So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
and Lamont was a god awful chancellor and is an arrogant bastard to boot - both seem very keen now to try to keep us in the EU. Nuff said?
@isam Simply telling someone 'they are wrong' isn't an actual argument. You can't keep repeating the same thing again and expect someone to concede a point. You haven't actually presented any argument, refuted any points (so rather odd of you then to assert that someone is 'plainly wrong given that you unable to do even this) you have instead presented your own opinion as total fact and bizarrely expect someone to 'concede' based on own repetitions. I'd call that a 'rick.'
If you expect your opinion to be accepted as an unchallengeable fact, then perhaps you shouldn't debate with others.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
and Lamont was a god awful chancellor and is an arrogant bastard to boot - both seem very keen now to try to keep us in the EU. Nuff said?
Lamont was and is a Brexiteer. Are you confusing him with Clarke, who is an arch remainer?
@isam Simply telling someone 'they are wrong' isn't an actual argument. You can't keep repeating the same thing again and expect someone to concede a point. You haven't actually presented any argument, refuted any points (so rather odd of you then to assert that someone is 'plainly wrong given that you unable to do even this) you have instead presented your own opinion as total fact and bizarrely expect someone to 'concede' based on own repetitions. I'd call that a 'rick.'
If you expect your opinion to be accepted as an unchallengeable fact, then perhaps you shouldn't debate with others.
I don't really care that much about it, just noticed your rick and mentioned it. Wish I hadn't seen it now!
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
and Lamont was a god awful chancellor and is an arrogant bastard to boot - both seem very keen now to try to keep us in the EU. Nuff said?
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
and Lamont was a god awful chancellor and is an arrogant bastard to boot - both seem very keen now to try to keep us in the EU. Nuff said?
Lamont was and is a Brexiteer. Are you confusing him with Clarke, who is an arch remainer?
I hadn't confused him with Kenny, who could. However I do acknowledge that my memory failed me about Lamont's leanings, possibly coloured by my personal opinion of him and my advancing years. Thanks for putting me right.
@isam Simply telling someone 'they are wrong' isn't an actual argument. You can't keep repeating the same thing again and expect someone to concede a point. You haven't actually presented any argument, refuted any points (so rather odd of you then to assert that someone is 'plainly wrong given that you unable to do even this) you have instead presented your own opinion as total fact and bizarrely expect someone to 'concede' based on own repetitions. I'd call that a 'rick.'
If you expect your opinion to be accepted as an unchallengeable fact, then perhaps you shouldn't debate with others.
I don't really care that much about it, just noticed your rick and mentioned it. Wish I hadn't seen it now!
Perhaps because you didn't expect me to notice your rick?
I come on this site to exchange views and debate. I expect my views to get challenged.
Corbyn did. Or at least he strongly implied that he would.
So much for "straight talking, honest politics".
The quote is this: [...] "I will deal with it."
Yes, my point exactly.
What is 'it'?
From the preceding sentence: "I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.”
Excessively is the key word. If I say - I don't want to pay an excessive amount for a new car - it doesn't mean I expect a new car for free.
To be extra clear he then, in the same interview, went on to suggest other ways of reducing the debt burden.
To be extra extra clear it was then not in the Labour manifesto.
In my experience, Mishcons is full of really nasty people.
Does Carter-Ruck still exist?
I believe so.
I've had dealings with Mishcons in the area of probate litigation, where they have been aggressive long past the point where it become counter-productive.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
and Lamont was a god awful chancellor and is an arrogant bastard to boot - both seem very keen now to try to keep us in the EU. Nuff said?
Lamont was and is a Brexiteer. Are you confusing him with Clarke, who is an arch remainer?
I hadn't confused him with Kenny, who could. However I do acknowledge that my memory failed me about Lamont's leanings, possibly coloured by my personal opinion of him and my advancing years. Thanks for putting me right.
The Chancellor the Conservatives love to hate, Gordon Brown, was ultimately the man who kept us out of the Euro, yet somehow on this matter they trust his judgement absolutely while regarding the man who actually delivered a smaller state and a balanced budget, Ken Clarke, as a heretic.
If Brexit is personal for Major, it's easy to see why.
Corbyn did. Or at least he strongly implied that he would.
So much for "straight talking, honest politics".
The quote is this: [...] "I will deal with it."
Yes, my point exactly.
What is 'it'?
From the preceding sentence: "I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.”
Excessively is the key word. If I say - I don't want to pay an excessive amount for a new car - it doesn't mean I expect a new car for free.
To be extra clear he then, in the same interview, went on to suggest other ways of reducing the debt burden.
To be extra extra clear it was then not in the Labour manifesto.
even with the context, you can see why he's struggling. So vague as to be all things to all people.
In my experience, Mishcons is full of really nasty people.
Does Carter-Ruck still exist?
I believe so.
I've had dealings with Mishcons in the area of probate litigation, where they have been aggressive long past the point where it become counter-productive.
I've had dealings with a very senior lawyer, who was a member of Conservative Way Forward, and one of the most aggressive and unpleasant people I'd ever met.
Everybody wants "access" to SM (even Jezza, Britains original Brexiteer ) it's what kind of access you want Vs full membership that's the question...
Very few actually know what the single market is, and that includes MPs.
What the public are saying is that they prioritise jobs and trade over a very hard line on immigration, if it comes down to a binary trade-off.
In reality, they probably want a bit of common sense on immigration, and as free a trading relationship as possible with the EU, without being governed by them.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
Except that graph cuts out most of the time before we joined ERM and the vast majority of that graph shows us after we left ERM too.
Looking at a longer term graph its hard to draw your conclusion.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
and Lamont was a god awful chancellor and is an arrogant bastard to boot - both seem very keen now to try to keep us in the EU. Nuff said?
Lamont was and is a Brexiteer. Are you confusing him with Clarke, who is an arch remainer?
I hadn't confused him with Kenny, who could. However I do acknowledge that my memory failed me about Lamont's leanings, possibly coloured by my personal opinion of him and my advancing years. Thanks for putting me right.
The Chancellor the Conservatives love to hate, Gordon Brown, was ultimately the man who kept us out of the Euro, yet somehow on this matter they trust his judgement absolutely while regarding the man who actually delivered a smaller state and a balanced budget, Ken Clarke, as a heretic.
If Brexit is personal for Major, it's easy to see why.
The only positive point of Mr Brown, and the only negative point of Mr Clarke, were their attitudes towards the Euro.
On any other subject, Mr Clarke was one of the best Chancellors in living memory, and Mr Brown one of the worst. We are still £50bn a year a debt as a result of Brown's spending splurges from a decade ago.
Everybody wants "access" to SM (even Jezza, Britains original Brexiteer ) it's what kind of access you want Vs full membership that's the question...
Very few actually know what the single market is, and that includes MPs.
What the public are saying is that they prioritise jobs and trade over a very hard line on immigration, if it comes down to a binary trade-off.
In reality, they probably want a bit of common sense on immigration, and as free a trading relationship as possible with the EU, without being governed by them.
It's a reasonable compromise that will please all but the most hardline of leavers and remainers.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
Except that graph cuts out most of the time before we joined ERM and the vast majority of that graph shows us after we left ERM too.
Looking at a longer term graph its hard to draw your conclusion.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
and Lamont was a god awful chancellor and is an arrogant bastard to boot - both seem very keen now to try to keep us in the EU. Nuff said?
Lamont was and is a Brexiteer. Are you confusing him with Clarke, who is an arch remainer?
I hadn't confused him with Kenny, who could. However I do acknowledge that my memory failed me about Lamont's leanings, possibly coloured by my personal opinion of him and my advancing years. Thanks for putting me right.
The Chancellor the Conservatives love to hate, Gordon Brown, was ultimately the man who kept us out of the Euro, yet somehow on this matter they trust his judgement absolutely while regarding the man who actually delivered a smaller state and a balanced budget, Ken Clarke, as a heretic.
If Brexit is personal for Major, it's easy to see why.
The only positive point of Mr Brown, and the only negative point of Mr Clarke, were their attitudes towards the Euro.
On any other subject, Mr Clarke was one of the best Chancellors in living memory, and Mr Brown one of the worst. We are still £50bn a year a debt as a result of Brown's spending splurges from a decade ago.
Even worse when you consider that virtually the entire budget deficit now is what we pay each year in interest! Without interest payments we'd be very close to a budget surplus.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
and Lamont was a god awful chancellor and is an arrogant bastard to boot - both seem very keen now to try to keep us in the EU. Nuff said?
Lamont was and is a Brexiteer. Are you confusing him with Clarke, who is an arch remainer?
I hadn't confused him with Kenny, who could. However I do acknowledge that my memory failed me about Lamont's leanings, possibly coloured by my personal opinion of him and my advancing years. Thanks for putting me right.
The Chancellor the Conservatives love to hate, Gordon Brown, was ultimately the man who kept us out of the Euro, yet somehow on this matter they trust his judgement absolutely while regarding the man who actually delivered a smaller state and a balanced budget, Ken Clarke, as a heretic.
If Brexit is personal for Major, it's easy to see why.
The only positive point of Mr Brown, and the only negative point of Mr Clarke, were their attitudes towards the Euro.
On any other subject, Mr Clarke was one of the best Chancellors in living memory, and Mr Brown one of the worst. We are still £50bn a year a debt as a result of Brown's spending splurges from a decade ago.
I beseech you to consider the possibility that Clarke's good judgement on macroeconomics extends to his position on the Euro and similarly for Brown's bad judgement.
You are letting your emotions guide your politics.
I see Crossrail 2 is getting the go-ahead. I'm sure that will help the Conservatives win those marginals in the north.
Once HS2 is paid for there will be no money left for XRail2. Electrification is already being cancelled to make room for HS2 spending.
There is no connection between the electrification cancellation and HS2. The government gave Network Rail £38-40 billion to spend in CP5 (up to 2019), and unfortunately NR are massively over budget and late on some of those big projects. AIUI NR are still getting the same amount of money; they're just doing much less with it. Sadly.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
@isam Simply telling someone 'they are wrong' isn't an actual argument. You can't keep repeating the same thing again and expect someone to concede a point. You haven't actually presented any argument, refuted any points (so rather odd of you then to assert that someone is 'plainly wrong given that you unable to do even this) you have instead presented your own opinion as total fact and bizarrely expect someone to 'concede' based on own repetitions. I'd call that a 'rick.'
If you expect your opinion to be accepted as an unchallengeable fact, then perhaps you shouldn't debate with others.
I don't really care that much about it, just noticed your rick and mentioned it. Wish I hadn't seen it now!
Perhaps because you didn't expect me to notice your rick?
I come on this site to exchange views and debate. I expect my views to get challenged.
Have a nice day.
To be fair, your original point (JRM not attracting the kind of voters the Cons need to win) was not a rick, wrong of me to say it was, it could well be true, but it invited the obvious response of pointing out that everyone said that about Corbyn until 6 weeks ago. So lets say I "reminded" you rather than "corrected". It really wasn't intended as a challenge, it was just pointing something out.
The strange thing then is you refuse to accept that people said Corbyn would be a disaster because he alienated so many people Labour needed to reach. That isn't really debatable, just read the contemporary posts/newspaper or PB articles
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
I see Crossrail 2 is getting the go-ahead. I'm sure that will help the Conservatives win those marginals in the north.
Once HS2 is paid for there will be no money left for XRail2. Electrification is already being cancelled to make room for HS2 spending.
There is no connection between the electrification cancellation and HS2. The government gave Network Rail £38-40 billion to spend in CP5 (up to 2019), and unfortunately NR are massively over budget and late on some of those big projects. AIUI NR are still getting the same amount of money; they're just doing much less with it. Sadly.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
given our performance since 1997 it's something of a surprise to learn the governments of the day were concerned about our national economic well being
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
Jezza is actually a political mastermind.
Yes. I admit that initially I was guilty of a gross underestimation of the man. I'd seen him in action years ago and rated him highly, but just assumed that old age had dimmed his powers. Not a bit of it - Jezza was luring the Blairites and Tories into a misguided sense of complacency and just waiting to strike, which he did when Theresa called her disastrous election. The next phase will be when the Tories choose Rees-Mogg as their leader. Jezza will pick him off with consummate ease and the premiership will be within his grasp.
Corbyn did. Or at least he strongly implied that he would.
So much for "straight talking, honest politics".
The quote is this: [...] "I will deal with it."
Yes, my point exactly.
What is 'it'?
From the preceding sentence: "I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.”
Excessively is the key word. If I say - I don't want to pay an excessive amount for a new car - it doesn't mean I expect a new car for free.
To be extra clear he then, in the same interview, went on to suggest other ways of reducing the debt burden.
To be extra extra clear it was then not in the Labour manifesto.
He was quite happy for people to understand that he would cancel student "debt".
I see Crossrail 2 is getting the go-ahead. I'm sure that will help the Conservatives win those marginals in the north.
Once HS2 is paid for there will be no money left for XRail2. Electrification is already being cancelled to make room for HS2 spending.
There is no connection between the electrification cancellation and HS2. The government gave Network Rail £38-40 billion to spend in CP5 (up to 2019), and unfortunately NR are massively over budget and late on some of those big projects. AIUI NR are still getting the same amount of money; they're just doing much less with it. Sadly.
These are the major projects from the Wiki link above: London Bridge station redevelopment Completion of Borders Railway East West Rail Link from Oxford to Milton Keynes Central via Bletchley Electrification from London Paddington to Bristol, Cardiff, Oxford and Newbury Electrification from Bedford to Kettering and Corby Electrification of Transpennine line from Manchester to Leeds Electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking Line Electrification of Leeds - York and Selby lines Electrification and station redevelopment Bromsgrove railway station[3] Reading, Ascot to Waterloo 10-car platform lengthening. The Streatham Resignalling Project (As a part of the Victoria Phase II Project) The Sutton-Wimbledon Project (As a part of the Victoria Phase II Project)
There are many smaller project as well. 'Smaller' being relative: as an example, NR are spending £200 million in the environs of Derby station next year. As another, Rochester station was moved (I think the latter was in CP5).
NR have really mucked up. Some of the blame must also fall on their contractors, but NR's planning for some of the schemes was utterly incompetent.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
O/T, one for Mr @JosiasJessop and his suggestion that an independent investigator such as the AAIB be responsible for the Grenfell Tower technical investigation.
I'm on holiday at the moment, and one of my reading list items was this, the AAIB report into the Shoreham Airshow accident in 2015. Eleven people were killed and thirteen injured.
The full report is a very long and dry but excellent read, given the nature of the accident and the implications for wider public policy and regulation. It's not afraid to address difficult questions at regulatory authorities and expect replies from them.
It's a model investigation that those investigating the Grenfell fire should be looking at carefully.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
Elegantly, and [unfortunately] accurately put. It will make little difference to me, when I'm living under the local underpass foraging for roadkill, whether I'm there because of the need to "take back control", or the need to impoverish "the rich".
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
Has the public been captured by those same "cabals" then, since they awarded the two main parties with their highest combined share of the vote in nearly 50 years?
O/T, one for Mr @JosiasJessop and his suggestion that an independent investigator such as the AAIB be responsible for the Grenfell Tower technical investigation.
I'm on holiday at the moment, and one of my reading list items was this, the AAIB report into the Shoreham Airshow accident in 2015. Eleven people were killed and thirteen injured.
The full report is a very long and dry but excellent read, given the nature of the accident and the implications for wider public policy and regulation. It's not afraid to address difficult questions at regulatory authorities and expect replies from them.
It's a model investigation that those investigating the Grenfell fire should be looking at carefully.
But, but MURDERERS. POOR PEOPLE BEING KILLED, JUSTICE!!!
@JosiasJessop Yes I know tis for a whole bunch of stuff, but money always seems to "get spent" irrespective of the outcome, or progress. The top bods of Balfour Beatty and so forth must enjoy the arrangement tremendously.
This is the man who produces David Attenborough's TV documentaries, Fergus Beeley:
What a nutter,hope he gets time off.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
Has the public been captured by those same "cabals" then, since they awarded the two main parties with their highest combined share of the vote in nearly 50 years?
The Conservatives collected a very sizeable anti-Labour vote and Labour collected a very sizeable anti-Conservative vote. If you were horrified at the thought of the hard right, you only had one real option. If you were horrified at the thought of the hard left, you only had one real option.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
The most plausible way out of the mess is for the Tory Brexiteers to pull back from the abyss and admit their mistakes, reunifying the party as the pro-European force it was between Suez and Maastricht. Those who don't buy into this vision should be expelled so that the party doesn't repeat the mistake of harbouring a Kipper cuckoo in the nest.
This is the man who produces David Attenborough's TV documentaries, Fergus Beeley:
What a nutter,hope he gets time off.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
O/T, one for Mr @JosiasJessop and his suggestion that an independent investigator such as the AAIB be responsible for the Grenfell Tower technical investigation.
I'm on holiday at the moment, and one of my reading list items was this, the AAIB report into the Shoreham Airshow accident in 2015. Eleven people were killed and thirteen injured.
The full report is a very long and dry but excellent read, given the nature of the accident and the implications for wider public policy and regulation. It's not afraid to address difficult questions at regulatory authorities and expect replies from them.
It's a model investigation that those investigating the Grenfell fire should be looking at carefully.
But, but MURDERERS. POOR PEOPLE BEING KILLED, JUSTICE!!!
From the political side, the government (Local Authority and Central govt) need to engage with the survivors of the fire (NB ONLY those who lived in Grenfell Tower, not any of their scumbag hangers-on) to work through the issues they face, but none of that can and should happen without the technical report on what actually happened.
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
@JosiasJessop Yes I know tis for a whole bunch of stuff, but money always seems to "get spent" irrespective of the outcome, or progress. The top bods of Balfour Beatty and so forth must enjoy the arrangement tremendously.
To be fair, there are externalities that can make these decisions difficult. For instance and AIUI, new trains need ordering soon for the Midland Main Line. These were to be electric trains. But the MML electrification has been delayed for so long that the trains need to arrive several years before the earliest date of electrification completion, and there are no suitable trains that can be cascaded over from other lines to cover the interim period.
So you can either order new trains that will only be used for a few years, or scrap the electrification.
It's an absolute and utter mess. And meanwhile Hitachi are rubbing their hands in glee. The IEP project is another disaster in the making.
O/T, one for Mr @JosiasJessop and his suggestion that an independent investigator such as the AAIB be responsible for the Grenfell Tower technical investigation.
I'm on holiday at the moment, and one of my reading list items was this, the AAIB report into the Shoreham Airshow accident in 2015. Eleven people were killed and thirteen injured.
The full report is a very long and dry but excellent read, given the nature of the accident and the implications for wider public policy and regulation. It's not afraid to address difficult questions at regulatory authorities and expect replies from them.
It's a model investigation that those investigating the Grenfell fire should be looking at carefully.
But, but MURDERERS. POOR PEOPLE BEING KILLED, JUSTICE!!!
From the political side, the government (Local Authority and Central govt) need to engage with the survivors of the fire (NB ONLY those who lived in Grenfell Tower, not any of their scumbag hangers-on) to work through the issues they face, but none of that can and should happen without the technical report on what actually happened.
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
From the political side, the government (Local Authority and Central govt) need to engage with the survivors of the fire (NB ONLY those who lived in Grenfell Tower, not any of their scumbag hangers-on) to work through the issues they face, but none of that can and should happen without the technical report on what actually happened.
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
The Davies report into the Aberfan disaster (with which this has some parallels) took 76 days to report and that was with the obfuscation of the National Coal Board.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
I paid £50 to see him on the "Alice Faye Alimony Tour" and he was bloody funny. Better than the vast majority of contemporary comedians.
I recall Charlie Sheen, having been caught by a kiss and tell from a hooker: "I don't pay them for sex, I pay them to leave in the morning" Way cheaper than marrying for the third time, surely?
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
The most plausible way out of the mess is for the Tory Brexiteers to pull back from the abyss and admit their mistakes, reunifying the party as the pro-European force it was between Suez and Maastricht. Those who don't buy into this vision should be expelled so that the party doesn't repeat the mistake of harbouring a Kipper cuckoo in the nest.
There was a thought that the LEAVE vote would produce a form of re-alignment creating one pro-LEAVE party and one pro-REMAIN party. That hasn't quite happened.
The Conservatives and Labour remain split from stem to stern on the issue - the Conservatives can't decide and run the whole gamut from BINO to crashing out to WTO rules while Labour is similarly split.
The result of the negotiation will be fascinating - will both sides be able to hold united lines once the proposed Treaty is published ?
O/T, one for Mr @JosiasJessop and his suggestion that an independent investigator such as the AAIB be responsible for the Grenfell Tower technical investigation.
I'm on holiday at the moment, and one of my reading list items was this, the AAIB report into the Shoreham Airshow accident in 2015. Eleven people were killed and thirteen injured.
The full report is a very long and dry but excellent read, given the nature of the accident and the implications for wider public policy and regulation. It's not afraid to address difficult questions at regulatory authorities and expect replies from them.
It's a model investigation that those investigating the Grenfell fire should be looking at carefully.
Thanks for that. I skimmed it a while back and have to agree: it's excellent, and the sort of work that should form the basis of the Grenfell Tower disaster, but won't.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
I paid £50 to see him on the "Alice Faye Alimony Tour" and he was bloody funny. Better than the vast majority of contemporary comedians.
I recall Charlie Sheen, having been caught by a kiss and tell from a hooker: "I don't pay them for sex, I pay them to leave in the morning" Way cheaper than marrying for the third time, surely?
*sigh* How did he ever end up with Bree Olsen and the other one.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
Except that graph cuts out most of the time before we joined ERM and the vast majority of that graph shows us after we left ERM too.
Looking at a longer term graph its hard to draw your conclusion.
Yes - the turning point for inflation was 15% interest rates, which persisted for far too long in order to defend the £'s value within the ERM. Major's policy made matters worse and recovery started only when his policy was destroyed by the markets.
From the political side, the government (Local Authority and Central govt) need to engage with the survivors of the fire (NB ONLY those who lived in Grenfell Tower, not any of their scumbag hangers-on) to work through the issues they face, but none of that can and should happen without the technical report on what actually happened.
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
The Davies report into the Aberfan disaster (with which this has some parallels) took 76 days to report and that was with the obfuscation of the National Coal Board.
Three months should be plenty.
I'd like to agree with that, but life has got a lot more complicated in recent decades. That said, an interim report that highlights general risks and standards should be possible within your timescale- indeed, within a couple of weeks of the fire there was a concerted effort to identify similar cladding in use elsewhere.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
I've never really worked out why richer older men get married for the second/third etc time...
Or indeed at all.
It's hard to see what the benefits of marriage to the one with the money. There seem to be only exposures and obligations. The law is socialist rather than sexist.
From the political side, the government (Local Authority and Central govt) need to engage with the survivors of the fire (NB ONLY those who lived in Grenfell Tower, not any of their scumbag hangers-on) to work through the issues they face, but none of that can and should happen without the technical report on what actually happened.
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
The Davies report into the Aberfan disaster (with which this has some parallels) took 76 days to report and that was with the obfuscation of the National Coal Board.
Three months should be plenty.
I'd like to agree with that, but life has got a lot more complicated in recent decades. That said, an interim report that highlights general risks and standards should be possible within your timescale- indeed, within a couple of weeks of the fire there was a concerted effort to identify similar cladding in use elsewhere.
Agree with that. IMO the final inquiry will be delayed until the authorities have completed their fingertip search of the building and know the number of fatalities.
I'd like to agree with that, but life has got a lot more complicated in recent decades. That said, an interim report that highlights general risks and standards should be possible within your timescale- indeed, within a couple of weeks of the fire there was a concerted effort to identify similar cladding in use elsewhere.
You'd better believe it !!
Local authorities everywhere, even though they are preparing for the big school capital project season, have been frantically checking buildings for cladding and looking back through records to see what cladding has been used, when it was installed, by whom and what kind of insulation was used.
Schools and other residential buildings are the top priority followed by other operational sites. It's an enormous job and mostly under the radar.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
Except that graph cuts out most of the time before we joined ERM and the vast majority of that graph shows us after we left ERM too.
Looking at a longer term graph its hard to draw your conclusion.
Yes - the turning point for inflation was 15% interest rates, which persisted for far too long in order to defend the £'s value within the ERM. Major's policy made matters worse and recovery started only when his policy was destroyed by the markets.
You will notice that during the period when we were in the ERM every move was down. It was only on Black Wednesday that there was a threat to raise them which was abandoned on the very same day. You are simply misinformed.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
He's very bitter about his ex-wives and life in general I think...
He's a lib dem.
I think anyone would be bitter who made it to John Cleese's age and reflected that, in your whole life, the party you support has never had a competent leader or a principled position.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
Except that graph cuts out most of the time before we joined ERM and the vast majority of that graph shows us after we left ERM too.
Looking at a longer term graph its hard to draw your conclusion.
Yes - the turning point for inflation was 15% interest rates, which persisted for far too long in order to defend the £'s value within the ERM. Major's policy made matters worse and recovery started only when his policy was destroyed by the markets.
You will notice that during the period when we were in the ERM every move was down. It was only on Black Wednesday that there was a threat to raise them which was abandoned on the very same day. You are simply misinformed.
He didn't say that rates were moved higher, he said that high rates persisted for too long. Your link doesn't change that.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
The most plausible way out of the mess is for the Tory Brexiteers to pull back from the abyss and admit their mistakes, reunifying the party as the pro-European force it was between Suez and Maastricht. Those who don't buy into this vision should be expelled so that the party doesn't repeat the mistake of harbouring a Kipper cuckoo in the nest.
I think the most plausible route towards sanity would be for Labour's pro-Europeans to split off and ally themselves with the Lib Dems. Then all it would take is for a few moderate Tories to rebel and bring down the government, a Vince Cable-led anti-Brexit alliance to win the ensuing General Election and Bob's your uncle! It'd all be sorted out in six months.
Then, once Trump's out of the White House, we can all get back to stitching the world economy together through TTIP, TPP etc.
O/T, one for Mr @JosiasJessop and his suggestion that an independent investigator such as the AAIB be responsible for the Grenfell Tower technical investigation.
I'm on holiday at the moment, and one of my reading list items was this, the AAIB report into the Shoreham Airshow accident in 2015. Eleven people were killed and thirteen injured.
The full report is a very long and dry but excellent read, given the nature of the accident and the implications for wider public policy and regulation. It's not afraid to address difficult questions at regulatory authorities and expect replies from them.
It's a model investigation that those investigating the Grenfell fire should be looking at carefully.
Thanks for that. I skimmed it a while back and have to agree: it's excellent, and the sort of work that should form the basis of the Grenfell Tower disaster, but won't.
We can only hope. We didn't expect the Chilcot inquiry to be anything other than a whitewash either.
You will notice that during the period when we were in the ERM every move was down. It was only on Black Wednesday that there was a threat to raise them which was abandoned on the very same day. You are simply misinformed.
He didn't say that rates were moved higher, he said that high rates persisted for too long. Your link doesn't change that.
"The turning point for inflation was 15% interest rates, which persisted for far too long in order to defend the £'s value within the ERM"
Please enlightened us precisely how long rates were kept at 15% to defend the value of the pound?
I think anyone would be bitter who made it to John Cleese's age and reflected that, in your whole life, the party you support has never had a competent leader or a principled position.
There writes a Tory loyalist..... or perhaps a Labourite...... Alice`s comment is real top quality humour.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
The most plausible way out of the mess is for the Tory Brexiteers to pull back from the abyss and admit their mistakes, reunifying the party as the pro-European force it was between Suez and Maastricht. Those who don't buy into this vision should be expelled so that the party doesn't repeat the mistake of harbouring a Kipper cuckoo in the nest.
I think the most plausible route towards sanity would be for Labour's pro-Europeans to split off and ally themselves with the Lib Dems. Then all it would take is for a few moderate Tories to rebel and bring down the government, a Vince Cable-led anti-Brexit alliance to win the ensuing General Election and Bob's your uncle! It'd all be sorted out in six months.
Then, once Trump's out of the White House, we can all get back to stitching the world economy together through TTIP, TPP etc.
The is a gaping hole ready to be filled by a new SDP formed of The LDs, Clarke, Soubry, Umunna, Miliband etc
Problem is they'll never win as the SDP. They need to take over their parties and make them the SDP.
Problem with that is both sides did it for 20 years and people had enough of it
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
Yes - the turning point for inflation was 15% interest rates, which persisted for far too long in order to defend the £'s value within the ERM. Major's policy made matters worse and recovery started only when his policy was destroyed by the markets.
You will notice that during the period when we were in the ERM every move was down. It was only on Black Wednesday that there was a threat to raise them which was abandoned on the very same day. You are simply misinformed.
Black Wednesday happened exactly because every interest rate move had been down. ERM membership required a minimum exchange rate equivalent to DM2.92 to the £. Every time the £ struggled up off that floor rates were cut because they were too high. Lamont was scolded about this by the EC, and told that the £ should be higher in its band, not at the bottom. If that meant 15% rates forever that was just our tough shit.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
The most plausible way out of the mess is for the Tory Brexiteers to pull back from the abyss and admit their mistakes, reunifying the party as the pro-European force it was between Suez and Maastricht. Those who don't buy into this vision should be expelled so that the party doesn't repeat the mistake of harbouring a Kipper cuckoo in the nest.
I think the most plausible route towards sanity would be for Labour's pro-Europeans to split off and ally themselves with the Lib Dems. Then all it would take is for a few moderate Tories to rebel and bring down the government, a Vince Cable-led anti-Brexit alliance to win the ensuing General Election and Bob's your uncle! It'd all be sorted out in six months.
Then, once Trump's out of the White House, we can all get back to stitching the world economy together through TTIP, TPP etc.
The problem with that scenario is that the Brexiteers will feel that Brexit was stolen from them and will never accept it. They need to have their feet held to the fire until even IDS is begging Jean-Claude Juncker to let us stay in the EU.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Except Michael Howard who left with some dignity
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Plus Major's other successes:
Withdrawal from the Exchange Rate Mechanism so sterling no longer had to track the Euro.
Government deficit reduction.
Recovery in growth.
Reduced unemployment.
Winning the Gulf War.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
Yes - the turning point for inflation was 15% interest rates, which persisted for far too long in order to defend the £'s value within the ERM. Major's policy made matters worse and recovery started only when his policy was destroyed by the markets.
You will notice that during the period when we were in the ERM every move was down. It was only on Black Wednesday that there was a threat to raise them which was abandoned on the very same day. You are simply misinformed.
Black Wednesday happened exactly because every interest rate move had been down. ERM membership required a minimum exchange rate equivalent to DM2.92 to the £. Every time the £ struggled up off that floor rates were cut because they were too high. Lamont was scolded about this by the EC, and told that the £ should be higher in its band, not at the bottom. If that meant 15% rates forever that was just our tough shit.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
I think the most plausible route towards sanity would be for Labour's pro-Europeans to split off and ally themselves with the Lib Dems. Then all it would take is for a few moderate Tories to rebel and bring down the government, a Vince Cable-led anti-Brexit alliance to win the ensuing General Election and Bob's your uncle! It'd all be sorted out in six months. Then, once Trump's out of the White House, we can all get back to stitching the world economy together through TTIP, TPP etc.
The problem with that scenario is that the Brexiteers will feel that Brexit was stolen from them and will never accept it. They need to have their feet held to the fire until even IDS is begging Jean-Claude Juncker to let us stay in the EU.
The problem with that scenario is that, until the Brexiteers have been tortured enough, the rest of the country, the vast majority, will have to suffer the consequences of their folly.
I think anyone would be bitter who made it to John Cleese's age and reflected that, in your whole life, the party you support has never had a competent leader or a principled position.
There writes a Tory loyalist..... or perhaps a Labourite...... Alice`s comment is real top quality humour.
Mention how wonderful a property tax would be and stand well back...
I think we can quickly figure out on which side of the political fence she (or he) sits.
It is a diabolical combination of Basil Fawlty's "Damn Good Thrashing", Alan Partridge's "Smell My Cheese" & David Brent's "You're not going to lose your job"
I was saddened to see a very elderly John Cleese re-enacting that scene for a Specsavers ad. Clearly times are hard for him.
From the political side, the government (Local Authority and Central govt) need to engage with the survivors of the fire (NB ONLY those who lived in Grenfell Tower, not any of their scumbag hangers-on) to work through the issues they face, but none of that can and should happen without the technical report on what actually happened.
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
The Davies report into the Aberfan disaster (with which this has some parallels) took 76 days to report and that was with the obfuscation of the National Coal Board.
Three months should be plenty.
I'd like to agree with that, but life has got a lot more complicated in recent decades. That said, an interim report that highlights general risks and standards should be possible within your timescale- indeed, within a couple of weeks of the fire there was a concerted effort to identify similar cladding in use elsewhere.
Agree with that. IMO the final inquiry will be delayed until the authorities have completed their fingertip search of the building and know the number of fatalities.
Yes, and it's quite likely there will never be an exact number of fatalities, nor a full list of those who died (for a number of reasons - undocumented immigrants not having accessible dental records for example). The forensic search will probably take until the end of the year at the earliest, before they can hand the tower over to the demolition team.
As I've said before, and was mentioned in the press over the weekend, I hope that all those workers involved on site are getting sufficient counselling - it's going to be quite horrible in there.
So, the moral of the story is being Conservative leader means Conservative MPs will destroy you one day?
Pretty much.
Sir John Major's departure was quite dignified as well...
The way he accepted his shellacking from the electorate was about the only thing he got right after between 1992 and 1997...
NI peace agreement and the National Lottery too.
Unfortunately, Major's policy was to stay in the ERM. It was the City that got us out. All Major's other economic "achievements" happened in spite, not because, of his policy, and over its dead body.
Historic data suggests that the turning point in controlling inflation was joining the ERM. Major's policy was a success.
Black Wednesday happened exactly because every interest rate move had been down. ERM membership required a minimum exchange rate equivalent to DM2.92 to the £. Every time the £ struggled up off that floor rates were cut because they were too high. Lamont was scolded about this by the EC, and told that the £ should be higher in its band, not at the bottom. If that meant 15% rates forever that was just our tough shit.
Precisely how long did we have 15% rates?
I'll give you that william. Rates went to 14.75% in mid-1989, and were there for around 15 months. They were raised to that level to reduce RPI inflation. They were cut to 13.75% at the Conservative conference, the day we entered the ERM. They were at 10% the day we left.
Relative to inflation, which the bout of 15% rates contained, they should have been around 6% throughout. They fell to this level very rapidly thereafter with no recurrence of inflation, which Major was adamant would be the result. The economy then recovered, which it was showing no signs of doing with rates at 10%.
Had we not been pursuing an exchange rate policy, we would never have had the Lawson inflation of 1988-9 in the first place, and if we had done so nonetheless, we would not have had interest rates 4 points too high for two years.
I think the most plausible route towards sanity would be for Labour's pro-Europeans to split off and ally themselves with the Lib Dems. Then all it would take is for a few moderate Tories to rebel and bring down the government, a Vince Cable-led anti-Brexit alliance to win the ensuing General Election and Bob's your uncle! It'd all be sorted out in six months. Then, once Trump's out of the White House, we can all get back to stitching the world economy together through TTIP, TPP etc.
The problem with that scenario is that the Brexiteers will feel that Brexit was stolen from them and will never accept it. They need to have their feet held to the fire until even IDS is begging Jean-Claude Juncker to let us stay in the EU.
The problem with that scenario is that, until the Brexiteers have been tortured enough, the rest of the country, the vast majority, will have to suffer the consequences of their folly.
I'm confident a sufficient level of discomfort can be reached before we actually leave the EU.
A key factor will be how Liam Fox is seen to be doing. If 'Empire 2.0' is off the table I think a lot of people will realise their vision will not become reality.
From the political side, the government (Local Authority and Central govt) need to engage with the survivors of the fire (NB ONLY those who lived in Grenfell Tower, not any of their scumbag hangers-on) to work through the issues they face, but none of that can and should happen without the technical report on what actually happened.
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
You're saying that the survivors are fine for now, and shouldn't expect more ("none of that can and should happen...") until the technical report is complete in 20 months or so? I'm not being political when I say that this isn't a reasonable way to address their issues - they are in a total mess though not actually on the streets, with traumatised children and adults, separation from familiar environment, problems of work, childcare and medium-term housing, total loss of possessions, visa issues and much more I know someone who has been working closely with them and they are really not in a position to wait for 20 months. The fact that there are all kinds of people who've tried to attach themselves to the disaster shouldn't make us tire of helping the people who really were in it.
But perhaps you meant that their personal issues should be addressed now and long-term political and fire regulation issues should await the technical inquiry? If so. I agree.
The is a gaping hole ready to be filled by a new SDP formed of The LDs, Clarke, Soubry, Umunna, Miliband etc
Problem is they'll never win as the SDP. They need to take over their parties and make them the SDP.
Problem with that is both sides did it for 20 years and people had enough of it
That would require all those people to choose between two options.
1/ Leave your existing party, form another one, renounce hope of ministerial office or of being prime minister and based on principle oppose something the electorate you despise voted against a year ago.
2/ Agree with your leader and hope for crumbs from the table.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
The most plausible way out of the mess is for the Tory Brexiteers to pull back from the abyss and admit their mistakes, reunifying the party as the pro-European force it was between Suez and Maastricht. Those who don't buy into this vision should be expelled so that the party doesn't repeat the mistake of harbouring a Kipper cuckoo in the nest.
I think the most plausible route towards sanity would be for Labour's pro-Europeans to split off and ally themselves with the Lib Dems. Then all it would take is for a few moderate Tories to rebel and bring down the government, a Vince Cable-led anti-Brexit alliance to win the ensuing General Election and Bob's your uncle! It'd all be sorted out in six months.
Then, once Trump's out of the White House, we can all get back to stitching the world economy together through TTIP, TPP etc.
The problem with that scenario is that the Brexiteers will feel that Brexit was stolen from them and will never accept it. They need to have their feet held to the fire until even IDS is begging Jean-Claude Juncker to let us stay in the EU.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
Has the public been captured by those same "cabals" then, since they awarded the two main parties with their highest combined share of the vote in nearly 50 years?
The Conservatives collected a very sizeable anti-Labour vote and Labour collected a very sizeable anti-Conservative vote. If you were horrified at the thought of the hard right, you only had one real option. If you were horrified at the thought of the hard left, you only had one real option.
Me? I spoiled my ballot paper.
What's the point of walking to the polling station and then spoil your ballot paper ? Did you need some exercise ?
The is a gaping hole ready to be filled by a new SDP formed of The LDs, Clarke, Soubry, Umunna, Miliband etc
Problem is they'll never win as the SDP. They need to take over their parties and make them the SDP.
Problem with that is both sides did it for 20 years and people had enough of it
That would require all those people to choose between two options.
1/ Leave your existing party, form another one, renounce hope of ministerial office or of being prime minister and based on principle oppose something the electorate you despise voted against a year ago.
2/ Agree with your leader and hope for crumbs from the table.
It's a tough call.
Why do you assume people who supported REMAIN "despise the electorate" ? That's a pretty crass and simplistic choice of words.
In 'you couldn't make it up news', Liam Fox says that global trading rules 'are not an external imposition', but have been 'largely shaped and codified by the work of successive US and British governments'.
Is Sir Kier about to abandon ship? Would make things easier for Jezza to support the "hard" Brexit he wants...
Except the vast bulk of LAB voters are totally opposed to the Leaver Luddites who are trying to destroy the UK economy. Corbyn is on dangerous ground
I actually think Jezza's on to something. If he engineers a hard Brexit, then blaming the baleful consequences on the Tories and capitalism will be child's play. Amid the ensuing economic Armageddon and societal collapse he can them foment his socialist uprising. The British Right and the eurosceptic movement have been led by the nose all the way. They are but pawns in Jezza's game.
The two main parties have both been captured by cabals who prioritise something other than the economic wellbeing of the nation. The country has entered a downward spiral for the foreseeable future.
Has the public been captured by those same "cabals" then, since they awarded the two main parties with their highest combined share of the vote in nearly 50 years?
The Conservatives collected a very sizeable anti-Labour vote and Labour collected a very sizeable anti-Conservative vote. If you were horrified at the thought of the hard right, you only had one real option. If you were horrified at the thought of the hard left, you only had one real option.
Me? I spoiled my ballot paper.
What's the point of walking to the polling station and then spoil your ballot paper ? Did you need some exercise ?
If you need to ask that question then I'm not sure you'd understand the answer.
I've walked to a polling station to intentionally spoil my ballot too.
From the political side, the government (Local Authority and Central govt) need to engage with the survivors of the fire (NB ONLY those who lived in Grenfell Tower, not any of their scumbag hangers-on) to work through the issues they face, but none of that can and should happen without the technical report on what actually happened.
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
You're saying that the survivors are fine for now, and shouldn't expect more ("none of that can and should happen...") until the technical report is complete in 20 months or so? I'm not being political when I say that this isn't a reasonable way to address their issues - they are in a total mess though not actually on the streets, with traumatised children and adults, separation from familiar environment, problems of work, childcare and medium-term housing, total loss of possessions, visa issues and much more I know someone who has been working closely with them and they are really not in a position to wait for 20 months. The fact that there are all kinds of people who've tried to attach themselves to the disaster shouldn't make us tire of helping the people who really were in it.
But perhaps you meant that their personal issues should be addressed now and long-term political and fire regulation issues should await the technical inquiry? If so. I agree.
Your last paragraph, Nick.
We already have charities, social workers and local authorities who can deal with the immediate problems on the ground, and AIUI (albeit from miles away) they have reacted well and continue to do so.
The political and regulatory response should wait for a comprehensive technical enquiry, lest we end up with another Dangerous Dogs Act as a result of politicians trying to pre-empt the facts of the case in the face of "public opinion" driven by protest groups.
The is a gaping hole ready to be filled by a new SDP formed of The LDs, Clarke, Soubry, Umunna, Miliband etc
Problem is they'll never win as the SDP. They need to take over their parties and make them the SDP.
Problem with that is both sides did it for 20 years and people had enough of it
That would require all those people to choose between two options.
1/ Leave your existing party, form another one, renounce hope of ministerial office or of being prime minister and based on principle oppose something the electorate you despise voted against a year ago.
2/ Agree with your leader and hope for crumbs from the table.
It's a tough call.
Why do you assume people who supported REMAIN "despise the electorate" ? That's a pretty crass and simplistic choice of words.
Pure Daily Mail nonsense.
It's a prevalent enough point of view to be a fair generalisation.
Conversely, Mr. Meeks is of the view that racism won the vote for Leave, and that Leave voters are morally equivalent to Confederate slave owners. We have also repeatedly seen claims that people voted Leave because they were ignorant and stupid.
From these facts, I am simply making the very, very minor leap to the assumption that Remain voters such as those cited probably do indeed despise ignorant, stupid racists with shameful views. So why would such people as Umunna and Soubry chuck in what I am sure they regard as their promising political career because of people like that?
The is a gaping hole ready to be filled by a new SDP formed of The LDs, Clarke, Soubry, Umunna, Miliband etc
Problem is they'll never win as the SDP. They need to take over their parties and make them the SDP.
Problem with that is both sides did it for 20 years and people had enough of it
That would require all those people to choose between two options.
1/ Leave your existing party, form another one, renounce hope of ministerial office or of being prime minister and based on principle oppose something the electorate you despise voted against a year ago.
2/ Agree with your leader and hope for crumbs from the table.
It's a tough call.
Why do you assume people who supported REMAIN "despise the electorate" ? That's a pretty crass and simplistic choice of words.
Pure Daily Mail nonsense.
It's a prevalent enough point of view to be a fair generalisation.
Conversely, Mr. Meeks is of the view that racism won the vote for Leave, and that Leave voters are morally equivalent to Confederate slave owners. We have also repeatedly seen claims that people voted Leave because they were ignorant and stupid.
From these facts, I am simply making the very, very minor leap to the assumption that Remain voters such as those cited probably do indeed despise ignorant, stupid racists with shameful views. So why would such people as Umunna and Soubry chuck in what I am sure they regard as their promising political career because of people like that?
The modern equivalent of Confederate Slave owners are the owners of big businesses whose immigrant staff live 16 to a flat in Brent
Comments
If you expect your opinion to be accepted as an unchallengeable fact, then perhaps you shouldn't debate with others.
I come on this site to exchange views and debate. I expect my views to get challenged.
Have a nice day.
From the preceding sentence:
"I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.”
Excessively is the key word. If I say - I don't want to pay an excessive amount for a new car - it doesn't mean I expect a new car for free.
To be extra clear he then, in the same interview, went on to suggest other ways of reducing the debt burden.
To be extra extra clear it was then not in the Labour manifesto.
I've had dealings with Mishcons in the area of probate litigation, where they have been aggressive long past the point where it become counter-productive.
If Brexit is personal for Major, it's easy to see why.
I won't touch him, or his firm, again.
What the public are saying is that they prioritise jobs and trade over a very hard line on immigration, if it comes down to a binary trade-off.
In reality, they probably want a bit of common sense on immigration, and as free a trading relationship as possible with the EU, without being governed by them.
Looking at a longer term graph its hard to draw your conclusion.
http://www.economicshelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/inflation-45.png
On any other subject, Mr Clarke was one of the best Chancellors in living memory, and Mr Brown one of the worst. We are still £50bn a year a debt as a result of Brown's spending splurges from a decade ago.
You are letting your emotions guide your politics.
This is the man who produces David Attenborough's TV documentaries, Fergus Beeley:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvharVxKYu0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Rail_Control_Periods#Control_Period_5_.28CP5.29:_2014-2019
Very excitable isn't he? I think he needs to get to his GP and get some Beta-Blockers before something bursts...
The strange thing then is you refuse to accept that people said Corbyn would be a disaster because he alienated so many people Labour needed to reach. That isn't really debatable, just read the contemporary posts/newspaper or PB articles
Jezza is actually a political mastermind.
Or do Labour think front benchers should take outside work?
Straight talking, honest politics.
London Bridge station redevelopment
Completion of Borders Railway
East West Rail Link from Oxford to Milton Keynes Central via Bletchley
Electrification from London Paddington to Bristol, Cardiff, Oxford and Newbury
Electrification from Bedford to Kettering and Corby
Electrification of Transpennine line from Manchester to Leeds
Electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking Line
Electrification of Leeds - York and Selby lines
Electrification and station redevelopment Bromsgrove railway station[3]
Reading, Ascot to Waterloo 10-car platform lengthening.
The Streatham Resignalling Project (As a part of the Victoria Phase II Project)
The Sutton-Wimbledon Project (As a part of the Victoria Phase II Project)
There are many smaller project as well. 'Smaller' being relative: as an example, NR are spending £200 million in the environs of Derby station next year. As another, Rochester station was moved (I think the latter was in CP5).
NR have really mucked up. Some of the blame must also fall on their contractors, but NR's planning for some of the schemes was utterly incompetent.
I'm on holiday at the moment, and one of my reading list items was this, the AAIB report into the Shoreham Airshow accident in 2015. Eleven people were killed and thirteen injured.
https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aircraft-accident-report-aar-1-2017-g-bxfi-22-august-2015#download-report
The full report is a very long and dry but excellent read, given the nature of the accident and the implications for wider public policy and regulation. It's not afraid to address difficult questions at regulatory authorities and expect replies from them.
It's a model investigation that those investigating the Grenfell fire should be looking at carefully.
The top bods of Balfour Beatty and so forth must enjoy the arrangement tremendously.
Me? I spoiled my ballot paper.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3452469/The-time-paid-sex-cost-20-million-John-Cleese-t-help-continue-make-jokes-costly-divorce-wife-Alyce-Faye-Eichelberger.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsR4Nx-ELgc
He's very bitter about his ex-wives and life in general I think...
The immediate issue of rehousing displaced people seems to have been dealt with quickly, which is as much as can be expected in the timescale. Note that the AAIB took 20 months to write the Shoreham report, albeit with three interim reports highlighting significant issues it came across. This timescale is normal for something so complicated.
So you can either order new trains that will only be used for a few years, or scrap the electrification.
It's an absolute and utter mess. And meanwhile Hitachi are rubbing their hands in glee. The IEP project is another disaster in the making.
Three months should be plenty.
I recall Charlie Sheen, having been caught by a kiss and tell from a hooker:
"I don't pay them for sex, I pay them to leave in the morning"
Way cheaper than marrying for the third time, surely?
The Conservatives and Labour remain split from stem to stern on the issue - the Conservatives can't decide and run the whole gamut from BINO to crashing out to WTO rules while Labour is similarly split.
The result of the negotiation will be fascinating - will both sides be able to hold united lines once the proposed Treaty is published ?
At the moment they seem to be Conservative supporters not students...
I promise you - if Labour drop the pledge to scrap tuition fees you will hear about it from actual students.
It's hard to see what the benefits of marriage to the one with the money. There seem to be only exposures and obligations. The law is socialist rather than sexist.
Local authorities everywhere, even though they are preparing for the big school capital project season, have been frantically checking buildings for cladding and looking back through records to see what cladding has been used, when it was installed, by whom and what kind of insulation was used.
Schools and other residential buildings are the top priority followed by other operational sites. It's an enormous job and mostly under the radar.
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/boeapps/iadb/Repo.asp
You will notice that during the period when we were in the ERM every move was down. It was only on Black Wednesday that there was a threat to raise them which was abandoned on the very same day. You are simply misinformed.
Then, once Trump's out of the White House, we can all get back to stitching the world economy together through TTIP, TPP etc.
Please enlightened us precisely how long rates were kept at 15% to defend the value of the pound?
Problem is they'll never win as the SDP. They need to take over their parties and make them the SDP.
Problem with that is both sides did it for 20 years and people had enough of it
David Davis: 5 / 6
Jacob Rees-Mogg: 8.2 / 9.6
Boris Johnson 9.4 / 16
Philip Hammond: 9.6 / 16.5
Amber Rudd: 12.5 / 16
Ruth Davidson: 18 / 20
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125574963
I think we can quickly figure out on which side of the political fence she (or he) sits.
As I've said before, and was mentioned in the press over the weekend, I hope that all those workers involved on site are getting sufficient counselling - it's going to be quite horrible in there.
Relative to inflation, which the bout of 15% rates contained, they should have been around 6% throughout. They fell to this level very rapidly thereafter with no recurrence of inflation, which Major was adamant would be the result. The economy then recovered, which it was showing no signs of doing with rates at 10%.
Had we not been pursuing an exchange rate policy, we would never have had the Lawson inflation of 1988-9 in the first place, and if we had done so nonetheless, we would not have had interest rates 4 points too high for two years.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/24/charliegards-parents-prepare-last-ditch-battle-could-decide/
Hopefully now the parents and doctors can come together and say goodbye to Charlie.
A key factor will be how Liam Fox is seen to be doing. If 'Empire 2.0' is off the table I think a lot of people will realise their vision will not become reality.
But perhaps you meant that their personal issues should be addressed now and long-term political and fire regulation issues should await the technical inquiry? If so. I agree.
1/ Leave your existing party, form another one, renounce hope of ministerial office or of being prime minister and based on principle oppose something the electorate you despise voted against a year ago.
2/ Agree with your leader and hope for crumbs from the table.
It's a tough call.
http://commentcentral.co.uk/a-quick-uk-eu-free-trade-deal-is-possible/
Pure Daily Mail nonsense.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/889482486081867778
I've walked to a polling station to intentionally spoil my ballot too.
We already have charities, social workers and local authorities who can deal with the immediate problems on the ground, and AIUI (albeit from miles away) they have reacted well and continue to do so.
The political and regulatory response should wait for a comprehensive technical enquiry, lest we end up with another Dangerous Dogs Act as a result of politicians trying to pre-empt the facts of the case in the face of "public opinion" driven by protest groups.
Conversely, Mr. Meeks is of the view that racism won the vote for Leave, and that Leave voters are morally equivalent to Confederate slave owners. We have also repeatedly seen claims that people voted Leave because they were ignorant and stupid.
From these facts, I am simply making the very, very minor leap to the assumption that Remain voters such as those cited probably do indeed despise ignorant, stupid racists with shameful views. So why would such people as Umunna and Soubry chuck in what I am sure they regard as their promising political career because of people like that?