Punter

Nigelb said:

A very interesting report into a high rise cladding fire in Australia:
http://www.mfb.vic.gov.au/Media/docs/Post_Incident_Analysis_for_Lacrosse_Docklands_-_25_11_2014 - FINAL-dd61c4b2-61f6-42ed-9411-803cc23e6acc-0.PDF

Aluminium cladding panels with a non fire resistant polyethylene core were the problem.

Yes, there appear to have been problems in China and Dubai too.

http://www.thenational.ae/uae/new-fire-code-requires-builders-to-reduce-cladding-flammability-in-uae-buildings

http://www.stoparsonuk.org/documents/resources/Fire Safety of Exterior Wall Claddings.pdf

JackW

Icarus said:

JackW said:

@icarus - Vince, Jo or AN Other ?

Have had 2 messages suggesting that I should stand. But one was from a Labour Party member and what do they know about selecting good leaders.

My heart would have said Clegg, so probably a blessing in disguise that he lost his seat.
I will have to listen to what the candidates say over the summer. Leaning towards Swinson.

Thanks ....

If eligible I go for old over young .... .... not quite the time for Jo, so the old goat gets it -(required for Queen's Speech velum) .... I mean of course old goat Lloyd George over sprightly youngster Jo Grimond.

Scott_P

Rumour that Jo Swinson is not standing for leader.

Booooooooooooooo

MonikerDiCanio

Scott_P said:

@PolhomeEditor: SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford: "Any referendum, if it does take place." Reverse ferret klaxon! #GMS

Apparently the cunning plan is this.

IndyRef2 is gone. Dead and buried.

Long live Scotref!

This is not an Indy ref. It's a Brexit ref. The question being, should Scotland be Independent...

It's GENIUS!!!!

You can thank Brexit for the SNP's woes. I hope you've got the integrity to admit that.

Slackbladder

OchEye said:

Looks like many people are beginning to organise May's Leaving Party for the end of June:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/theresa-may-spoof-leaving-drinks-has-over-50k-attendees-1-4475396

Lefties really have too much time on their hands.

atia2

freetochoose said:

As Milton Friedman said:

"The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

When I read this site I'm constantly amazed how and why adults put faith in politicians. OK at some stage we all have to make a choice, but the sycophantic idolatry from some is weird.

The point is regardless of who is in govt and by what majority we all just get on with our lives, some will thrive and others not, and all at different times. Politicians have a negative effect on us all.

It's a ludicrous quote. It was only through government that the activities of subsistence became sufficiently collectivised to allow architecture, painting, science, literature, etc. in large degree.

I would suggest that putting faith in economic ideologues is our main problem.

rcs1000

Scott_P said:

Rumour that Jo Swinson is not standing for leader.

Booooooooooooooo

I think the LibDems dodged a bullet there.

Arise Mr Lamb.

HYUFD

logical_song said:

Alistair said:

freetochoose said:

felix said:

Surely the lessons of the last year or so show there are no certainties any more and that historical precedents give precious few clues either. The only certainty I can see looking at the UK from afar is that the country's mess is only exceeded by the lamentable quality of its politicians.

Yep, dreadful. While these twerps squabble and pontificate 99% of us get on with our lives.

Its why there won't be an election in years, its one big yawn to the electorate.

Turnout was up nationally.

... and apparently another election in the Autumn would be popular.

Britain Elects‏ @britainelects Jun 13
On another general election this autumn:

Support: 43%
Oppose: 38%

(via @YouGov / 09 - 10 Jun)

Survation had voters opposing another general election this autumn by 49% to 40% and Survation were closest to the final election result

HYUFD

Scott_P said:

Rumour that Jo Swinson is not standing for leader.

Booooooooooooooo

Sensible, Cable it is then

DecrepitJohnL

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Pretty pleased. Backed Swinson at 3.5 on the 12th, for next Lib Dem leader, then the hedge I set up and forgot about was matched on Betfair at 1.3 yesterday [only remembered when I logged on today to make a lay at 1.59].

I do wonder if Farron's attitude or views towards homosexuality would have been questioned so much had he been of a different religion.

Who knows? Farron's problem was not that he was asked once but that he was asked every bloody time, when he needed to talk about other things. This was in part due to his not having thought of a good answer before he was asked for the first time. It became part of the journalistic zeitgeist that you had to pose this question. For a long time Jeremy Corbyn could not be interviewed by Home Jam Makers Monthly without being asked about shoot to kill (which in its original sense is probably still illegal anyway) -- how many months did it take the Labour press office to spot that Theresa May had decimated the police?

Jo Swinson will be asked about her young child. She needs to answer it in a way that closes the issue down, perhaps by pointing to her strong family life, adequate childcare arrangements, and the sexist nature of the question; perhaps like Cameron and Blair by simply ruling her family off-limits. Then it will stop. But if, like Farron, she hums and haws and agrees the questioner has a point and it is all a bit tricky, the questions will recur.

Peter_the_Punter

logical_song said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

Yes, the Tories are now buying each day in office for two days of future opposition.

I don't see May having the negotiating skill to manage a minority government for very long at all, even in ideal circumstances, and these are far from ideal.

How are her negotiations going with the DUP I wonder. It will be interesting to see how much she has to give them.

The problem is that whatever she gives to the DUP she has to give also to SF.

And what she gives to NI, she also has to give to Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, the NE, Merseyside, Manchester, Harpenden North etc etc.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. P, lay value of 1.55 on Betfair, for those who want it. I put down a pound or two, just in case.

CarlottaVance

Scott_P said:

@PolhomeEditor: SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford: "Any referendum, if it does take place." Reverse ferret klaxon! #GMS

Apparently the cunning plan is this.

IndyRef2 is gone. Dead and buried.

Long live Scotref!

This is not an Indy ref. It's a Brexit ref. The question being, should Scotland be Independent...

It's GENIUS!!!!

Wonder what will happen to the IndyRef2 donations?

https://twitter.com/AgentP22/status/875249583022116864

RobD

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/jamieross7/status/875250612237197312

Has May's kamikaze election saved the union?

Scott_P

MonikerDiCanio said:

You can thank Brexit for the SNP's woes. I hope you've got the integrity to admit that.

I don't believe that to be true.

The SNPs' woes are due to their monomaniacal obsession with the constitution to the detriment of good governance.

If Scotland really was the shining beacon on the hill the zoomers imagine, Brexit would indeed have been the perfect trigger for Indy.

But is isn't. And wasn't.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. HYUFD, Cable's past it.

If not Swinson, Lamb.