As difficult as the next few years may be it is like ripping off a bandage. At least now the issue is being dealt with rather than getting kicked perpetually down the road building up more and more resentment.
The can-kicks and the resentment have hardly even started. There's (probably) going to be a deal, the pro-EU people are going to simmer with rage and the anti-EU people are going to go ballistic at the betrayal. Everybody is going to promise to renegotiate it then get elected and fail, it's going to go on and on.
This is why it makes sense politically to have a harder Brexit. The pro-EU people are never going to be happy with anything that isn't membership of the EU. On the other hand, if we are free of EU law/ECJ, and can control our migration policy, fisheries and trade deals, most eurosceptics would be very happy.
Apart from the punctuation from what I've read it's pretty shoddy journalism - you've got to stand next to and downwind from the funnel - on the oldest ship in the fleet - to support their claims...
Like the life of Canadians is imperiled by not being ruled by President Trump? Like the life of the Japanese is imperiled by not being ruled by the Communist Party of China? Like the life of Kiwis is imperiled by not being ruled by Australia?
I don't see any of those nationals campaigning to be joining their larger neighbour. We either needed to be full members of the EU (Eurozone, Schengen, the works) or not at all.
Those parallels are false. Canada, Japan and New Zealand are no more likely to become part of their larger neighbours than we are to become a part of Germany. As the multilateral body that decides how things are done in Europe and with us outside the EU system, it puts us in an uncomfortable position that has a direct effect on our prosperity and lifestyles. We're going to be spending our political energies almost entirely on simultaneously co-opting, ignoring and undermining the EU and there's going to be very enervating debate on how to do it.
We were not members of the Eurozone or Schengen so those straw men don't apply either.
As I say, the EU will be a much more dominant factor in our lives outside than in
Or the government! It's not the BBC's fault the cabinet Brexiteers have decided to use public sector pay as a stick with which to beat the Chancellor. Again, this is one the Tories are going to have to own.
This is true. I am afraid that the good government of the Cameron/Osborne period is not going to come back anytime soon. It was excellent while it lasted.
Indeed, also can Tory Leavers tell me when their prediction that only a Leave vote would finally unite the Tory party will be realised?
The Conservative Party is more united than it has been in years. That's why we won 42% of the vote of the public in the last election. It is just a handful of retrenched pro-Europeans that are opposed.
Given Theresa May loyally served under the Cameroons for many years, sticking to her own brief and not interfering in others' areas, other people could learn from her lead.
Yes, so popular we saw a swing from Con to Lab.
Ok, you don't like swings, how about net seat gains.
How many net seat gains did the Tories achieve on June 8th?
As I've said before, net seat gains are meaningless because, other than the incumbency effect, the number of seats won in one election has no statistical relationship to the number of seats won in the next. You have told me you will write an article disputing this, and I look forward to reading it. Perhaps it will change my mind.
In the meantime, I care most about how many votes and how many seats were won. In votes, we have done very well. In seats, we have done better than 2010 but worse than 2015. We must now concentrate on doing better than 2015 in the next election. That means knuckling down, delivering Brexit and reaching out to the young and the working class. It certainly means avoiding a civil war that some seem intent on starting.
One of the reasons Labour rose in the poll ratings is because Labour moderates stopped undermining him. Some ministers could learn from that, assuming they care more about defeating Labour than getting revenge on Theresa May.
This is why it makes sense politically to have a harder Brexit. The pro-EU people are never going to be happy with anything that isn't membership of the EU. On the other hand, if we are free of EU law/ECJ, and can control our migration policy, fisheries and trade deals, most eurosceptics would be very happy.
It makes no sense politically to appease the headbangers.
When the economy crashes, they are not going to fess up they caused it. They will still blame "others" for their failures
Not a massive surprise tbh. We were supposed to invoke immediately remember - at least May managed to buy some time.
How long can Nick and Fi be blamed for everything I wonder?
They'll be blamed for the next century. They and their boss are likely to be remembered alongside the Brexiteers as the people who made Jeremy Corbyn as PM a reality.
They'll be remembered as latter day Neville Chamberlains.
Yes, the appointment of Liam was an odd one. With his smouldering good looks and pop-babe past, I can only think that Theresa's intention was to add a bit of sexiness to the Brexit proceedings. Perhaps having the glamorous doctor in place, gallivanting around the globe securing his trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ghana, was considered Brexit's answer to Poldark.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
The calculation of "swings" can be very misleading when the electorate changes a lot to a big increase in turnout. A lot of young people came out for Labour, having been fed up with student loans and the unaffordability of housing. Those have been trends that are long in the making, and could have had much better attention from the last government.
It is important we get on with fixing the issues facing the British people, and then we can see of the Corbyn threat. Unfortunately, some people care more about staying in the EU than they do about Conservative governance, which is making this a lot harder. As I mentioned, Theresa May loyally served under Cameron, getting on with her job and not interfering in the briefs of other ministers. Others should take a leaf out of her book.
Is it true that TM avoided getting into it with other ministers? She had a run in with Gove I think? My sense wasthe cameroons found her unreliable - her non campaign during the referendum for instance....
The run-in with Gove was because he started trying to tell the Home Secretary how to handle Home Office affairs. I like Michael, but he was Education Secretary at the time and should have stuck to his brief. Thankfully and admirably, May has let bygones be bygones and put him back in government. They are both strong talents and will now be working together.
During the referendum campaign, May gave speeches backing EU membership in line with her own conscience. I can understand her finding it difficult to be a full part of the official Remain campaign, given the untruths Cameron and Osborne were pushing, but she made her case as honestly she could, and not once did she try to undermine them. I actually admire her for her integrity in a difficult situation.
Yes, the appointment of Liam was an odd one. With his smouldering good looks and pop-babe past, I can only think that Theresa's intention was to add a bit of sexiness to the Brexit proceedings. Perhaps having the glamorous doctor in place, gallivanting around the globe securing his trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ghana, was considered Brexit's answer to Poldark.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
It feels like we are hearing nothing from May these days, and all the news stories are being driven by her cabinet. Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Hunt, they seem to be the face of the government now.
I think many of the current major players are going to realise that the ideal Tory plan - deliver Brexit then go to the polls with a fresh leader in 2019/20, means skipping over their generation entirely. It's going to be now or never for many of them. Initial attempts at unity are fracturing, and I think conference in the autumn will be when it boils over. I'm sure they would prefer May to 'absorb the toxicity' of the coming couple years, but if she does, they still won't get the reward. If you want to be PM you normally have a big dose of self-belief - so surely they are going to think they would rather inherit a tinderbox and try and defuse the situation, rather than miss out entirely.
I think there will be a challenge in the later part of the year, and a new PM for 2018.
The calculation of "swings" can be very misleading when the electorate changes a lot to a big increase in turnout. A lot of young people came out for Labour, having been fed up with student loans and the unaffordability of housing. Those have been trends that are long in the making, and could have had much better attention from the last government.
It is important we get on with fixing the issues facing the British people, and then we can see of the Corbyn threat. Unfortunately, some people care more about staying in the EU than they do about Conservative governance, which is making this a lot harder. As I mentioned, Theresa May loyally served under Cameron, getting on with her job and not interfering in the briefs of other ministers. Others should take a leaf out of her book.
Is it true that TM avoided getting into it with other ministers? She had a run in with Gove I think? My sense wasthe cameroons found her unreliable - her non campaign during the referendum for instance....
The run-in with Gove was because he started trying to tell the Home Secretary how to handle Home Office affairs. I like Michael, but he was Education Secretary at the time and should have stuck to his brief. Thankfully and admirably, May has let bygones be bygones and put him back in government. They are both strong talents and will now be working together.
During the referendum campaign, May gave speeches backing EU membership in line with her own conscience. I can understand her finding it difficult to be a full part of the official Remain campaign, given the untruths Cameron and Osborne were pushing, but she made her case as honestly she could, and not once did she try to undermine them. I actually admire her for her integrity in a difficult situation.
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
As difficult as the next few years may be it is like ripping off a bandage. At least now the issue is being dealt with rather than getting kicked perpetually down the road building up more and more resentment.
The can-kicks and the resentment have hardly even started. There's (probably) going to be a deal, the pro-EU people are going to simmer with rage and the anti-EU people are going to go ballistic at the betrayal. Everybody is going to promise to renegotiate it then get elected and fail, it's going to go on and on.
This is why it makes sense politically to have a harder Brexit. The pro-EU people are never going to be happy with anything that isn't membership of the EU. On the other hand, if we are free of EU law/ECJ, and can control our migration policy, fisheries and trade deals, most eurosceptics would be very happy.
Nope, they'll be hopping mad. Let's take one of the first issues: The UK is going to end up paying some money for pensions of British people who worked for the EU over the years. The papers will write this up as a treacherous act of betrayal.
That said, I think the least-bad way to square the circle politically is hardish Brexit + re-referendum. The re-referendum will force the sceptics to pretend to like the deal, for fear of damaging their chances of winning. Then whatever the result ends up being, she (or whatever unlucky person takes her job) has a decent case to make that the voters have signed off on it.
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
Well, without wanting to be unduly nasty, if the residents of Grenfell Tower were among the sharper tools in the shed, they wouldn't have been residents of Grenfell Tower.
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
Well, without wanting to be unduly nasty, if the residents of Grenfell Tower were among the sharper tools in the shed, they wouldn't have been residents of Grenfell Tower.
That's overly nasty, and also wrong. Several of the flats were RTB purchases.
Not a massive surprise tbh. We were supposed to invoke immediately remember - at least May managed to buy some time.
How long can Nick and Fi be blamed for everything I wonder?
They'll be blamed for the next century. They and their boss are likely to be remembered alongside the Brexiteers as the people who made Jeremy Corbyn as PM a reality.
They'll be remembered as latter day Neville Chamberlains.
They are Ralph Seymour to TMay's David Beatty.
That is a fantastically obscure reference and I salute you for it.
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
Well, without wanting to be unduly nasty, if the residents of Grenfell Tower were among the sharper tools in the shed, they wouldn't have been residents of Grenfell Tower.
That's overly nasty, and also wrong. Several of the flats were RTB purchases.
I'd say it was harsh but fair, private tenants excepted.
Yes, the appointment of Liam was an odd one. With his smouldering good looks and pop-babe past, I can only think that Theresa's intention was to add a bit of sexiness to the Brexit proceedings. Perhaps having the glamorous doctor in place, gallivanting around the globe securing his trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ghana, was considered Brexit's answer to Poldark.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
Ghana? A trade deal with Ghana is going to make up for Brexit?
Not a massive surprise tbh. We were supposed to invoke immediately remember - at least May managed to buy some time.
How long can Nick and Fi be blamed for everything I wonder?
They'll be blamed for the next century. They and their boss are likely to be remembered alongside the Brexiteers as the people who made Jeremy Corbyn as PM a reality.
They'll be remembered as latter day Neville Chamberlains.
They are Ralph Seymour to TMay's David Beatty.
That is a fantastically obscure reference and I salute you for it.
It is but if you are familiar with the names it is, if I say it myself, spot on.
Your salute is not executive until it is hauled down, of course...
It feels like we are hearing nothing from May these days, and all the news stories are being driven by her cabinet. Boris, Davis, Hammond, Gove, Hunt, they seem to be the face of the government now.
I think many of the current major players are going to realise that the ideal Tory plan - deliver Brexit then go to the polls with a fresh leader in 2019/20, means skipping over their generation entirely. It's going to be now or never for many of them. Initial attempts at unity are fracturing, and I think conference in the autumn will be when it boils over. I'm sure they would prefer May to 'absorb the toxicity' of the coming couple years, but if she does, they still won't get the reward. If you want to be PM you normally have a big dose of self-belief - so surely they are going to think they would rather inherit a tinderbox and try and defuse the situation, rather than miss out entirely.
I think there will be a challenge in the later part of the year, and a new PM for 2018.
Possibly.
But if the current senior generation is to be skipped then new faces need to be brought forward now. This requires a major reshuffle and it is doubtful that TMay has the authority to deliver one. A palace revolution mid-Brexit will look dreadful imo - totally self-indulgent.
It will be so they can ignore the 60% plus (using the 2014 referendum as a guide) who will boycott the exercise as invalid resulting in an overwhelmingly Yes selectorate. The fact the turnout figures weren't published is an indicator of dodginess.
While the Catalan politicians are charlatans, the Madrid ones are no less irresponsible.
@jonwalker121: Education Minister Nick Gibb confirms in Commons that the Government has done a u-turn over plans to axe universal free school infant meals
You don't know anything about these people or their situations.
I think we do. It is common ground I think that Grenfell Tower was social housing, aside from a few privately owned flats that had been sold off and perhaps let out. Social housing is by definition typically occupied by those who can't afford any other kind (if they can they shouldn't be in subsidised housing).
It follows that they are unlikely to be from walks of life in which they would have routinely absorbed something about how an inquiry is likely to be run. That some have suggested the council should be banned from having input to the inquiry, and that the judge should be replaced because they've already decided he's biased, supports this supposition.
I have every sympathy for them but we don't let crime victims decide the sentence.
Yes, the appointment of Liam was an odd one. With his smouldering good looks and pop-babe past, I can only think that Theresa's intention was to add a bit of sexiness to the Brexit proceedings. Perhaps having the glamorous doctor in place, gallivanting around the globe securing his trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ghana, was considered Brexit's answer to Poldark.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
Ghana? A trade deal with Ghana is going to make up for Brexit?
Seriously? Ghana?
I don't know how CornishJohn manages to keep a straight face.
EU's Juncker calls empty European Parliament 'ridiculous'
"Mr Juncker complained that if Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel or French President Emmanuel Macron had been in the chamber, it would have been full."
That's because Merkel and Macron are important people, whereas Juncker is a nobody.
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
Well, without wanting to be unduly nasty, if the residents of Grenfell Tower were among the sharper tools in the shed, they wouldn't have been residents of Grenfell Tower.
I suspect there's a connection between there being a devastating fire specifically at Grenfell Tower and attitudes towards the residents that are similar to yours. These events happen more often to people who lack wealth and influence.
Mr. M, be fair, that tweet's dated today and it says it's breaking news (although you're correct that it broke yesterday).
Good afternoon Mr Dancer.
I'm not sure that AFP News deserve any "fairness" when they are reporting as Breaking something which is already yesterday's fishwrapper.
Although I admit that we are watching developments keenly here - sitting on the very edges of our sunloungers - as it's a very significant political event locally.
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
Well, without wanting to be unduly nasty, if the residents of Grenfell Tower were among the sharper tools in the shed, they wouldn't have been residents of Grenfell Tower.
I suspect there's a connection between there being a devastating fire specifically at Grenfell Tower and attitudes towards the residents that are similar to yours. These events happen more often to people who lack wealth and influence.
I couldn't disagree more with your unpleasant insinuation. If there were a genuine lack of concern for the residents of Grenfell and its like, there would have been no £10 million attempt to improve the buildings they lived in. They would have just been left to scratch along in dirty brown towers.
You will also find that exactly the same building regulations apply to people with wealth and influence as to those without. Of course, if any of the former died in a tower fire, you'd no doubt find that less politically useful, and not nearly such an attractive opportunity to signal your virtue with crocodile tears.
@jonwalker121: Education Minister Nick Gibb confirms in Commons that the Government has done a u-turn over plans to axe universal free school infant meals
The boughs of the Magic Money Tree are laden with plenty. We've got a Labour government without the party having to win an election.
You don't know anything about these people or their situations.
I think we do. It is common ground I think that Grenfell Tower was social housing, aside from a few privately owned flats that had been sold off and perhaps let out. Social housing is by definition typically occupied by those who can't afford any other kind (if they can they shouldn't be in subsidised housing).
It follows that they are unlikely to be from walks of life in which they would have routinely absorbed something about how an inquiry is likely to be run. That some have suggested the council should be banned from having input to the inquiry, and that the judge should be replaced because they've already decided he's biased, supports this supposition.
I have every sympathy for them but we don't let crime victims decide the sentence.
Frank Dobson and Bob Crow, to name but two, lived in social housing.
Yes, the appointment of Liam was an odd one. With his smouldering good looks and pop-babe past, I can only think that Theresa's intention was to add a bit of sexiness to the Brexit proceedings. Perhaps having the glamorous doctor in place, gallivanting around the globe securing his trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ghana, was considered Brexit's answer to Poldark.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
You mean we follow the EU, which already has an Economic Partnership Agreement with Ghana that allows all Ghanaian goods into the EU free of quotas and tariffs? It's non-reciprocal so Ghana can still apply tariffs on EU imports, although this is supposed to reduce over time.
Yes, the appointment of Liam was an odd one. With his smouldering good looks and pop-babe past, I can only think that Theresa's intention was to add a bit of sexiness to the Brexit proceedings. Perhaps having the glamorous doctor in place, gallivanting around the globe securing his trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ghana, was considered Brexit's answer to Poldark.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
Ghana? A trade deal with Ghana is going to make up for Brexit?
Seriously? Ghana?
I don't know how CornishJohn manages to keep a straight face.
Easy enough online ....
Next week, a trade deal with Kiribati will be announced which will be the first step in ensuring that the Sun Never Sets on The British Empire (Mk.2)
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
Well, without wanting to be unduly nasty, if the residents of Grenfell Tower were among the sharper tools in the shed, they wouldn't have been residents of Grenfell Tower.
I suspect there's a connection between there being a devastating fire specifically at Grenfell Tower and attitudes towards the residents that are similar to yours. These events happen more often to people who lack wealth and influence.
Given the same issues have been found at 181 out of 181 tower blocks (some of which would have far wealthier residents) I'd argue that it was more a systemic failure of regulation and building control, with a failure to understand the dynamics that could lead to catastrophic failure.
It is probably true that casualties would have been lower with similar types of fires in wealthier towers, partly due to lower occupancy and sub-letting, and fewer cultural misunderstandings.
Going to the Test at Lords on Friday, and have bought Jonny Bairstow player performance at 111. I am normally a big seller of player performances as the value is in the sell price, but Bairstow averages 143 when he has the gloves, lowest make up of 50.
Incidentally two of the future superstars of English sport are both named Mason.
Mason Crane the leg spinner and Mason Mount the midfielder.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
Ghana? A trade deal with Ghana is going to make up for Brexit?
Seriously? Ghana?
I don't know how CornishJohn manages to keep a straight face.
Easy enough online ....
Next week, a trade deal with Kiribati will be announced which will be the first step in ensuring that the Sun Never Sets on The British Empire (Mk.2)
I suggest you take the time to read what I had actually written rather than try to put words in my mouth. I clearly articulated that a trade deal with Ghana would be good for moral reasons, due to it helping their economy so much.
I think it would be helpful if people on all sides tried to have an honest and good faith discussion.
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
Well, without wanting to be unduly nasty, if the residents of Grenfell Tower were among the sharper tools in the shed, they wouldn't have been residents of Grenfell Tower.
I suspect there's a connection between there being a devastating fire specifically at Grenfell Tower and attitudes towards the residents that are similar to yours. These events happen more often to people who lack wealth and influence.
Given the same issues have been found at 181 out of 181 tower blocks (some of which would have far wealthier residents) I'd argue that it was more a systemic failure of regulation and building control, with a failure to understand the dynamics that could lead to catastrophic failure.
It is probably true that casualties would have been lower with similar types of fires in wealthier towers, partly due to lower occupancy and sub-letting, and fewer cultural misunderstandings.
It will be a mixture of reasons. The cladding is probably part of it.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
Ghana? A trade deal with Ghana is going to make up for Brexit?
Seriously? Ghana?
I don't know how CornishJohn manages to keep a straight face.
Easy enough online ....
Next week, a trade deal with Kiribati will be announced which will be the first step in ensuring that the Sun Never Sets on The British Empire (Mk.2)
I suggest you take the time to read what I had actually written rather than try to put words in my mouth. I clearly articulated that a trade deal with Ghana would be good for moral reasons, due to it helping their economy so much.
That is not how it came across. Try being less subtle and indirect.
Yes, the appointment of Liam was an odd one. With his smouldering good looks and pop-babe past, I can only think that Theresa's intention was to add a bit of sexiness to the Brexit proceedings. Perhaps having the glamorous doctor in place, gallivanting around the globe securing his trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ghana, was considered Brexit's answer to Poldark.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
You mean we follow the EU, which already has an Economic Partnership Agreement with Ghana that allows all Ghanaian goods into the EU free of quotas and tariffs? It's non-reciprocal so Ghana can still apply tariffs on EU imports, although this is supposed to reduce over time.
The problem with the EU system is that Ghana's main employment sector is agriculture, and the main barriers to their exports to the West are not tariffs but subsidies to Western agricultural producers. I would hope that our trade agreements with these countries go hand in hand with phasing out agricultural subsidies to give these people a fair shake.
I see we have labour repeating the disgusting murderer claims today and this is bonkers.. .
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
Well, without wanting to be unduly nasty, if the residents of Grenfell Tower were among the sharper tools in the shed, they wouldn't have been residents of Grenfell Tower.
I suspect there's a connection between there being a devastating fire specifically at Grenfell Tower and attitudes towards the residents that are similar to yours. These events happen more often to people who lack wealth and influence.
The ignorance lies not with tenants but with the society and establishment that is satisfied with their living there. If you're seen as untermenschen you're kept as untermenschen until the stench of barbequed corpses forces hands to perform some remedial camouflage on the state of things and everbody jockeys for position to be seen as giving a shit without actually having to (or losing their own particular slice of entitlement and wealth). Those that point this out will be decried as extremists and the communal hand wringing will satisfy the majority that they have paid due penance amd can go back to their cosy little corporatist bubble. And all the while we will continue to live in a fashion that gives disproportionate and inverse levels of satisfaction ensuring our own level is collared so that less worthies cannot access it whilst never admitting we are less worthy than those just out of reach on the floor above. And onwards until the top are bored and decide to reinvent everything in the cleansing fire of slaughter. Merry Christmas all.
The calculation of "swings" can be very misleading when the electorate changes a lot to a big increase in turnout. A lot of young people came out for Labour, having been fed up with student loans and the unaffordability of housing. Those have been trends that are long in the making, and could have had much better attention from the last government.
It is important we get on with fixing the issues facing the British people, and then we can see of the Corbyn threat. Unfortunately, some people care more about staying in the EU than they do about Conservative governance, which is making this a lot harder. As I mentioned, Theresa May loyally served under Cameron, getting on with her job and not interfering in the briefs of other ministers. Others should take a leaf out of her book.
Is it true that TM avoided getting into it with other ministers? She had a run in with Gove I think? My sense wasthe cameroons found her unreliable - her non campaign during the referendum for instance....
May hasn't learnt how to operate without Timothy and Hill yet. She isn't able to deal with both Grenfell and Brexit at the same time (FWIW, I suspect she's spending too much time on the former at the moment, rather than delegating) and it's clear that Timothy and Hill suppressed dissent and kept a lockdown on the whole Brexit process whilst they were there.
Now they're gone, all that pent-up frustration has been released, May's limited bandwith has been exposed and there is now a power vacuum at the heart of No.10.
Gavin Barwell has so far not been able to fill, and all the cabinet ministers are scrabbling around with their own ideas and briefing against one another.
This is 1994-1997 behaviour. If it doesn't change we'll get another 1997 result.
She needs to get a grip, establish a new No. 10 operation, find a different way of working, and re-exert her authority on the (secret) understanding she goes by October 2019.
The calculation of "swings" can be very misleading when the electorate changes a lot to a big increase in turnout. A lot of young people came out for Labour, having been fed up with student loans and the unaffordability of housing. Those have been trends that are long in the making, and could have had much better attention from the last government.
It is important we get on with fixing the issues facing the British people, and then we can see of the Corbyn threat. Unfortunately, some people care more about staying in the EU than they do about Conservative governance, which is making this a lot harder. As I mentioned, Theresa May loyally served under Cameron, getting on with her job and not interfering in the briefs of other ministers. Others should take a leaf out of her book.
Is it true that TM avoided getting into it with other ministers? She had a run in with Gove I think? My sense wasthe cameroons found her unreliable - her non campaign during the referendum for instance....
May hasn't learnt how to operate without Timothy and Hill yet. She isn't able to deal with both Grenfell and Brexit at the same time (FWIW, I suspect she's spending too much time on the former at the moment, rather than delegating) and it's clear that Timothy and Hill suppressed dissent and kept a lockdown on the whole Brexit process whilst they were there.
Now they're gone, all that pent-up frustration has been released, May's limited bandwith has been exposed and there is now a power vacuum at the heart of No.10.
Gavin Barwell has so far not been able to fill, and all the cabinet ministers are scrabbling around with their own ideas and briefing against one another.
This is 1994-1997 behaviour. If it doesn't change we'll get another 1997 result.
She needs to get a grip, establish a new No. 10 operation, find a different way of working, and re-exert her authority on the (secret) understanding she goes by October 2019.
There is no way Corbyn would get a 1997 style result
The calculation of "swings" can be very misleading when the electorate changes a lot to a big increase in turnout. A lot of young people came out for Labour, having been fed up with student loans and the unaffordability of housing. Those have been trends that are long in the making, and could have had much better attention from the last government.
It is important we get on with fixing the issues facing the British people, and then we can see of the Corbyn threat. Unfortunately, some people care more about staying in the EU than they do about Conservative governance, which is making this a lot harder. As I mentioned, Theresa May loyally served under Cameron, getting on with her job and not interfering in the briefs of other ministers. Others should take a leaf out of her book.
Is it true that TM avoided getting into it with other ministers? She had a run in with Gove I think? My sense wasthe cameroons found her unreliable - her non campaign during the referendum for instance....
May hasn't learnt how to operate without Timothy and Hill yet. She isn't able to deal with both Grenfell and Brexit at the same time (FWIW, I suspect she's spending too much time on the former at the moment, rather than delegating) and it's clear that Timothy and Hill suppressed dissent and kept a lockdown on the whole Brexit process whilst they were there.
Now they're gone, all that pent-up frustration has been released, May's limited bandwith has been exposed and there is now a power vacuum at the heart of No.10.
Gavin Barwell has so far not been able to fill, and all the cabinet ministers are scrabbling around with their own ideas and briefing against one another.
This is 1994-1997 behaviour. If it doesn't change we'll get another 1997 result.
She needs to get a grip, establish a new No. 10 operation, find a different way of working, and re-exert her authority on the (secret) understanding she goes by October 2019.
There is no way Corbyn would get a 1997 style result
Not quite as high sure, but Blair only got 43% in 1997, it was FPTP and, crucially, anti Tory tactical voting that did for Major. A strong majority could be possible if that takes hold again.
Cnting around the globe securing his trade deals with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ghana, was considered Brexit's answer to Poldark.
Why Ghana? I don't think he's running a medical mission
The Ghana deal was the jewel in the crown of post-Brexit settlements. Bicycles made of bamboo on the streets of London was one of the many advantages hailed by Boris:
A trade deal with Ghana would be excellent. That county has made a number of very positive reforms over the last decade, and could be an example to the African continent in what can be achieved with the right governance. We should certainly support that by being the first Western country to genuinely deliver trade justice to African economies, at least the ones moving in the right direction. Achieving free access to a major Western economy would be highly beneficial for them and could be the 21st Century's answer to the 1807 Slave Trade Act. Where we start, may others follow.
You mean we follow the EU, which already has an Economic Partnership Agreement with Ghana that allows all Ghanaian goods into the EU free of quotas and tariffs? It's non-reciprocal so Ghana can still apply tariffs on EU imports, although this is supposed to reduce over time.
The problem with the EU system is that Ghana's main employment sector is agriculture, and the main barriers to their exports to the West are not tariffs but subsidies to Western agricultural producers. I would hope that our trade agreements with these countries go hand in hand with phasing out agricultural subsidies to give these people a fair shake.
Fair point. The UK government is committed to continuing agricultural subsidies. Ghana is unlikely to get a better deal from us than it already has from the EU.
The calculation of "swings" can be very misleading when the electorate changes a lot to a big increase in turnout. A lot of young people came out for Labour, having been fed up with student loans and the unaffordability of housing. Those have been trends that are long in the making, and could have had much better attention from the last government.
It is important we get on with fixing the issues facing the British people, and then we can see of the Corbyn threat. Unfortunately, some people care more about staying in the EU than they do about Conservative governance, which is making this a lot harder. As I mentioned, Theresa May loyally served under Cameron, getting on with her job and not interfering in the briefs of other ministers. Others should take a leaf out of her book.
Is it true that TM avoided getting into it with other ministers? She had a run in with Gove I think? My sense wasthe cameroons found her unreliable - her non campaign during the referendum for instance....
May hasn't learnt how to operate without Timothy and eration, find a different way of working, and re-exert her authority on the (secret) understanding she goes by October 2019.
There is no way Corbyn would get a 1997 style result
Not quite as high sure, but Blair only got 43% in 1997, it was FPTP and, crucially, anti Tory tactical voting that did for Major. A strong majority could be possible if that takes hold again.
No the fact the Tories are even now polling 41% with Survation shows that there is still a strong anti Corbyn vote even though voters are tiring of the Tories in a way there was not a strong anti Blair vote in 1997
Comments
We were not members of the Eurozone or Schengen so those straw men don't apply either.
As I say, the EU will be a much more dominant factor in our lives outside than in
In the meantime, I care most about how many votes and how many seats were won. In votes, we have done very well. In seats, we have done better than 2010 but worse than 2015. We must now concentrate on doing better than 2015 in the next election. That means knuckling down, delivering Brexit and reaching out to the young and the working class. It certainly means avoiding a civil war that some seem intent on starting.
One of the reasons Labour rose in the poll ratings is because Labour moderates stopped undermining him. Some ministers could learn from that, assuming they care more about defeating Labour than getting revenge on Theresa May.
When the economy crashes, they are not going to fess up they caused it. They will still blame "others" for their failures
http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/UK-to-push-for-free-trade-deal-with-Ghana-510661
IMO, people do not like owning their mistakes. Far, far better to blame them on someone else.
I shall watch the Brexit fallout with great interest
During the referendum campaign, May gave speeches backing EU membership in line with her own conscience. I can understand her finding it difficult to be a full part of the official Remain campaign, given the untruths Cameron and Osborne were pushing, but she made her case as honestly she could, and not once did she try to undermine them. I actually admire her for her integrity in a difficult situation.
I think many of the current major players are going to realise that the ideal Tory plan - deliver Brexit then go to the polls with a fresh leader in 2019/20, means skipping over their generation entirely. It's going to be now or never for many of them. Initial attempts at unity are fracturing, and I think conference in the autumn will be when it boils over. I'm sure they would prefer May to 'absorb the toxicity' of the coming couple years, but if she does, they still won't get the reward. If you want to be PM you normally have a big dose of self-belief - so surely they are going to think they would rather inherit a tinderbox and try and defuse the situation, rather than miss out entirely.
I think there will be a challenge in the later part of the year, and a new PM for 2018.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_2017#Scotland
Actually May was interfering in Education too. It was a two way clash. See
https://www.channel4.com/news/may-and-gove-clash-over-extremism-in-schools
Fiona Hill had to resign as a result of briefing for May against Gove - a sign of things to follow in 2017. See
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/01/theresa-may-v-michael-gove-personality-clash-with-long-history
.
"Grenfell residents have questioned whether Sir Martin's background in commercial law is appropriate. They have also been angered by his decision to allow Kensington Council - who was criticised for its slow and ineffective response to the disaster - to contribute to the inquiry."
So the council shouldn't be allowed to say anything? Not to defend their actions? Imagine in criminal trial if a defendant was told they would have no right of reply because the prosecution said they weren't very nice.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/882196977634750464
That said, I think the least-bad way to square the circle politically is hardish Brexit + re-referendum. The re-referendum will force the sceptics to pretend to like the deal, for fear of damaging their chances of winning. Then whatever the result ends up being, she (or whatever unlucky person takes her job) has a decent case to make that the voters have signed off on it.
Seriously? Ghana?
Your salute is not executive until it is hauled down, of course...
But if the current senior generation is to be skipped then new faces need to be brought forward now. This requires a major reshuffle and it is doubtful that TMay has the authority to deliver one. A palace revolution mid-Brexit will look dreadful imo - totally self-indulgent.
You don't know anything about these people or their situations.
While the Catalan politicians are charlatans, the Madrid ones are no less irresponsible.
@jonwalker121: Education Minister Nick Gibb confirms in Commons that the Government has done a u-turn over plans to axe universal free school infant meals
It follows that they are unlikely to be from walks of life in which they would have routinely absorbed something about how an inquiry is likely to be run. That some have suggested the council should be banned from having input to the inquiry, and that the judge should be replaced because they've already decided he's biased, supports this supposition.
I have every sympathy for them but we don't let crime victims decide the sentence.
"Mr Juncker complained that if Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel or French President Emmanuel Macron had been in the chamber, it would have been full."
That's because Merkel and Macron are important people, whereas Juncker is a nobody.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40492396
I'm not sure that AFP News deserve any "fairness" when they are reporting as Breaking something which is already yesterday's fishwrapper.
Although I admit that we are watching developments keenly here - sitting on the very edges of our sunloungers - as it's a very significant political event locally.
You will also find that exactly the same building regulations apply to people with wealth and influence as to those without. Of course, if any of the former died in a tower fire, you'd no doubt find that less politically useful, and not nearly such an attractive opportunity to signal your virtue with crocodile tears.
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-56441398.html
NEW THREAD
Next week, a trade deal with Kiribati will be announced which will be the first step in ensuring that the Sun Never Sets on The British Empire (Mk.2)
It is probably true that casualties would have been lower with similar types of fires in wealthier towers, partly due to lower occupancy and sub-letting, and fewer cultural misunderstandings.
Incidentally two of the future superstars of English sport are both named Mason.
Mason Crane the leg spinner and Mason Mount the midfielder.
You heard it here first!
I think it would be helpful if people on all sides tried to have an honest and good faith discussion.
Those that point this out will be decried as extremists and the communal hand wringing will satisfy the majority that they have paid due penance amd can go back to their cosy little corporatist bubble. And all the while we will continue to live in a fashion that gives disproportionate and inverse levels of satisfaction ensuring our own level is collared so that less worthies cannot access it whilst never admitting we are less worthy than those just out of reach on the floor above.
And onwards until the top are bored and decide to reinvent everything in the cleansing fire of slaughter.
Merry Christmas all.
Now they're gone, all that pent-up frustration has been released, May's limited bandwith has been exposed and there is now a power vacuum at the heart of No.10.
Gavin Barwell has so far not been able to fill, and all the cabinet ministers are scrabbling around with their own ideas and briefing against one another.
This is 1994-1997 behaviour. If it doesn't change we'll get another 1997 result.
She needs to get a grip, establish a new No. 10 operation, find a different way of working, and re-exert her authority on the (secret) understanding she goes by October 2019.