Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Remembering Mark Senior – poster on PB 2004-2017

24

Comments

  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,056
    On then to yesterday's German election which seems not to have caused much disturbance in the morning financial markets so far.

    The worst result for the SPD in modern German history and the second worst for the CDU/CSU leaving the duopoly or GroKo as they are called languishing at 53-54%.

    With the SPD choosing, not surprisingly, to move into Opposition, the options for a Governing bloc are limited to the Union plus presumably the FDP (and that was a fine result for Germany's Liberals) either as a minority or with the tacit support of the Greens. In theory, the Union/FDP could be voted down by other parties but it's hard to see AfD, die Linke and the SPD all joining together.

    Is this Merkel's last election ? You'd be inclined to think so and start thinking about the successor for 2021 and how that person may wish to deal with the UK through the likely transitional period.
  • RIP Mark Senior - I used to disagree with him a lot, but sad to know he won't be with us any more :(
  • I see the Labour Party won't even be debating Brexit.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    edited September 2017
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    A reminder Uber is fighting on two regulatory fronts. Arguably much more important than the TfL licensing decision is this week's appeal on the employment status of it's drivers. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/sep/24/uber-faces-double-battle-against-ban-and-scrutiny-of-hiring-practices

    Three and a half million Londoners depend on Uber? How many people do the Uber-tweeters think live in London? Uber does provide a good service and is particularly favoured by women, at least where I work, but it is easy to be disruptive when you do not follow any inconvenient laws or regulations. Black cabs are a red herring: Uber in London is mainly a great way to book minicabs.
    London reconnections has a very complete article (as it always does) about the Uber issues from both sides see https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/
    That’s a very good article indeed, well researched and does a brilliant job of explaining what the debate is actually about.
    Agreed. A really excellent article. Khan's position seems much more comprehensible now.
    Many people have been taken in by Uber’s slick PR campaign on this one, rather like people were taken in initially by Ryanair’s claims that they were cancelling flights so pilots could go on holiday.

    In other news, US minicab app company Lyft are looking at their first international expansion - in London. They’re basically Uber but without the evil.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/09/23/uber-arch-rival-lyft-holds-talks-transport-london-plots-global/
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,056
    I suggested yesterday returning to the terrace of the National Liberal Club next summer for a soirée in Mark's memory.
  • DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    Meanwhile, on planet Batshit Insane:
    twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/912029997879218177

    I'm waiting for the all-black welsh disabled woman trades unionist shortlist. :smiley:
    Surely there is no way that an all black shortlist is going to be acceptable in Wales?
    A dspute that will dragon and on and on....
    Your Powys are weak, old man!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520

    I see the Labour Party won't even be debating Brexit.

    Why would they want to debate Brexit? They are doing a pretty good job of being all things to all men on the subject at the moment. Why on Earth should the Opposition commit to a policy on the biggest issue of the day, and indeed of this Parliament? < / facetious >
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    A reminder Uber is fighting on two regulatory fronts. Arguably much more important than the TfL licensing decision is this week's appeal on the employment status of it's drivers. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/sep/24/uber-faces-double-battle-against-ban-and-scrutiny-of-hiring-practices

    Three and a half million Londoners depend on Uber? How many people do the Uber-tweeters think live in London? Uber does provide a good service and is particularly favoured by women, at least where I work, but it is easy to be disruptive when you do not follow any inconvenient laws or regulations. Black cabs are a red herring: Uber in London is mainly a great way to book minicabs.
    London reconnections has a very complete article (as it always does) about the Uber issues from both sides see https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/
    That’s a very good article indeed, well researched and does a brilliant job of explaining what the debate is actually about.
    Agreed. A really excellent article. Khan's position seems much more comprehensible now.
    But the nub of it is are they employees or self-employed. I doubt (but actually have no idea) whether the thousands of minicab firms' drivers are employees. Perhaps they are. If so, then Uber should fall in line; if not then not.

    Plus all I ever hear from Uber drivers is how they like the flexibility, can work when they want, are in charge of their days. I wonder how indicative of the whole number of Uber drivers are the two who brought the case.

    Plus if they succeed and Uber is shut down, then I'm sure they will count it as a huge personal victory.

    PS - very sorry to hear about Mark Senior; he to me seemed to be one of the grown-ups on the site.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,215
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    A reminder Uber is fighting on two regulatory fronts. Arguably much more important than the TfL licensing decision is this week's appeal on the employment status of it's drivers. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/sep/24/uber-faces-double-battle-against-ban-and-scrutiny-of-hiring-practices

    Three and a half million Londoners depend on Uber? How many people do the Uber-tweeters think live in London? Uber does provide a good service and is particularly favoured by women, at least where I work, but it is easy to be disruptive when you do not follow any inconvenient laws or regulations. Black cabs are a red herring: Uber in London is mainly a great way to book minicabs.
    London reconnections has a very complete article (as it always does) about the Uber issues from both sides see https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/
    That’s a very good article indeed, well researched and does a brilliant job of explaining what the debate is actually about.
    Agreed. A really excellent article. Khan's position seems much more comprehensible now.
    Many people have been taken in by Uber’s slick PR campaign on this one, rather like people were taken in initially by Ryanair’s claims that they were cancelling flights so pilots could go on holiday.

    In other news, US minicab app company Lyft are looking at their first international expansion - in London. They’re basically Uber but without the evil.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/09/23/uber-arch-rival-lyft-holds-talks-transport-london-plots-global/
    The ,most interesting bits (for me) were the greyball allegations, which I find truly remarkable, and the economics. It seems remarkable that Uber are investing so heavily into so many different markets at the same time. It shows considerable resources.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    I confess I don't know a great deal about uber to know if they are an especially nasty company, but then Google and amazon are pieces of shit i hear and it doesn't stop me relying on them, so it comes down to if someone can do ubers job bether than them.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406
    stodge said:

    On then to yesterday's German election which seems not to have caused much disturbance in the morning financial markets so far.

    The worst result for the SPD in modern German history and the second worst for the CDU/CSU leaving the duopoly or GroKo as they are called languishing at 53-54%.

    With the SPD choosing, not surprisingly, to move into Opposition, the options for a Governing bloc are limited to the Union plus presumably the FDP (and that was a fine result for Germany's Liberals) either as a minority or with the tacit support of the Greens. In theory, the Union/FDP could be voted down by other parties but it's hard to see AfD, die Linke and the SPD all joining together.

    Is this Merkel's last election ? You'd be inclined to think so and start thinking about the successor for 2021 and how that person may wish to deal with the UK through the likely transitional period.

    She is 63. Have to admit I thought she would be older before I looked it up.
    67 next time around - I certainly don't think you can rule her out on age.


  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406
    DavidL said:



    The ,most interesting bits (for me) were the greyball allegations, which I find truly remarkable, and the economics. It seems remarkable that Uber are investing so heavily into so many different markets at the same time. It shows considerable resources.

    I do wonder how far there is a link between very low interest rates in most of the Western world, and what seems to me to be crazy valuations of companies that aren't anywhere near profitability - but seem to be able to raise money from investors extremely easily.

    Uber lost over $3bn in 2016 on $6.5bn revenue.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    One for @Morris_Dancer:
    Aston Martin to be Red Bull title sponsor from next year
    https://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-aston/aston-martin-returns-to-formula-one/36799
  • DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,439
    edited September 2017
    Very nice tribute from Mike.

    Thoughts and condolences with Mark's friends and family.

    RIP Mark Senior.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    rkrkrk said:

    stodge said:

    On then to yesterday's German election which seems not to have caused much disturbance in the morning financial markets so far.

    The worst result for the SPD in modern German history and the second worst for the CDU/CSU leaving the duopoly or GroKo as they are called languishing at 53-54%.

    With the SPD choosing, not surprisingly, to move into Opposition, the options for a Governing bloc are limited to the Union plus presumably the FDP (and that was a fine result for Germany's Liberals) either as a minority or with the tacit support of the Greens. In theory, the Union/FDP could be voted down by other parties but it's hard to see AfD, die Linke and the SPD all joining together.

    Is this Merkel's last election ? You'd be inclined to think so and start thinking about the successor for 2021 and how that person may wish to deal with the UK through the likely transitional period.

    She is 63. Have to admit I thought she would be older before I looked it up.
    67 next time around - I certainly don't think you can rule her out on age.


    Two or three of my German contacts with whom I have spoken on the election have independently thought she has already served for long enough suggesting there has been a hollowing out of talent below and successors are hard to see, but continuation is sub optimal now and not acceptable next time.
  • stodge said:

    I suggested yesterday returning to the terrace of the National Liberal Club next summer for a soirée in Mark's memory.

    A good idea if someone can take on the job of organisation.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    I was taken aback that the bbc report commentary went so far as to use the word disaster - the overall tone has not been close to that bad.
  • On topic, very saddened to hear of Mark's death, and a fitting final post from him, of Lib Dem success and sticking one in the eye of Tories.

    I have to say I was surprised to find that Mark was as old as he was (I don't know exactly but when news of his passing was posted on here, I had a quick google and in another post on another site, he said he'd been a Liberal / successor-party member since 1966 (IIRC), and an active support since 1962, so I expect he must have been into his 70s at least. He never gave that impression here: his vigour in debate was that of a much younger man.

    Will I miss him? Yes. He could be annoying, spiky and at times, downright rude, but he was knowledgeable, insightful and ever-optimistic about the Lib Dems' prospects, which even for those not of his tribe, is an essential feature for those who help to make democracy work. RIP, Mark.
  • DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    2nd election this year? Another blow to May's Brexit nonsense, I mean, cunning plan.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,301
    Another General Election in Japan coming up.

    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/912243921111146497
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    That sounds like it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that we may get a second election, or an unstable minority coalition relying on others for every vote in Parliament.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    That sounds like it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that we may get a second election, or an unstable minority coalition relying on others for every vote in Parliament.
    Out of interest, when was the last time Germany had an election before the full term had run?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Very sorry to hear of Marks passing. I wrote the anti A/V thread header against his pro back in the day and tbf he'd pretty much convinced me by the end of it. Rest in peace and I hope wherever you are there are by elections to enjoy.
  • philiph said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    That sounds like it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that we may get a second election, or an unstable minority coalition relying on others for every vote in Parliament.
    Out of interest, when was the last time Germany had an election before the full term had run?
    2005 when Merkel first became Chancellor.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,295
    RIP Mark. And Roger is correct about there once being a photo posted here.

    Mark was once a skilled pub sports player - might have been pool or darts - and he and his local team won a competition (I guess must have been around 2006/7?) and provided a link to the newspaper photo. He looked the embodiment of geniality and good humour.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:


    London reconnections has a very complete article (as it always does) about the Uber issues from both sides see https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/

    That’s a very good article indeed, well researched and does a brilliant job of explaining what the debate is actually about.
    Agreed. A really excellent article. Khan's position seems much more comprehensible now.
    Many people have been taken in by Uber’s slick PR campaign on this one, rather like people were taken in initially by Ryanair’s claims that they were cancelling flights so pilots could go on holiday.

    In other news, US minicab app company Lyft are looking at their first international expansion - in London. They’re basically Uber but without the evil.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/09/23/uber-arch-rival-lyft-holds-talks-transport-london-plots-global/
    The ,most interesting bits (for me) were the greyball allegations, which I find truly remarkable, and the economics. It seems remarkable that Uber are investing so heavily into so many different markets at the same time. It shows considerable resources.
    There's a long history of the evil stuff, yet they seem to have hoodwinked a lot of Silicon Valley types into throwing money down the pit.

    https://yro.slashdot.org/story/17/09/08/2015210/uber-faces-fbi-probe-over-program-targeting-rival-lyft
    https://yro.slashdot.org/story/17/08/30/220211/uber-says-itll-stop-tracking-riders-after-theyre-dropped-off
    https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/17/08/03/2124211/uber-knowingly-leased-unsafe-cars-to-drivers-says-report
    https://yro.slashdot.org/story/17/06/28/2037203/equal-rights-center-sues-uber-for-denying-equal-access-to-people-who-use-wheelchairs
    https://yro.slashdot.org/story/17/06/14/2021219/federal-regulators-are-investigating-uber-over-privacy-violations
    https://tech.slashdot.org/story/17/06/06/1824234/more-than-20-employees-fired-at-uber-in-sexual-harassment-investigation
    https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/17/05/30/1943256/uber-fires-executive-accused-of-stealing-googles-self-driving-car-secrets
    https://news.slashdot.org/story/17/05/23/2116216/uber-plans-millions-in-back-pay-after-shorting-nyc-drivers
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    philiph said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    That sounds like it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that we may get a second election, or an unstable minority coalition relying on others for every vote in Parliament.
    Out of interest, when was the last time Germany had an election before the full term had run?
    To answer my own question after the 2002 to 2005 session.

    RIP Mark, your ability to pluck out local information way over and beyond the raw data was astounding and will be missed by all here.
  • rkrkrk said:

    stodge said:

    On then to yesterday's German election which seems not to have caused much disturbance in the morning financial markets so far.

    The worst result for the SPD in modern German history and the second worst for the CDU/CSU leaving the duopoly or GroKo as they are called languishing at 53-54%.

    With the SPD choosing, not surprisingly, to move into Opposition, the options for a Governing bloc are limited to the Union plus presumably the FDP (and that was a fine result for Germany's Liberals) either as a minority or with the tacit support of the Greens. In theory, the Union/FDP could be voted down by other parties but it's hard to see AfD, die Linke and the SPD all joining together.

    Is this Merkel's last election ? You'd be inclined to think so and start thinking about the successor for 2021 and how that person may wish to deal with the UK through the likely transitional period.

    She is 63. Have to admit I thought she would be older before I looked it up.
    67 next time around - I certainly don't think you can rule her out on age.


    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.
  • Interesting thread exchange on State Aid.

    https://twitter.com/nickmacpherson2/status/911959448343728129
  • eekeek Posts: 28,784
    Sandpit said:

    One for @Morris_Dancer:
    Aston Martin to be Red Bull title sponsor from next year
    https://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-aston/aston-martin-returns-to-formula-one/36799

    That's missing a lot of background which Joe Saward's blog can fill you in on. Basically Red Bull are looking at leaving F1 over the next few years...
  • 3/4 of Labour voters want 2nd referendum. Meanwhile, Corbyn wants out of Single Market as he thinks it will stop him nationalising water companies without paying.
  • Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    That sounds like it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that we may get a second election, or an unstable minority coalition relying on others for every vote in Parliament.
    Both have to be realistic possibilities. Indeed, they're not mutually exclusive: a minority coalition (or the failure to agree a coalition at all, if the CDU decide that a minority deal with FDP or Greens wouldn't be worth it, and a majority Jamaica or SPD deal can't be struck) could well lead to another election within a year.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,689
    My condolences to his family and friends. As a long time lurker and occasional poster, I always appreciated his contributions. There is no greater thing you can have done with a life than to be missed as you leave it.
  • dr_spyn said:

    Another General Election in Japan coming up.

    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/912243921111146497

    Bit worrying with the NK situation.
  • Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    A reminder Uber is fighting on two regulatory fronts. Arguably much more important than the TfL licensing decision is this week's appeal on the employment status of it's drivers. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/sep/24/uber-faces-double-battle-against-ban-and-scrutiny-of-hiring-practices

    Three and a half million Londoners depend on Uber? How many people do the Uber-tweeters think live in London? Uber does provide a good service and is particularly favoured by women, at least where I work, but it is easy to be disruptive when you do not follow any inconvenient laws or regulations. Black cabs are a red herring: Uber in London is mainly a great way to book minicabs.
    London reconnections has a very complete article (as it always does) about the Uber issues from both sides see https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/
    That’s a very good article indeed, well researched and does a brilliant job of explaining what the debate is actually about.
    Agreed. A really excellent article. Khan's position seems much more comprehensible now.
    Many people have been taken in by Uber’s slick PR campaign on this one, rather like people were taken in initially by Ryanair’s claims that they were cancelling flights so pilots could go on holiday.

    In other news, US minicab app company Lyft are looking at their first international expansion - in London. They’re basically Uber but without the evil.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/09/23/uber-arch-rival-lyft-holds-talks-transport-london-plots-global/
    It's perfectly possible to hold the position that, whilst Uber is a very bad company, TfL's action is currently unjustified and based more on maintaining the black cab's threatened position.

    In fact, expect similar behaviour to come on other companies that dare to challenge black cabs, including Lyft. It's just that Uber's a much easier target due to their policies.
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,889
    RIP Mark Senior. Two things I remember. He would put his money where his mouth was and bet with other PBers on his opinions at times. Also he collected coins. I don't know which coins - possibly very old ones, e.g Roman.

    Re cerulean. A great word and an anagram of Laurence.
  • Sandpit said:

    I see the Labour Party won't even be debating Brexit.

    Why would they want to debate Brexit? They are doing a pretty good job of being all things to all men on the subject at the moment. Why on Earth should the Opposition commit to a policy on the biggest issue of the day, and indeed of this Parliament? < / facetious >
    Seems Momentum organized to get their guys to vote it off the list of debates. I guess because a division over Brexit is actually seen by them as an attack on the high priest guru himself.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,215

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    Fortunately my modest bet was simply on most seats. But it is hard to see how a government containing both the FDP and the Greens makes any decisions at all.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    One for @Morris_Dancer:
    Aston Martin to be Red Bull title sponsor from next year
    https://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-aston/aston-martin-returns-to-formula-one/36799

    That's missing a lot of background which Joe Saward's blog can fill you in on. Basically Red Bull are looking at leaving F1 over the next few years...
    Joe's a little slow in reporting this morning, but yes I'm aware of the background. RB have spent a couple of billion on their two team F1 effort over the past decade, and after a few years of winning are now discovering it's a real money pit and the marketing dollars are best utilised somewhere else. They want to get good money back on their investments though, will probably try and sell STR to Honda if possible, following their match up for next season.

    Rumours are that McLaren, AM and Cosworth will jointly build a new engine from 2021 season, depending on the final regulations being announced soon.
  • Mark always struck me as being more anti-Tory than pro anything else and for that reason, I found it difficult, tiresome even, to read many of his posts on PB. That said, he was a very worthwhile and knowledgeable contributor to the site over many years. R.I.P.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    edited September 2017

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    A reminder Uber is fighting on two regulatory fronts. Arguably much more important than the TfL licensing decision is this week's appeal on the employment status of it's drivers. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/sep/24/uber-faces-double-battle-against-ban-and-scrutiny-of-hiring-practices

    Three and a half million Londoners depend on Uber? How many people do the Uber-tweeters think live in London? Uber does provide a good service and is particularly favoured by women, at least where I work, but it is easy to be disruptive when you do not follow any inconvenient laws or regulations. Black cabs are a red herring: Uber in London is mainly a great way to book minicabs.
    London reconnections has a very complete article (as it always does) about the Uber issues from both sides see https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/
    That’s a very good article indeed, well researched and does a brilliant job of explaining what the debate is actually about.
    Agreed. A really excellent article. Khan's position seems much more comprehensible now.
    Many people have been taken in by Uber’s slick PR campaign on this one, rather like people were taken in initially by Ryanair’s claims that they were cancelling flights so pilots could go on holiday.

    In other news, US minicab app company Lyft are looking at their first international expansion - in London. They’re basically Uber but without the evil.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/09/23/uber-arch-rival-lyft-holds-talks-transport-london-plots-global/
    It's perfectly possible to hold the position that, whilst Uber is a very bad company, TfL's action is currently unjustified and based more on maintaining the black cab's threatened position.

    In fact, expect similar behaviour to come on other companies that dare to challenge black cabs, including Lyft. It's just that Uber's a much easier target due to their policies.
    Yes, it's a complicated one. Uber are well known as being evil, but it's difficult to separate a genuine problem with them against Khan's wanting to roll over to the Black Cab Union.

    Personally I don't see the difference between Lyft and an existing large minicab firm such as Addison Lee - who also have an app for booking cars.

    What everyone agrees on (except for SeanT), is that minicab firms should make sure their drivers are vetted, their cars have the right insurance and that they co-operate with regulators and police where required. TfL are currently saying that Uber don't meet these requirements.
  • Mark always struck me as being more anti-Tory than pro anything else and for that reason, I found it difficult, tiresome even, to read many of his posts on PB. That said, he was a very worthwhile and knowledgeable contributor to the site over many years. R.I.P.

    Mark, I suspect, made many anti-Labour comments during their time in govt. He was, I think, one of those people attracted to the Lib Dems precisely because they opposed what governments did rather than to promote a vision. Despite that, his instinctive partisan loyalty managed to survive the coalition years surprisingly intact, before 2015 released him to return to his comfort zone.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    Fortunately my modest bet was simply on most seats. But it is hard to see how a government containing both the FDP and the Greens makes any decisions at all.
    Which I think the FDP have foreseen which is why they've been extremely cool towards that option. For one thing, a failed CDU/CSU-FDP-Green coalition could easily see them back out of the Bundestag at the next election.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Did Thornbury have vodka on her corn flakes she sounded pissed at times
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    edited September 2017
    @Sandpit

    What everyone agrees on (except for SeanT), is that minicab firms should make sure their drivers are vetted, their cars have the right insurance and that they co-operate with regulators and police where required. TfL are currently saying that Uber don't meet these requirements.

    I'm not sure that is what TfL are saying. They are saying there is a problem with:

    Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
    Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
    Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
    Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.

    Nothing to do with insurance. As for Greyball - it is, well, a grey area. It tries to identify particular users and bans them, perhaps an off-duty police officer. That is not quite not cooperating with the regulatory or law enforcement authorities.
  • 3/4 of Labour voters want 2nd referendum. Meanwhile, Corbyn wants out of Single Market as he thinks it will stop him nationalising water companies without paying.

    There was a delightful (and simultaneously terrifying) quote from McDonnell (I think) this morning on R4, which was that in respect of compensation for shareholders, "parliament will decide what the market value of the shares is".
  • Did John McD slip in the possibility of nationalising major construction companies, maybe even house builders into R4 interview?

    "My own priorities are rail, water, energy, construction in that way, and Royal Mail, that would follow."

    Slip of the tongue?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    Labour Conference sounds fun:
    https://order-order.com/2017/09/25/mcdonnell-parliament-determine-nationalisation-share-prices/
    Investors in utility companies would not be fully compensated at market value for their shares under Labour’s nationalisation plans, John McDonnell has admitted. Speaking on Radio 4 this morning the Shadow Chancellor instead said share prices would be determined by Parliament according to how MPs perceived the past behaviour of firms
  • 3/4 of Labour voters want 2nd referendum. Meanwhile, Corbyn wants out of Single Market as he thinks it will stop him nationalising water companies without paying.

    There was a delightful (and simultaneously terrifying) quote from McDonnell (I think) this morning on R4, which was that in respect of compensation for shareholders, "parliament will decide what the market value of the shares is".
    So, it begins.

    Sunday Times economics guys saying protocols under Article 1 of European Human Rights might come into play on property rights.

    Although if that is true then Corbyn's next act will be to say its time we pulled out of that, as it might stop him.

    Has anyone told these two clowns that pensions companies hold large stakes in these kinds of companies? The public would be voting to rob themselves.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    surbiton said:

    AfD in the end received 1% fewer votes [ 12.4% [. On the direct mandate [ FPTP ], they won 3 seats against 5 for the Left. All 3 seats came in the far east of Germany around Dresden. So we now which part of Germany is the most racist,

    So, Jamaica coalition 393 out of 709.
    All 4 minor parties within 4 percent, but big winners AfD on 94 and FDP on 80, both from nowhere having been below the threshold last time.
    Left and Greens edge up also.
    The expectation is that this is going to take months to put together. Merkel is much weakened which is not necessarily good news for the UK. In negotiations an essential element is the ability of a party to say yes. AfD are opposed to ever closer Union, amongst other things of course.
    The result for Merkel in Germany is worse than that for May here this June. I'm amazed at the inability of mainstream political commentators to notice that not only does she not have anything like a majority (it looks likely to be the CDU/CSU's worst share since 1949), she may not be able to put together a functioning majority* government at all. The blithe talk of 'Merkel being elected for a fourth term' ignores both that and potential repercussions for her leadership personally, either in coalition negotiations or internally within her party.

    * i.e. one that has the reliable confidence of the parliament, even if not on all votes.
    Fortunately my modest bet was simply on most seats. But it is hard to see how a government containing both the FDP and the Greens makes any decisions at all.
    Which I think the FDP have foreseen which is why they've been extremely cool towards that option. For one thing, a failed CDU/CSU-FDP-Green coalition could easily see them back out of the Bundestag at the next election.
    If there's one thing Merkel is good it, it's as a facilitator in negotiations. That's why I'm expecting a radical programme of environmentally friendly pro-business policies. The biggest loser of the election could be Elon Musk.
  • PendduPenddu Posts: 265
    RIP Mark.

    I observe that if you get actively involved in politics at council level you will go to many funerals, as many councillors take up the role after retirement. It has always put me off standing.
  • Quite funny from Emily Thornberry:

    “I know that Boris does not like paternity tests, but maybe we need one for Brexit. Maybe we should take him into a studio with Jeremy Kyle. “I’m sorry, Mr Johnson, we got the results back, and it looks like this one is one of yours. It must have been that wild night out you had with Michael Gove. And I’ve calculated your maintenance payments. And that will be £350m a week.’”
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,215

    3/4 of Labour voters want 2nd referendum. Meanwhile, Corbyn wants out of Single Market as he thinks it will stop him nationalising water companies without paying.

    There was a delightful (and simultaneously terrifying) quote from McDonnell (I think) this morning on R4, which was that in respect of compensation for shareholders, "parliament will decide what the market value of the shares is".
    So, it begins.

    Sunday Times economics guys saying protocols under Article 1 of European Human Rights might come into play on property rights.

    Although if that is true then Corbyn's next act will be to say its time we pulled out of that, as it might stop him.

    Has anyone told these two clowns that pensions companies hold large stakes in these kinds of companies? The public would be voting to rob themselves.
    Is that not called running a deficit?
  • 3/4 of Labour voters want 2nd referendum. Meanwhile, Corbyn wants out of Single Market as he thinks it will stop him nationalising water companies without paying.

    There was a delightful (and simultaneously terrifying) quote from McDonnell (I think) this morning on R4, which was that in respect of compensation for shareholders, "parliament will decide what the market value of the shares is".
    So, it begins.

    Sunday Times economics guys saying protocols under Article 1 of European Human Rights might come into play on property rights.

    Although if that is true then Corbyn's next act will be to say its time we pulled out of that, as it might stop him.

    Has anyone told these two clowns that pensions companies hold large stakes in these kinds of companies? The public would be voting to rob themselves.
    Do these two care about pension companies? Or only those on state pensions?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406



    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.

    I don't share your confidence in what will happen. I think it's very possible the CDU recover from this relative lowpoint. I'd be wary of underestimating her.

    I think it's very impressive that she has won a 4th term despite the challenging situation in Europe, Global Financial Crisis and her very courageous decision on refugees.

    I agree though that after 12-16 years in power she should be thinking hard about succession.
  • 3/4 of Labour voters want 2nd referendum. Meanwhile, Corbyn wants out of Single Market as he thinks it will stop him nationalising water companies without paying.

    There was a delightful (and simultaneously terrifying) quote from McDonnell (I think) this morning on R4, which was that in respect of compensation for shareholders, "parliament will decide what the market value of the shares is".
    So, it begins.

    Sunday Times economics guys saying protocols under Article 1 of European Human Rights might come into play on property rights.

    Although if that is true then Corbyn's next act will be to say its time we pulled out of that, as it might stop him.

    Has anyone told these two clowns that pensions companies hold large stakes in these kinds of companies? The public would be voting to rob themselves.
    Do these two care about pension companies? Or only those on state pensions?
    I could hazard a guess.

  • rkrkrk said:



    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.

    I don't share your confidence in what will happen. I think it's very possible the CDU recover from this relative lowpoint. I'd be wary of underestimating her.

    I think it's very impressive that she has won a 4th term despite the challenging situation in Europe, Global Financial Crisis and her very courageous decision on refugees.

    I agree though that after 12-16 years in power she should be thinking hard about succession.
    The CDU could recover with fresh blood but there's very little historical precedent anywhere that I can think of that indicates after 16 years an individual leader can recover.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    TOPPING said:

    @Sandpit

    What everyone agrees on (except for SeanT), is that minicab firms should make sure their drivers are vetted, their cars have the right insurance and that they co-operate with regulators and police where required. TfL are currently saying that Uber don't meet these requirements.

    I'm not sure that is what TfL are saying. They are saying there is a problem with:

    Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
    Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
    Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
    Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.

    Nothing to do with insurance. As for Greyball - it is, well, a grey area. It tries to identify particular users and bans them, perhaps an off-duty police officer. That is not quite not cooperating with the regulatory or law enforcement authorities.

    The not co-operating is things like:
    Not reporting to police allegations of sexual assault by drivers
    Not reporting to police incidents of customers clearly being involved in crime - as an example two passengers who were covered in the red ink dispersed by cash-in-transit containers.
    Blacklisting TfL officials from their service, to avoid mandatory inspections (Greyball)
    Refusing to assist people reporting lost property

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4911364/London-safer-without-Uber-writes-Katie-Hopkins.html
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    edited September 2017

    3/4 of Labour voters want 2nd referendum. Meanwhile, Corbyn wants out of Single Market as he thinks it will stop him nationalising water companies without paying.

    There was a delightful (and simultaneously terrifying) quote from McDonnell (I think) this morning on R4, which was that in respect of compensation for shareholders, "parliament will decide what the market value of the shares is".
    So, it begins.

    Sunday Times economics guys saying protocols under Article 1 of European Human Rights might come into play on property rights.

    Although if that is true then Corbyn's next act will be to say its time we pulled out of that, as it might stop him.

    Has anyone told these two clowns that pensions companies hold large stakes in these kinds of companies? The public would be voting to rob themselves.
    Do these two care about pension companies? Or only those on state pensions?
    What are these pension companies, of which you speak? Surely pensions are paid by the State because we look after our people, and everyone else are all just evil bankers.

    This week is going to be very funny, but hopefully will get some serious points across as to what people like McDonnell want to do.
  • So it looks like the AfD are going to split before they even enter the Bundestag, after Frauke Petry walked out and said she'll sit as an independent.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,215

    rkrkrk said:



    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.

    I don't share your confidence in what will happen. I think it's very possible the CDU recover from this relative lowpoint. I'd be wary of underestimating her.

    I think it's very impressive that she has won a 4th term despite the challenging situation in Europe, Global Financial Crisis and her very courageous decision on refugees.

    I agree though that after 12-16 years in power she should be thinking hard about succession.
    The CDU could recover with fresh blood but there's very little historical precedent anywhere that I can think of that indicates after 16 years an individual leader can recover.
    Bismarck? First Minister 1862-1873 and then, after a brief period out of power 1873-1890. About the closest I can think of but quite apposite.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    Sandpit said:

    Labour Conference sounds fun:
    https://order-order.com/2017/09/25/mcdonnell-parliament-determine-nationalisation-share-prices/
    Investors in utility companies would not be fully compensated at market value for their shares under Labour’s nationalisation plans, John McDonnell has admitted. Speaking on Radio 4 this morning the Shadow Chancellor instead said share prices would be determined by Parliament according to how MPs perceived the past behaviour of firms

    And this. And this is the shower that Theresa May lost her overall majority to.

    Jesus F*****g Christ.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811

    rkrkrk said:



    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.

    I don't share your confidence in what will happen. I think it's very possible the CDU recover from this relative lowpoint. I'd be wary of underestimating her.

    I think it's very impressive that she has won a 4th term despite the challenging situation in Europe, Global Financial Crisis and her very courageous decision on refugees.

    I agree though that after 12-16 years in power she should be thinking hard about succession.
    The CDU could recover with fresh blood but there's very little historical precedent anywhere that I can think of that indicates after 16 years an individual leader can recover.
    For a free and democratic state lasting that long woukd be very impressive, and ensuring a good successor a fine end project.
  • DavidL said:

    rkrkrk said:



    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.

    I don't share your confidence in what will happen. I think it's very possible the CDU recover from this relative lowpoint. I'd be wary of underestimating her.

    I think it's very impressive that she has won a 4th term despite the challenging situation in Europe, Global Financial Crisis and her very courageous decision on refugees.

    I agree though that after 12-16 years in power she should be thinking hard about succession.
    The CDU could recover with fresh blood but there's very little historical precedent anywhere that I can think of that indicates after 16 years an individual leader can recover.
    Bismarck? First Minister 1862-1873 and then, after a brief period out of power 1873-1890. About the closest I can think of but quite apposite.
    That was only as Chancellor of Prussia; Bismarck retained the imperial chancellorship throughout 1873 (and indeed, from 1871-90). Completely different political system though: the pre-WWI chancellors held office on the confidence of the emperor, not the parliament (though as always, sufficient opposition could force a change).
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,764
    Off topic.

    is it just me or are the conferences getting much less coverage than they used to, both on the telly, proper news and social media. The LD conference had all the visibility of a witness protection programme.

    I ask because I am really busy and might be missing it. I am also watching the Labour conference from behind the sofa.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,274

    So it looks like the AfD are going to split before they even enter the Bundestag, after Frauke Petry walked out and said she'll sit as an independent.

    Is there not a rule against that sort of thing? Did she win a constituency seat or a list seat?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406

    rkrkrk said:



    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.

    I don't share your confidence in what will happen. I think it's very possible the CDU recover from this relative lowpoint. I'd be wary of underestimating her.

    I think it's very impressive that she has won a 4th term despite the challenging situation in Europe, Global Financial Crisis and her very courageous decision on refugees.

    I agree though that after 12-16 years in power she should be thinking hard about succession.
    The CDU could recover with fresh blood but there's very little historical precedent anywhere that I can think of that indicates after 16 years an individual leader can recover.
    How many democratically elected leaders have lasted 16 years anyway?
    I'm not sure historical precedent is a good guide to something so rare.

    Helmut Kohl lost after 16 years as Chancellor, while William Mackenzie King lasted 21 (!) years in office.
  • Mark Senior provided a much valued public service with his local election results which I followed on the Vote Uk Forum.

    For more background I copy one of Mark's posts at Compass On Line during the coalition period, July 9 2013. In reply to a post by a Lib Dem resigner he said:

    "Having joined the Liberal Party in 1966 and supported them since the Blackpool North by election in 1962, the hope through all the following years both bad and good was that we should achieve power and use it to bring Liberal policies into effect . This we are doing despite being much outnumbered by our coalition partners and rather too successfully according to most posters on say Conservativehome .

    "The fact that you think after a such a short period of membership [you] should be believing that now Liberal policies can be achieved by a Labour Party simply shows that there is no fool like a young fool and you sir are a fool ."

    RIP Mark
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    Jonathan said:

    Off topic.

    is it just me or are the conferences getting much less coverage than they used to, both on the telly, proper news and social media. The LD conference had all the visibility of a witness protection programme.

    I ask because I am really busy and might be missing it. I am also watching the Labour conference from behind the sofa.

    The lds have struggled for airtime anyway, but it feels like less coverage - I keep forgetting it's conference season, even acknowledging I've been taking a bit of a political break.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    Jonathan said:

    The LD conference had all the visibility of a witness protection programme.

    Genuine LOL :D
  • tlg86 said:

    So it looks like the AfD are going to split before they even enter the Bundestag, after Frauke Petry walked out and said she'll sit as an independent.

    Is there not a rule against that sort of thing? Did she win a constituency seat or a list seat?
    She won a direct mandate in Saxony.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,215
    Jonathan said:

    Off topic.

    is it just me or are the conferences getting much less coverage than they used to, both on the telly, proper news and social media. The LD conference had all the visibility of a witness protection programme.

    I ask because I am really busy and might be missing it. I am also watching the Labour conference from behind the sofa.

    The Lib Dems had a conference?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,764
    FWIW Starmer is a almost single handedly keeping me in Labour. The man is sound.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811

    Mark Senior provided a much valued public service with his local election results which I followed on the Vote Uk Forum.

    For more background I copy one of Mark's posts at Compass On Line during the coalition period, July 9 2013. In reply to a post by a Lib Dem resigner he said:

    "Having joined the Liberal Party in 1966 and supported them since the Blackpool North by election in 1962, the hope through all the following years both bad and good was that we should achieve power and use it to bring Liberal policies into effect . This we are doing despite being much outnumbered by our coalition partners and rather too successfully according to most posters on say Conservativehome .

    "The fact that you think after a such a short period of membership [you] should be believing that now Liberal policies can be achieved by a Labour Party simply shows that there is no fool like a young fool and you sir are a fool ."

    RIP Mark

    Hard headed, but realistic in the price to get some liberal things achieved.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    edited September 2017
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    @Sandpit

    What everyone agrees on (except for SeanT), is that minicab firms should make sure their drivers are vetted, their cars have the right insurance and that they co-operate with regulators and police where required. TfL are currently saying that Uber don't meet these requirements.

    I'm not sure that is what TfL are saying. They are saying there is a problem with:

    Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
    Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
    Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
    Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.

    Nothing to do with insurance. As for Greyball - it is, well, a grey area. It tries to identify particular users and bans them, perhaps an off-duty police officer. That is not quite not cooperating with the regulatory or law enforcement authorities.

    The not co-operating is things like:
    Not reporting to police allegations of sexual assault by drivers
    Not reporting to police incidents of customers clearly being involved in crime - as an example two passengers who were covered in the red ink dispersed by cash-in-transit containers.
    Blacklisting TfL officials from their service, to avoid mandatory inspections (Greyball)
    Refusing to assist people reporting lost property

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4911364/London-safer-without-Uber-writes-Katie-Hopkins.html
    Look through your list. It sounds bad on first glance, but:

    1) Not reporting to police allegations of sexual assault by drivers - so why isn't the assaultee reporting those allegations to the police? Rider rings up uber: "your driver assaulted me sexually". What should the company do?
    2) Not reporting to police allegations of customers clearly involved in crime - What is the statutory requirement? Plus "Clearly"? Red ink at night two guys get into the car. How obvious would that be? What else is "clear"?
    3) Blacklisting TfL officials is a bad one, maybe, but if the inspection is mandatory then it is mandatory and TfL should be able to work out a way of one of its employees managing to use Uber. 3.5m other Londoners do.
    4) Refusing to assist people reporting lost property - I would rather leave something in the back of an Uber than the back of a black cab. For incredibly obvious reasons. Plus does the LTCA "assist" people in reporting lost property?

    Ridiculous.
  • nichomar said:

    Did Thornbury have vodka on her corn flakes she sounded pissed at times

    She was drunk on adrenalin.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    Jonathan said:

    FWIW Starmer is a almost single handedly keeping me in Labour. The man is sound.

    Was thinking that this morning - bolted on next Lab leader in a sensible world.

    Sadly, we do not live in....
  • So it looks like the AfD are going to split before they even enter the Bundestag, after Frauke Petry walked out and said she'll sit as an independent.

    ... and she was their leader!
  • glwglw Posts: 9,997
    Sandpit said:

    Labour Conference sounds fun:
    https://order-order.com/2017/09/25/mcdonnell-parliament-determine-nationalisation-share-prices/
    Investors in utility companies would not be fully compensated at market value for their shares under Labour’s nationalisation plans, John McDonnell has admitted. Speaking on Radio 4 this morning the Shadow Chancellor instead said share prices would be determined by Parliament according to how MPs perceived the past behaviour of firms

    If you wanted to terminally damage business in the UK you could hardly do anything worse. It's quite bonkers.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,722
    Jonathan said:

    Off topic.

    is it just me or are the conferences getting much less coverage than they used to, both on the telly, proper news and social media. The LD conference had all the visibility of a witness protection programme.

    I ask because I am really busy and might be missing it. I am also watching the Labour conference from behind the sofa.

    Labour conferences in the Eighties were great. I remember when I was at home with flu, watching Neil Kinnock ripping into Militant, with Derek Hatton screaming "Liar, Liar" from the floor.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    @Sandpit

    I'm not sure that is what TfL are saying. They are saying there is a problem with:

    Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
    Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
    Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
    Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.

    Nothing to do with insurance. As for Greyball - it is, well, a grey area. It tries to identify particular users and bans them, perhaps an off-duty police officer. That is not quite not cooperating with the regulatory or law enforcement authorities.

    The not co-operating is things like:
    Not reporting to police allegations of sexual assault by drivers
    Not reporting to police incidents of customers clearly being involved in crime - as an example two passengers who were covered in the red ink dispersed by cash-in-transit containers.
    Blacklisting TfL officials from their service, to avoid mandatory inspections (Greyball)
    Refusing to assist people reporting lost property

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4911364/London-safer-without-Uber-writes-Katie-Hopkins.html
    Look through your list. It sounds bad on first glance, but:

    1) Not reporting to police allegations of sexual assault by drivers - so why isn't the assaultee reporting those allegations to the police? Rider rings up uber: "your driver assaulted me sexually". What should the company do?
    2) Not reporting to police allegations of customers clearly involved in crime - What is the statutory requirement? Plus "Clearly"? Red ink at night two guys get into the car. How obvious would that be? What else is "clear"?
    3) Blacklisting TfL officials is a bad one, maybe, but if the inspection is mandatory then it is mandatory and TfL should be able to work out a way of one of its employees managing to use Uber. 3.5m other Londoners do.
    4) Refusing to assist people reporting lost property - I would rather leave something in the back of an Uber than the back of a black cab. For incredibly obvious reasons. Plus does the LTCA "assist" people in reporting lost property?

    Ridiculous.
    These things are mandatory for minicab firms though, every other minicab operator complys in order to retain its operating licence fromTfL. This company is ignoring the rules and hoping that a huge PR campaign and a bunch of expensive lawyers will make TfL change their minds.

    I’m as free market as any Conservative, but there needs to be a level playing field. Regulations around minicabs are there for damn good reasons.
  • rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:



    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.

    I don't share your confidence in what will happen. I think it's very possible the CDU recover from this relative lowpoint. I'd be wary of underestimating her.

    I think it's very impressive that she has won a 4th term despite the challenging situation in Europe, Global Financial Crisis and her very courageous decision on refugees.

    I agree though that after 12-16 years in power she should be thinking hard about succession.
    The CDU could recover with fresh blood but there's very little historical precedent anywhere that I can think of that indicates after 16 years an individual leader can recover.
    How many democratically elected leaders have lasted 16 years anyway?
    I'm not sure historical precedent is a good guide to something so rare.

    Helmut Kohl lost after 16 years as Chancellor, while William Mackenzie King lasted 21 (!) years in office.
    There was a PM in Luxembourg who lasted from 1995-2013. Don't know what happened to him.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,722

    So it looks like the AfD are going to split before they even enter the Bundestag, after Frauke Petry walked out and said she'll sit as an independent.

    ... and she was their leader!
    I can understand a leader resigning when she's led her party to a bad result, but not when she's led them to a good one.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,439
    Jonathan said:

    Off topic.

    is it just me or are the conferences getting much less coverage than they used to, both on the telly, proper news and social media. The LD conference had all the visibility of a witness protection programme.

    I ask because I am really busy and might be missing it. I am also watching the Labour conference from behind the sofa.

    I suspect the Tory conference will get plenty of attention next week when Theresa has to face up to her Party members for her election shambles and welshing over Brexit.
  • Jonathan said:

    Off topic.

    is it just me or are the conferences getting much less coverage than they used to, both on the telly, proper news and social media. The LD conference had all the visibility of a witness protection programme.

    I ask because I am really busy and might be missing it. I am also watching the Labour conference from behind the sofa.

    Yes, they're getting less coverage (or less high-profile coverage; what was once on BBC2 is now on BBC Parliament).

    The Lib Dems' coverage reduction was also compounded by their reduced status. Two elections at 7-8% and with no more than a dozen MPs means they're really not a major party these days.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    @Sandpit

    I'm not sure that is what rhaps an off-duty police officer. That is not quite not cooperating with the regulatory or law enforcement authorities.

    The not co-operating is things like:
    Not reporting to police allegations of sexual assault by drivers
    Not reporting to police incidents of customers clearly being involved in crime - as an example two passengers who were covered in the red ink dispersed by cash-in-transit containers.
    Blacklisting TfL officials from their service, to avoid mandatory inspections (Greyball)
    Refusing to assist people reporting lost property

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4911364/London-safer-without-Uber-writes-Katie-Hopkins.html
    Look through your list. It sounds bad on first glance, but:

    1) Not reporting to police allegations of sexual assault by drivers - so why isn't the assaultee reporting those allegations to the police? Rider rings up uber: "your driver assaulted me sexually". What should the company do?
    2) Not reporting to police allegations of customers clearly involved in crime - What is the statutory requirement? Plus "Clearly"? Red ink at night two guys get into the car. How obvious would that be? What else is "clear"?
    3) Blacklisting TfL officials is a bad one, maybe, but if the inspection is mandatory then it is mandatory and TfL should be able to work out a way of one of its employees managing to use Uber. 3.5m other Londoners do.
    4) Refusing to assist people reporting lost property - I would rather leave something in the back of an Uber than the back of a black cab. For incredibly obvious reasons. Plus does the LTCA "assist" people in reporting lost property?

    Ridiculous.
    These things are mandatory for minicab firms though, every other minicab operator complys in order to retain its operating licence fromTfL. This company is ignoring the rules and hoping that a huge PR campaign and a bunch of expensive lawyers will make TfL change their minds.

    I’m as free market as any Conservative, but there needs to be a level playing field. Regulations around minicabs are there for damn good reasons.
    If they are mandatory for mincab firms (no idea if this is the case) then fine, make them comply, don't ban them overnight.

    Plus the common charges against Uber are failing to check drivers and lack of insurance/licensing which doesn't make the list at all and hence is a red herring jumped on by people, yourself included, to discriminate against the company.
  • Sean_F said:

    So it looks like the AfD are going to split before they even enter the Bundestag, after Frauke Petry walked out and said she'll sit as an independent.

    ... and she was their leader!
    I can understand a leader resigning when she's led her party to a bad result, but not when she's led them to a good one.
    She was apparently a 'moderate' in AfD terms and in a bit of a minority.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,520
    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:
    Look through your list. It sounds bad on first glance, but:

    1) Not reporting to police allegations of sexual assault by drivers - so why isn't the assaultee reporting those allegations to the police? Rider rings up uber: "your driver assaulted me sexually". What should the company do?
    2) Not reporting to police allegations of customers clearly involved in crime - What is the statutory requirement? Plus "Clearly"? Red ink at night two guys get into the car. How obvious would that be? What else is "clear"?
    3) Blacklisting TfL officials is a bad one, maybe, but if the inspection is mandatory then it is mandatory and TfL should be able to work out a way of one of its employees managing to use Uber. 3.5m other Londoners do.
    4) Refusing to assist people reporting lost property - I would rather leave something in the back of an Uber than the back of a black cab. For incredibly obvious reasons. Plus does the LTCA "assist" people in reporting lost property?

    Ridiculous.
    These things are mandatory for minicab firms though, every other minicab operator complys in order to retain its operating licence fromTfL. This company is ignoring the rules and hoping that a huge PR campaign and a bunch of expensive lawyers will make TfL change their minds.

    I’m as free market as any Conservative, but there needs to be a level playing field. Regulations around minicabs are there for damn good reasons.
    If they are mandatory for mincab firms (no idea if this is the case) then fine, make them comply, don't ban them overnight.

    Plus the common charges against Uber are failing to check drivers and lack of insurance/licensing which doesn't make the list at all and hence is a red herring jumped on by people, yourself included, to discriminate against the company.
    Their five year minicab licence expired at the end of May. Instead of renewing it for another five years, TfL renewed it for only four months, highlighting the issues they raised and giving the company those four months (until 30th Sept) to comply. Now been decided that they haven’t (See original article posted early in this thread), and from reports today they are only now engaging with TfL as to what is required of them.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,090
    edited September 2017
    The Labour Conference (Marxist party of UK) has become a hard left mantra which many thought was dead and buried.

    Where are all these labour moderates who are idly standing by and watching their party taken over by the hard left and the unions. Is is time that made a stand and resigned on block to set up a centre left party of their own


  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited September 2017
    @ Topping

    "make them comply"

    Ha ha ha. They were given a four month extension to the licence to do just that. They gave TfL the finger. I love *using* Uber, but TfL are on the right side of this one.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:
    Look through your list. It sounds bad on first glance, but:

    1) Not reporting to polFor incredibly obvious reasons. Plus does the LTCA "assist" people in reporting lost property?

    Ridiculous.
    These things are mandatory for minicab firms though, every other minicab operator complys in order to retain its operating licence fromTfL. This company is ignoring the rules and hoping that a huge PR campaign and a bunch of expensive lawyers will make TfL change their minds.

    I’m as free market as any Conservative, but there needs to be a level playing field. Regulations around minicabs are there for damn good reasons.
    If they are mandatory for mincab firms (no idea if this is the case) then fine, make them comply, don't ban them overnight.

    Plus the common charges against Uber are failing to check drivers and lack of insurance/licensing which doesn't make the list at all and hence is a red herring jumped on by people, yourself included, to discriminate against the company.
    Their five year minicab licence expired at the end of May. Instead of renewing it for another five years, TfL renewed it for only four months, highlighting the issues they raised and giving the company those four months (until 30th Sept) to comply. Now been decided that they haven’t (See original article posted early in this thread), and from reports today they are only now engaging with TfL as to what is required of them.
    If the details of the BBC report on it are true:

    "One of the points raised by TfL was Uber's "approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained" for its drivers.
    That part of the process was not even handled by Uber, said Mr Jones. Instead, the drivers organised their own DBS check and took that paperwork to TfL.
    TfL then reviews that application before giving the driver a licence allowing them to drive for Uber.
    TfL would not elaborate further on its issue with the way in which Uber organises DBS checks, because that would be likely to come up when Uber appealed against the decision."


    Then I think we have a right to be sceptical.
  • If Uber had lost their licence in Leeds rather than London would it be receiving quite so much coverage?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,406
    TOPPING said:



    If they are mandatory for mincab firms (no idea if this is the case) then fine, make them comply, don't ban them overnight.

    They aren't being banned overnight.
    Even if they lose their appeal they will continue operating for months. The BBC reckons Uber's license in (say) Brighton would enable them to continue to function even after that...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41363923

    Authorities right to stand up to Uber and apply some pressure on them to follow the rules.
    They are also encouraging competitors to enter the marketplace which will be of longer-term benefit to consumers.
  • rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:



    I think you can rule her out on performance. The SDP should surely recover next time a bit due to being in opposition (though the opposite can't be ruled out) while the CDU should continue to drop further and 33% is not a very high score to drop from.

    I don't share your confidence in what will happen. I think it's very possible the CDU recover from this relative lowpoint. I'd be wary of underestimating her.

    I think it's very impressive that she has won a 4th term despite the challenging situation in Europe, Global Financial Crisis and her very courageous decision on refugees.

    I agree though that after 12-16 years in power she should be thinking hard about succession.
    The CDU could recover with fresh blood but there's very little historical precedent anywhere that I can think of that indicates after 16 years an individual leader can recover.
    How many democratically elected leaders have lasted 16 years anyway?
    I'm not sure historical precedent is a good guide to something so rare.

    Helmut Kohl lost after 16 years as Chancellor, while William Mackenzie King lasted 21 (!) years in office.
    There was a PM in Luxembourg who lasted from 1995-2013. Don't know what happened to him.
    lol
  • glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Labour Conference sounds fun:
    https://order-order.com/2017/09/25/mcdonnell-parliament-determine-nationalisation-share-prices/
    Investors in utility companies would not be fully compensated at market value for their shares under Labour’s nationalisation plans, John McDonnell has admitted. Speaking on Radio 4 this morning the Shadow Chancellor instead said share prices would be determined by Parliament according to how MPs perceived the past behaviour of firms

    If you wanted to terminally damage business in the UK you could hardly do anything worse. It's quite bonkers.
    McDonnell wasn't putting forward some new idea, parliament has debated and decided the terms of compensation in previous nationalisations in exactly the same way.

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/3309606 - 1949 American article on the problem of compensation with reference to Labour's nationalisations, goes on about the particular conditions of nationalisation that make compensation by market price inappropriate etc. Quite interesting. I'm sure there's more up to date stuff on this.



  • Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    Off topic.

    is it just me or are the conferences getting much less coverage than they used to, both on the telly, proper news and social media. The LD conference had all the visibility of a witness protection programme.

    I ask because I am really busy and might be missing it. I am also watching the Labour conference from behind the sofa.

    Labour conferences in the Eighties were great. I remember when I was at home with flu, watching Neil Kinnock ripping into Militant, with Derek Hatton screaming "Liar, Liar" from the floor.
    Thatcher flying the Tory flag.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,111
    rkrkrk said:

    TOPPING said:



    If they are mandatory for mincab firms (no idea if this is the case) then fine, make them comply, don't ban them overnight.

    They aren't being banned overnight.
    Even if they lose their appeal they will continue operating for months. The BBC reckons Uber's license in (say) Brighton would enable them to continue to function even after that...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41363923

    Authorities right to stand up to Uber and apply some pressure on them to follow the rules.
    They are also encouraging competitors to enter the marketplace which will be of longer-term benefit to consumers.
    Which is almost worse. If no one is expecting to be banned "properly", because, as per the BBC report on the DBS, it is all bullshit, then it shows the action up for the gesture politics that it is.
This discussion has been closed.