The former head of South Yorkshire Police has said never in his "wildest dreams" did he imagine that the BBC would cover the force's inquiry into Sir Cliff Richard, in the way it did.
The former head of South Yorkshire Police has said never in his "wildest dreams" did he imagine that the BBC would cover the force's inquiry into Sir Cliff Richard, in the way it did.
Mr. D, tweeted in reply that the high stat is unsurprising given the current state of affairs, but that a party coming into force wouldn't be a blank canvas anymore. Having concrete positions on taxation, spending, borrowing, and the EU would whittle away its support.
There's still a big space for a new party, but Labour MPs still campaigning for the Party of Corbyn suggests they'll never split, and the Conservatives are (Soubrey and a few others aside) unlikely to do so because they don't want to let the far left in.
Edited extra bit: if Labour did split, that could also open the door for the left of the Conservatives to do likewise, though.
Mr. Rentool, parties that have been around get tarnished by the grubby realities of governance. A new party is fresh and clean and lovely. The newness is the (small) counterbalance to the problems it faces trying to win under FPTP.
Mr. Rentool, parties that have been around get tarnished by the grubby realities of governance. A new party is fresh and clean and lovely. The newness is the (small) counterbalance to the problems it faces trying to win under FPTP.
But, for this "new" centrist party to get any attention, it would surely be relying on high-profile MPs from existing parties to defect to it and lead it. High-profile MPs who themselves would be "tarnished by the grubby realities of governance"...
Does leaving and going straight back in mean you actually left?
Yes, she's let the cat out of the bag. Clearly the plan is to 'leave' the Customs Union but then immediately instigate an identical arrangement. If pressed Theresa can then state we've left the Customs Union although there'll be no logical difference. Clever.
F1: a few notes ahead of the weekend. First off, I ran a couple of polls on Twitter (not huge reply numbers but still interesting) which suggests a narrow majority thought Ferrari would beat Mercedes, Red Bull a distant third. The other poll had Haas/McLaren/Renault closely tied for best of the rest, with Toro Rosso singularly unloved.
Also, the FIA has banned exhaust gas blowing for aerodynamic purposes with immediate effect which, contrary to the Ferrari International Assistance jest, many people believe will harm Ferrari more than anyone else.
My own view is that picking a winning team is very difficult. Azerbaijan's weird, being very tight but also having a massive straight. I think credible arguments can be put forward for any of the top three winning (one advantage that Red Bull enjoys is that they can be more strategically daring because right now neither driver appears to be in the title fight, whereas Mercedes and Ferrari can't risk losing a chunk of points).
In the midfield, as I've said before, I think Haas will be top. Their car was great around Australia and they've got the Ferrari engine would should be best for the straight.
(How much) will the FIA ruling compromise Ferrari? Impossible to say. The cars undergo constant development so it's a moving target. It may also compromise Renault, who apparently have been doing something similar.
How does Hodges know 'she is well aware of that'? Is he one of her confidants? Has he suddenly become psychic?
The Tories aren’t at 40 points in the polls because of their housing policies....
Speaking of which am I the only one deeply unimpressed with this:
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB. Either the UK side will sign up to a transition agreement on those terms, which Mrs May and the DUP who are propping up her government have both said is completely unacceptable; or it convinces the EU to allow the arrangements to apply to all UK (CU+CAP+SM for goods); or there will be no transition and we will crash out of the EU in utter chaos - this really would be the no flights and empty supermarket shelves scenario.
The government appears to be completely paralysed on the issue. It's not clear whether it's playing for time in the hope that the players will eventually be shocked into compromise or whether it really is incapable of making a move. If it doesn't go for SM+CU now the same standoff will kick in during the transition period.
Leaving THE Customs Union, joining A Customs Union?
Pinhead dancing - why would we join another similar protectionist racket which restricts our trade ?
I can foresee the following. We'll remain the Custom's Union (albeit under a new title) but they'll agree some clause that states that we can technically have our own trade deals but only with a case-by-case agreement of the EU. Which, of course, will never happen. So all the terrible disruption will be avoided, but Liam still gets to say he has a purpose. Should work like a charm.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
How does Hodges know 'she is well aware of that'? Is he one of her confidants? Has he suddenly become psychic?
The Tories aren’t at 40 points in the polls because of their housing policies....
Speaking of which am I the only one deeply unimpressed with this:
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
Does leaving and going straight back in mean you actually left?
Yes, she's let the cat out of the bag. Clearly the plan is to 'leave' the Customs Union but then immediately instigate an identical arrangement. If pressed Theresa can then state we've left the Customs Union although there'll be no logical difference. Clever.
More likely a "temporary arrangement" with a guillotine clause. We agree a customs and trading rules arrangement with a six month notice of cancellation period. We will work on a final looser arrangement that will substitute for the temporary arrangement. We expect to move to the new arrangement in - pick a date.
(Actually we never will move to the new arrangement, the belief that we might keeps the show on the road until eventually everyone accepts the by then very stale stalemate).
How does Hodges know 'she is well aware of that'? Is he one of her confidants? Has he suddenly become psychic?
The Tories aren’t at 40 points in the polls because of their housing policies....
Speaking of which am I the only one deeply unimpressed with this:
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
How does Hodges know 'she is well aware of that'? Is he one of her confidants? Has he suddenly become psychic?
The Tories aren’t at 40 points in the polls because of their housing policies....
Speaking of which am I the only one deeply unimpressed with this:
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
Speaking of which am I the only one deeply unimpressed with this:
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
What's the problem? Those are the terms according to the rules. In the vast majority of cases, taxpayers gain because they get a share of uprated value. In this extremely unusual case, it works the other way. That seems entirely fair.
Your obsession with trying to find fault with George Osborne - by any standards, one of the most successful Chancellors since the war, and generally regarded internationally as one of the best finance ministers since the financial crisis - is quite extraordinary.
Mr. Walker, no. I didn't say UKIP. I said a new party that was very Kipperish (I'm sure Farage/Banks would write a rulebook to make it less prone to endless infighting).
As for 'moment', don't forget that more than half those who bothered to vote wanted to leave. UKIP and the sceptic side generally had been gaining strength for years. This wasn't a moment, it was the culmination of decades of frustration with the EU and UK political class (for what it's worth, I still think Lisbon was critical to changing public opinion).
It may comfort you to consider it a moment of madness, but that's to misunderstand why people voted the way they did.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
How does Hodges know 'she is well aware of that'? Is he one of her confidants? Has he suddenly become psychic?
The Tories aren’t at 40 points in the polls because of their housing policies....
Speaking of which am I the only one deeply unimpressed with this:
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
Hilarious to see how quickly Remainers jumped on Amber Rudd's comments.
It's going to be quite fun seeing them eat their words, or more likely just trying to reverse ferret and argue that's what they had said all along, once the shape of the final A50 and HoT for future FTA is clear.
Speaking of which am I the only one deeply unimpressed with this:
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
What's the problem? Those are the terms according to the rules. In the vast majority of cases, taxpayers gain because they get a share of uprated value. In this extremely unusual case, it works the other way. That seems entirely fair.
Your obsession with trying to find fault with George Osborne - by any standards, one of the most successful Chancellors since the war, and generally regarded internationally as one of the best finance ministers since the financial crisis - is quite extraordinary.
I think you're on thin ice accusing other people of being biased about George Osborne.
I am at least willing to acknowledge that he did some good things - increasing VAT and reforming pensions as examples.
Hilarious to see how quickly Remainers jumped on Amber Rudd's comments.
It's going to be quite fun seeing them eat their words, or more likely just trying to reverse ferret and argue that's what they had said all along, once the shape of the final A50 and HoT for future FTA is clear.
Hehe. Everyone knows we are leaving THE customs union.
I think you're on thin ice accusing other people of being biased about George Osborne.
I am at least willing to acknowledge that he did some good things - increasing VAT and reforming pensions as examples.
You forgot 'rescuing the UK economy from being in the worst state of any European country other than Greece to being one of the two best, whilst amazingly managing to keep unemployment very low'. I've no idea why you don't seem to think that is rather the key point about his tenure as Chancellor.
These still look like very good figures for Labour in London. As I have said before Labour really should outperform in these elections in the same way that the Tories did in 2017 when the elections were on their turf. As the country becomes ever more divided each should do better than overall in their target areas and these elections are mainly in Corbyn central.
I still think if the Tories keep Labour down to under 200 net gains they will have done very well. Given the UKIP position they may hope to keep their losses to about 100 but that may prove optimistic.
Why should the Tories expect losses when they are better placed in the polls versus Labour than in 2014 and the Kipper collapse will free up seats for all other parties?
That's very much my view. I expect the Tories to make gains outside London.
Why are they actually writing it down rather than waiting for her to sell the flat and then writing it down?
It's odd. I think the same as yourself..
Looking at help to buy in the round, it seems a massive bung to housebuilders. Which may not be a bad thing, though due to the affordability/LTV situation it creates a situation where new-builds can sell for an artificially higher price than the rest of the market (Than they otherwise might be) since those who can plan 6 years ahead (When the Gov't scheme starts to bite with the whole RPI + 2.75% business on the loans) will pay the loan off early, and those who can't plan 6 years ahead start to subsidise the rest of the scheme with their expensive payments from yr 7 onward. Even if you have enough deposit for a 25% put down, it is worth taking the Gov't cash if you're determined to buy a new build - though noting the above arguments a house of existing stock may well be better value for money.
All in all it's not a bad scheme (Since we need more homes), but it's particularly good if you're the CEO of a big housebuilder I wonder how the outflows and inflows are doing against the original projections mind.
Hilarious to see how quickly Remainers jumped on Amber Rudd's comments.
It's going to be quite fun seeing them eat their words, or more likely just trying to reverse ferret and argue that's what they had said all along, once the shape of the final A50 and HoT for future FTA is clear.
Hilarious to see how quickly Remainers jumped on Amber Rudd's comments.
It's going to be quite fun seeing them eat their words, or more likely just trying to reverse ferret and argue that's what they had said all along, once the shape of the final A50 and HoT for future FTA is clear.
Everyone knows we are leaving THE customs union.
Now sure HoL do?
I believe the HoL motion refers to A customs union.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
Why do we believe every single word and pronouncement that comes out of the EU as though it's being handed down by God to Moses on a Tablet Of Stone?
Why are they actually writing it down rather than waiting for her to sell the flat and then writing it down?
The rules say you can pay back at any time, the amount being proportional to the current valuation.
THat's not a bad clause, and makes the scheme actually a little more taxpayer friendly (And individual unfriendly) than my original paragraph proposes. But who values the property if you have the readies ready to pay it all back at say 3 years in ? & Who pays for the valuation... Can you pay your friendly local surveyor, or does the Gov't pay the surveyor. Or is it just done on a general market basis ?
Mr. Flashman (deceased), the vast majority are more comfortable following than leading. That said, some do take it to extremes (as we've seen recently with the far left and Corbyn).
Why are they actually writing it down rather than waiting for her to sell the flat and then writing it down?
The rules say you can pay back at any time, the amount being proportional to the current valuation.
THat's not a bad clause, and makes the scheme actually a little more taxpayer friendly (And individual unfriendly) than my original paragraph proposes. But who values the property if you have the readies ready to pay it all back at say 3 years in ? & Who pays for the valuation... Can you pay your friendly local surveyor, or does the Gov't pay the surveyor. Or is it just done on a general market basis ?
You do, you then submit it to (effectively) the government who checks it's legit.
Ordinarily such a valuation is easy - I believe a couple of hundred quid is the going rate.
Of course cladded flats are much more difficult because of the liquidity trap.
That's excellent news for her and her partner! Though it makes the notion of her coming to Westminster in a by-election to succeed Theresa much less likely, I think.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
Leaving THE Customs Union, joining A Customs Union?
Pinhead dancing - why would we join another similar protectionist racket which restricts our trade ?
I can foresee the following. We'll remain the Custom's Union (albeit under a new title) but they'll agree some clause that states that we can technically have our own trade deals but only with a case-by-case agreement of the EU. Which, of course, will never happen. So all the terrible disruption will be avoided, but Liam still gets to say he has a purpose. Should work like a charm.
Sounds great. We can apply the same approach to nearly everything else. We'll effectively be in the EU but in name only. Then people who have specific objections to particular things the EU does can make their arguments on a case by case basis. Perfect.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
Can't you do it? You're far better qualified than Liam. Look, I'll even provide a reference if you need one.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
Why do we believe every single word and pronouncement that comes out of the EU as though it's being handed down by God to Moses on a Tablet Of Stone?
I don't think you need to listen to the EU, I think you can listen to some of our partners outside the EU who are worried about lack of roll over, such as Switzerland.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
Why do we believe every single word and pronouncement that comes out of the EU as though it's being handed down by God to Moses on a Tablet Of Stone?
I don't think you need to listen to the EU, I think you can listen to some of our partners outside the EU who are worried about lack of roll over, such as Switzerland.
Pretty damning then, isn’t it?
All this heat and light over the customs union and we’re making a hash of our trade policy anyway.
What has Liam Fox got on May? Can’t she boot him for another Brexiter, someone who is not paralysed from the neck up?
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
Can't you do it? You're far better qualified than Liam. Look, I'll even provide a reference if you need one.
I would suggest Kwasi Kwarteng. A finance background (worked at Odey), extremely bright (Fulbright scholar), and a Leaver (but not a doctrinaire one).
Mr. Dawning, under those circumstances, I'd suggest we'd see the I Can't Believe It's Not UKIP Party being founded rather promptly.
Doubt it. The moment of madness has passed.
Even if May cancelled Brexit, I can’t see a revival of UKIP. Tory Party meltdown sure, UKIP no.
If May cancelled Brexit, she would be quickly deposed and a hardcore Brexiteer would be leader. The same is true of a Brexit-lite. That is what the moderates fail to recognise. The only way they can succeed May is by not sabotaging Brexit.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
I keep thinking this guy qualified for medical school and became a doctor so he can't be completely stupid. But the evidence to the contrary is really compelling.
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
I think that you are wrong about DExEU turnover, staff turnover there is extremely high, at 3% per month.
Speaking of which am I the only one deeply unimpressed with this:
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
What's the problem? Those are the terms according to the rules. In the vast majority of cases, taxpayers gain because they get a share of uprated value. In this extremely unusual case, it works the other way. That seems entirely fair.
Your obsession with trying to find fault with George Osborne - by any standards, one of the most successful Chancellors since the war, and generally regarded internationally as one of the best finance ministers since the financial crisis - is quite extraordinary.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
I think that you are wrong about DExEU turnover, staff turnover there is extremely high, at 3% per month.
Do you think that is steady state? Perhaps it's a transition over 16 months, by which time all the oikophobes will have left.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
I keep thinking this guy qualified for medical school and became a doctor so he can't be completely stupid. But the evidence to the contrary is really compelling.
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
What I find staggering is that he was given a junket rich job after the whole Adam Werrity affair.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
I keep thinking this guy qualified for medical school and became a doctor so he can't be completely stupid. But the evidence to the contrary is really compelling.
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
Well so did Harold Shipman and he had a 'poor command of punctuation and spelling':
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
I keep thinking this guy qualified for medical school and became a doctor so he can't be completely stupid. But the evidence to the contrary is really compelling.
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
What I find staggering is that he was given a junket rich job after the whole Adam Werrity affair.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
I keep thinking this guy qualified for medical school and became a doctor so he can't be completely stupid. But the evidence to the contrary is really compelling.
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
What I find staggering is that he was given a junket rich job after the whole Adam Werrity affair.
Are there any rules about foreigners in the Cabinet? If not, May should ennoble the Commonwealth's most successful trade negotiator and put them in charge of the dept (a la Carney and the Bank of England).
Google "How DEXEU is shedding staff faster than the rest of Whitehall" to dodge the paywall.
That's a very misleading number as a lot of staff are on temporary secondment from other departments.
The top team has been pretty solid in the last 12 months at DfExEU.
Yes, DexEU has had to send out the pressgang to other departments to get bums on seats, though these conscripts start looking for a way to escape out ASAP.
The fact is that there is v high turnover in the dept, particularly at the coalface detail level.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
I keep thinking this guy qualified for medical school and became a doctor so he can't be completely stupid. But the evidence to the contrary is really compelling.
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
Well so did Harold Shipman and he had a 'poor command of punctuation and spelling':
Are there any rules about foreigners in the Cabinet? If not, May should ennoble the Commonwealth's most successful trade negotiator and put them in charge of the dept (a la Carney and the Bank of England).
This is going to sound stupid, but why not Baron Mandelson?
There's no place for him in Labour. He's very able. Scandals are no barrier.
And wouldn't he like something positive to come out of his career?
As for Fox and the Trade department. There isn't a single bigger driver of pushing MPs towards the customs union. If we had a competent minister who had got 30-40 countries to put pen to paper on rolling over the existing trade deals the EU has with a view to enhancing them once we leave, there would be far fewer Tories on the fence wrt to the customs union or a customs union. His incompetence is one of the major causes of a possible tight vote on the Lords amendment.
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
I keep thinking this guy qualified for medical school and became a doctor so he can't be completely stupid. But the evidence to the contrary is really compelling.
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
What I find staggering is that he was given a junket rich job after the whole Adam Werrity affair.
Perhaps Theresa fell for his smooth Scottish accent and smouldering looks. She won't have been the first. So did Natalie Imbruglia!
The EU aren't investing any effort into amending the Irish border backstop in the withdrawal agreement, where Northern Ireland has a different trade regime from mainland GB.
Indeed the EU is frightfully complacent on this border issue - who pays ? EU or ROI ? Also the EU has no plans on how it will make up the huge shortfall in budget contributions when we exit with no deal.
The EU can live with that. On the whole it wants an agreement, but it doesn't see protecting the UK government from its own folly as its responsibility. On a related matter, the UK, unlike the EU, is not deeply concerned about Liam Fox's incompetence in rolling over third party trade deals: https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
I have been warning about the Department for International Trade for some time.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
I keep thinking this guy qualified for medical school and became a doctor so he can't be completely stupid. But the evidence to the contrary is really compelling.
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
Well so did Harold Shipman and he had a 'poor command of punctuation and spelling':
Are there any rules about foreigners in the Cabinet? If not, May should ennoble the Commonwealth's most successful trade negotiator and put them in charge of the dept (a la Carney and the Bank of England).
This is going to sound stupid, but why not Baron Mandelson?
There's no place for him in Labour. He's very able. Scandals are no barrier.
And wouldn't he like something positive to come out of his career?
Excellent idea. I really wanted him involved in the Brexit negotiations. He knows more about how the EU works than any active UK politician. But this would be a good second best.
Comments
SYP to distract from Rotherham
BBC to distract from Savile
"Oooh look, shiny Brexit controversy thingy!!"
There's still a big space for a new party, but Labour MPs still campaigning for the Party of Corbyn suggests they'll never split, and the Conservatives are (Soubrey and a few others aside) unlikely to do so because they don't want to let the far left in.
Edited extra bit: if Labour did split, that could also open the door for the left of the Conservatives to do likewise, though.
Also, the FIA has banned exhaust gas blowing for aerodynamic purposes with immediate effect which, contrary to the Ferrari International Assistance jest, many people believe will harm Ferrari more than anyone else.
My own view is that picking a winning team is very difficult. Azerbaijan's weird, being very tight but also having a massive straight. I think credible arguments can be put forward for any of the top three winning (one advantage that Red Bull enjoys is that they can be more strategically daring because right now neither driver appears to be in the title fight, whereas Mercedes and Ferrari can't risk losing a chunk of points).
In the midfield, as I've said before, I think Haas will be top. Their car was great around Australia and they've got the Ferrari engine would should be best for the straight.
(How much) will the FIA ruling compromise Ferrari? Impossible to say. The cars undergo constant development so it's a moving target. It may also compromise Renault, who apparently have been doing something similar.
' The government has agreed to virtually wipe out a help-to-buy loan on an apartment in a London block with cladding similar to that used at Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.
It will make the write-down on the grounds that the value of the flat in Greenwich has been reduced from £500,000 to £50,000 because the developer has no plans to remove the cladding.
The concession raises the prospect of multimillion-pound losses for the government scheme on any flat that goes into negative equity. This is because, unlike high street mortgages, help-to-buy loans can be redeemed on the sale value of the property rather than the value of the original loan.
Homes England, the agency responsible for the loan, wrote to Cecile Langevin last week to say it had agreed she could pay back her loan at the knock-down valuation.
This means Langevin has to pay back 20% of the new valuation of £50,000, which is £10,000, leaving the government with a £85,000 shortfall on its original loan. '
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/apr/25/help-to-buy-agency-writes-down-loan-on-flat-over-grenfell-style-cladding
Another triumph of the Osborne legacy.
The government appears to be completely paralysed on the issue. It's not clear whether it's playing for time in the hope that the players will eventually be shocked into compromise or whether it really is incapable of making a move. If it doesn't go for SM+CU now the same standoff will kick in during the transition period.
(Actually we never will move to the new arrangement, the belief that we might keeps the show on the road until eventually everyone accepts the by then very stale stalemate).
Or perhaps not.
As rental prices are £1,250+ per month in Greenwich that would give a 30% yield.
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/Greenwich.html
The moment of madness has passed.
Even if May cancelled Brexit, I can’t see a revival of UKIP. Tory Party meltdown sure, UKIP no.
Your obsession with trying to find fault with George Osborne - by any standards, one of the most successful Chancellors since the war, and generally regarded internationally as one of the best finance ministers since the financial crisis - is quite extraordinary.
Mr. Walker, no. I didn't say UKIP. I said a new party that was very Kipperish (I'm sure Farage/Banks would write a rulebook to make it less prone to endless infighting).
As for 'moment', don't forget that more than half those who bothered to vote wanted to leave. UKIP and the sceptic side generally had been gaining strength for years. This wasn't a moment, it was the culmination of decades of frustration with the EU and UK political class (for what it's worth, I still think Lisbon was critical to changing public opinion).
It may comfort you to consider it a moment of madness, but that's to misunderstand why people voted the way they did.
https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/989406060300685312
It's going to be quite fun seeing them eat their words, or more likely just trying to reverse ferret and argue that's what they had said all along, once the shape of the final A50 and HoT for future FTA is clear.
I am at least willing to acknowledge that he did some good things - increasing VAT and reforming pensions as examples.
Everyone knows we are leaving THE customs union.
(Incorporating Big G TV).
Looking at help to buy in the round, it seems a massive bung to housebuilders.
Which may not be a bad thing, though due to the affordability/LTV situation it creates a situation where new-builds can sell for an artificially higher price than the rest of the market (Than they otherwise might be) since those who can plan 6 years ahead (When the Gov't scheme starts to bite with the whole RPI + 2.75% business on the loans) will pay the loan off early, and those who can't plan 6 years ahead start to subsidise the rest of the scheme with their expensive payments from yr 7 onward.
Even if you have enough deposit for a 25% put down, it is worth taking the Gov't cash if you're determined to buy a new build - though noting the above arguments a house of existing stock may well be better value for money.
All in all it's not a bad scheme (Since we need more homes), but it's particularly good if you're the CEO of a big housebuilder
I wonder how the outflows and inflows are doing against the original projections mind.
Why do we believe every single word and pronouncement that comes out of the EU as though it's being handed down by God to Moses on a Tablet Of Stone?
But who values the property if you have the readies ready to pay it all back at say 3 years in ?
& Who pays for the valuation... Can you pay your friendly local surveyor, or does the Gov't pay the surveyor.
Or is it just done on a general market basis ?
Congrats to Ms. Davidson.
Ordinarily such a valuation is easy - I believe a couple of hundred quid is the going rate.
Of course cladded flats are much more difficult because of the liquidity trap.
It should be a dream posting for a civil servant: lots of foreign travel, and plenty of achievements (i.e. deals).
Staff turnover should have been low. (Turnover at DfExEU is extremely low, as everyone knows the seriousness of what's involved.) But it isn't. Dr Fox has clashed with senior civil servants, repeatedly, and doesn't like to be given information he disagrees with. And so the smarter members of his team have left
Dr Fox is an Altlantacist (which is no bad thing in general), but there is an almost myopic focus on getting a deal with the US, over replicating existing arrangements. This leads to our partners (such as South Korea) being frustrated that they don't get time, and which led to a very undiplomatic statement by the South Korean government.
The one area where he appears to have good relationships is with Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Hopefully that will result is positive outcomes sooner rather than later.
Many congratulations to her.
All this heat and light over the customs union and we’re making a hash of our trade policy anyway.
What has Liam Fox got on May? Can’t she boot him for another Brexiter, someone who is not paralysed from the neck up?
He was at Trinity with me...
Its a highly competitive race but for me he is the single most useless member of the Cabinet.
https://www.ft.com/content/20435922-9f18-306f-b12c-792e68691481
Google "How DEXEU is shedding staff faster than the rest of Whitehall" to dodge the paywall.
The top team has been pretty solid in the last 12 months at DfExEU.
Perhaps it's a transition over 16 months, by which time all the oikophobes will have left.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2002/jul/22/health.shipman
And he murdered lots of people.
The fact is that there is v high turnover in the dept, particularly at the coalface detail level.
There's no place for him in Labour. He's very able. Scandals are no barrier.
And wouldn't he like something positive to come out of his career?
“ 'In all my years I have never seen anything like it, not even under Brown,' says a regular visitor to No 10."