This is going to be an expensive lunch, if @TOPPING gets to choose the wines.
I think we should let Ms Cyclefree choose the venue.
amortised over, oh I don't know, 15 years which is probably when I (and others?) last had a comparable blow out it's positively a steal...
Can good Muslim boys who don't drink alcohol attend this shindig?
Like all these things I rather think that it will remain in the imagination rather than take place but I could be wrong (in which case the answer is yes of course!).
JohnO and I recently had lunch and drinks in Searcys, it was immense fun.
This is going to be an expensive lunch, if @TOPPING gets to choose the wines.
I think we should let Ms Cyclefree choose the venue.
amortised over, oh I don't know, 15 years which is probably when I (and others?) last had a comparable blow out it's positively a steal...
Can good Muslim boys who don't drink alcohol attend this shindig?
If allowed to, I will join you in attacking the Perrier water.
NB this is why I love travelling in Muslim countries; westerners accurately assume I don't drink because I'm a drunk, Muslims just think I am normal. I was asked on Lamu once whether it was true that some westerners drink alcohol *every day*; I said I believed there were a couple of medical reports of such cases.
Now, I have started, I just can't stop. My ideal long lunch menu: 1. Pub - three pints, or equivalent, maximum. 2. Restaurant - a glass of two of white wine to get started, with olives and a few thin slices of Iberico ham; then oysters; then very garlicky fish soup; then chorizo, egg and chips; then some kind of mousse or crème caramel; then cheese; all with appropriate wines - the filthier the better. 3. Cigar place for a Montecristo No. 2 and two or three Macallans. 4. Pub - Guinness, or whatever, until closing or death, whichever comes first.
Throw in the discussion, the laughs, the anecdotes, and that is what I call the Mother of All Lunches. I used to do these quite regularly when younger and based in London. What larks they were. Let is do this. How to organise?
The PCP should stop thinking they are as impotent as a eunuch.
May I draw your attention to the title of the previous thread?
Also FPT: which pb'ers will be at Manchester next week? I'm assuming bigjohnowls will be there...
Even DD will be better than Theresa May.
Alas I won't be in Manchester next week.
But will GO?
I hope so.
You could still walk by the massed ranks of sniffer dogs and tactical units securing the conference centre this morning. Interesting scene. I'll give it a miss next week though.
I was there in 2015, the great unwashed made it an unpleasant experience outside the venues, but inside it was amazing, because Dave won a majority.
This time inside it'll be worse because Mrs May lost Dave's majority against Jeremy fecking Corbyn.
Correct me if I'm wrong TSE but sometimes I get the impression that you are not Mrs. May' most ardent fan - but then who is?
Philip May? (Have a lot of time for him he was regularly making calls from CCHQ throughout the campaign, very polite and happy to give selfies and no airs, intelligent and had a successful City career, he and Theresa were introduced by the late Benazir Bhutto and in his time at the Oxford Union he chaperoned Richard Nixon when he came to speak). Perhaps the Tories were led by the wrong May?
It would be pleasing to think that Labour picked the wrong Miliband and the Tories picked the wrong May.
This is going to be an expensive lunch, if @TOPPING gets to choose the wines.
I think we should let Ms Cyclefree choose the venue.
amortised over, oh I don't know, 15 years which is probably when I (and others?) last had a comparable blow out it's positively a steal...
Can good Muslim boys who don't drink alcohol attend this shindig?
If allowed to, I will join you in attacking the Perrier water.
NB this is why I love travelling in Muslim countries; westerners accurately assume I don't drink because I'm a drunk, Muslims just think I am normal. I was asked on Lamu once whether it was true that some westerners drink alcohol *every day*; I said I believed there were a couple of medical reports of such cases.
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
The PCP should stop thinking they are as impotent as a eunuch.
May I draw your attention to the title of the previous thread?
Also FPT: which pb'ers will be at Manchester next week? I'm assuming bigjohnowls will be there...
Even DD will be better than Theresa May.
Alas I won't be in Manchester next week.
But will GO?
I hope so.
You could still walk by the massed ranks of sniffer dogs and tactical units securing the conference centre this morning. Interesting scene. I'll give it a miss next week though.
I was there in 2015, the great unwashed made it an unpleasant experience outside the venues, but inside it was amazing, because Dave won a majority.
This time inside it'll be worse because Mrs May lost Dave's majority against Jeremy fecking Corbyn.
Why is it held in Manchester though ?
Manchester absolutely hates the Conservatives ! Even during Torymania when the locals were on Andy Burnham crushed everyone else for the mayoralty, and that was when the blue team was winning Tees valley, West Midlands...
Surely Birmingham would have been a better choice with Andy Street being mayor and all.
Trafford is normally Tory (albeit Burnham won it)
That's the kind of inflammatory rhetoric that gets the Tories in trouble with the locals. Even some of the City centre is not Manchester, let alone Trafford!
It is in Greater Manchester and the home of Manchester's most famous brand, Manchester United even if City fans are parochial
Technically it is in Stretford, where the Tories poll sub 30%.
Trafford council is Tory though and the seat of Altrincham and Sale is held by Grrahan Brady
May stands as much chance of beating Corbyn as any of the other members of the cabinet. Replacing May with a buffoon is not the answer. If they cannot find a younger more junior person to become PM then they may as well stay with the devil they know. May's fate will be decided by 7 by elections.
This is going to be an expensive lunch, if @TOPPING gets to choose the wines.
I think we should let Ms Cyclefree choose the venue.
amortised over, oh I don't know, 15 years which is probably when I (and others?) last had a comparable blow out it's positively a steal...
Can good Muslim boys who don't drink alcohol attend this shindig?
If allowed to, I will join you in attacking the Perrier water.
NB this is why I love travelling in Muslim countries; westerners accurately assume I don't drink because I'm a drunk, Muslims just think I am normal. I was asked on Lamu once whether it was true that some westerners drink alcohol *every day*; I said I believed there were a couple of medical reports of such cases.
As a non-drinking Westerner, it sometimes got very awkward in Muslim countries. Especially after they had proudly opened their incredibly well-stocked cocktail cabinets and asked me what I would like.... That fleeting moment of panic, that I might be part of a sting operation by Clerical investigators...before I could explain no, I was just faddy...
If this headline is true, given the time available, doesn't it realistically mean that no deal will be done in time?
Ironic that Tories looked to the EU to save the country from Bennite economics then turned against it when Delors came along. And now - with the prospect of McDonnell economics - we will need those 4 Freedoms more than ever, particularly the freedom to move capital.
The PCP should stop thinking they are as impotent as a eunuch.
May I draw your attention to the title of the previous thread?
Also FPT: which pb'ers will be at Manchester next week? I'm assuming bigjohnowls will be there...
Even DD will be better than Theresa May.
Alas I won't be in Manchester next week.
But will GO?
I hope so.
You could still walk by the massed ranks of sniffer dogs and tactical units securing the conference centre this morning. Interesting scene. I'll give it a miss next week though.
I was there in 2015, the great unwashed made it an unpleasant experience outside the venues, but inside it was amazing, because Dave won a majority.
This time inside it'll be worse because Mrs May lost Dave's majority against Jeremy fecking Corbyn.
Why is it held in Manchester though ?
Manchester absolutely hates the Conservatives ! Even during Torymania when the locals were on Andy Burnham crushed everyone else for the mayoralty, and that was when the blue team was winning Tees valley, West Midlands...
Because Manchester is best placed for the huge security operation that is required. The location, GMEX, is very easy to seal off and there's the room for all the screening and security stuff. Also the main hotels are within the closed zone.
I've been to party conferences in Bournemouth, Brighton, Glasgow, and Birmingham and Manchester is by far the best venue. it is also the biggest media centre outside London.
Blackpool was always good value though, you could stay in a cheap b and b by the sea for less than half the price of a Manchester hotel room
Blackpool suffered because of its awful transport links and was not in a good position when security became so important. It also does not have enough quality hotel rooms and restaurants to satisfy the huge needs of a modern conference
Maybe not for a party in government then but no reason a party in opposition cannot use it, the Imperial Hotel is excellent, more party members rather thsn corporates and lobbyists can attend as it is cheaper and it also has 2 marginal seats
On Saturday 10th June I wanted Mrs May to go. Then on Sunday 11th June I wanted her to stay. I did an abrupt U-turn, because my excellent good friend suddenly unexpectedly became her right-hand-man. He will help steady the ship. But I reckon that if it does become necessary to dump May in order to win the next election, he will be able to persuade her that it is necessary.
After the catastrophe of the election, and the ongoing prevarications and backsliding on the Brexit issue, my membership of the Conservative Party is hanging by a thread. But as long as Gavin Barwell is at the helm, it's a mighty strong thread. It also helps that UKIP is an irrelevant shambles, and therefore not a viable alternative.
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's sounds like a great example of the NIMBY backlash from the tory client vote that is strangling the party - and the country.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
Yep. Abolish the green belt. It's a bonkers policy when the population is now at 65 million, will clear 70 million before 2030, and is likely to hit 80 million around 2050. We simply can't keep towns and cities the same size forever.
If this headline is true, given the time available, doesn't it realistically mean that no deal will be done in time?
Ironic that Tories looked to the EU to save the country from Bennite economics then turned against it when Delors came along. And now - with the prospect of McDonnell economics - we will need those 4 Freedoms more than ever, particularly the freedom to move capital.
It is becoming increasingly clear that there won't be a deal and we should start preparing for such an eventuality. I just can't see the EU willing to accept anything proposed by the UK. Every proposal will have an excuse as to why it is not acceptable. For example, insisting on ECJ jurisdiction using the Home Office blunders as an excuse.
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Ending free movement is also key to reducing demand for housing
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Yes indeed - someone has to pay the price if we're to have halfway sensible moves in that area.
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Yes indeed - someone has to pay the price if we're to have halfway sensible moves in that area.
The price will be Tory council seats lost in the Home Counties, so if more people get on the housing ladder Tories better hope some vote Tory at general elections at least to compensate
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
Yep. Abolish the green belt. It's a bonkers policy when the population is now at 65 million, will clear 70 million before 2030, and is likely to hit 80 million around 2050. We simply can't keep towns and cities the same size forever.
It was also a policy to allow cities to breathe, despite all the fumes of their heavy industry. You remember heavy industry? It's been a while.
This is going to be an expensive lunch, if @TOPPING gets to choose the wines.
I think we should let Ms Cyclefree choose the venue.
amortised over, oh I don't know, 15 years which is probably when I (and others?) last had a comparable blow out it's positively a steal...
Can good Muslim boys who don't drink alcohol attend this shindig?
If allowed to, I will join you in attacking the Perrier water.
NB this is why I love travelling in Muslim countries; westerners accurately assume I don't drink because I'm a drunk, Muslims just think I am normal. I was asked on Lamu once whether it was true that some westerners drink alcohol *every day*; I said I believed there were a couple of medical reports of such cases.
If this headline is true, given the time available, doesn't it realistically mean that no deal will be done in time?
Ironic that Tories looked to the EU to save the country from Bennite economics then turned against it when Delors came along. And now - with the prospect of McDonnell economics - we will need those 4 Freedoms more than ever, particularly the freedom to move capital.
At what point are the UK's Bexit negotiators going to twig that Brussels has sent that contingent of French Knights from Monty Python and the Holy Grail - and that Barnier is just farting in their general direction?
"Now go away, you silly English...or I shall taunt you a second time!"
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
Yep. Abolish the green belt. It's a bonkers policy when the population is now at 65 million, will clear 70 million before 2030, and is likely to hit 80 million around 2050. We simply can't keep towns and cities the same size forever.
It was also a policy to allow cities to breathe, despite all the fumes of their heavy industry. You remember heavy industry? It's been a while.
The current state of things is too restrictive, despite attempts to encourage presumption in favour of sustainable development- I understand now why so many planning officers seem so gung ho for development when I see the NIMBY nonsense that can greet even the most sensible and reasonable expansion for a village or town with even a patch of it in designated green belt, and the insistent belief everything can be done on tiny brownfield sections (what the national situation on brownfield may be I do not know, but in local terms people are usually insistent even a tiny amount means no building for growth anywhere else..but also god forbid young people cannot afford to buy houses there).
If this headline is true, given the time available, doesn't it realistically mean that no deal will be done in time?
Ironic that Tories looked to the EU to save the country from Bennite economics then turned against it when Delors came along. And now - with the prospect of McDonnell economics - we will need those 4 Freedoms more than ever, particularly the freedom to move capital.
It is becoming increasingly clear that there won't be a deal and we should start preparing for such an eventuality. I just can't see the EU willing to accept anything proposed by the UK. Every proposal will have an excuse as to why it is not acceptable.
Quite probably. They may be prepared to take some pain knowing we will have more rather than, gasp, compromise to the benefit of all (yes, we have to do this too).
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Yes indeed - someone has to pay the price if we're to have halfway sensible moves in that area.
The price will be Tory council seats lost in the Home Counties, so if more people get on the housing ladder Tories better hope some vote Tory at general elections at least to compensate
Well if there's a place they can generally afford to lose some votes it would be the Home Counties, granted they lost some previously safe ones in June.
People can be awfully fancy with their meals. One vote for a some greasy whitefish of mysterious origin wrapped in newspaper please.
Put me down for a dozen bottles of craft ale, something foreign served on an old coal shovel, unisex toilets anserved by some tatooed person of indeterminate gender. I like to keep up with fashion.
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Yes indeed - someone has to pay the price if we're to have halfway sensible moves in that area.
The price will be Tory council seats lost in the Home Counties, so if more people get on the housing ladder Tories better hope some vote Tory at general elections at least to compensate
Well if there's a place they can generally afford to lose some votes it would be the Home Counties, granted they lost some previously safe ones in June.
There are a lot of elderly residents with bungalows backing onto green fields and even mothers with meadows backing onto their house who were fiercely anti any development there at all in my council by election campaign. People want more affordable housing in theory just not in their backyard (Though developers should also be required to ensure they are building that affordable housing too and not just expensive detached properties when given planning permission)
More houses have to be built yes but part of the problem is the increase in population in part driven by immigration and free movement, that is also another reason why Tories will expect free movement to ultimately end post Brexit
People can be awfully fancy with their meals. One vote for a some greasy whitefish of mysterious origin wrapped in newspaper please.
Put me down for a dozen bottles of craft ale, something foreign served on an old coal shovel, unisex toilets anserved by some tatooed person of indeterminate gender. I like to keep up with fashion.
People can be awfully fancy with their meals. One vote for a some greasy whitefish of mysterious origin wrapped in newspaper please.
Put me down for a dozen bottles of craft ale, something foreign served on an old coal shovel, unisex toilets anserved by some tatooed person of indeterminate gender. I like to keep up with fashion.
I'm sure such a place exists - ever since I saw a place called 'Wiff Waff' described as a 'Ping ping noshery' nothing surprises me.
Now, I have started, I just can't stop. My ideal long lunch menu: 1. Pub - three pints, or equivalent, maximum. 2. Restaurant - a glass of two of white wine to get started, with olives and a few thin slices of Iberico ham; then oysters; then very garlicky fish soup; then chorizo, egg and chips; then some kind of mousse or crème caramel; then cheese; all with appropriate wines - the filthier the better. 3. Cigar place for a Montecristo No. 2 and two or three Macallans. 4. Pub - Guinness, or whatever, until closing or death, whichever comes first.
Throw in the discussion, the laughs, the anecdotes, and that is what I call the Mother of All Lunches. I used to do these quite regularly when younger and based in London. What larks they were. Let is do this. How to organise?
1. Pub - pint or two 2. Restaurant - glass or two of champagne, Bolly is fine, while standing around. 2a. Restaurant - ice cold meursault (Michelot out of preference) with smoked salmon, brown bread, lemon. Then either - kidneys (pink), thin chips, an egg, with an '05 cru bourgeois, or perhaps a 2007 4th/5th growth. Or game, I'm fine with game, any of them grouse for preference - plus everything and also extra bread sauce and game chips. Then a savoury - angels on horseback, with the remainder of the wine, then bread and butter pudding and cream, with a 1995 Rieussec, then cheese with a '77 port, Fonseca perhaps. Then a brandy or two. 3. Then collapse while watching the racing.
Or...prawn cocktail then fish and chips in the pub with Bolly throughout is also good.
Oh my days. Not done that for a while.
Edit: sorry *wakes up* were we talking about politics?
I probably understood about a third of that. I guess that most of the gibberish words mean some sort of alcohol. I dare not imagine what might have had a "4th/5th growth". Game chips? Potato? Anyway. Angels?? On Horseback? Not literally I hope. I don't mind coming to see what it all means, as long as someone else is paying. The whole thing could be sponsored by SeanT perhaps as part of his, er, job. Or something.
Wikipedia explains to me that "angels on horseback" means
Angels on horseback is a hot hors d'œuvre or savoury made of oysters wrapped with bacon. The dish, when served atop breads, can also be a canapé.[2]
The dish is typically prepared by rolling shucked oysters in bacon and baking them in an oven. Modern variations of angels on horseback include skewering and frying. Serving can vary widely to taste on either skewers or breads, with additional accompaniments or condiments.
But this explanation requires explanation. Does "atop breads" mean "on top of bread"? Slices of bread? Or does "breads" mean something else? If so, what? And what does "shucked" mean?
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Yes indeed - someone has to pay the price if we're to have halfway sensible moves in that area.
The price will be Tory council seats lost in the Home Counties, so if more people get on the housing ladder Tories better hope some vote Tory at general elections at least to compensate
Well if there's a place they can generally afford to lose some votes it would be the Home Counties, granted they lost some previously safe ones in June.
(Though developers should also be required to ensure they are building that affordable housing too and not just expensive detached properties when given planning permission)
They usually are - round this way it is 40% must be Affordable if a certain total number are built, they they can sometimes weasel the percentage down by arguing it won't be sustainable at 40%
People can be awfully fancy with their meals. One vote for a some greasy whitefish of mysterious origin wrapped in newspaper please.
One of my best meals was sausage, egg, chips, beans, mushroom and a slice.
Dare I ask: a slice of what?
Well hold on John you can't have it both ways. Either you don't understand the fancy schmancy world or you don't understand the non-fancy schmancy world.
In any greasy spoon cafe worth its salt you are offered, with whatever else you order, a slice (of bread).
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Yes indeed - someone has to pay the price if we're to have halfway sensible moves in that area.
The price will be Tory council seats lost in the Home Counties, so if more people get on the housing ladder Tories better hope some vote Tory at general elections at least to compensate
Well if there's a place they can generally afford to lose some votes it would be the Home Counties, granted they lost some previously safe ones in June.
(Though developers should also be required to ensure they are building that affordable housing too and not just expensive detached properties when given planning permission)
They usually are - round this way it is 40% must be Affordable if a certain total number are built, they they can sometimes weasel the percentage down by arguing it won't be sustainable at 40%
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Yes indeed - someone has to pay the price if we're to have halfway sensible moves in that area.
The price will be Tory council seats lost in the Home Counties, so if more people get on the housing ladder Tories better hope some vote Tory at general elections at least to compensate
Well if there's a place they can generally afford to lose some votes it would be the Home Counties, granted they lost some previously safe ones in June.
(Though developers should also be required to ensure they are building that affordable housing too and not just expensive detached properties when given planning permission)
They usually are - round this way it is 40% must be Affordable if a certain total number are built, they they can sometimes weasel the percentage down by arguing it won't be sustainable at 40%
It is that weaselling down which is the problem
The biggest problem with housing is the teeny tiny size of new builds. Average new home 76 m^2 ! OK So I'm living in a (Sold STC) 66m^2 house at the moment, but 4 bed new builds should be 140m^2, 3 beds 110, 2 beds 80 or something around those figures to be honest.
"a new generation of Tories will begin to understand why so many on the centre-right in the 1970s and 1980s were prepared to trade sovereignty as a hedge against Bennite economics."
The article also says the Tories must build homes urgently or lose.
There is a hell of a lot resting on Javid, and no sign whatsoever of action.
Javid only recently announced thousands of new homes in areas with the highest house price to earnings differential, in Epping we are getting 4000 more than set out in the local plan. However that is also leading to a backlash in the other direction for building too many houses on the green belt
That's a great example of a backlash from the tory client vote strangling the party.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
You can either have more houses or protect all the green belt and countryside, you cannot have both.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Yes indeed - someone has to pay the price if we're to have halfway sensible moves in that area.
The
Well if there's a place they can generally afford to lose some votes it would be the Home Counties, granted they lost some previously safe ones in June.
(Though developers should also be required to ensure they are building that affordable housing too and not just expensive detached properties when given planning permission)
They usually are - round this way it is 40% must be Affordable if a certain total number are built, they they can sometimes weasel the percentage down by arguing it won't be sustainable at 40%
It is that weaselling down which is the problem
The biggest problem with housing is the teeny tiny size of new builds. Average new home 76 m^2 ! OK So I'm living in a (Sold STC) 66m^2 house at the moment, but 4 bed new builds should be 140m^2, 3 beds 110, 2 beds 80 or something around those figures to be honest.
Quite possibly but getting first time buyers into a new build is the first priority
free-market economics – has established a system where eight people own as much wealth as half the planet
May thinks its our greatest ever achievement
How is that there Venezuela coming along ?
*cough* "That's not true socialism/communism."
I believe that's the standard answer when someone points out the 100% failure record.
It will be quite an interesting experiment though, to introduce it in this country, where everyone is accustomed to instant responses.
In the days of the old telephone company or water board or gas board or whatever, you reported a fault or made a request for service, and 3 - 6 months later you were still waiting.
(edit: remove a 't' - not 'experiment thought' , but 'experiment though'.)
free-market economics – has established a system where eight people own as much wealth as half the planet
May thinks its our greatest ever achievement
How is that there Venezuela coming along ?
*cough* "That's not true socialism/communism."
I believe that's the standard answer when someone points out the 100% failure record.
It will be quite an interesting experiment thought, to introduce it in this country, where everyone is accustomed to instant responses.
In the days of the old telephone company or water board or gas board or whatever, you reported a fault or made a request for service, and 3 - 6 months later you were still waiting.
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
Although my feeling about apple / ios11 at the moment, he can grind those bastards into the ground!
Quite possibly but getting first time buyers into a new build is the first priority
God, no. Building good-quality houses (and the associated infrastructure) should be the first priority. Far too many houses are being thrown up, poorly built and without adequate local infrastructure.
free-market economics – has established a system where eight people own as much wealth as half the planet
May thinks its our greatest ever achievement
How is that there Venezuela coming along ?
*cough* "That's not true socialism/communism."
I believe that's the standard answer when someone points out the 100% failure record.
It will be quite an interesting experiment thought, to introduce it in this country, where everyone is accustomed to instant responses.
In the days of the old telephone company or water board or gas board or whatever, you reported a fault or made a request for service, and 3 - 6 months later you were still waiting.
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
Although my feeling about apple / ios11 at the moment, he can grind those bastards into the ground!
That's the sort of thing I had in mind - not that they would be stopped (or die), but how things would carry on as we're accustomed to, even under full-blooded socialism.
free-market economics – has established a system where eight people own as much wealth as half the planet
May thinks its our greatest ever achievement
How is that there Venezuela coming along ?
*cough* "That's not true socialism/communism."
I believe that's the standard answer when someone points out the 100% failure record.
I believe the only country in the Soviet bloc that achieved socialism (against a set list of criteria implemented by Stalin and assiduously tracked) was Czechoslovakia in the early 1960s. The economy duly collapsed and set the country on its path towards the Prague Spring.
Nobody got within a country mile of the criteria for communism.
I don't know whether, if you look globally, countries elsewhere would have met the definitions, but I don't think the USSR were tracking further afield.
Sky reporting that the anger in Catalonia is sparking Spain's biggest crises in 40 years
Also Italtian opposition leader demanding a referendum
Good job the EU is such a democratic organisation
It's ok, when junker and co push through ever closer union that will sort out the problem. as a bit like not proper socialism is why Venezuelan is failing, it is the same with the EU (and that is what they have said themselves).
Well we have now reached the 6.25% mark of this Parliament if Polling Day remains scheduled for 5th May 2022!
Yes and I can't see it anytime before that date. Full term would take us up late June 2022 but given that the London council elections are scheduled for the first Thursday in May it'll almost certainly be on the same day. Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act which the current government has no desire to repeal there are two ways to effect an earlier election.
1, A two-thirds majority in the HOC, but given what happened last time I doubt the Tories would risk that again and 2. A vote of no confidence in the government, which is not rescinded within 14 days, in which case the speaker will inform The Queen who will call the election whether the government wanted one or not.
Sinn Fein don't take their seats so the government has a majority of three, if the Democratic Unionists don't vote against them, I can't imagine the DUP voting with Corbyn's Labour and It would be a tall order to get the combined opposition together anyway. some of the SNP members are not as left wing as most people think and a few might manage to be absent on the night.
So it would take defections, what kind of Tory would line up with Corbyn? or By-election losses, at least half a dozen needed and I just can't see that happening in the next 4 1/2 years, despite all the hullaballoo at Brighton.
On topic though, Theresa Mat will go quietly when the men in grey suits come for her, this year or next.
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
One of the things I find most perplexing about Corbynism is the way that his ardent supporters don't seem to follow through on the implication of some of his policies. The things that young people like most would be non-viable or stifled in a Corbyn led Britain.
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
One of the things I find most perplexing about Corbynism is the way that his ardent supporters don't seem to follow through on the implication of some of his policies. The things that young people like most would be non-viable or stifled in a Corbyn led Britain.
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
Quite possibly but getting first time buyers into a new build is the first priority
God, no. Building good-quality houses (and the associated infrastructure) should be the first priority. Far too many houses are being thrown up, poorly built and without adequate local infrastructure.
We need to build communities, not houses.
The 2 have to go together yes but it should be taken as a given that builders build properties to the appropriate standard
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
One of the things I find most perplexing about Corbynism is the way that his ardent supporters don't seem to follow through on the implication of some of his policies. The things that young people like most would be non-viable or stifled in a Corbyn led Britain.
It is quite bizarre. I don't know if they blindly think that corbynism will just make them nicer companies and they will still be able to get £3 taxi fares, free same day delivery of goods etc or think that the extra cost of all his meddling will be tiny surcharge.
But on the other than they do their nut over brexit possibly meaning no free texts when abroad.
Another great thread and finally decent discussion Ireland. I'd have though Leavers of all people would have understood politics and identity trumping economics. If something is unsustainable then it won't be sustained. The post GFA peace and a Hard Brexit are unsustainable. So...
#1 Ireland is wise to wait while the Brexiters hang themselves. The border is a fiendishly difficult problem. Ireland are right to make the British take ownership of it.
#2 One option is to rupture the union which different statuses for NI and GB within the UK.
#3 The other extreme is seeing the hard border return with all that does for nationalism.
While the most likely outcome is a technical compromise between #1 and #2 Irish nationalism wins in either. Either Ireland's economic unity will be preserved at the expense of the political unity of the UK or Ireland's economic unity will be ruptured with an added impetus to political unity. This is big sweep of history stuff and the Irish can see the scale of the mistake we've made.
If you add in the enjoyment of a small ex colony being able to dictate to it's big ex colonising neighbour for a few years with the rEU at their back.... I'd argue the Irish position makes perfect sense. This is the UK's mess, the UK needs to fix it, the capacity to lubricate eventual reunification is there and the power dynamics since the 13th century are briefly reversed. Good luck to them I say.
free-market economics – has established a system where eight people own as much wealth as half the planet
May thinks its our greatest ever achievement
It has also produced a system where fewer people are in absolute poverty than at any time in human history
Biggest progress recently being good old free markt China.
Yes, compare it now to when it was under Mao
Yes, and? Is China today your free market ideal? Too far for me comrade.
China's process of industrialisation in the 20th century killed as many peasants as our industrialisation killed Indian peasants in the 19th. Many here would say te latter was worth it because of the gains which ultimately followed (and did in the last thread). Is the logic different for Communist Party China?
Quite possibly but getting first time buyers into a new build is the first priority
God, no. Building good-quality houses (and the associated infrastructure) should be the first priority. Far too many houses are being thrown up, poorly built and without adequate local infrastructure.
We need to build communities, not houses.
It is very difficult to build communities, take the pub on a new estate, it doent succeed people want established venues not modern pubs. The shopping centres don't work because people go to tescos every fridat. You don't know your next door neighbour and don't want to, the only instituation that brings some people together is the local primary school. Tradditional villages in places like somerset are taken over by second home owners who turn uo on Friday night with a boot full of food and booze, they walk their dogs and wonder at the beautiful countryside. But add nothing to either village life or the community. Something went wrong along they way which made us more selfish and insular. Maybe Thatcher?
I believe the only country in the Soviet bloc that achieved socialism (against a set list of criteria implemented by Stalin and assiduously tracked) was Czechoslovakia in the early 1960s. The economy duly collapsed and set the country on its path towards the Prague Spring.
Nobody got within a country mile of the criteria for communism.
I don't know whether, if you look globally, countries elsewhere would have met the definitions, but I don't think the USSR were tracking further afield.
I would genuinely be interested if someone could point to a country and say "it worked here". I suppose some will argue that the real problem is not communism in itself, but that no state peacefully makes the transition to it. i.e. The process fails, and the desired outcome is never reached.
As it is impossible to simply switch overnight to communism, no matter how desirous it may be the strife caused trying to implement it rules against it.
Another great thread and finally decent discussion Ireland. I'd have though Leavers of all people would have understood politics and identity trumping economics. If something is unsustainable then it won't be sustained. The post GFA peace and a Hard Brexit are unsustainable. So...
#1 Ireland is wise to wait while the Brexiters hang themselves. The border is a fiendishly difficult problem. Ireland are right to make the British take ownership of it.
#2 One option is to rupture the union which different statuses for NI and GB within the UK.
#3 The other extreme is seeing the hard border return with all that does for nationalism.
While the most likely outcome is a technical compromise between #1 and #2 Irish nationalism wins in either. Either Ireland's economic unity will be preserved at the expense of the political unity of the UK or Ireland's economic unity will be ruptured with an added impetus to political unity. This is big sweep of history stuff and the Irish can see the scale of the mistake we've made.
If you add in the enjoyment of a small ex colony being able to dictate to it's big ex colonising neighbour for a few years with the rEU at their back.... I'd argue the Irish position makes perfect sense. This is the UK's mess, the UK needs to fix it, the capacity to lubricate eventual reunification is there and the power dynamics since the 13th century are briefly reversed. Good luck to them I say.
I don't know for sure that Hard Brexit and peace in N. Ireland are unsustainable- I'd suggest no one can really. That might lead you to think that it's unwise to risk things - but it would hardly be the first time the rest of the UK shafted Northern Ireland.
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
800,000 people have signed a petition to save minicab company that treats and pays its workers very poorly. I don't think young people are all that committed to economic and social justice when it inconveniences them.
I believe the only country in the Soviet bloc that achieved socialism (against a set list of criteria implemented by Stalin and assiduously tracked) was Czechoslovakia in the early 1960s. The economy duly collapsed and set the country on its path towards the Prague Spring.
Nobody got within a country mile of the criteria for communism.
I don't know whether, if you look globally, countries elsewhere would have met the definitions, but I don't think the USSR were tracking further afield.
I would genuinely be interested if someone could point to a country and say "it worked here". I suppose some will argue that the real problem is not communism in itself, but that no state peacefully makes the transition to it. i.e. The process fails, and the desired outcome is never reached.
As it is impossible to simply switch overnight to communism, no matter how desirous it may be the strife caused trying to implement it rules against it.
I think it's that Communism was a sort of shock therapy for disintegrating agricultural empires, taking power in ruined undemocratic states, turning them into industrial countries ready to compete against the developed world. They weren't post-capitalist, but prepared the ground for capitalism in countries that struggled to make te shift from feudalism. Royden Harrison did a good article on it decades ago.
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
800,000 people have signed a petition to save minicab company that treats and pays its workers very poorly. I don't think young people are all that committed to economic and social justice when it inconveniences them.
They are in for a shock if chairman corbyn gets in....
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
800,000 people have signed a petition to save minicab company that treats and pays its workers very poorly. I don't think young people are all that committed to economic and social justice when it inconveniences them.
They are for a shock if chairman corbyn gets in....
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
One of the things I find most perplexing about Corbynism is the way that his ardent supporters don't seem to follow through on the implication of some of his policies. The things that young people like most would be non-viable or stifled in a Corbyn led Britain.
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
And do we think Corbyn will be building houses to buy, or houses for the council to rent out?
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
800,000 people have signed a petition to save minicab company that treats and pays its workers very poorly. I don't think young people are all that committed to economic and social justice when it inconveniences them.
They are for a shock if chairman corbyn gets in....
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
800,000 people have signed a petition to save minicab company that treats and pays its workers very poorly. I don't think young people are all that committed to economic and social justice when it inconveniences them.
They are for a shock if chairman corbyn gets in....
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
800,000 people have signed a petition to save minicab company that treats and pays its workers very poorly. I don't think young people are all that committed to economic and social justice when it inconveniences them.
They are for a shock if chairman corbyn gets in....
We are all in for a shock if Corbyn gets in
Perhaps no more so than when Thatcher got in.
Well yes, must be a shock to find that your phone is connected this week rather than in a few months time...
free-market economics – has established a system where eight people own as much wealth as half the planet
May thinks its our greatest ever achievement
How is that there Venezuela coming along ?
*cough* "That's not true socialism/communism."
I believe that's the standard answer when someone points out the 100% failure record.
It will be quite an interesting experiment thought, to introduce it in this country, where everyone is accustomed to instant responses.
In the days of the old telephone company or water board or gas board or whatever, you reported a fault or made a request for service, and 3 - 6 months later you were still waiting.
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
Although my feeling about apple / ios11 at the moment, he can grind those bastards into the ground!
Don't worry, apple will soon be a thing of the past - after six months, National Telecom will get round to fitting your phone onto your hallway wall....in Corbyn's Seventies Socialist Utopia..
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
One of the things I find most perplexing about Corbynism is the way that his ardent supporters don't seem to follow through on the implication of some of his policies. The things that young people like most would be non-viable or stifled in a Corbyn led Britain.
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
And do we think Corbyn will be building houses to buy, or houses for the council to rent out?
Achievable? Dunno. Labour clearly understand the problem better than oldies on here going 'they have uber why are they whinging when I was a lad we didn't have uber'
free-market economics – has established a system where eight people own as much wealth as half the planet
May thinks its our greatest ever achievement
It has also produced a system where fewer people are in absolute poverty than at any time in human history
Biggest progress recently being good old free markt China.
Yes, compare it now to when it was under Mao
Yes, and? Is China today your free market ideal? Too far for me comrade.
China's process of industrialisation in the 20th century killed as many peasants as our industrialisation killed Indian peasants in the 19th. Many here would say te latter was worth it because of the gains which ultimately followed (and did in the last thread). Is the logic different for Communist Party China?
No of course not, Switzerland would be far better for most.
It was Mao who made the 'Great Leap Forward' so brutal
Also no Uber is only for starters...There will be no airbnb, no deliveroo, no Amazon prime next day delivery etc etc etc, but ohhhhhhhh Jeremy corbyn.
One of the things I find most perplexing about Corbynism is the way that his ardent supporters don't seem to follow through on the implication of some of his policies. The things that young people like most would be non-viable or stifled in a Corbyn led Britain.
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
And do we think Corbyn will be building houses to buy, or houses for the council to rent out?
Achievable? Dunno. Labour clearly understand the problem better than oldies on here going 'they have uber why are they whinging when I was a lad we didn't have uber'
Yes young people love having Amazon Prime delivering next day to the house they don't own.
800,000 people have signed a petition to save minicab company that treats and pays its workers very poorly. I don't think young people are all that committed to economic and social justice when it inconveniences them.
They are for a shock if chairman corbyn gets in....
We are all in for a shock if Corbyn gets in
Thatcher got in about the same time as Reagan and shifted the western world in a more free market, less state interventionist direction. If Corbyn gets in, with Sanders also having a comfortable lead in current US polls for 2020 it would likely be part of a western shift back towards the state and protectionism (perhaps Trump and Brexit just the path in between)
Comments
NB this is why I love travelling in Muslim countries; westerners accurately assume I don't drink because I'm a drunk, Muslims just think I am normal. I was asked on Lamu once whether it was true that some westerners drink alcohol *every day*; I said I believed there were a couple of medical reports of such cases.
I once had a business meeting in there.
The food was pretty good.
http://www.stringfellows.co.uk/stringfellows-restaurant/stringfellows-restaurant-menu/
May's fate will be decided by 7 by elections.
If this headline is true, given the time available, doesn't it realistically mean that no deal will be done in time?
Ironic that Tories looked to the EU to save the country from Bennite economics then turned against it when Delors came along. And now - with the prospect of McDonnell economics - we will need those 4 Freedoms more than ever, particularly the freedom to move capital.
Making as much progress as the Brexit negotiators.
After the catastrophe of the election, and the ongoing prevarications and backsliding on the Brexit issue, my membership of the Conservative Party is hanging by a thread. But as long as Gavin Barwell is at the helm, it's a mighty strong thread. It also helps that UKIP is an irrelevant shambles, and therefore not a viable alternative.
The blue team have learned precisely the wrong lesson from the dementia tax debacle.
Tory councils are focusing on brownbelt land as far as possible but inevitably some green belt land is going to be built on, that will cost Tory council seats to the LDs even if it saves a few Tory parliamentary seats from Labour.
Ending free movement is also key to reducing demand for housing
The dementia tax has been scrapped
"Now go away, you silly English...or I shall taunt you a second time!"
And a decent claret.
More houses have to be built yes but part of the problem is the increase in population in part driven by immigration and free movement, that is also another reason why Tories will expect free movement to ultimately end post Brexit
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/house/house-magazine/89347/theresa-may-“weve-got-make-case-free-markets-all-over-again
May thinks its our greatest ever achievement
Angels on horseback is a hot hors d'œuvre or savoury made of oysters wrapped with bacon. The dish, when served atop breads, can also be a canapé.[2]
The dish is typically prepared by rolling shucked oysters in bacon and baking them in an oven. Modern variations of angels on horseback include skewering and frying. Serving can vary widely to taste on either skewers or breads, with additional accompaniments or condiments.
But this explanation requires explanation. Does "atop breads" mean "on top of bread"? Slices of bread? Or does "breads" mean something else? If so, what? And what does "shucked" mean?
In any greasy spoon cafe worth its salt you are offered, with whatever else you order, a slice (of bread).
It needs softening, sure, but full blooded socialism hasn't worked yet. Nor will it, because you remove the incentive to innovate.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-were-unprepared-snap-election-11252868
She also bemoaned the lack of people "coming together for debates"
OK So I'm living in a (Sold STC) 66m^2 house at the moment, but 4 bed new builds should be 140m^2, 3 beds 110, 2 beds 80 or something around those figures to be honest.
I believe that's the standard answer when someone points out the 100% failure record.
In the days of the old telephone company or water board or gas board or whatever, you reported a fault or made a request for service, and 3 - 6 months later you were still waiting.
(edit: remove a 't' - not 'experiment thought' , but 'experiment though'.)
Although my feeling about apple / ios11 at the moment, he can grind those bastards into the ground!
We need to build communities, not houses.
Also Italtian opposition leader demanding a referendum
Good job the EU is such a democratic organisation
Nobody got within a country mile of the criteria for communism.
I don't know whether, if you look globally, countries elsewhere would have met the definitions, but I don't think the USSR were tracking further afield.
Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act which the current government has no desire to repeal there are two ways to effect an earlier election.
1, A two-thirds majority in the HOC, but given what happened last time I doubt the Tories would risk that again and
2. A vote of no confidence in the government, which is not rescinded within 14 days, in which case the speaker will inform The Queen who will call the election whether the government wanted one or not.
Sinn Fein don't take their seats so the government has a majority of three, if the Democratic Unionists don't vote against them, I can't imagine the DUP voting with Corbyn's Labour and It would be a tall order to get the combined opposition together anyway. some of the SNP members are not as left wing as most people think and a few might manage to be absent on the night.
So it would take defections, what kind of Tory would line up with Corbyn? or By-election losses, at least half a dozen needed and I just can't see that happening in the next 4 1/2 years, despite all the hullaballoo at Brighton.
On topic though, Theresa Mat will go quietly when the men in grey suits come for her, this year or next.
But on the other than they do their nut over brexit possibly meaning no free texts when abroad.
#1 Ireland is wise to wait while the Brexiters hang themselves. The border is a fiendishly difficult problem. Ireland are right to make the British take ownership of it.
#2 One option is to rupture the union which different statuses for NI and GB within the UK.
#3 The other extreme is seeing the hard border return with all that does for nationalism.
While the most likely outcome is a technical compromise between #1 and #2 Irish nationalism wins in either. Either Ireland's economic unity will be preserved at the expense of the political unity of the UK or Ireland's economic unity will be ruptured with an added impetus to political unity. This is big sweep of history stuff and the Irish can see the scale of the mistake we've made.
If you add in the enjoyment of a small ex colony being able to dictate to it's big ex colonising neighbour for a few years with the rEU at their back.... I'd argue the Irish position makes perfect sense. This is the UK's mess, the UK needs to fix it, the capacity to lubricate eventual reunification is there and the power dynamics since the 13th century are briefly reversed. Good luck to them I say.
China's process of industrialisation in the 20th century killed as many peasants as our industrialisation killed Indian peasants in the 19th. Many here would say te latter was worth it because of the gains which ultimately followed (and did in the last thread). Is the logic different for Communist Party China?
As it is impossible to simply switch overnight to communism, no matter how desirous it may be the strife caused trying to implement it rules against it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-41435183
Achievable? Dunno. Labour clearly understand the problem better than oldies on here going 'they have uber why are they whinging when I was a lad we didn't have uber'
It was Mao who made the 'Great Leap Forward' so brutal
Probably Neil Woodford trying to flog his latest fund !