politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB / Polling Matters podcast: German election special & Labour conference reaction
On this week’s PB / Polling Matters podcast, Keiran is joined by Dr Roland Kappe of UCL to discuss the recent German election results and what happens next.
If Boris moves now prepare for a second snap Brexit election in the Spring. It's the only logic to him moving now. The moment he enters No 10 he inherits the same dismal hand that May has now. How to let down Brexiters with no Commons majority as back up. If we wants to collapse the talks and go for nuclear Brexit that surely requires an election as well.If he's concluded he needs to move now prepare for a second snap election.
Thought I think Thornberry's conference jibe had a purpose. She followed Amber Rudd in making the same jibe hidden in plain sight.
We all know the rumours about Boris. I doubt they would have any effect, now.
I doubt they'd have any significant effect with the population at large but they might do with the PCP and/or with Tory party members.
Did Corbyn say anything today about wealth creation or job creation (public sector excepted)? Was there anything said at the entire conference that might encourage investment in the UK?
Did Corbyn say anything today about wealth creation or job creation (public sector excepted)? Was there anything said at the entire conference that might encourage investment in the UK?
Not really. In the wonderful world of Corbynism business will simply go along with his plans, and certainly won't pull the plug on investment or relocate.
I have to say that the robot tax sounds particularly stupid, and will likely stifle quite a bit of UK development and deployment.
Did Corbyn say anything today about wealth creation or job creation (public sector excepted)? Was there anything said at the entire conference that might encourage investment in the UK?
There was quite a big chunk on a National Investment Bank, providing good well paid secure jobs.
Quite likely pie in the sky, but it was a part of the speech.
So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.
Assuming the Sun's video shows what they say it does it seems unlikely that Stokes can tour Oz and inconceivable that he can retain the vice captaincy.
I don't see how the German election result can be seen as bad for the Brexit negotiations.
Had Schulz won that would have been devastating for them given he is an ardent Europhile who believes the UK should be punished for Brexit but he was trounced. Instead Merkel won but lost a lot of votes and seats to the pro Brexit AfD and will have to govern in coalition with the FDP who are more pro UK and the City of London than the SPD
If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?
If they don't expect England fans to come out with a lot of chants about the criminal history of those who were first let into Australia and their descendants on the opposing team
So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.
Nothing to worry about - the trillion pound of exports by 2020 George predicted is a certainty.
A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.
One other thing...is that Alex Hales kicking the guy on the floor? or the random other mate? I am guessing if it the former, he could be in the shit too.
Assuming the Sun's video shows what they say it does it seems unlikely that Stokes can tour Oz and inconceivable that he can retain the vice captaincy.
Well he should probably lose the vice captaincy but he is an absolute lock on the team sheet stats wise (Highest rated all rounder for either side)
So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.
We'll buy Boeing aircraft - duty free and we'll put 100% tariff on Airbus.
A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.
One other thing...is that Alex Hales kicking the guy on the floor? or the random other mate? I am guessing if it the former, he could be in the shit too.
An individual who is with Stokes takes a massive kick at the initial attackers head.
A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.
Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.
So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.
We'll buy Boeing aircraft - duty free and we'll put 100% tariff on Airbus.
Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.
A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.
Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.
And no TSE around to protect him!!
It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.
We'll buy Boeing aircraft - duty free and we'll put 100% tariff on Airbus.
Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.
A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.
Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.
And no TSE around to protect him!!
It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
Yep. Sports science has moved on seriously in the last 40 years or so. Here is an interesting comparison.
A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.
Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.
And no TSE around to protect him!!
It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
Yep. Sports science has moved on seriously in the last 40 years or so. Here is an interesting comparison.
A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.
Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.
And no TSE around to protect him!!
It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
Yep. Sports science has moved on seriously in the last 40 years or so. Here is an interesting comparison.
Manu and Stokesy look like they will both have plenty of time on their hands this winter. Perhaps they could take some of their energy out on one another!
Manu and Stokesy look like they will both have plenty of time on their hands this winter. Perhaps they could take some of their energy out on one another!
Manu and Stokesy look like they will both have plenty of time on their hands this winter. Perhaps they could take some of their energy out on one another!
How about a team brawl - England footballers against England cricketers.
I think I have told this story on here before, but...
I few years ago, I was in Vegas and just chilling in the pool, when suddenly the sun appeared to be in eclipse. When I looked to see what was bloking out my rays, I was confronted with this beast in tiny speedos who looked like the statue of David with extra muscly bits...after a few seconds I realised that the balding gentleman was in fact Lawrence Dallaglio.
As you can imagine, I refrained from informing him that he was in fact blocking my rays and would he mind moving or that his budgie smugglers were shall we say rather revealing.
Manu and Stokesy look like they will both have plenty of time on their hands this winter. Perhaps they could take some of their energy out on one another!
How about a team brawl - England footballers against England cricketers.
Or RU vs RL.
RU vs RL sounds a good one. I seemed to remember they once played a cross code series, best RL vs best RU in league and union match, and it got a bit tasty at times.
Does this mean that Jeremy Hunt is eight times as good as Nye Bevin ?
' When the NHS was launched in 1948, it had a budget of £437 million (roughly £15 billion at today’s value). For 2015/16, the overall NHS budget was around £116.4 billion '
"Theresa May is set to restate her determination to be tough on public spending despite political pressure to ease up on austerity.
"Continuing to deal with our debts," is the way to strengthen the economy, the prime minister will insist on Thursday.
"Unless there are Northern Irish politicians to bribe, in which case the deficit can go hang. Keeping myself in my job is more important than that", she will add."
"Theresa May is set to restate her determination to be tough on public spending despite political pressure to ease up on austerity.
"Continuing to deal with our debts," is the way to strengthen the economy, the prime minister will insist on Thursday.
"Unless there are Northern Irish politicians to bribe, in which case the deficit can go hang. Keeping myself in my job is more important than that", she will add."
A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.
Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.
And no TSE around to protect him!!
It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
Yep. Sports science has moved on seriously in the last 40 years or so. Here is an interesting comparison.
A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.
Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway
A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.
Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway
There'll only be a transition period if the EU agrees. Canada + the UK v the US in a trade war. Hmmm.
A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.
Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway
There'll only be a transition period if the EU agrees. Canada + the UK v the US in a trade war. Hmmm.
As long as Britain makes the payments and continues free movement during that time, which May has said she will, the EU will agree.
It is also not a trade war, it is a dispute over Boeing which does not even control all the aerospace market let alone the whole UK US Canadian trading market and it was a dispute started by Boeing and the US administration
A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.
Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway
There'll only be a transition period if the EU agrees. Canada + the UK v the US in a trade war. Hmmm.
As long as Britain makes the payments and continues free movement during that time, which May has said she will, the EU will agree.
It is also not a trade war, it is a dispute over Boeing which does not even control all the aerospace market let alone the whole UK US Canadian trading market and it was a dispute started by Boeing and the US administration
I am merely echoing the Tory-supporting, Brexit-backing Telegraph. As for a transition deal, we'll get one if the EU agrees. That means the UK accepting the conditions they set out. It's not up to us.
A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.
Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway
There'll only be a transition period if the EU agrees. Canada + the UK v the US in a trade war. Hmmm.
As long as Britain makes the payments and continues free movement during that time, which May has said she will, the EU will agree.
It is also not a trade war, it is a dispute over Boeing which does not even control all the aerospace market let alone the whole UK US Canadian trading market and it was a dispute started by Boeing and the US administration
I am merely echoing the Tory-supporting, Brexit-backing Telegraph. As for a transition deal, we'll get one if the EU agrees. That means the UK accepting the conditions they set out. It's not up to us.
So what that does not mean it is right, just writing exaggerated headlines for effect.
Thanks for just repeating exactly what I said on the transition deal ie May has said she will accept free movement and payments over that time. Many Leavers are up in arms over that but still not even one bit of gratitude from a hardcore Remainer like you, just yet more whinging!
@HYUFD It's the first shot. Whether it turns into a trade war depends on whether we fire back. You have to look at the Bombardier thing through the prism of Trump's Blitzkrieg renegotiation of NAFTA which is currently underway. It's a shot across the bows. Though the protectionist Trade War breaking out first on an intra anglosphere basis is of course hilarious.
I have to say I like Eddie George's approach to bad behaved rugby players. Obviously it is well documented that he dropped those who went boozing and haven't been reselected, but apparently for any infractions a player has to answer to a chosen senior player, who in the past has been Big Billy.
I think most normal souls would shit themselves at the thought of having to go in front of him and explain their bad behaviour.
@HYUFD It's the first shot. Whether it turns into a trade war depends on whether we fire back. You have to look at the Bombardier thing through the prism of Trump's Blitzkrieg renegotiation of NAFTA which is currently underway. It's a shot across the bows. Though the protectionist Trade War breaking out first on an intra anglosphere basis is of course hilarious.
We won't be firing back to any significant degree, Canada on the other hand may well do
Trump is already making noises on moving onto German goods soon and of course Chinese goods are also in his sights
I have to say I like Eddie George's approach to bad behaved rugby players. Obviously it is well documented that he dropped those who went boozing and haven't been reselected, but apparently for any infractions a player has to answer to a chosen senior player, who in the past has been Big Billy.
I think most normal souls would shit themselves at the thought of having to go in front of him and explain their bad behaviour.
Yes - but I guess that some of those players thought that Eddie's behaviour was a bit like that of "banker"?
So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.
We'll buy Boeing aircraft - duty free and we'll put 100% tariff on Airbus.
Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.
Something tells me that both the DUP and Sinn Féin are going to be a bit more willing to sit down around a table with the Westminster Government to discuss ending the current stalemate between them at the Conservative Conference. Not a good time for NI to be without a fully functioning devolved Parliament while this stalemate continues with the two main political parties whatever your politics!
Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.
Something tells me that both the DUP and Sinn Féin are going to be a bit more willing to sit down around a table with the Westminster Government to discuss ending the current stalemate between them at the Conservative Conference. Not a good time for NI to be without a fully functioning devolved Parliament while this stalemate continues with the two main political parties whatever your politics!
It is in neither the interest of the DUP nor that of Sinn Fein to banjax an agreement on the border. What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned. As for South-bound trade, the ball is in the EU's court." There is is the risk of illegal importation to the UK and there is the risk of illegal immigrants. That may be the price to pay for a friction-free border that unlocks the Brexit difficulties.
What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.
The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
(1) How many seats for each party in each Land? (2) How are the overhang seats calculated, i.e. specifically what is the difference between the new method (which has just been introduced) and the old method?
Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't have full details
...and even the website which appears to be the official returning officer's results website seems to have alarming gaps in the actual results, e.g. it has percentages and votes for the parties but it doesn't seem to have the number of seats for each party, and doesn't have an easily accessible list of the constituencies. The only constituency results seem to be if you click on the map, or look in the list in the order in which they were declared (?!).
Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.
Is that correct, or am I senile again?
If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.
Is that correct, or am I senile again?
If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.
What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.
Is that correct, or am I senile again?
If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.
What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.
The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.
Is that correct, or am I senile again?
If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.
What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.
The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
That sounds like a very interesting piece of research. Do you know how much of the subsidy was direct financial aid and how much indirect, such as governments buying planes from the ‘local’ manufacturer with no effective competition?
Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.
Is that correct, or am I senile again?
If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.
What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.
The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
The Economist takes a more cynical view, and also reminds us Boeing has done the same thing as regards pricing (the first few orders are sold at less than the cost of production, or seem to be until development and tooling costs are averaged over lots of orders), and Boeing is not directly hurt as it makes no planes this small so just wants to damage a foreign plane-maker. https://www.economist.com/news/business/21729469-row-between-planemakers-has-become-political-boeing-takes-flight-hypocrisy
Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.
Is that correct, or am I senile again?
If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.
What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.
The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
That sounds like a very interesting piece of research. Do you know how much of the subsidy was direct financial aid and how much indirect, such as governments buying planes from the ‘local’ manufacturer with no effective competition?
Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
You might find this twitter thread interesting by a former WTO official involved with aerospace:
The question for betting purposes is whether this criticism of the Corbyn cult will mean CCHQ orders a shorter standing ovation for the Prime Minister next week.
The question for betting purposes is whether this criticism of the Corbyn cult will mean CCHQ orders a shorter standing ovation for the Prime Minister next week.
May may be creepy, but she hardly has a cult following!
The question for betting purposes is whether this criticism of the Corbyn cult will mean CCHQ orders a shorter standing ovation for the Prime Minister next week.
They might double down and get people to chant 'ohhhhhh Theresa May.'
They'd look a bit stupid but that hasn't worried Labour.
The question for betting purposes is whether this criticism of the Corbyn cult will mean CCHQ orders a shorter standing ovation for the Prime Minister next week.
May may be creepy, but she hardly has a cult following!
Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.
Is that correct, or am I senile again?
If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.
What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range
Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
You might find this twitter thread interesting by a former WTO official involved with aerospace:
correction, Chris Kendall worked for the UK DTI on the aerospace dispute in the 90's, and later went on to start the CETA deal. His twitter threads on trade policy are very well sourced. Todays is not happy reading for Corbynites.
Comments
But I wouldn't expect a trial until later on in 2017.
Pleasant thoughts all.
You don't get that poncey fifth tackle rule in Union.
I have to say that the robot tax sounds particularly stupid, and will likely stifle quite a bit of UK development and deployment.
The words of JC really were inflammatory.
Quite likely pie in the sky, but it was a part of the speech.
https://twitter.com/UKDefJournal/status/913153627279302656
Except snakes.
I'm like a pound shop Indiana Jones, except I'm a better historian.
Had Schulz won that would have been devastating for them given he is an ardent Europhile who believes the UK should be punished for Brexit but he was trounced. Instead Merkel won but lost a lot of votes and seats to the pro Brexit AfD and will have to govern in coalition with the FDP who are more pro UK and the City of London than the SPD
One other thing...is that Alex Hales kicking the guy on the floor? or the random other mate? I am guessing if it the former, he could be in the shit too.
And no TSE around to protect him!!
Top class journalism
Chris Ashton must be one hard bastard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSa9hAl1Lpo
https://www.joe.ie/sport/graph-bigger-is-better-check-out-how-the-size-of-rugby-players-has-changed-in-the-last-40-years-434067
Or RU vs RL.
I few years ago, I was in Vegas and just chilling in the pool, when suddenly the sun appeared to be in eclipse. When I looked to see what was bloking out my rays, I was confronted with this beast in tiny speedos who looked like the statue of David with extra muscly bits...after a few seconds I realised that the balding gentleman was in fact Lawrence Dallaglio.
As you can imagine, I refrained from informing him that he was in fact blocking my rays and would he mind moving or that his budgie smugglers were shall we say rather revealing.
' When the NHS was launched in 1948, it had a budget of £437 million (roughly £15 billion at today’s value). For 2015/16, the overall NHS budget was around £116.4 billion '
http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41419858
"Theresa May is set to restate her determination to be tough on public spending despite political pressure to ease up on austerity.
"Continuing to deal with our debts," is the way to strengthen the economy, the prime minister will insist on Thursday.
"Unless there are Northern Irish politicians to bribe, in which case the deficit can go hang. Keeping myself in my job is more important than that", she will add."
I remain to be convinced they are any more skillful...
What I meant is we were fighting Europe AND the US!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/theresa-may-threatens-us-withtrade-war-bombardier-row/
It is also not a trade war, it is a dispute over Boeing which does not even control all the aerospace market let alone the whole UK US Canadian trading market and it was a dispute started by Boeing and the US administration
"Boeing Super Hornet jet purchase likely to become 1st casualty in possible trade war
"Critics question Trudeau's tactic of linking Super Hornet purchase with Bombardier trade dispute"
Thanks for just repeating exactly what I said on the transition deal ie May has said she will accept free movement and payments over that time. Many Leavers are up in arms over that but still not even one bit of gratitude from a hardcore Remainer like you, just yet more whinging!
I think most normal souls would shit themselves at the thought of having to go in front of him and explain their bad behaviour.
Trump is already making noises on moving onto German goods soon and of course Chinese goods are also in his sights
BBC News Northern Ireland - Is Stormont stalemate coming to an end?
Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.
Something tells me that both the DUP and Sinn Féin are going to be a bit more willing to sit down around a table with the Westminster Government to discuss ending the current stalemate between them at the Conservative Conference. Not a good time for NI to be without a fully functioning devolved Parliament while this stalemate continues with the two main political parties whatever your politics!
BBC News Northern Ireland - Is Stormont stalemate coming to an end?
It is in neither the interest of the DUP nor that of Sinn Fein to banjax an agreement on the border. What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned. As for South-bound trade, the ball is in the EU's court." There is is the risk of illegal importation to the UK and there is the risk of illegal immigrants. That may be the price to pay for a friction-free border that unlocks the Brexit difficulties.
Joseph
"Why the calamity of Brexit is really the fault of those who warned against it, and really, really, really not the people who voted for it, OK?"
(1) How many seats for each party in each Land?
(2) How are the overhang seats calculated, i.e. specifically what is the difference between the new method (which has just been introduced) and the old method?
Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't have full details
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_2017
...and even the website which appears to be the official returning officer's results website seems to have alarming gaps in the actual results, e.g. it has percentages and votes for the parties but it doesn't seem to have the number of seats for each party, and doesn't have an easily accessible list of the constituencies. The only constituency results seem to be if you click on the map, or look in the list in the order in which they were declared (?!).
https://www.bundeswahlleiter.de/en/bundestagswahlen/2017/ergebnisse.html
Is there something badly wrong with this, or am I genuinely getting senile?
Is that correct, or am I senile again?
If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
https://www.economist.com/news/business/21729469-row-between-planemakers-has-become-political-boeing-takes-flight-hypocrisy
https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/912999011459756032
They'd look a bit stupid but that hasn't worried Labour.
Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.
Someone who is too racist for Nigel Farage shows you have a big problem.