If anything now we are leaving the single market and customs union an independent Scotland that joined the EEA would be even more difficult on economic grounds as even with a FTA that would see some tariffs with the rUK just as the UK is likely to have with the Republic of Ireland. Implementing monitoring measures as will be used at the Irish border may make it practically simpler but does not change that fact
At school weren't you ever taught to use punctuation? Your lack thereof garbles many of your posts including the excellent example above.
Last time I checked a full stop was a punctuation mark
Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. .
Why? For the zillionth time, anything that looks like a white van might be being used to smuggle fags. So you presumably must believe that therefore all white vans are inspected at the border. If you don't believe this, why on earth can't you understand that the same is even more true of ordinary commercial goods, for which the incentives for smuggling will be far less under all scenarios.
It speaks volumes about what a fucked up country the US has become that LBJ's great reforms on civil rights and on building a small safety net for the poor/elderly put him more beyond the pale than Trump.
I would imagine the Vietnam War did rather more for LBJ's relatively low rating than his civil rights and social reforms
Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a types.
Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
The swing is more pronounced in the Notts area coalfield than Yorkshire though. Look at the seats the Tories have in that part of the world, Sherwood, Mansfield, NE Derbyshire etc. It's UDM country so it's always been more rightwing than other coalfields. Bassetlaw seems like the outlier, but John Mann isn't exactly a standard Labour MP i suppose.
Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.
NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
I think that statement is far too broad brush. The pattern is regional and patchy. There are plenty of English mining seats where the Tories are still seen as the antichrist. I doubt we are going to see Tory MPs any time soon in the likes of Easington, Barnsley East/Central or Doncaster North/Central.
The old Somerset, Leicestershire, Kent, Nottinghamshire, and Derbyshire coalfields have all swung rightwards, and Labour's majorities in Durham and South Yorkshire are well below where they used to be.
The border issue may be less relevant next time there's a Scottish IndyRef (*if* there's a next time). However, the currency issue will as relevant and the oil-running-out issue will be even more relevant.
But to get another referendum, there needs to be a pro-SIndyRef2 majority in Holyrood, which probably won't now come about until the SNP have lost power, Someone has replaced them as the Scottish government and then have themselves lost power. We're talking maybe 15 years down the line.
One's almost tempted to say a generation.
Is the alternative to the SNP at Holyrooda Unionist grand coalistion?
Except SLAB are not the German Social Democrats, and I can't see them rolling over to have their tummies tickled by Ruthie.
So .. never ending SNP minority government?
Only until (by as yet unspecified means) Ruthy becomes FM.
Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. .
Why? For the zillionth time, anything that looks like a white van might be being used to smuggle fags. So you presumably must believe that therefore all white vans are inspected at the border. If you don't believe this, why on earth can't you understand that the same is even more true of ordinary commercial goods, for which the incentives for smuggling will be far less under all scenarios.
You didn't read what I wrote. I expect vans to be excluded from spot checks because they are "dual use". They might just be ferrying people. Cars and vans are spot checked at the Canada/US border but I could see customs dialling back on that in Ireland because of the sensitivity of the border.
Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. Because of the sensitivity around the border other vehicles won't be checked unless the customs officers have specific information. Smugglers will use those vehicles, probably including vans -- a plumber might be visiting his mum or a client 5 miles away across the border ditch. The "bordering on bonkers" concerns are, as I say, the reason why every single WTO member does control its borders.
Do you know how many road crossing points there are on the border to the nearest 100 ?
Clue - not a dozen.
There will be a limited number of customs crossing points. This is normal.
OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.
It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
You are having a momentary lapse of logic informed perhaps by only a vague understanding of the past 50-odd years of life on the island of Ireland.
To repeat a post of some moons ago:
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Now, you may say that it's all low grade stuff (booze 'n' fags) but the more opportunities there are to make money, the more they will be exploited.
Eh? There's already a HUGE different tariff environment. The criminal gangs operate at the moment. The idea that they are going to switch from booze'n'fags, which are widely available, easy to sell and highly profitable, to car parts or US chickens in order to arbitrate on rules of origin is bonkers. In any case, why would there be any tariffs at all? Every man and his dog wants a Free Trade Agreement; there very probably won't be any tariffs.
While the other side of that coin is the ideological disagreement with any kind of stricter border. Two elements that despite your indisputable logic, absolutely no one wants.
Except you don’t think anyone should worry about it.
If anything now we are leaving the single market and customs union an independent Scotland that joined the EEA would be even more difficult on economic grounds as even with a FTA that would see some tariffs with the rUK just as the UK is likely to have with the Republic of Ireland. Implementing monitoring measures as will be used at the Irish border may make it practically simpler but does not change that fact
At school weren't you ever taught to use punctuation? Your lack thereof garbles many of your posts including the excellent example above.
Last time I checked a full stop was a punctuation mark
Both sides in the Chinese civil war largely left it up to the Americans to fight the Japanese, so they could concentrate on shoring up their own positions. The nationalists and the communists separately won a significant battle against the Japanese.
Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
There I was about to declare that it was a Terrrrrible Night for the Conservatives, and then I saw this result. At least we held the seat.
A chunk of the terrrrrrible night was down to the former Tory councillor in Devon being sent to prison for trying to murder his wife with a mallet (polo or croquet wasn't specified). All very Midsummer Murders - and not the best circumstances for the Tories to get the vote out to replace him.
The Chudleigh seat in Devon was won by the LDs in 2003 and they won a by election there in 2016 too so the LDs clearly have a presence there too
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
German cars in China are mostly built in China not Germany. VW etc have massive factories in China, though they are forced to operate as joint ventures with local partners under Chinese law. Not that this means the message of the tweet is incorrect.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Gun ownership rates have fallen in recent decades and the US has had the second amendment for over 200 years.
Given mass school and other shootings are only a recent phenomenon in the US the problem has to be a bit more complex than the second amendment. Why are young men doing this today when they weren't 30 or 50 or 100 years ago?
They have very tight gun control in Chicago - doesn't stop them having a very high murder rate. More people will probably be murdered there by guns in the next week than died in this incident.
Not saying access to guns doesn't contribute - but the solution is way more complex. Because 99.999 per cent of US gun owners don't commit mass shootings do they? What is driving these young men to do this - when they weren't for 90 per cent of the time there has been a second amendment.
Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.
NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
How long before Wales follows suit?
They have over the last 20 years moved from Labour to PC and sometimes back again. Some refer to PC as Green Tories!
England is different to Wales. Bonkers Soviet style socialism has never been the turn-off in the economic deserts of South Wales as it has been in the green and pleasant land east of Offa's dyke.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Corbyn got his vote share by piling up useless votes in seats Labour already held. Corbyn got fewer seats and lost at his first attempt. We dont have a proportional system.
Not sure if any of you have seen Star Trek: Discovery on Netflix yet, let alone enjoyed it (I did, BTW!)
Of course in the Star Trek "Mirror Universe", we don't have an EU and a referendum about Britain leaving it.
What we have instead is the Brexit Empire, "a fascistic culture described as oppressive, racist and xenophobic, predicated on an unconditional hatred and rejection of anything and everything "other"." Despite covering the entire continent of Europe (not just the EU27 of our universe), The Empire is the antithesis of the EU in every way.
Heroically standing up to the Brexit Empire are Emmanuel Macron of the French Resistance, and Angela Merkel of the German Resistance, along with Ambassadors Barnier and Juncker, who collectively coordinate efforts by Resistance cells all over Europe, with the eventual aim of restoring Freedom to all the occupied nations.
Key among the Brexit Empire personnel include Captain Michael Burnham Smithson, Admiral Anna Soubry and Commissar Nick Clegg. But who is the head honcho of the Brexit Empire in this Mirror Universe? Who might be turned on by all this oppression, racism and xenophobia in an alternate dimension?
Easy: our very own Alastair Meeks.
Sorry, make that - Emperor Alastair Meeks Augustus Hungaricus Centaurius, Father of the Motherland, Overlord of France, Dominus of Germany, Rex Hispania.
Anyway, just for a bit of harmless fun - most of you probably have no idea what I mean by "mirror universe". But remember, "Context is for Kings"
Both sides in the Chinese civil war largely left it up to the Americans to fight the Japanese, so they could concentrate on shoring up their own positions. The nationalists and the communists separately won a significant battle against the Japanese.
You do know 10 million Chinese died during WW2?
Indeed. And not all at the hands of the Japanese. The Chinese government deliberately breached the Yellow River dykes in a probably futile effort at holding back the Japanese advance. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese peasants were killed.
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
“Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.
It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs are importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. Because of the sensitivity around the border other vehicles won't be checked unless the customs officers have specific information. Smugglers will use those vehicles, probably including vans -- a plumber might be visiting his mum or a client 5 miles away across the border ditch. The "bordering on bonkers" concerns are, as I say, the reason why every single WTO member does control its borders.
Do you know how many road crossing points there are on the border to the nearest 100 ?
Clue - not a dozen.
Which should make it obvious that it is unlike most borders, either politically or geographically.
Yes - and the idea of barbed wire and customs officers in EU uniforms manning every one is bonkers.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
He certainly wouldn't have made the mistake of opening up leadership vote to a load of £3 trot students.
Brexit will lead to Scottish independence. Brexit will lead to World war. Brexit will lead to a return of the Irish troubles. Brexit will lead to mass unemployment. Brexit will lead to a shortage of Labour. (despite mass unemployment). Brexit will lead to hyper inflation. Brexit will lead to Recession. Brexit will lead to Depression. Brexit will lead to the river Thames flowing with blood and a plague of locusts and boils.....
Calm down dear. its only the UK standing up to a powerful foreign power and becoming independent.
While the other side of that coin is the ideological disagreement with any kind of stricter border. Two elements that despite your indisputable logic, absolutely no one wants.
Except you don’t think anyone should worry about it.
It's partly because no-one wants it that I don't think it's a problem. There seems to be a common view that there is some kind of universal law of nature which decrees that in the absence of a Customs Union you have to physically inspect every consignment, and not only that, that you have to inspect them at the border. That's evident nonsense. Since the degree to which physical checks are imposed is completely at the discretion of two sides neither of whom wants to impose them, and since there is no realistic risk of any significance arising from not inspecting them, it should be straightforward to set up some sensible procedures to avoid physically inspecting them.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Interesting to imagine what would have happened if George Brown had won the leadership, given his battle with the booze.
While the other side of that coin is the ideological disagreement with any kind of stricter border. Two elements that despite your indisputable logic, absolutely no one wants.
Except you don’t think anyone should worry about it.
It's partly because no-one wants it that I don't think it's a problem. There seems to be a common view that there is some kind of universal law of nature which decrees that in the absence of a Customs Union you have to physically inspect every consignment, and not only that, that you have to inspect them at the border. That's evident nonsense. The degree to which physical checks are imposed is completely at the discretion of two sides neither of whom wants to impose them, and since there is no realistic risk of any significance arising from not inspecting them, it should be straightforward to set up some sensible procedures to avoid physically inspecting them.
You are conflating inspection and controls. Every border movement has to be controlled somehow, and some have to be inspected. There's no getting away from this.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Interesting to imagine what would have happened if George Brown had won the leadership, given his battle with the booze.
It wasnt booze that was the problem. Asquith and Churchill both had similar problems. Brown was a man of poor judgment and no popular appeal to swing voters.
Both sides in the Chinese civil war largely left it up to the Americans to fight the Japanese, so they could concentrate on shoring up their own positions. The nationalists and the communists separately won a significant battle against the Japanese.
You do know 10 million Chinese died during WW2?
Indeed. And not all at the hands of the Japanese. The Chinese government deliberately breached the Yellow River dykes in a probably futile effort at holding back the Japanese advance. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese peasants were killed.
And after the Doolittle Raid in 1942, the Japanese launched a massive offensive to search for US airmen and capture the Chinese airfields that most of them landed at:
When Japanese troops moved out of the Zhejiang and Jiangxi areas in mid-August, they left behind a trail of devastation. Chinese estimates put the civilian death toll at 250,000.[2] The Imperial Japanese Army had also spread cholera, typhoid, plague and dysentery pathogens.[4] Around 1,700 Japanese troops died out of a total 10,000 Japanese soldiers who fell ill with disease when their biological weapons attack rebounded on their own forces.[5][6]
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Interesting to imagine what would have happened if George Brown had won the leadership, given his battle with the booze.
It wasnt booze that was the problem. Asquith and Churchill both had similar problems. Brown was a man of poor judgment and no popular appeal to swing voters.
His judgement on the Labour left was the same as yours....when he died he was a member of the SDP.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Corbyn got his vote share by piling up useless votes in seats Labour already held. Corbyn got fewer seats and lost at his first attempt. We dont have a proportional system.
True though Wilson only got a majority of 4 in 1964 and Home ran him very close and he was beaten by Heath in 1970
It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.
NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
How long before Wales follows suit?
They have over the last 20 years moved from Labour to PC and sometimes back again. Some refer to PC as Green Tories!
England is different to Wales. Bonkers Soviet style socialism has never been the turn-off in the economic deserts of South Wales as it has been in the green and pleasant land east of Offa's dyke.
Bonkers Soviet style socialism probably seemed like an enticing forbidden fruit after Chapel Wales!
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
“Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
"The StB officer used the codename Jan Dymič, which according to Slovak archives was the name for Jan Sarkocy, a Slovak StB agent who started working in London in May 1986 but returned to Czechoslovakia in 1989."
"Britain ordered the expulsion of four diplomats at Czechoslovakia's Embassy on Thursday for "activities incompatible with their status," and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said she is not willing to sacrifice national security for better ties with the East Bloc.
Czechoslovak Ambassador Jan Fidler, who was summoned to the Foreign Office, was told the four diplomats had 14 days to leave the country.
Fidler later issued a statement denying what he called the "totally unfounded allegations" of espionage.
Thatcher on Thursday told Parliament that Britain will act against East Bloc spies whatever the consequences for international relations.
"The action had to be taken regardless. The worst thing of all would have been to say that because we have better relations we could ignore these unacceptable activities," she said.
Although ties between Britain and the Soviet Union have recently improved, frictions remain with Prague over human rights and alleged espionage.
It was not immediately clear whether Thursday's expulsions, the second involving Czechoslovaks in a year, were related to the defection to Britain earlier this year of Czechoslovak diplomat Vlastimil Ludwik.
The four expelled are Jan Pavlicek, 39, third secretary and press attache; Dr. Helena Krepelkova, 38, a second secretary; Jan Sarkocy, 35, third secretary, and Rudolf Kasparovsky, 35, technical adviser."
Brexit will lead to Scottish independence. Brexit will lead to World war. Brexit will lead to a return of the Irish troubles. Brexit will lead to mass unemployment. Brexit will lead to a shortage of Labour. (despite mass unemployment). Brexit will lead to hyper inflation. Brexit will lead to Recession. Brexit will lead to Depression. Brexit will lead to the river Thames flowing with blood and a plague of locusts and boils.....
Calm down dear. its only the UK standing up to a powerful foreign power and becoming independent.
You are absolutely right in all your statements, except the last two. Welcome to the sun-drenched plains of Remainderdom!
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Corbyn got his vote share by piling up useless votes in seats Labour already held. Corbyn got fewer seats and lost at his first attempt. We dont have a proportional system.
True though Wilson only got a majority of 4 in 1964 and Home ran him very close and he was beaten by Heath in 1970
It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
If this government lasts until 2022 a Tory government will only have been in power for 7 years. The coalition years would not count as "Tory government" from the point of view of an impartial historian - it contained many Lib Dem ministers including the Deputy Prime Minister.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Corbyn got his vote share by piling up useless votes in seats Labour already held. Corbyn got fewer seats and lost at his first attempt. We dont have a proportional system.
True though Wilson only got a majority of 4 in 1964 and Home ran him very close and he was beaten by Heath in 1970
It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
It is very rare for a PM to win four elections in a row. Its never been done since we became a democracy, so Wilson's 1 out of 4 defeat can be forgiven. But if you are judging by vote share, Wilson lost in 1970 with a higher vote share than Corbyn.
I suspect this government will last until at least 2027. Next time things will be very different now that there is an expectation of a Corbyn government. Indeed, Wilson's close run election of 1964 is proof that expectation of a result often becomes a self denying prophecy.
While the other side of that coin is the ideological disagreement with any kind of stricter border. Two elements that despite your indisputable logic, absolutely no one wants.
Except you don’t think anyone should worry about it.
It's partly because no-one wants it that I don't think it's a problem. There seems to be a common view that there is some kind of universal law of nature which decrees that in the absence of a Customs Union you have to physically inspect every consignment, and not only that, that you have to inspect them at the border. That's evident nonsense. Since the degree to which physical checks are imposed is completely at the discretion of two sides neither of whom wants to impose them, and since there is no realistic risk of any significance arising from not inspecting them, it should be straightforward to set up some sensible procedures to avoid physically inspecting them.
It's more the other way round, I believe. Because people think it's a problem they don't want it. It comes down to how much the parties are willing to compromise to avoid the problem: to have a customs union, to not have a customs union, to allow divergence between NI and rUK. I genuinely don't know how this will play out. There are good reasons for the UK being in the CU anyway, so that would be my preferred choice.
Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.
NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
I think that statement is far too broad brush. The pattern is regional and patchy. There are plenty of English mining seats where the Tories are still seen as the antichrist. I doubt we are going to see Tory MPs any time soon in the likes of Easington, Barnsley East/Central or Doncaster North/Central.
Last nights results show that the number of candidates Ukip (if any) put up in the next GE could be a big factor in the outcome.
While the other side of that coin is the ideological disagreement with any kind of stricter border. Two elements that despite your indisputable logic, absolutely no one wants.
Except you don’t think anyone should worry about it.
It's partly because no-one wants it that I don't think it's a problem. There seems to be a common view that there is some kind of universal law of nature which decrees that in the absence of a Customs Union you have to physically inspect every consignment, and not only that, that you have to inspect them at the border. That's evident nonsense. The degree to which physical checks are imposed is completely at the discretion of two sides neither of whom wants to impose them, and since there is no realistic risk of any significance arising from not inspecting them, it should be straightforward to set up some sensible procedures to avoid physically inspecting them.
You are conflating inspection and controls. Every border movement has to be controlled somehow, and some have to be inspected. There's no getting away from this.
No, I'm the one who is NOT conflating and controls, that is the entire point. It is true that in the absence of a Customs Union most commercial cross-border consignments have to be recorded in some way (there would probably be an exemption for small local traders). It is also true that customs on both sides would want to reserve the right to inspect (as they do at the moment, for booze'n'fags particularly). Neither of those mean that there have to be routine physical checks at the border; since we are talking about very marginal risks of non-compliance anyway, you can easily have a system of self-certification, plus attendance at a customs facility somewhere for non-certified traders, backed up by spot checks as happen at the moment.
"FTPA thus makes thinkable some peculiar scenarios that were unthinkable before it passed. Britain could wind up with an unelected Prime Minister who lacks the confidence of the House of Commons. The Queen could be forced to dismiss a Prime Minister who refused to give way to a credible successor. She could, just about, be left without a government, or forced to keep a PrimeMinister in office who wished to step aside. Much would depend on convention, on the Cabinet Manual, and on the behind-the-scenes manoeuvring of two unelected officials—the Cabinet Secretary and the Queen’s PrivateSecretary"
Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.
NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
I think that statement is far too broad brush. The pattern is regional and patchy. There are plenty of English mining seats where the Tories are still seen as the antichrist. I doubt we are going to see Tory MPs any time soon in the likes of Easington, Barnsley East/Central or Doncaster North/Central.
Last nights results show that the number of candidates Ukip (if any) put up in the next GE could be a big factor in the outcome.
By 2022 UKIP will have no councillors, no MEPs, no Welsh Assembly members, and everyone still in the party will have had a turn at being leader. That's if they exist at all.
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
.
Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
“Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
He was explaining how the difference between the 2 affected the US and meant that the benefits of GDP growth would be less than expected to the domestic economy but in truth the gap between the 2 is relatively small beer in the US compared to a country like Eire. The rapid rise in GDP gives very little benefit to Eire because the tax wedge available to the domestic economy is very small. In short Apple, Dell, Pfizer and others benefit from the high GDP of Eire, the Irish largely don't.
Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.
NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
I think that statement is far too broad brush. The pattern is regional and patchy. There are plenty of English mining seats where the Tories are still seen as the antichrist. I doubt we are going to see Tory MPs any time soon in the likes of Easington, Barnsley East/Central or Doncaster North/Central.
Last nights results show that the number of candidates Ukip (if any) put up in the next GE could be a big factor in the outcome.
By 2022 UKIP will have no councillors, no MEPs, no Welsh Assembly members, and everyone still in the party will have had a turn at being leader. That's if they exist at all.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
He certainly wouldn't have made the mistake of opening up leadership vote to a load of £3 trot students.
Should that even be seen as a mistake?
Labour got a load of new members (which must have helped somewhat in 2017), they also got a nice cash injection and a load of younger supporters attracted into politics.
Corbyn won with all groups of members - the £3 thing didn’t change the result.
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Corbyn got his vote share by piling up useless votes in seats Labour already held. Corbyn got fewer seats and lost at his first attempt. We dont have a proportional system.
True though Wilson only got a majority of 4 in 1964 and Home ran him very close and he was beaten by Heath in 1970
It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
If this government lasts until 2022 a Tory government will only have been in power for 7 years. The coalition years would not count as "Tory government" from the point of view of an impartial historian - it contained many Lib Dem ministers including the Deputy Prime Minister.
The PM was Tory as was most of the Cabinet, it was a Tory led government.
That was certainly the view of left wing voters as seen by the LDs trouncing in 2015 and 2017 post Coalition
"The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.
In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."
The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.
What's coming down the line in the next 3-4 years will solve the problem of high house prices. However the broader macro-economic conditions that bring about change will be enough to destroy any government in power.
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
“Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
Those were the days when Labour had a decent leader. Won four elections more than any other PM in twentieth century. He would be horrified by Jeremy Corbyn.
Though Wilson lost in 1970 and the only landslide he won was in 1966. Indeed Corbyn got a higher voteshare in 2017 than Wilson got on 1974
Corbyn got his vote share by piling up useless votes in seats Labour already held. Corbyn got fewer seats and lost at his first attempt. We dont have a proportional system.
True though Wilson only got a majority of 4 in 1964 and Home ran him very close and he was beaten by Heath in 1970
It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
It is very rare for a PM to win four elections in a row. Its never been done since we became a democracy, so Wilson's 1 out of 4 defeat can be forgiven. But if you are judging by vote share, Wilson lost in 1970 with a higher vote share than Corbyn.
I suspect this government will last until at least 2027. Next time things will be very different now that there is an expectation of a Corbyn government. Indeed, Wilson's close run election of 1964 is proof that expectation of a result often becomes a self denying prophecy.
Much could depend on post election deals, had Heath got Thorpe on board in February 1974 he would have been PM not Wilson and had Clegg gone with Labour in 2010 Cameron would not have become PM
Regarding mining areas, I agree there is definitely regional variation. Former mining areas close to big cities (e.g. NE Somerset) or with good transport links (Notts/Derbys) have and are trending to the Tories.
The issue with the Welsh Valleys is that they haven't been able to replace mining with sufficient alternative industries and that Cardiff and Newport aren't economically strong enough to support a commuter effect. People in the Valleys may not agree with Corbyn on a lot of things but they are simply too poor to vote Tory.
Wales as a whole still suffers economically and it is stiffed by Barnett when compared to Scotland and NI
Rank Place GDP per capita, 2015[201] 1 England £26,160/ $40,000 2 Scotland £23,685/ $36,200 3 Northern Ireland £18,584/ $28,400 4 Wales £18,002/ $27,500
Yes, to be fair I think it was Richard Nabavi who said we shouldn't get too excited about the apparent Tory poll lead. In the same way I don't think this reflects anything special. Basically the two parties are tied and have been for some time.
Yes, to be fair I think it was Richard Nabavi who said we shouldn't get too excited about the apparent Tory poll lead. In the same way I don't think this reflects anything special. Basically the two parties are tied and have been for some time.
Yes, to be fair I think it was Richard Nabavi who said we shouldn't get too excited about the apparent Tory poll lead. In the same way I don't think this reflects anything special. Basically the two parties are tied and have been for some time.
Yes, it seems fairly static.
The top two issues in the YouGov poll (with respondents asked to choose three) are Brexit (61%), and Health (52%). I think we'll remain in the current fairly static position until the nature of the Brexit settlement becomes clear, which probably won't be for another year. It's very hard to predict how sentiment will then shift.
Regarding mining areas, I agree there is definitely regional variation. Former mining areas close to big cities (e.g. NE Somerset) or with good transport links (Notts/Derbys) have and are trending to the Tories.
The issue with the Welsh Valleys is that they haven't been able to replace mining with sufficient alternative industries and that Cardiff and Newport aren't economically strong enough to support a commuter effect. People in the Valleys may not agree with Corbyn on a lot of things but they are simply too poor to vote Tory.
Wales as a whole still suffers economically and it is stiffed by Barnett when compared to Scotland and NI
Rank Place GDP per capita, 2015[201] 1 England £26,160/ $40,000 2 Scotland £23,685/ $36,200 3 Northern Ireland £18,584/ $28,400 4 Wales £18,002/ $27,500
Considering that Wales has been led by a Labour government for 21 years now looking at those figures makes me think about the maxim about insanity usually credited to Einstein.
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
“Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
Has the UK ever achieved 7%+ growth?
Not since comparable records began after the war
Really? What about during the Barber boom?
Q1 of 1973 saw 9.7% year-over-year GDP growth, the post war record.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
Mehta said the government would normally be entitled to deference in asserting the need to keep its investigative work under wraps, but perhaps no longer with respect to the dossier.
“This isn’t the ordinary case,” Mehta told a Justice Department lawyer, Anjali Motgi. “I don’t know of any time the president has declassified the fact of a counterintelligence investigation. That’s going to be a hard sell given what the president has done. … This is a new frontier and it has an impact.”
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
“Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
Not to mention a program for 116 million Euro of infrastructure projects by 2040.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
“Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
Not to mention a program for 116 million Euro of infrastructure projects by 2040.
Regarding mining areas, I agree there is definitely regional variation. Former mining areas close to big cities (e.g. NE Somerset) or with good transport links (Notts/Derbys) have and are trending to the Tories.
The issue with the Welsh Valleys is that they haven't been able to replace mining with sufficient alternative industries and that Cardiff and Newport aren't economically strong enough to support a commuter effect. People in the Valleys may not agree with Corbyn on a lot of things but they are simply too poor to vote Tory.
Wales as a whole still suffers economically and it is stiffed by Barnett when compared to Scotland and NI
Rank Place GDP per capita, 2015[201] 1 England £26,160/ $40,000 2 Scotland £23,685/ $36,200 3 Northern Ireland £18,584/ $28,400 4 Wales £18,002/ $27,500
Considering that Wales has been led by a Labour government for 21 years now looking at those figures makes me think about the maxim about insanity usually credited to Einstein.
The issue is that even if Lab fail to get a majority (which they have 3 times) Con and Plaid are unlikely to work together, which means Lab get to stay in power in coalition with the LDs or Plaid.
We may see something similar happen in Scotland going forward where the SNP don't get a majority but stay in power as Lab and Con won't work together.
Regarding mining areas, I agree there is definitely regional variation. Former mining areas close to big cities (e.g. NE Somerset) or with good transport links (Notts/Derbys) have and are trending to the Tories.
The issue with the Welsh Valleys is that they haven't been able to replace mining with sufficient alternative industries and that Cardiff and Newport aren't economically strong enough to support a commuter effect. People in the Valleys may not agree with Corbyn on a lot of things but they are simply too poor to vote Tory.
Wales as a whole still suffers economically and it is stiffed by Barnett when compared to Scotland and NI
Rank Place GDP per capita, 2015[201] 1 England £26,160/ $40,000 2 Scotland £23,685/ $36,200 3 Northern Ireland £18,584/ $28,400 4 Wales £18,002/ $27,500
Considering that Wales has been led by a Labour government for 21 years now looking at those figures makes me think about the maxim about insanity usually credited to Einstein.
The issue is that even if Lab fail to get a majority (which they have 3 times) Con and Plaid are unlikely to work together, which means Lab get to stay in power in coalition with the LDs or Plaid.
We may see something similar happen in Scotland going forward where the SNP don't get a majority but stay in power as Lab and Con won't work together.
Ultimately maybe if the Welsh want to grow and leave their malaise behind then they should do what England have done and elect a Tory government.
Alternatively they could just languish at the bottom with an indefinite Labour government incompetently "leading" them forever.
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
Yet if referendum were won solely on economic sense then Remain would have won a landslide.
are much more compelling now than they were then.
However the pensioners that panicked on that topic at the behest of the great clunking fist are diminishing rapidly.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
That is incorrect, the boundaries were different in 2005, we are now using boundaries which came in to force in 2010.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
“Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
Has the UK ever achieved 7%+ growth?
Not since comparable records began after the war
Really? What about during the Barber boom?
Q1 of 1973 saw 9.7% year-over-year GDP growth, the post war record.
Of course, it did not end well.
Ah yes, I see the point.
That was a year period, but it wasn't a calendar year. Or a financial year. So it wasn't captured in any of the data I was looking at.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
The key in 2005 was the LDs got 22% of the vote, Blair held the centre and won a comfortable majority of seats in England it was just he lost a number of leftwingers to the LDs while still holding most Labour marginals.
Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becomes PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
That is incorrect, the boundaries were different in 2005, we are now using boundaries which came in to force in 2010.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
The key in 2005 was the LDs got 22% of the vote, Blair held the centre and won a comfortable majority of seats in England it was just he lost a number of leftwingers to the LDs while still holding most Labour marginals.
Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becones PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
1). Governments almost always get a higher percentage of the vote in real general elections than they do in between election polls. 2). Even if this poll were translated into reality, and Corbyn became PM, he would be in a much more unstable position than May is now, SNP votes would be insufficient to shore him up, he would be dependent on the Liberals who would not allow any socialist legislation through, and it would be a gift to the Tories who could go stronger in opposition for 1 year or two until the government collapsed before returning a la Thatcher at the subsequent election. Any Corbynista who rejoices at that must be bonkers.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
The key in 2005 was the LDs got 22% of the vote, Blair held the centre and won a comfortable majority of seats in England it was just he lost a number of leftwingers to the LDs while still holding most Labour marginals.
Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becones PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
1). Governments almost always get a higher percentage of the vote in real general elections than they do in between election polls. 2). Even if this poll were translated into reality, and Corbyn became PM, he would be in a much more unstable position than May is now, SNP votes would be insufficient to shore him up, he would be dependent on the Liberals who would not allow any socialist legislation through, and it would be a gift to the Tories who could go stronger in opposition for 1 year or two until the government collapsed before returning a la Thatcher at the subsequent election. Any Corbynista who rejoices at that must be bonkers.
A Corbyn government propped up by the SNP and LDs with the Tories having won most seats would certainly not be a bad position for a Tory Leader of the Opposition Boris or Jacob Rees Mogg to be in
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
The key in 2005 was the LDs got 22% of the vote, Blair held the centre and won a comfortable majority of seats in England it was just he lost a number of leftwingers to the LDs while still holding most Labour marginals.
Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becones PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
1). Governments almost always get a higher percentage of the vote in real general elections than they do in between election polls. 2). Even if this poll were translated into reality, and Corbyn became PM, he would be in a much more unstable position than May is now, SNP votes would be insufficient to shore him up, he would be dependent on the Liberals who would not allow any socialist legislation through, and it would be a gift to the Tories who could go stronger in opposition for 1 year or two until the government collapsed before returning a la Thatcher at the subsequent election. Any Corbynista who rejoices at that must be bonkers.
A Corbyn government propped up by the SNP and LDs with the Tories having won most seats would certainly not be a bad position for a Tory Leader of the Opposition Boris or Jacob Rees Mogg to be in
I doubt the LDs would prop up a Corbyn government: it would be electoral suicide in South West London, Eastbourne, Bath.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
The key in 2005 was the LDs got 22% of the vote, Blair held the centre and won a comfortable majority of seats in England it was just he lost a number of leftwingers to the LDs while still holding most Labour marginals.
Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becones PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
1). Governments almost always get a higher percentage of the vote in real general elections than they do in between election polls. 2). Even if this poll were translated into reality, and Corbyn became PM, he would be in a much more unstable position than May is now, SNP votes would be insufficient to shore him up, he would be dependent on the Liberals who would not allow any socialist legislation through, and it would be a gift to the Tories who could go stronger in opposition for 1 year or two until the government collapsed before returning a la Thatcher at the subsequent election. Any Corbynista who rejoices at that must be bonkers.
A Corbyn government propped up by the SNP and LDs with the Tories having won most seats would certainly not be a bad position for a Tory Leader of the Opposition Boris or Jacob Rees Mogg to be in
It would be a good position for a Tory leader. I think there is a zero chance of Johnson or Mogg becoming Tory leader. The Tories will skip a generation in those circumstances.
Comments
https://twitter.com/haroldsrise
https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/964465485478858752
Except you don’t think anyone should worry about it.
Here's a quote from St Mark:
" I have had many worries in my life, most of which never happened".
Perfect for Remoaners.
Given mass school and other shootings are only a recent phenomenon in the US the problem has to be a bit more complex than the second amendment. Why are young men doing this today when they weren't 30 or 50 or 100 years ago?
They have very tight gun control in Chicago - doesn't stop them having a very high murder rate. More people will probably be murdered there by guns in the next week than died in this incident.
Not saying access to guns doesn't contribute - but the solution is way more complex. Because 99.999 per cent of US gun owners don't commit mass shootings do they? What is driving these young men to do this - when they weren't for 90 per cent of the time there has been a second amendment.
England is different to Wales. Bonkers Soviet style socialism has never been the turn-off in the economic deserts of South Wales as it has been in the green and pleasant land east of Offa's dyke.
Of course in the Star Trek "Mirror Universe", we don't have an EU and a referendum about Britain leaving it.
What we have instead is the Brexit Empire, "a fascistic culture described as oppressive, racist and xenophobic, predicated on an unconditional hatred and rejection of anything and everything "other"." Despite covering the entire continent of Europe (not just the EU27 of our universe), The Empire is the antithesis of the EU in every way.
Heroically standing up to the Brexit Empire are Emmanuel Macron of the French Resistance, and Angela Merkel of the German Resistance, along with Ambassadors Barnier and Juncker, who collectively coordinate efforts by Resistance cells all over Europe, with the eventual aim of restoring Freedom to all the occupied nations.
Key among the Brexit Empire personnel include Captain Michael Burnham Smithson, Admiral Anna Soubry and Commissar Nick Clegg. But who is the head honcho of the Brexit Empire in this Mirror Universe? Who might be turned on by all this oppression, racism and xenophobia in an alternate dimension?
Easy: our very own Alastair Meeks.
Sorry, make that - Emperor Alastair Meeks Augustus Hungaricus Centaurius, Father of the Motherland, Overlord of France, Dominus of Germany, Rex Hispania.
Anyway, just for a bit of harmless fun - most of you probably have no idea what I mean by "mirror universe". But remember, "Context is for Kings"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_Yellow_River_flood
Brexit will lead to World war.
Brexit will lead to a return of the Irish troubles.
Brexit will lead to mass unemployment.
Brexit will lead to a shortage of Labour. (despite mass unemployment).
Brexit will lead to hyper inflation.
Brexit will lead to Recession.
Brexit will lead to Depression.
Brexit will lead to the river Thames flowing with blood and a plague of locusts and boils.....
Calm down dear. its only the UK standing up to a powerful foreign power and becoming independent.
When Japanese troops moved out of the Zhejiang and Jiangxi areas in mid-August, they left behind a trail of devastation. Chinese estimates put the civilian death toll at 250,000.[2] The Imperial Japanese Army had also spread cholera, typhoid, plague and dysentery pathogens.[4] Around 1,700 Japanese troops died out of a total 10,000 Japanese soldiers who fell ill with disease when their biological weapons attack rebounded on their own forces.[5][6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhejiang-Jiangxi_campaign
It took Blair for a Labour government to be in power for 10 years or more from 1997 to 2010, a feat the Tories have achieved twice since WW2 from 1951 to 1964 and 1979 to 1997 and if this government lasts until 2022 may achieve again
"The StB officer used the codename Jan Dymič, which according to Slovak archives was the name for Jan Sarkocy, a Slovak StB agent who started working in London in May 1986 but returned to Czechoslovakia in 1989."
and this http://articles.latimes.com/1989-05-26/news/mn-719_1_britain-ousts-czechoslovak-ambassador-jan-fidler-foreign-office
"Britain ordered the expulsion of four diplomats at Czechoslovakia's Embassy on Thursday for "activities incompatible with their status," and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said she is not willing to sacrifice national security for better ties with the East Bloc.
Czechoslovak Ambassador Jan Fidler, who was summoned to the Foreign Office, was told the four diplomats had 14 days to leave the country.
Fidler later issued a statement denying what he called the "totally unfounded allegations" of espionage.
Thatcher on Thursday told Parliament that Britain will act against East Bloc spies whatever the consequences for international relations.
"The action had to be taken regardless. The worst thing of all would have been to say that because we have better relations we could ignore these unacceptable activities," she said.
Although ties between Britain and the Soviet Union have recently improved, frictions remain with Prague over human rights and alleged espionage.
It was not immediately clear whether Thursday's expulsions, the second involving Czechoslovaks in a year, were related to the defection to Britain earlier this year of Czechoslovak diplomat Vlastimil Ludwik.
The four expelled are Jan Pavlicek, 39, third secretary and press attache; Dr. Helena Krepelkova, 38, a second secretary; Jan Sarkocy, 35, third secretary, and Rudolf Kasparovsky, 35, technical adviser."
"Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world — and never will."
The petrified, with petrified loyalty to a petrified Brussels - yes williamglenn, I'm talking about you!
I suspect this government will last until at least 2027. Next time things will be very different now that there is an expectation of a Corbyn government. Indeed, Wilson's close run election of 1964 is proof that expectation of a result often becomes a self denying prophecy.
Men
Con 44
Lab 36
Brexit right 46
Brexit wrong 45
Women
Con 37
Lab 45
Brexit right 38
Brexit wrong 47
In the end he got eaten by a fox - just saying..
"FTPA thus makes thinkable some peculiar scenarios that were unthinkable before it passed. Britain could wind up with an unelected Prime Minister who lacks the confidence of the House of Commons. The Queen could be forced to dismiss a Prime Minister who refused to give way to a credible successor. She could, just about, be left without a government, or forced to keep a PrimeMinister in office who wished to step aside. Much would depend on convention, on the Cabinet Manual, and on the behind-the-scenes manoeuvring of two unelected officials—the Cabinet Secretary and the Queen’s PrivateSecretary"
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-923X.12485/epdf
One for OGH!!!!
May: 36
Corbyn: 29
Not Sure: 35
He was explaining how the difference between the 2 affected the US and meant that the benefits of GDP growth would be less than expected to the domestic economy but in truth the gap between the 2 is relatively small beer in the US compared to a country like Eire. The rapid rise in GDP gives very little benefit to Eire because the tax wedge available to the domestic economy is very small. In short Apple, Dell, Pfizer and others benefit from the high GDP of Eire, the Irish largely don't.
Labour got a load of new members (which must have helped somewhat in 2017), they also got a nice cash injection and a load of younger supporters attracted into politics.
Corbyn won with all groups of members - the £3 thing didn’t change the result.
That was certainly the view of left wing voters as seen by the LDs trouncing in 2015 and 2017 post Coalition
LAB: 41% (+2)
CON: 40% (-3)
LDEM: 8% (-)
UKIP: 4% (+1)
GRN: 2% (-1)
via @YouGov, 12 - 13 Feb
Swingback, reverse-crossover, etc.
The issue with the Welsh Valleys is that they haven't been able to replace mining with sufficient alternative industries and that Cardiff and Newport aren't economically strong enough to support a commuter effect. People in the Valleys may not agree with Corbyn on a lot of things but they are simply too poor to vote Tory.
Wales as a whole still suffers economically and it is stiffed by Barnett when compared to Scotland and NI
Rank Place GDP per capita, 2015[201]
1 England £26,160/ $40,000
2 Scotland £23,685/ $36,200
3 Northern Ireland £18,584/ $28,400
4 Wales £18,002/ $27,500
Corbyn still becomes PM with SNP confidence and supply
The top two issues in the YouGov poll (with respondents asked to choose three) are Brexit (61%), and Health (52%). I think we'll remain in the current fairly static position until the nature of the Brexit settlement becomes clear, which probably won't be for another year. It's very hard to predict how sentiment will then shift.
Of course, it did not end well.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/964491048146948099
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/scott-pruitt-first-class-travel-epa-351669?lo=ap_d1
Pruitt's security threat? A passenger shouting, 'You're f---ing up the environment'
I think the figures for women are a leading indicator and we’re approaching a tipping point (on Brexit).
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/trump-gop-memo-fbi-investigations-disclosures-415596
U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta grew frustrated with a Justice Department lawyer who argued that Trump’s declassification order did not alter the contours of the legal dispute.
Mehta said the government would normally be entitled to deference in asserting the need to keep its investigative work under wraps, but perhaps no longer with respect to the dossier.
“This isn’t the ordinary case,” Mehta told a Justice Department lawyer, Anjali Motgi. “I don’t know of any time the president has declassified the fact of a counterintelligence investigation. That’s going to be a hard sell given what the president has done. … This is a new frontier and it has an impact.”
Unlikely to have enough candidates for this to be possible.
He will be an effective anti-Trump voice, I suspect.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
We may see something similar happen in Scotland going forward where the SNP don't get a majority but stay in power as Lab and Con won't work together.
Alternatively they could just languish at the bottom with an indefinite Labour government incompetently "leading" them forever.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/16/public-services-privatisation-pfi-state-market
Needless to say, his very sensible article has them frothing at the mouth in the comments.
That was a year period, but it wasn't a calendar year. Or a financial year. So it wasn't captured in any of the data I was looking at.
Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becomes PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
EDIT: Yes you're right, my mistake.
2). Even if this poll were translated into reality, and Corbyn became PM, he would be in a much more unstable position than May is now, SNP votes would be insufficient to shore him up, he would be dependent on the Liberals who would not allow any socialist legislation through, and it would be a gift to the Tories who could go stronger in opposition for 1 year or two until the government collapsed before returning a la Thatcher at the subsequent election. Any Corbynista who rejoices at that must be bonkers.
The 2010s have so far had zero.
That's right: schools.
http://newsthump.com/2018/02/15/national-rifle-association-calls-for-ban-on-schools/