1.2 million European job loses, 500,000+ UK and over 42,000 in Denmark. Goodness only knows how many German jobs are under threat.
Threatened by a political decision of the Tory party to interpret the referendum as a mandate to leave the single market. The pressure on them to reverse that decision will become unbearable.
The mandate was to leave the EU and you cannot do that while in the single market
Norway is in the single market and they are not in the EU.
And free movement which is the red line
But you said that it is not possible to be out of the EU and in the single market. I said Norway did. I do not recall there was any mention of FoM on the ballot paper.
1.2 million European job loses, 500,000+ UK and over 42,000 in Denmark. Goodness only knows how many German jobs are under threat.
Threatened by a political decision of the Tory party to interpret the referendum as a mandate to leave the single market. The pressure on them to reverse that decision will become unbearable.
The mandate was to leave the EU and you cannot do that while in the single market
Norway is in the single market and they are not in the EU.
And free movement which is the red line
But you said that it is not possible to be out of the EU and in the single market. I said Norway did. I do not recall there was any mention of FoM on the ballot paper.
You are really being silly - free movement and control of our laws was the number one reason for leaving
1.2 million European job loses, 500,000+ UK and over 42,000 in Denmark. Goodness only knows how many German jobs are under threat.
Threatened by a political decision of the Tory party to interpret the referendum as a mandate to leave the single market. The pressure on them to reverse that decision will become unbearable.
The mandate was to leave the EU and you cannot do that while in the single market
Norway is in the single market and they are not in the EU.
And free movement which is the red line
But you said that it is not possible to be out of the EU and in the single market. I said Norway did. I do not recall there was any mention of FoM on the ballot paper.
No, just that all the leave votes were cast by xenophobes, is a normal accusation from you.
1.2 million European job loses, 500,000+ UK and over 42,000 in Denmark. Goodness only knows how many German jobs are under threat.
Threatened by a political decision of the Tory party to interpret the referendum as a mandate to leave the single market. The pressure on them to reverse that decision will become unbearable.
The mandate was to leave the EU and you cannot do that while in the single market
Of course it won't. But the point is leverage in negotiations. This study confirms the UK has little to none.
Poppycock. It's not a zero-sum game, it's a question of mutual interest.
Yes, of course it is. But insisting that the UK has some kind of advantage in the negotiations, that the EU will be desperate to do a deal and that no deal will hurt them more than it hurts us is actively preventing us from getting to a point where we can start to explore what these mutual interests are.
1.2 million European job loses, 500,000+ UK and over 42,000 in Denmark. Goodness only knows how many German jobs are under threat.
Threatened by a political decision of the Tory party to interpret the referendum as a mandate to leave the single market. The pressure on them to reverse that decision will become unbearable.
The mandate was to leave the EU and you cannot do that while in the single market
Ah, so they need to teach us a lesson before offering the same kind of deal that they’ve reached with others non-EU countries?
No, we need to understand that we have voted to change our trading relationship with the EU27 and if we want to establish a new one without suffering significant, long-term damage we need to start getting serious about doing a deal. No-one forced the UK to trigger Article 50 without having developed a negotiation strategy or exit plan; neither as Theresa may forced to call an election. These were fundamental mistakes she made herself.
I like the 15% of Tory voters that aren't sure whether May or Corbyn makes the best PM. I can sort of get why Labour right wingers might fudge this to register a protest. . The other way around, not so much.
Certainly Labour's PFI shift is threatening the retroactive renegotiation of contracts by a British government with all that that will do to investor confidence. But politically you have to view it via the new populist paradigm. I notice the words " take back control " were in one statement on the policy. If not effect contractors were asked to and ' voluntarily ' agreed to take 5% to 10% haircuts when the contracts where bought out by Labour ( which is what the policy suggests ) it could be portrayed as government thrift and good negotiating.
You could even divide the hypothetical savings by 52 and say the NHS was getting £X pw extra. Voters are suckers for absurdly large numbers hypothecated.
If Labour had any sense they'd call it a Windfall Tax evoking Blair's deal with the utilities before 1997. If handled correctly many contractors would sign n the dotted line for certainty and to avoid a media circus. Noone knows where all this is heading but by 2022 the view that PFI contractors should share the societal pain by modest hair cuts could be quite popular. After all most other areas of British society have had hair cuts.
And in macroeconomic ( rather than legal ) terms it's tiny compared to say all the FDI we've had on the basis of SM membership. If the electorate can tear up the later " retroactively " then why not the former ? Of course they are different but that sort of stuff is for experts.
Listening to the hard left rantings of McDonnell and Corbyn there is a possibiliy that they have mistaken their cult following for approval of their hardest of moves to the left, and may just have made a very big mistake and will not take the Country with them
Interesting that Belgium's leading University has revealed 1.2 million ordinary EU citizens will lose their jobs if there is no compromise. ...
Do you have a link for that?
Article in Daily Express on line
Did the Express article mention the 500,000+ UK job losses?
Yes
The study confirms that in all scenarios the UK comes out worse and with hard Brexit it comes out much worse. If the Express reported that, fair play.
The Express reported the EU and the UK loses.
Of course the UK will come out worse but tell that to the 1.2 million EU workers and their families if you think it will console them
Of course it won't. But the point is leverage in negotiations. This study confirms the UK has little to none.
Best give up and go home then.
No, best to stop posturing, accept reality and get down to serious negotiation. If we go off a cliff the UK will suffer the most damage.
With no influence to serious negotiation. The labour flip flopping on Brexit seems to have infected you.
How about trying to get the best from the position we have?
We can pretend we have serious influence, or we can accept the reality in the knowledge that falling out of the EU without a deal will hurt us a lot more than it will hurt them. That is the choice.
Yes, of course it is. But insisting that the UK has some kind of advantage in the negotiations, that the EU will be desperate to do a deal and that no deal will hurt them more than it hurts us is actively preventing us from getting to a point where we can start to explore what these mutual interests are.
I don't think anyone claims that the UK has an advantage in the negotiations. What they claim is that both sides have a lot to lose and that it is in the economic interests of the EU27 to respond favourably to the UK's desire for a good deal - a point which is consistent with this model.
Of course it is just one economic model, and there must be a lot of uncertainty about its conclusions; in particular, it might not account sufficiently for the short-term disruption effects. So there is a possibility that the damage to individual countries, including the UK of course, might be substantially worse than those figures show. Is that a risk individual countries such as Ireland will want to take?
Yes, of course it is. But insisting that the UK has some kind of advantage in the negotiations, that the EU will be desperate to do a deal and that no deal will hurt them more than it hurts us is actively preventing us from getting to a point where we can start to explore what these mutual interests are.
Is that a risk individual countries such as Ireland will want to take?
The new PM seems keen to buddy up to his mates in Brussels.....
Ah, so they need to teach us a lesson before offering the same kind of deal that they’ve reached with others non-EU countries?
No, we need to understand that we have voted to change our trading relationship with the EU27 and if we want to establish a new one without suffering significant, long-term damage we need to start getting serious about doing a deal. No-one forced the UK to trigger Article 50 without having developed a negotiation strategy or exit plan; neither as Theresa may forced to call an election. These were fundamental mistakes she made herself.
Last time I checked the UK was more than willing to discuss trade. Unfortunately, the EU are insisting on extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ, which is obviously holding things up.
Certainly Labour's PFI shift is threatening the retroactive renegotiation of contracts by a British government with all that that will do to investor confidence. But politically you have to view it via the new populist paradigm. I notice the words " take back control " were in one statement on the policy. If not effect contractors were asked to and ' voluntarily ' agreed to take 5% to 10% haircuts when the contracts where bought out by Labour ( which is what the policy suggests ) it could be portrayed as government thrift and good negotiating.
You could even divide the hypothetical savings by 52 and say the NHS was getting £X pw extra. Voters are suckers for absurdly large numbers hypothecated.
If Labour had any sense they'd call it a Windfall Tax evoking Blair's deal with the utilities before 1997. If handled correctly many contractors would sign n the dotted line for certainty and to avoid a media circus. Noone knows where all this is heading but by 2022 the view that PFI contractors should share the societal pain by modest hair cuts could be quite popular. After all most other areas of British society have had hair cuts.
And in macroeconomic ( rather than legal ) terms it's tiny compared to say all the FDI we've had on the basis of SM membership. If the electorate can tear up the later " retroactively " then why not the former ? Of course they are different but that sort of stuff is for experts.
Interesting view - none of that is beyond the realm of possibilities imo.
Yes, of course it is. But insisting that the UK has some kind of advantage in the negotiations, that the EU will be desperate to do a deal and that no deal will hurt them more than it hurts us is actively preventing us from getting to a point where we can start to explore what these mutual interests are.
I don't think anyone claims that the UK has an advantage in the negotiations. What they claim is that both sides have a lot to lose and that it is in the economic interests of the EU27 to respond favourably to the UK's desire for a good deal - a point which is consistent with this model.
Of course it is just one economic model, and there must be a lot of uncertainty about its conclusions; in particular, it might not account sufficiently for the short-term disruption effects. So there is a possibility that the damage to individual countries, including the UK of course, might be substantially worse than those figures show. Is that a risk individual countries such as Ireland will want to take?
I think you'll find that plenty on the Tory right claim that the UK has an advantage. We hold all the cards apparently:
Yes, of course it is. But insisting that the UK has some kind of advantage in the negotiations, that the EU will be desperate to do a deal and that no deal will hurt them more than it hurts us is actively preventing us from getting to a point where we can start to explore what these mutual interests are.
I don't think anyone claims that the UK has an advantage in the negotiations. What they claim is that both sides have a lot to lose and that it is in the economic interests of the EU27 to respond favourably to the UK's desire for a good deal - a point which is consistent with this model.
Of course it is just one economic model, and there must be a lot of uncertainty about its conclusions; in particular, it might not account sufficiently for the short-term disruption effects. So there is a possibility that the damage to individual countries, including the UK of course, might be substantially worse than those figures show. Is that a risk individual countries such as Ireland will want to take?
I think you'll find that plenty on the Tory right claim that the UK has an advantage. We hold all the cards apparently:
Listening to the hard left rantings of McDonnell and Corbyn there is a possibiliy that they have mistaken their cult following for approval of their hardest of moves to the left, and may just have made a very big mistake and will not take the Country with them
Consider the audience. This is a conference for Labour activists. The purpose is to fire them up with zeal.
The general public are not watching, and have little love for the utilities.
Listening to the hard left rantings of McDonnell and Corbyn there is a possibiliy that they have mistaken their cult following for approval of their hardest of moves to the left, and may just have made a very big mistake and will not take the Country with them
Consider the audience. This is a conference for Labour activists. The purpose is to fire them up with zeal.
The general public are not watching, and have little love for the utilities.
It is on a 24 hour news cycle and tomorrow's headlines will be more than interesting
Yes, of course it is. But insisting that the UK has some kind of advantage in the negotiations, that the EU will be desperate to do a deal and that no deal will hurt them more than it hurts us is actively preventing us from getting to a point where we can start to explore what these mutual interests are.
I don't think anyone claims that the UK has an advantage in the negotiations. What they claim is that both sides have a lot to lose and that it is in the economic interests of the EU27 to respond favourably to the UK's desire for a good deal - a point which is consistent with this model.
Of course it is just one economic model, and there must be a lot of uncertainty about its conclusions; in particular, it might not account sufficiently for the short-term disruption effects. So there is a possibility that the damage to individual countries, including the UK of course, might be substantially worse than those figures show. Is that a risk individual countries such as Ireland will want to take?
I think you'll find that plenty on the Tory right claim that the UK has an advantage. We hold all the cards apparently:
Ah, so they need to teach us a lesson before offering the same kind of deal that they’ve reached with others non-EU countries?
No, we she made herself.
Last time I checked the UK was more than willing to discuss trade. Unfortunately, the EU are insisting on extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ, which is obviously holding things up.
There seems to be progress on citizens' rights and the exit bill. What's holding things up is the Irish border.
But there is not much point in talking trade until the government works out what it wants from a final deal. Is it Canada, Switzerland, Norway, or something that falls between them - and, if so, what is it and how do we get to it?
Listening to the hard left rantings of McDonnell and Corbyn there is a possibiliy that they have mistaken their cult following for approval of their hardest of moves to the left, and may just have made a very big mistake and will not take the Country with them
Consider the audience. This is a conference for Labour activists. The purpose is to fire them up with zeal.
The general public are not watching, and have little love for the utilities.
It is on a 24 hour news cycle and tomorrow's headlines will be more than interesting
Uber, TV contests and Champions League, the rest of the country concentrates on these things. Probably rightly!
Yes, of course it is. But insisting that the UK has some kind of advantage in the negotiations, that the EU will be desperate to do a deal and that no deal will hurt them more than it hurts us is actively preventing us from getting to a point where we can start to explore what these mutual interests are.
I don't think anyone claims that the UK has an advantage in the negotiations. What they claim is that both sides have a lot to lose and that it is in the economic interests of the EU27 to respond favourably to the UK's desire for a good deal - a point which is consistent with this model.
Of course it is just one economic model, and there must be a lot of uncertainty about its conclusions; in particular, it might not account sufficiently for the short-term disruption effects. So there is a possibility that the damage to individual countries, including the UK of course, might be substantially worse than those figures show. Is that a risk individual countries such as Ireland will want to take?
I think you'll find that plenty on the Tory right claim that the UK has an advantage. We hold all the cards apparently:
The government has yet to demonstrate it is capable of ignoring such nonsense. Until it does, the talks are going to go nowhere.
I should have been clearer: no one in government.
Hmm.
I thought Theresa May delivered a decent speech on Friday, albeit one that was a year later than it should have been. By Sunday, Boris had weed all over it. He gives every impression of being in the same camp as John Redwood.
Listening to the hard left rantings of McDonnell and Corbyn there is a possibiliy that they have mistaken their cult following for approval of their hardest of moves to the left, and may just have made a very big mistake and will not take the Country with them
Consider the audience. This is a conference for Labour activists. The purpose is to fire them up with zeal.
The general public are not watching, and have little love for the utilities.
It is on a 24 hour news cycle and tomorrow's headlines will be more than interesting
Uber, TV contests and Champions League, the rest of the country concentrates on these things. Probably rightly!
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
I thought Theresa May delivered a decent speech on Friday, albeit one that was a year later than it should have been. By Sunday, Boris had weed all over it. He gives every impression of being in the same camp as John Redwood.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
The far-left, like the far-right, thrives on hate. And, unfortunately, there are now apologists for - nay, members of - the far-left all over the Labour party, from the leader's office down. After what happened to Jo Cox and the threats made to Gina Miller it's wise for the BBC to play it safe.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
With a name like Kuenssberg I doubt that either of your (a) and (b) tops the list of Lab objections.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
Another example would be Vice Chancellors.
The two Vice Chancellors who have been most heavily criticised are both female.
This is despite the fact that most Vice Chancellors are male. One of the most highly paid Vice Chancellors (in the top five) is a prominent (male) member of the Labour Party. His name has not even been mentioned in all Labour's attacks on Vice Chancellor's pay.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
There are a lot of angry people on the left of the Labour party who think that this is their time, that they are righteous and are justified in the action they take.
It's not a left wing thing. We've seen it on the right with things like the country alliance dumping carcasses in the streets and raiding conferences. Thankfully nothing yet comes close to Jo Cox.
Here's to the unfashionable centre ground, which by definition is all about working with other viewpoints.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
With regards to b) the BBC Trust disagree
I think you mean she misreports what Corbyn says
Even if true, it's hardly reason enough to be on the receiving end of threats,
There are a lot of angry people on the left of the Labour party who think that this is their time, that they are righteous and are justified in the action they take.
It's not a left wing thing. We've seen it on the right with things like the country alliance dumping carcasses in the streets and raiding conferences. Thankfully nothing yet comes close to Jo Cox.
Here's to the unfashionable centre ground, which by definition is all about working with other viewpoints.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
'The President has not declared war on North Korea'
What
The Norks disagree
"North Korea's foreign minister has accused US President Donald Trump of declaring war on his country and said Pyongyang had the right to shoot down US bombers. Ri Yong-ho said this could apply even if the warplanes were not in North Korea's airspace."
There are a lot of angry people on the left of the Labour party who think that this is their time, that they are righteous and are justified in the action they take.
It's not a left wing thing. We've seen it on the right with things like the country alliance dumping carcasses in the streets and raiding conferences. Thankfully nothing yet comes close to Jo Cox.
Here's to the unfashionable centre ground, which by definition is all about working with other viewpoints.
There are a lot of angry people on the left of the Labour party who think that this is their time, that they are righteous and are justified in the action they take.
It's not a left wing thing. We've seen it on the right with things like the country alliance dumping carcasses in the streets and raiding conferences. Thankfully nothing yet comes close to Jo Cox.
Here's to the unfashionable centre ground, which by definition is all about working with other viewpoints.
Agreed.
Providing it doesn't include the invading a middle easter country sort of 'centrism'
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
With regards to b) the BBC Trust disagree
I think you mean she misreports what Corbyn says
Even if true, it's hardly reason enough to be on the receiving end of threats,
What threats? Any Labour member who threatens her should be thrown out. Calling her out for bias is fine in my book.
Watching the Labour conference i'm reminded of those Tory ones where Peter Lilley broke into song and you had to pinch yourself to believe that we were watching adults who were members of our government.
It's embarrassing and the EU must be mightily relieved. If this is the government most likely to take over from the current lot they've just dodged one gigantic bullet.
There are a lot of angry people on the left of the Labour party who think that this is their time, that they are righteous and are justified in the action they take.
It's not a left wing thing. We've seen it on the right with things like the country alliance dumping carcasses in the streets and raiding conferences. Thankfully nothing yet comes close to Jo Cox.
Here's to the unfashionable centre ground, which by definition is all about working with other viewpoints.
There are a lot of angry people on the left of the Labour party who think that this is their time, that they are righteous and are justified in the action they take.
It's not a left wing thing. We've seen it on the right with things like the country alliance dumping carcasses in the streets and raiding conferences. Thankfully nothing yet comes close to Jo Cox.
Here's to the unfashionable centre ground, which by definition is all about working with other viewpoints.
Agreed.
Providing it doesn't include the invading a middle easter country sort of 'centrism'
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
With regards to b) the BBC Trust disagree
I think you mean she misreports what Corbyn says
You have taken one instance where she reported something accurately but out of context and hence misleadingly, and turned that into a generic statement that she misreports (present continuous, and hence habitually). Now who's misleading?
Can anyone help this bloke by explaining what these areas have in common:
' Birmingham has topped the UK's "crash for cash" postcode league - the second time in a year the city has featured in a table of hotspots for the crime.
In total, Birmingham has 10 postcodes on the list. Washwood Heath, Aston and Small Heath were the three worst postcodes for the crime in the UK.
In Bradford, Frizinghall and Manningham came joint fourth for the numbers of fraudulent claims, while in Manchester the M8 postcode, which includes Cheetham Hill, was ranked sixth.
A survey carried out by insurance company Aviva in 2016 said 25% of its 3,000 crash for cash claims last year were in Birmingham.
"We don't know the exact reason Birmingham features so heavily in these surveys," said Ben Fletcher, the director of the IFB, a not-for-profit organisation set up to detect fraud.
"Obviously, this is a nationwide problem and we have investigations that range from Kent to the North East, but large urban areas tend to be the focal points for these kind of crimes." '
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.
It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference...
Can anyone help this bloke by explaining what these areas have in common:
' Birmingham has topped the UK's "crash for cash" postcode league - the second time in a year the city has featured in a table of hotspots for the crime.
In total, Birmingham has 10 postcodes on the list. Washwood Heath, Aston and Small Heath were the three worst postcodes for the crime in the UK.
In Bradford, Frizinghall and Manningham came joint fourth for the numbers of fraudulent claims, while in Manchester the M8 postcode, which includes Cheetham Hill, was ranked sixth.
A survey carried out by insurance company Aviva in 2016 said 25% of its 3,000 crash for cash claims last year were in Birmingham.
"We don't know the exact reason Birmingham features so heavily in these surveys," said Ben Fletcher, the director of the IFB, a not-for-profit organisation set up to detect fraud.
"Obviously, this is a nationwide problem and we have investigations that range from Kent to the North East, but large urban areas tend to be the focal points for these kind of crimes." '
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
With regards to b) the BBC Trust disagree
I think you mean she misreports what Corbyn says
You have taken one instance where she reported something accurately but out of context and hence misleadingly, and turned that into a generic statement that she misreports (present continuous, and hence habitually). Now who's misleading?
You mean the instance where she was found to have failed in terms of impartiality and accuracy and was censured. There have been times since Jezza became leader where LKs Blue Rosette was airbrushed out.
Surely nobody can think she is not a Tory mouthpiece
Seeing Dennis Skinner ranting about Tesco; Emily Thornberry guffawing at her own jokes; Len McCluskey singing the Red Flag but replacing 'red' with 'Corbyn'.... If this joke party actually gets elected the country is in deep deep doodoo. When push comes to shove will the marginals really back them? Maybe so. But the regrets will be deep and swift I think.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.
It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference...
Seeing Dennis Skinner ranting about Tesco; Emily Thornberry guffawing at her own jokes; Len McCluskey singing the Red Flag but replacing 'red' with 'Corbyn'.... If this joke party actually gets elected the country is in deep deep doodoo. When push comes to shove will the marginals really back them? Maybe so. But the regrets will be deep and swift I think.
The hard Brexit we will still ultimately have under Corbyn and McDonnell combined with their nationalising and taxing everything in site with an army of striking trade unionists and Momentum behind them would probably lead to the worst government this country has had since WW2 if they did win the next general election.
Many professionals and businessmen and those with significant capital would move to Geneva, New York (provided the US avoids Sanders or Warren), the Bahamas, Monaco, Singapore or even Paris during the Corbyn years
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
(a) She's a woman (b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
With regards to b) the BBC Trust disagree
I think you mean she misreports what Corbyn says
You have taken one instance where she reported something accurately but out of context and hence misleadingly, and turned that into a generic statement that she misreports (present continuous, and hence habitually). Now who's misleading?
You mean the instance where she was found to have failed in terms of impartiality and accuracy and was censured. There have been times since Jezza became leader where LKs Blue Rosette was airbrushed out.
Surely nobody can think she is not a Tory mouthpiece
She did not look particularly happy with the exit poll in 2015 ... But at least you are not alone in your opinion - one shared by my sister.
SNOWFLAKE. Pathetic. Fake news. “Not exactly Kate Adie in a war zone.”
And that’s just a flavour of the way some people on social media greeted the news that the BBC’s political editor has been assigned a bodyguard to protect her at Labour party conference: by blaming the victim, not those who threaten violence against her. She’s making it up for attention! She was asking for it, what with her wilful refusal to report the news in a manner more to people’s liking! She should have known it was provocative even to set foot there!
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
Surely nobody can think she is not a Tory mouthpiece
I doubt she is. Your mistake arises because she is not blatently anti-Tory unlike most of the BBC news and current affairs journalists and editors. They in turn are a bit less anti-Tory than C4.
1. the headline for politico.com's reporting of the German election = "Angela's Ashes" 2. Wiener has been sentenced to 21 months prison time for the last of his sexting scandals.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
She is a reporter, and therefore does occasionally highlight the impact of something - but hate, that's a strong word....
Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones hate the Conservatives, but neither would need a bodyguard if they went to their conference.
Yes, but will George Osborne?
Not if his entourage is with him:
Some come with large entourages, others, such as the Norwegian ambassador to London, Mona Juul, slip into the studio alone. The hefty entourages tend to come with business folk or with Jonathan Sacks for Thought for the Day, two very different types of security needs.
So far as domestic politicians are concerned, I understand that the former chancellor George Osborne always used to bring the biggest crowd, a detail which plays to his recent Don Corleone image.
"For perfectly understandable reasons, neither she nor her employers want to talk about it, but the fact that Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC is covering the Labour Party conference in Brighton accompanied by a bodyguard is an outrage that has not been greeted with the anger and disgust it merits."
1. the headline for politico.com's reporting of the German election = "Angela's Ashes" 2. Wiener has been sentenced to 21 months prison time for the last of his sexting scandals.
Bloomberg were giving her six months at most in post. Result worse than Theresa's
Comments
Can't have it both ways.
Which we have chosen to leave. The EU is not at fault there.
Any deal inc Transition has to be passed by the European parliament as well as our own by March 2019. If not then WTO brexit applies.
WTO tariff quotas sound as if they would take years:
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/12/15/if-liam-fox-messes-up-we-re-all-in-deep-trouble
How about trying to get the best from the position we have?
You could even divide the hypothetical savings by 52 and say the NHS was getting £X pw extra. Voters are suckers for absurdly large numbers hypothecated.
If Labour had any sense they'd call it a Windfall Tax evoking Blair's deal with the utilities before 1997. If handled correctly many contractors would sign n the dotted line for certainty and to avoid a media circus. Noone knows where all this is heading but by 2022 the view that PFI contractors should share the societal pain by modest hair cuts could be quite popular. After all most other areas of British society have had hair cuts.
And in macroeconomic ( rather than legal ) terms it's tiny compared to say all the FDI we've had on the basis of SM membership. If the electorate can tear up the later " retroactively " then why not the former ? Of course they are different but that sort of stuff is for experts.
Of course it is just one economic model, and there must be a lot of uncertainty about its conclusions; in particular, it might not account sufficiently for the short-term disruption effects. So there is a possibility that the damage to individual countries, including the UK of course, might be substantially worse than those figures show. Is that a risk individual countries such as Ireland will want to take?
Simply that reaching that sort of deal before A50 runs out is not feasible.
Unless we were to stay in single market or customs union, but we have decided not to do so.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/737306/Brexit-negotiations-EU-trade-deal-single-market-WTO
Just ask John Redwood:
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/07/17/getting-out-of-the-eu-can-be-quick-and-easy-the-uk-holds-most-of-the-cards-in-any-negotiation/
The government has yet to demonstrate it is capable of ignoring such nonsense. Until it does, the talks are going to go nowhere.
The general public are not watching, and have little love for the utilities.
But there is not much point in talking trade until the government works out what it wants from a final deal. Is it Canada, Switzerland, Norway, or something that falls between them - and, if so, what is it and how do we get to it?
I thought Theresa May delivered a decent speech on Friday, albeit one that was a year later than it should have been. By Sunday, Boris had weed all over it. He gives every impression of being in the same camp as John Redwood.
@PA
Follow
More
Hammond refuses to endorse May to lead Tories into next election
LAB 42
CON 40
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/09/laura-kuenssbergs-bodyguard-is-no-joke/
(b) She reports what Corbyn says.
(As an aside, I do think that there is a lot of truth in the observation that women in or associated with politics get a lot more hate thrown at them than men. Not a nice observation, but sadly one where it's easy to cite examples.)
Blast them yellow reds to hell.
The two Vice Chancellors who have been most heavily criticised are both female.
This is despite the fact that most Vice Chancellors are male. One of the most highly paid Vice Chancellors (in the top five) is a prominent (male) member of the Labour Party. His name has not even been mentioned in all Labour's attacks on Vice Chancellor's pay.
I think you mean she misreports what Corbyn says
It's not a left wing thing. We've seen it on the right with things like the country alliance dumping carcasses in the streets and raiding conferences. Thankfully nothing yet comes close to Jo Cox.
Here's to the unfashionable centre ground, which by definition is all about working with other viewpoints.
'The President has not declared war on North Korea'
What
She is a reporter, and therefore does occasionally highlight the impact of something - but hate, that's a strong word....
"North Korea's foreign minister has accused US President Donald Trump of declaring war on his country and said Pyongyang had the right to shoot down US bombers.
Ri Yong-ho said this could apply even if the warplanes were not in North Korea's airspace."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-41391978
Providing it doesn't include the invading a middle easter country sort of 'centrism'
It's embarrassing and the EU must be mightily relieved. If this is the government most likely to take over from the current lot they've just dodged one gigantic bullet.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-41382494
What do they keep on fighting for?
https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/03/17/lawyers-takedown-laura-kuenssberg-bias-going-viral-because-perfect-video/
' Birmingham has topped the UK's "crash for cash" postcode league - the second time in a year the city has featured in a table of hotspots for the crime.
In total, Birmingham has 10 postcodes on the list. Washwood Heath, Aston and Small Heath were the three worst postcodes for the crime in the UK.
In Bradford, Frizinghall and Manningham came joint fourth for the numbers of fraudulent claims, while in Manchester the M8 postcode, which includes Cheetham Hill, was ranked sixth.
A survey carried out by insurance company Aviva in 2016 said 25% of its 3,000 crash for cash claims last year were in Birmingham.
"We don't know the exact reason Birmingham features so heavily in these surveys," said Ben Fletcher, the director of the IFB, a not-for-profit organisation set up to detect fraud.
"Obviously, this is a nationwide problem and we have investigations that range from Kent to the North East, but large urban areas tend to be the focal points for these kind of crimes." '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41360891
10th Anniversary Special!
Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference...
Surely nobody can think she is not a Tory mouthpiece
2007 Brown hysteria
2017 Corbyn hysteria
2027 ???
ICM
Many professionals and businessmen and those with significant capital would move to Geneva, New York (provided the US avoids Sanders or Warren), the Bahamas, Monaco, Singapore or even Paris during the Corbyn years
SNOWFLAKE. Pathetic. Fake news. “Not exactly Kate Adie in a war zone.”
And that’s just a flavour of the way some people on social media greeted the news that the BBC’s political editor has been assigned a bodyguard to protect her at Labour party conference: by blaming the victim, not those who threaten violence against her. She’s making it up for attention! She was asking for it, what with her wilful refusal to report the news in a manner more to people’s liking! She should have known it was provocative even to set foot there!
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/25/laura-kuenssberg-bodyguard-abuse-female-political-journalist-abuse
Surely nobody can think she is not a Tory mouthpiece
I doubt she is. Your mistake arises because she is not blatently anti-Tory unlike most of the BBC news and current affairs journalists and editors. They in turn are a bit less anti-Tory than C4.
1. the headline for politico.com's reporting of the German election = "Angela's Ashes"
2. Wiener has been sentenced to 21 months prison time for the last of his sexting scandals.
Some come with large entourages, others, such as the Norwegian ambassador to London, Mona Juul, slip into the studio alone. The hefty entourages tend to come with business folk or with Jonathan Sacks for Thought for the Day, two very different types of security needs.
So far as domestic politicians are concerned, I understand that the former chancellor George Osborne always used to bring the biggest crowd, a detail which plays to his recent Don Corleone image.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/09/sarah-sands-george-osborne-turns-up-to-radio-4-with-an-entourage-he-thinks-hes-don-corleone/