I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
And I don't doubt that some people disagreed with that decision. And I think they were perfectly entitled to do so, without being accused of banning free speech.
I bet you chumley-warner who is getting angry about Peterson didn't bat an eyelid ken Livingstone.
Well they are different people so he might well have different views on their suitability to be invited!
Doubtless had Livingstone been uninvited - you would have been decrying the ban on a former mayor of London speaking at the Oxford Union?
It is about consistency....Peterson has become this weird hate figure among some that has to be silenced. If you are going to complain on the grounds of intellectual honesty of invitees you better be complaining about all that display those traits.
I would actually welcome the opportunity to watch red ken try and explain his views under proper challenge.
From a recent article:
"Peterson is an apologist for a set of beliefs that we once took for granted but now require an articulate defence, such as: Free speech is an essential value; perfect equality inevitably conflicts with individual freedom; one should be cautious before attempting to reengineer social institutions that appear to be working; men and women are, in certain quantifiable respects, different. His life advice concerns the necessity to defer gratification, face up to the trials of life with equanimity, take responsibility for one’s own choices, and struggle against the temptation to grow resentful. How such traditional values came to be portrayed as a danger adjacent to Nazism is one of the puzzles of our time."
There's something right on the nose about the debate surrounding the Professor in that summary.
Lewisham East is one of the safest Labour seats in the country and should be a solid Labour hold.
The more interesting question might be whether the Tories will hold second place or the LDs or Greens will emerge as the main challengers to Labour in the by election.
TELL US!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well I hope the Tories hold second place obviously but we will see how the campaign progresses
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time. Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
May as well have a Lords vote on the electorate getting things wrong and proving themselves unworthy of being entrusted with deciding how the country is run...
And again The Lords show their total disconnect from reality. It will not be up to the Lords or the Commons whether we are allowed to participate in EU programmes after we leave. It will be up to the EU.
Anyone who thinks these amendments are anything other than an attempt by the Lords to stop Brexit completely is not living in the real world.
And again The Lords show their total disconnect from reality. It will not be up to the Lords or the Commons whether we are allowed to participate in EU programmes after we leave. It will be up to the EU.
Paraphrasing: After we leave, the EU will take back control, not the British parliament.
And again The Lords show their total disconnect from reality. It will not be up to the Lords or the Commons whether we are allowed to participate in EU programmes after we leave. It will be up to the EU.
Anyone who thinks these amendments are anything other than an attempt by the Lords to stop Brexit completely is not living in the real world.
If i was a democratic remainer,I would be embarrassed with the Lord's and the real motives.
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
A 50 provides that the leaving date is the one stipulated in the Withdrawal agreement, or in default of that, two years after serving Notice. The deadline can only be extended with the unanimous agreement of all member states. The House of Lords can't determine the withdrawal date.
And again The Lords show their total disconnect from reality. It will not be up to the Lords or the Commons whether we are allowed to participate in EU programmes after we leave. It will be up to the EU.
Anyone who thinks these amendments are anything other than an attempt by the Lords to stop Brexit completely is not living in the real world.
It's also bonkers in purely UK terms: of course this or a future government can negotiate to participate in EU programmes, and any future parliament can replicate any EU law it fancies.
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
A 50 provides that the leaving date is the one stipulated in the Withdrawal agreement, or in default of that, two years after serving Notice. The deadline can only be extended with the unanimous agreement of all member states. The House of Lords can't determine the withdrawal date.
Of course not, but it can unbind an executive that was seeking to bind its own hands.
Sigh, another almost certainly dull by-election. It's not like Labour are doing really badly and therefore people might be tempted to abandon them en masse.
Let's hope the LDs can at least make Labour work for it a bit though, spice things up.
After oxford uni getting rid of Kim jong mays from the wall of women, the campaign is onto banning Jordan Peterson from the union....We can't be having people we disagree with speaking now can we.
It is in all seriousness rather troubling. I actually think Peterson is a bit of a weird individual and far from convinced about a lot of things he says, but if you also think so (or worse that he is a total charlatan) go and debate him...Isn't that the whole point of the union...
banning =/= not inviting in the first place or uninviting.
It seems perfectly reasonable to me that paying Oxford Union members should have a say in who gets invited to speak at their club. And again perfectly reasonable that some people should think this guy has nothing to offer and so shouldn't be invited.
As an aside - Elliott Gulliver-Needham (if a real name) is impressively posh sounding.
It really is amazing how much they can write about someone that supposedly has nothing to offer. Sounds like they want him uninvited because they don’t agree with what he says.
The article is basically a listicle of his top lies/distortions. Thus there's a direct correlation between length and him not being worth listening to.
The article itself is full of distortions and lies. It is written in the hope no one will actually follow up what the facts are in various cases cited and is about as dishonest an article as I have read in a very long time.
O/T, the result from Redbridge is almost identical to Enfield.
Lead candidate only, Con 35.5%, Lab 55.2%, Lib Dem 4.2%, Others 5.1%. Since 2010, that's a 10% swing to Labour.
There is however, better news for the Conservatives in the wards making up Chingford & Wood Green (six from Waltham Forest, two from Redbridge, albeit, boundaries slightly altered from 2014). Lead candidate only:-
Con 15,910 49.5%, Lab 10,940 34.1% Lib Dem 2,931 9.1%, Other 2,304 7.2%..
That represents a swing of 5% to the Conservatives since the general election. The Conservatives won 18 seats, to 5 for Labour.
So much for going after IDS’ seat.
BTW- thanks for the analysis!
There has been some speculation that Labour could gain Uxbridge and South Ruislip. These were Thursday's results (lead candidate only):-
Con 17,529, 60.5%, Lab 8,672, 30.0%, Lib Dem 519, 1.9%, Others 2,220, 7.6%.
That's a swing of 9% to the Conservatives since the general election.
Momentum: winning here!!!
Some caution is required for those who think Labour are doomed under Corbyn because:
1) We saw the difference between Labour support in the 2017 locals and GE.
2) Corbyn voters are not necessarily Labour voters even if there is huge overlap. In a similar way that Trump voters are not always supporting GOP candidates down ballot across the rust belt and farm belt.
3)The demographics in local elections are likely to benefit the Tories over Labour given the huge polarization of voters along age.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
Tories in Lewisham East should lend their vote to the Lib Dems.
A shock LD victory would put pressure on Corbyn, perhaps leading to his defenestration.
Only if they are anti Brexit, otherwise the result will be interpreted as Labour voters not happy with Corbyn's stance on the issue. (as far as they have one that is).
The difficulty that the government has is that Theresa May, Greg Clark and (even) David Cameron went on an intensive love in with the automakers in the wake of the Brexit vote. And it was undoubtedly a success.
But it involved giving assurances that may not be deliverable, in terms of the impact on EU-UK trade, and on the ability of the UK to continue to benefit from some of the EU's trade agreements. (These in particular relate to Rules of Origin: i.e. the percentage of a product's production that happens in a customs area.)
I don't know how this resolves itself: either we'll end up giving state aid that may not be legal under WTO rules, or we'll be seen as untrustworthy by automakers, or we'll end up with a (probably short term) fudge that infuriates the Brexit purists.
Reading your views on Brexit from an apparently sensible person is an increasingly surreal experience.
There is no majority in parliament or the country for anything which disrupts cross-border trade with our neighbours, and in the case of Northern Ireland we have a political and moral obligation to ensure it does not happen. These practical realities will determine where we end up far more than anyone's notions about protecting the 'cause of Brexit'.
Parliament does not have a say in it (regrettably). Once they had voted to allow Article 50 to be enacted they lost control over the whole process bar accepting or rejecting the final deal.
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
A 50 provides that the leaving date is the one stipulated in the Withdrawal agreement, or in default of that, two years after serving Notice. The deadline can only be extended with the unanimous agreement of all member states. The House of Lords can't determine the withdrawal date.
Perhaps I don't understand diplomacy and treaty draftsmanship, but having looked at the text of Article 50 it seems to me that it would be possible for the withdrawal agreement to specify a withdrawal date beyond the two year timescale.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
Nobody thought an election was possible in 2017... Until Theresa went walking around Wales that is!
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
I have had the same issue over the last few days but even when signed in. I have needed to make a comment to anchor the comments thread.
F1: markets up on Spain, but no value as yet. I'll check the weather forecast nearer the time, small chance rain could affect practice, offering value to top the session.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
I think May is in serious trouble. Why is she proposing something that the EU think is unworkable? If the Tories got rid of her she would be gone almost immediately and a contest to replace her would run into the summer. The Tories would not call an election again without a manifesto that had been thought about, and the new leader would have cover as calling an election would provide more instability before Brexit?
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
It's the same on an Ipad Signing in does not help. System will not update at all only when you open the page again but it's still 60 to 90 mins behind.
And again The Lords show their total disconnect from reality. It will not be up to the Lords or the Commons whether we are allowed to participate in EU programmes after we leave. It will be up to the EU.
Paraphrasing: After we leave, the EU will take back control, not the British parliament.
Nope. After we leave the EU will control their own institutions and we will control ours. I see you need some lessons in basic comprehension this evening.
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
It's the same on an Ipad Signing in does not help. System will not update at all only when you open the page again but it's still 60 to 90 mins behind.
MikeS
I can confirm seeing this behaviour on Chrome on my Mac when logged out. Last post from 90 minutes ago. I'll send TSE a note.
Of course this could be a new feature to allow members to see betting tips before the wider public...
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
It's the same on an Ipad Signing in does not help. System will not update at all only when you open the page again but it's still 60 to 90 mins behind.
MikeS
I can confirm seeing this behaviour on Chrome on my Mac when logged out. Last post from 90 minutes ago. I'll send TSE a note.
Previously this has much more affected me on IE (at work) than Chrome/Firefox (at home)
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
I understand that quite a lot of the acts that granted independence to former colonies have been repealed as spent. Repealing an act doesn't reset the law to how it was before the repealed act was enacted. For instance, repealing the FTPA would not restore the former royal prerogative to dissolve parliaments; the repealing act would need to specify how parliaments are to be dissolved in future.
O/T, the result from Redbridge is almost identical to Enfield.
Lead candidate only, Con 35.5%, Lab 55.2%, Lib Dem 4.2%, Others 5.1%. Since 2010, that's a 10% swing to Labour.
There is however, better news for the Conservatives in the wards making up Chingford & Wood Green (six from Waltham Forest, two from Redbridge, albeit, boundaries slightly altered from 2014). Lead candidate only:-
Con 15,910 49.5%, Lab 10,940 34.1% Lib Dem 2,931 9.1%, Other 2,304 7.2%..
That represents a swing of 5% to the Conservatives since the general election. The Conservatives won 18 seats, to 5 for Labour.
So much for going after IDS’ seat.
BTW- thanks for the analysis!
There has been some speculation that Labour could gain Uxbridge and South Ruislip. These were Thursday's results (lead candidate only):-
Con 17,529, 60.5%, Lab 8,672, 30.0%, Lib Dem 519, 1.9%, Others 2,220, 7.6%.
That's a swing of 9% to the Conservatives since the general election.
Momentum: winning here!!!
Some caution is required for those who think Labour are doomed under Corbyn because:
1) We saw the difference between Labour support in the 2017 locals and GE.
2) Corbyn voters are not necessarily Labour voters even if there is huge overlap. In a similar way that Trump voters are not always supporting GOP candidates down ballot across the rust belt and farm belt.
3)The demographics in local elections are likely to benefit the Tories over Labour given the huge polarization of voters along age.
1) The Tory vote also vote from the 2017 locals to the GE, it was the LD vote which collapsed
2) Not New Labour voters no but voters for current Labour candidates yes
3) That still does not explain the Tory holds in London which have a younger voting demographic
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
The Customs partnership, whether deliberately or not, will restrict the ability to diverge: thus it is seen by Brexiteers as part of the continual and unrelenting effort on the part of some to wreck Brexit.
It would be one compromise too far for Brexiteers, as spotted by Williamson and Javid; not backing it - seemingly somewhat to the surprise of No 10
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
I think May is in serious trouble. Why is she proposing something that the EU think is unworkable? If the Tories got rid of her she would be gone almost immediately and a contest to replace her would run into the summer. The Tories would not call an election again without a manifesto that had been thought about, and the new leader would have cover as calling an election would provide more instability before Brexit?
Do not underestimate back channels there is likely to be some kind of Customs fudge which everyone will wail about and which will prove remarkably similar to what we have today.
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
and you think all those happy euro federalists want their biggest pain back ?
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
I think May is in serious trouble. Why is she proposing something that the EU think is unworkable? If the Tories got rid of her she would be gone almost immediately and a contest to replace her would run into the summer. The Tories would not call an election again without a manifesto that had been thought about, and the new leader would have cover as calling an election would provide more instability before Brexit?
I do struggle to understand quite what she is trying here - I too thought that the EU had said her idea was not acceptable. I get not taking their pronouncements as gospel, but that seems like a non starter, so why choose it as the battle between her and the more strident brexiters? Is it because she thinks she can win this battle, and this a trickier one later?
I'm glad Brexit has opened the eyes of those on the right about much needed reform of the upper chamber.
Not great for important changes to be made off the back of partisan disappointment, but I think all should be able to agree that there is much about the current arrangements that could be improved, so hopefully something good can come of the feeling, if not right away.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
There is no way on earth any Tory leader will be calling a general election anytime soon, for starters the polls and local election results confirm we are looking at another hung parliament or Corbyn minority government, not a big Tory victory as they were forecasting this time last year.
Brexiteer and Remainer MPs will also rant and throw their toys out of the pram but at the end of the day none have any enthusiasm for another general election anytime soon and Tory members most certainly do not and short of Ruth Davidson all the polling confirms that no alternative leader would do much better than May and many would do significantly worse than she is doing.
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
and you think all those happy euro federalists want their biggest pain back ?
The Federalists don't - they want to punish Britain.
But Member States would prefer Britain to remain, and indeed would probably allow it to do so on the basis we had up to 2016, if push came to shove.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
I think May is in serious trouble. Why is she proposing something that the EU think is unworkable? If the Tories got rid of her she would be gone almost immediately and a contest to replace her would run into the summer. The Tories would not call an election again without a manifesto that had been thought about, and the new leader would have cover as calling an election would provide more instability before Brexit?
Do not underestimate back channels there is likely to be some kind of Customs fudge which everyone will wail about and which will prove remarkably similar to what we have today.
precisely
which is why most of the stuff in the uk media is just nonsense
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
and you think all those happy euro federalists want their biggest pain back ?
The Federalists don't - they want to punish Britain.
But Member States would prefer Britain to remain, and indeed would probably allow it to do so on the basis we had up to 2016, if push came to shove.
you mean the same member states who have done little so far but back the commission
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
and you think all those happy euro federalists want their biggest pain back ?
Who knows? I think there might be a lot of value to the project to have the most Eurosceptic country fail to leave: it would render A50 practically moot.
What I'm saying is that legally it seems to me that the withdrawal agreement could consist solely of the words "The United Kingdom will withdraw from the European Union on March 29th, 12,019 CE." Whether that's feasible politically is a different matter!
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
I think May is in serious trouble. Why is she proposing something that the EU think is unworkable? If the Tories got rid of her she would be gone almost immediately and a contest to replace her would run into the summer. The Tories would not call an election again without a manifesto that had been thought about, and the new leader would have cover as calling an election would provide more instability before Brexit?
Do not underestimate back channels there is likely to be some kind of Customs fudge which everyone will wail about and which will prove remarkably similar to what we have today.
precisely
which is why most of the stuff in the uk media is just nonsense
The deal looks pretty obvious to me. What I don't understand is why anyone is hyping this particular stage up. Cui bono from the suggestion of internecine warfare?
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
and you think all those happy euro federalists want their biggest pain back ?
The Federalists don't - they want to punish Britain.
But Member States would prefer Britain to remain, and indeed would probably allow it to do so on the basis we had up to 2016, if push came to shove.
you mean the same member states who have done little so far but back the commission
And whenever the point is raised that perhaps some member states are more amenable than the commission, ultras point out that the member states are perfectly content to do so, so not likely to do otherwise.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
I think May is in serious trouble. Why is she proposing something that the EU think is unworkable? If the Tories got rid of her she would be gone almost immediately and a contest to replace her would run into the summer. The Tories would not call an election again without a manifesto that had been thought about, and the new leader would have cover as calling an election would provide more instability before Brexit?
Do not underestimate back channels there is likely to be some kind of Customs fudge which everyone will wail about and which will prove remarkably similar to what we have today.
precisely
which is why most of the stuff in the uk media is just nonsense
The deal looks pretty obvious to me. What I don't understand is why anyone is hyping this particular stage up. Cui bono from the suggestion of internecine warfare?
the cynic in me says they agreed all the contentious stuff 2 years ago and are now playing PS4 and drinking beer. The media hype is simply to make people think theyre doing something
O/T, the result from Redbridge is almost identical to Enfield.
Lead candidate only, Con 35.5%, Lab 55.2%, Lib Dem 4.2%, Others 5.1%. Since 2010, that's a 10% swing to Labour.
There is however, better news for the Conservatives in the wards making up Chingford & Wood Green (six from Waltham Forest, two from Redbridge, albeit, boundaries slightly altered from 2014). Lead candidate only:-
Con 15,910 49.5%, Lab 10,940 34.1% Lib Dem 2,931 9.1%, Other 2,304 7.2%..
That represents a swing of 5% to the Conservatives since the general election. The Conservatives won 18 seats, to 5 for Labour.
Well yes but in the GE was the Tory candidate not IDS? That can hardly have helped.
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
and you think all those happy euro federalists want their biggest pain back ?
Who knows? I think there might be a lot of value to the project to have the most Eurosceptic country fail to leave: it would render A50 practically moot.
What I'm saying is that legally it seems to me that the withdrawal agreement could consist solely of the words "The United Kingdom will withdraw from the European Union on March 29th, 12,019 CE." Whether that's feasible politically is a different matter!
in the various european websites I trawl Ive detected some twinges of regret but no overwhelming move to have us back
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
If you are not signed in, then it shows the times using GMT and not BST, which means it *looks* like you are an hour behind, but in fact are not.
What odds LDs pushing the Tories into third place? Remain seat, London, lots of chances for Brexit to descend into a bigger mess in the next few weeks...
The difficulty that the government has is that Theresa May, Greg Clark and (even) David Cameron went on an intensive love in with the automakers in the wake of the Brexit vote. And it was undoubtedly a success.
But it involved giving assurances that may not be deliverable, in terms of the impact on EU-UK trade, and on the ability of the UK to continue to benefit from some of the EU's trade agreements. (These in particular relate to Rules of Origin: i.e. the percentage of a product's production that happens in a customs area.)
I don't know how this resolves itself: either we'll end up giving state aid that may not be legal under WTO rules, or we'll be seen as untrustworthy by automakers, or we'll end up with a (probably short term) fudge that infuriates the Brexit purists.
or we'll be seen as untrustworthy by automakers
you mean the guys who have falsified all their performance data and are causing thousands of premature deaths in this country ?
Ummm... I think VW is about the only auto maker without any major UK presence.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
I think May is in serious trouble. Why is she proposing something that the EU think is unworkable? If the Tories got rid of her she would be gone almost immediately and a contest to replace her would run into the summer. The Tories would not call an election again without a manifesto that had been thought about, and the new leader would have cover as calling an election would provide more instability before Brexit?
Do not underestimate back channels there is likely to be some kind of Customs fudge which everyone will wail about and which will prove remarkably similar to what we have today.
precisely
which is why most of the stuff in the uk media is just nonsense
The deal looks pretty obvious to me. What I don't understand is why anyone is hyping this particular stage up. Cui bono from the suggestion of internecine warfare?
I have found in my limited experience that the inevitable compromise in business is more quickly set upon by the British than by others in Europe
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
If you are not signed in, then it shows the times using GMT and not BST, which means it *looks* like you are an hour behind, but in fact are not.
That's not what I've been seeing for a few weeks. Comments appear and disappear; they can be more or less up to date, and then reloading the page 'loses' some. Only intermittently on some PCs, and it seems to occur whether logged in or not. It's very annoying.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
A collapse of May looks much more likely than a month ago, but what Tory replacement would be stupid enough to ask for another GE? Sure, they would say they won't run as bad a campaign as last time, but they have no manifesto ready, and it has no guarantee or even strong likelihood that they will do better than last time .
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
I think May is in serious trouble. Why is she proposing something that the EU think is unworkable? If the Tories got rid of her she would be gone almost immediately and a contest to replace her would run into the summer. The Tories would not call an election again without a manifesto that had been thought about, and the new leader would have cover as calling an election would provide more instability before Brexit?
Do not underestimate back channels there is likely to be some kind of Customs fudge which everyone will wail about and which will prove remarkably similar to what we have today.
precisely
which is why most of the stuff in the uk media is just nonsense
The deal looks pretty obvious to me. What I don't understand is why anyone is hyping this particular stage up. Cui bono from the suggestion of internecine warfare?
It's not really about customs. Nobody cares what the import tariff is on Peruvian guano. It's a cultural revolution that pitches the Maoists against the technocrats. It's serious dysfunction.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
There is no way on earth any Tory leader will be calling a general election anytime soon, for starters the polls and local election results confirm we are looking at another hung parliament or Corbyn minority government, not a big Tory victory as they were forecasting this time last year.
Brexiteer and Remainer MPs will also rant and throw their toys out of the pram but at the end of the day none have any enthusiasm for another general election anytime soon and Tory members most certainly do not and short of Ruth Davidson all the polling confirms that no alternative leader would do much better than May and many would do significantly worse than she is doing.
There is also no guarantee that a pure Brexit JRM or Boris led Conservative Party would win a majority. Most people probably would not vote on Brexit alone and in all likelihood we would have another hung parliament and votes in the balance and quite possibly Labour as the largest party and a softer Brexit as a result.
For the ignorant amongst us not fluent in German any chance of a summary?
there was a riot in Ellwangen in Bavaria at a refugee centre. The germans were trying to deport a Togolese immigrant back to Italy. The police hit a fullscale riot when they arrived to collect the man and the refugees added in a series of insults to the germans about their hospitality.
The human rights industry has now joined in to say no deportations and the Bavarian government has subsequently deported the guy. There is now a raging debate on how far Germany's obligations go with the usual candidates going at it hammer and tongs.
Either way this is not a settled issue and the argument has been going on for most of this month with no signs of letting up.
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
If you are not signed in, then it shows the times using GMT and not BST, which means it *looks* like you are an hour behind, but in fact are not.
That's not what I've been seeing for a few weeks. Comments appear and disappear; they can be more or less up to date, and then reloading the page 'loses' some. Only intermittently on some PCs, and it seems to occur whether logged in or not. It's very annoying.
That sounds like it might be a load balancing problem where not all the nodes are properly synchronised, so what comments you get depends on which server you hit.
The difficulty that the government has is that Theresa May, Greg Clark and (even) David Cameron went on an intensive love in with the automakers in the wake of the Brexit vote. And it was undoubtedly a success.
But it involved giving assurances that may not be deliverable, in terms of the impact on EU-UK trade, and on the ability of the UK to continue to benefit from some of the EU's trade agreements. (These in particular relate to Rules of Origin: i.e. the percentage of a product's production that happens in a customs area.)
I don't know how this resolves itself: either we'll end up giving state aid that may not be legal under WTO rules, or we'll be seen as untrustworthy by automakers, or we'll end up with a (probably short term) fudge that infuriates the Brexit purists.
or we'll be seen as untrustworthy by automakers
you mean the guys who have falsified all their performance data and are causing thousands of premature deaths in this country ?
Ummm... I think VW is about the only auto maker without any major UK presence.
Bentley, though that's hardly major, but it's not the only one to be caught cheating, simply the biggest.
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
Not so. The date of withdrawal was already defined when we instigated Article 50. The only way to change that would be for a formal extension of the negotiating period which requires the explicit consent of all member states.
O/T, the result from Redbridge is almost identical to Enfield.
Lead candidate only, Con 35.5%, Lab 55.2%, Lib Dem 4.2%, Others 5.1%. Since 2010, that's a 10% swing to Labour.
There is however, better news for the Conservatives in the wards making up Chingford & Wood Green (six from Waltham Forest, two from Redbridge, albeit, boundaries slightly altered from 2014). Lead candidate only:-
Con 15,910 49.5%, Lab 10,940 34.1% Lib Dem 2,931 9.1%, Other 2,304 7.2%..
That represents a swing of 5% to the Conservatives since the general election. The Conservatives won 18 seats, to 5 for Labour.
So much for going after IDS’ seat.
BTW- thanks for the analysis!
There has been some speculation that Labour could gain Uxbridge and South Ruislip. These were Thursday's results (lead candidate only):-
Con 17,529, 60.5%, Lab 8,672, 30.0%, Lib Dem 519, 1.9%, Others 2,220, 7.6%.
That's a swing of 9% to the Conservatives since the general election.
Momentum: winning here!!!
Some caution is required for those who think Labour are doomed under Corbyn because:
1) We saw the difference between Labour support in the 2017 locals and GE.
2) Corbyn voters are not necessarily Labour voters even if there is huge overlap. In a similar way that Trump voters are not always supporting GOP candidates down ballot across the rust belt and farm belt.
3)The demographics in local elections are likely to benefit the Tories over Labour given the huge polarization of voters along age.
1) The Tory vote also vote from the 2017 locals to the GE, it was the LD vote which collapsed
2) Not New Labour voters no but voters for current Labour candidates yes
3) That still does not explain the Tory holds in London which have a younger voting demographic
3) huh? Labour made big gains in London.....the labour lead was down from GE 2017 to the locals from 20% to 16% probably down to the older voting population even in London.
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
Not so. The date of withdrawal was already defined when we instigated Article 50. The only way to change that would be for a formal extension of the negotiating period which requires the explicit consent of all member states.
The withdrawal agreement can have any date in it. It doesn’t have to be the default of 2 years after invoking Article 50.
As I've been saying Theresa May's government is about to collapse.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
There is no way on earth any Tory leader will be calling a general election anytime soon, for starters the polls and local election results confirm we are looking at another hung parliament or Corbyn minority government, not a big Tory victory as they were forecasting this time last year.
Brexiteer and Remainer MPs will also rant and throw their toys out of the pram but at the end of the day none have any enthusiasm for another general election anytime soon and Tory members most certainly do not and short of Ruth Davidson all the polling confirms that no alternative leader would do much better than May and many would do significantly worse than she is doing.
There is also no guarantee that a pure Brexit JRM or Boris led Conservative Party would win a majority. Most people probably would not vote on Brexit alone and in all likelihood we would have another hung parliament and votes in the balance and quite possibly Labour as the largest party and a softer Brexit as a result.
I assume you missed out the part of the sentence where I said 'and short of Ruth Davidson all the polling confirms that no alternative leader would do much better than May and many would do significantly worse than she is doing.'
Though of course Corbyn would not abandon Brexit even if he has to deal with the LDs in another hung parliament as he needs the Labour Leave voters and the 20% of 2015 UKIP voters who voted Labour in 2017
O/T, the result from Redbridge is almost identical to Enfield.
Lead candidate only, Con 35.5%, Lab 55.2%, Lib Dem 4.2%, Others 5.1%. Since 2010, that's a 10% swing to Labour.
There is however, better news for the Conservatives in the wards making up Chingford & Wood Green (six from Waltham Forest, two from Redbridge, albeit, boundaries slightly altered from 2014). Lead candidate only:-
Con 15,910 49.5%, Lab 10,940 34.1% Lib Dem 2,931 9.1%, Other 2,304 7.2%..
That represents a swing of 5% to the Conservatives since the general election. The Conservatives won 18 seats, to 5 for Labour.
So much for going after IDS’ seat.
BTW- thanks for the analysis!
There has been some speculation that Labour could gain Uxbridge and South Ruislip. These were Thursday's results (lead candidate only):-
Con 17,529, 60.5%, Lab 8,672, 30.0%, Lib Dem 519, 1.9%, Others 2,220, 7.6%.
That's a swing of 9% to the Conservatives since the general election.
Momentum: winning here!!!
Some caution is required for those who think Labour are doomed under Corbyn because:
1) We saw the difference between Labour support in the 2017 locals and GE.
2) Corbyn voters are not necessarily Labour voters even if there is huge overlap. In a similar way that Trump voters are not always supporting GOP candidates down ballot across the rust belt and farm belt.
3)The demographics in local elections are likely to benefit the Tories over Labour given the huge polarization of voters along age.
1) The Tory vote also vote from the 2017 locals to the GE, it was the LD vote which collapsed
2) Not New Labour voters no but voters for current Labour candidates yes
3) That still does not explain the Tory holds in London which have a younger voting demographic
3) huh? Labour made big gains in London.....the labour lead was down from GE 2017 to the locals from 20% to 16% probably down to the older voting population even in London.
Labour gained none of the Tory 'crown jewel' councils it was supposedly on course to take, including in youthful areas like Wandsworth
Article 50 says what it says. The Lords might just as well try to repeal Indian independence.
Article 50 allows for a different date to be in the withdrawal agreement, and an extension to allow time for a second referendum is very possible.
Not without the explicit agreement of all 28 countries including the UK.
No, that's for extending the negotiating period. Only a qualified majority plus the consent of the European Parliament is required to adopt the withdrawal agreement.
and you think all those happy euro federalists want their biggest pain back ?
Who knows? I think there might be a lot of value to the project to have the most Eurosceptic country fail to leave: it would render A50 practically moot.
What I'm saying is that legally it seems to me that the withdrawal agreement could consist solely of the words "The United Kingdom will withdraw from the European Union on March 29th, 12,019 CE." Whether that's feasible politically is a different matter!
That ship has sailed. The date of withdrawal has already been defined as 2 years from the date Article 50 was triggered. That cannot now be changed without an extension.
I don't know if the Moderators have been made aware of this but the comments are only updating in real time for those who are actually signed in. If not signed in then the comments are lagging about 90 minutes behind time (by that I mean that at 5pm I could only see comments posted up to 3:27pm when I wasn't signed in). Unless it's only me... anyway, as I said, fine if signed in but not if I'm not.
If you are not signed in, then it shows the times using GMT and not BST, which means it *looks* like you are an hour behind, but in fact are not.
No it is more than that. It will not show the most recent messages and some messages appear and disappear as one refreshes.
Comments
"Peterson is an apologist for a set of beliefs that we once took for granted but now require an articulate defence, such as: Free speech is an essential value; perfect equality inevitably conflicts with individual freedom; one should be cautious before attempting to reengineer social institutions that appear to be working; men and women are, in certain quantifiable respects, different. His life advice concerns the necessity to defer gratification, face up to the trials of life with equanimity, take responsibility for one’s own choices, and struggle against the temptation to grow resentful. How such traditional values came to be portrayed as a danger adjacent to Nazism is one of the puzzles of our time."
There's something right on the nose about the debate surrounding the Professor in that summary.
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2018/may/07/get-your-hands-off-my-double-entendres-is-the-smutty-pun-now-under-attack-carry-on-great-british-bake-off
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/993884338142969858
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/993816959451049984
Anyone who thinks these amendments are anything other than an attempt by the Lords to stop Brexit completely is not living in the real world.
The Absolute Boy aint going anywhere.
A new Con leader and probably a general election in the next 2-3 months IMO.
But Brenda from Bristol will go ballistic.
Let's hope the LDs can at least make Labour work for it a bit though, spice things up.
1) We saw the difference between Labour support in the 2017 locals and GE.
2) Corbyn voters are not necessarily Labour voters even if there is huge overlap. In a similar way that Trump voters are not always supporting GOP candidates down ballot across the rust belt and farm belt.
3)The demographics in local elections are likely to benefit the Tories over Labour given the huge polarization of voters along age.
There is a lot of brinkmanship going on - given the statements leaked or outright stated, I don't see how May gets out of this one. She can get some options through parliament, but not without pissing off too many of her own party.
MikeS
Of course this could be a new feature to allow members to see betting tips before the wider public...
Germany going through an intense debate on migration following a riot in Bavaria at a refugee camp.
https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article176193618/Migration-Richter-teilen-Dobrindts-Kritik-an-Abschiebungsgegnern.html
2) Not New Labour voters no but voters for current Labour candidates yes
3) That still does not explain the Tory holds in London which have a younger voting demographic
It would be one compromise too far for Brexiteers, as spotted by Williamson and Javid; not backing it - seemingly somewhat to the surprise of No 10
Brexiteer and Remainer MPs will also rant and throw their toys out of the pram but at the end of the day none have any enthusiasm for another general election anytime soon and Tory members most certainly do not and short of Ruth Davidson all the polling confirms that no alternative leader would do much better than May and many would do significantly worse than she is doing.
The Federalists don't - they want to punish Britain.
But Member States would prefer Britain to remain, and indeed would probably allow it to do so on the basis we had up to 2016, if push came to shove.
which is why most of the stuff in the uk media is just nonsense
What I'm saying is that legally it seems to me that the withdrawal agreement could consist solely of the words "The United Kingdom will withdraw from the European Union on March 29th, 12,019 CE." Whether that's feasible politically is a different matter!
If you are not signed in, then it shows the times using GMT and not BST, which means it *looks* like you are an hour behind, but in fact are not.
https://order-order.com/2018/05/08/victory-oxford-university-will-put-may-portrait-back/
The human rights industry has now joined in to say no deportations and the Bavarian government has subsequently deported the guy. There is now a raging debate on how far Germany's obligations go with the usual candidates going at it hammer and tongs.
Either way this is not a settled issue and the argument has been going on for most of this month with no signs of letting up.
Easy Labour hold it is then.
Though of course Corbyn would not abandon Brexit even if he has to deal with the LDs in another hung parliament as he needs the Labour Leave voters and the 20% of 2015 UKIP voters who voted Labour in 2017