I notice however that while full of concern for those who due to their own efforts get kicked out (belatedly, in my experience) they don't make any mention of the potential negative impact on other children of keeping them in school.
This thread reminds me of Brown.. back in the day, everyone or pretty much everyone(including me) was predicting that Brown would be out, but it didn't happen. If it didn't happen to someone who really ought to have been summarily got rid of, its unlikely to happen to May, unless the Tories think they will lose the next election in which case she wall be booted. on this matter the Tories are ruthless. We are a long way from the next election IMHO>
Good analysis. The provisions of the fixed term Parliament Act make an early General Election very very difficult and the chances are that the Tories will hang on until 2022 which is an awful long way off. The political world could change dramatically in the ensuing.
This thread reminds me of Brown.. back in the day, everyone or pretty much everyone(including me) was predicting that Brown would be out, but it didn't happen. If it didn't happen to someone who really ought to have been summarily got rid of, its unlikely to happen to May, unless the Tories think they will lose the next election in which case she wall be booted. on this matter the Tories are ruthless. We are a long way from the next election IMHO>
Good analysis. The provisions of the fixed term Parliament Act make an early General Election very very difficult and the chances are that the Tories will hang on until 2022 which is an awful long way off. The political world could change dramatically in the ensuing.
Corbyn will be 73 in 2022. Cable would be approaching 80. If the election is really that date, surely we will see new leaders for all parties? (I'm assuming May will be ditched by next summer at the latest, even with her limpet like qualities.)
I’ve just got back from a 2.5 week holiday in Canada with my wife and we really got into that after we met a couple of Mounties briefly. I vaguely remembered it from the 90s. Great show.
King Cole, must've taken some foresight to pick the only day in two months when substantial rainfall is expected for a charity cricket match... hope you're spared the sogginess, for a while.
It’s been planned for a long while! Might, of course, have to hide in the beer tent. Ah, calamity!
So at least if it's wet, you won't have to stay dry?
(Hope it doesn't rain. In my experience the last few weeks every time they've forecast rain, sometimes even when it's put on the radar screen at the time it's happening, it's been dry.)
Both the BBC and Accuweather give a good chance of rain, sadly. However the latter gives it as most likely before the game starts and there’s an excellent, although largely amateur ground staff.
Mr. Doethur, at school, the teachers had a brilliant idea of pairing up hard-working and lazier pupils as they thought the good habits might rub off on the bad ones.
I notice however that while full of concern for those who due to their own efforts get kicked out (belatedly, in my experience) they don't make any mention of the potential negative impact on other children of keeping them in school.
One of my grandchildren was a TA for a while in an exclusion unit. He had some quite horrific stories, although he always tried to be positive about the children.
On topic, can I point out that at the end of last year when I predicted that all the party leaders would remain in position for 2018 I received a lot of comments about how timid a prediction that was?
This thread reminds me of Brown.. back in the day, everyone or pretty much everyone(including me) was predicting that Brown would be out, but it didn't happen. If it didn't happen to someone who really ought to have been summarily got rid of, its unlikely to happen to May, unless the Tories think they will lose the next election in which case she wall be booted. on this matter the Tories are ruthless. We are a long way from the next election IMHO>
Good analysis. The provisions of the fixed term Parliament Act make an early General Election very very difficult and the chances are that the Tories will hang on until 2022 which is an awful long way off. The political world could change dramatically in the ensuing.
Corbyn will be 73 in 2022. Cable would be approaching 80. If the election is really that date, surely we will see new leaders for all parties? (I'm assuming May will be ditched by next summer at the latest, even with her limpet like qualities.)
Just how are the Tories going to ditch her? The figure that we should be looking at is not just the 48 letters going into the chairman of the 1922 committee asking for a confidence motion but 155 the required total, if all MPs vote, for that confidence motion to go against her. Situation only gets dangerous for Mrs May if her successor becomes obvious because of wide support within the parliamentary party. That simply does not exist at the moment
This thread reminds me of Brown.. back in the day, everyone or pretty much everyone(including me) was predicting that Brown would be out, but it didn't happen. If it didn't happen to someone who really ought to have been summarily got rid of, its unlikely to happen to May, unless the Tories think they will lose the next election in which case she wall be booted. on this matter the Tories are ruthless. We are a long way from the next election IMHO>
Has the tactic of coordinated resignations ever worked?
But how strong is the parallel with Gordon Brown? In style, perhaps, but was there a real policy difference between Brown and the Blairites? Certainly nothing on the scale of the Brexit chasm.
Brexit is remarkable: perhaps unparalleled in British history. The government has no fixed policy: it changes each week. The Cabinet is split. The ERG has no agreed policy, except it does not like where it thinks the government is heading. And that's betting without hardcore remainers. The only agreed point is that, handled wrongly, Brexit poses the biggest threat to our economy since the war -- possibly the Civil War.
This thread reminds me of Brown.. back in the day, everyone or pretty much everyone(including me) was predicting that Brown would be out, but it didn't happen. If it didn't happen to someone who really ought to have been summarily got rid of, its unlikely to happen to May, unless the Tories think they will lose the next election in which case she wall be booted. on this matter the Tories are ruthless. We are a long way from the next election IMHO>
Good analysis. The provisions of the fixed term Parliament Act make an early General Election very very difficult and the chances are that the Tories will hang on until 2022 which is an awful long way off. The political world could change dramatically in the ensuing.
Corbyn will be 73 in 2022. Cable would be approaching 80. If the election is really that date, surely we will see new leaders for all parties? (I'm assuming May will be ditched by next summer at the latest, even with her limpet like qualities.)
Just how are the Tories going to ditch her? The figure that we should be looking at is not just the 48 letters going into the chairman of the 1922 committee asking for a confidence motion but 155 the required total, if all MPs vote, for that confidence motion to go against her. Situation only gets dangerous for Mrs May if her successor becomes obvious because of wide support within the parliamentary party. That simply does not exist at the moment
Theresa May would surely lose any vote of no confidence. The only thing that unites the Conservative Party is contempt for the prime minister. Your point about the lack of an obvious successor is why no-one dares trigger a vote of no confidence: the wrong faction might get in and be set for the next decade. But if they did, May would lose. If Theresa May thought for a minute she'd win, she'd follow John Major and call one herself.
This thread reminds me of Brown.. back in the day, everyone or pretty much everyone(including me) was predicting that Brown would be out, but it didn't happen. If it didn't happen to someone who really ought to have been summarily got rid of, its unlikely to happen to May, unless the Tories think they will lose the next election in which case she wall be booted. on this matter the Tories are ruthless. We are a long way from the next election IMHO>
Good analysis. The provisions of the fixed term Parliament Act make an early General Election very very difficult and the chances are that the Tories will hang on until 2022 which is an awful long way off. The political world could change dramatically in the ensuing.
Corbyn will be 73 in 2022. Cable would be approaching 80. If the election is really that date, surely we will see new leaders for all parties? (I'm assuming May will be ditched by next summer at the latest, even with her limpet like qualities.)
Just how are the Tories going to ditch her? The figure that we should be looking at is not just the 48 letters going into the chairman of the 1922 committee asking for a confidence motion but 155 the required total, if all MPs vote, for that confidence motion to go against her. Situation only gets dangerous for Mrs May if her successor becomes obvious because of wide support within the parliamentary party. That simply does not exist at the moment
I think once negotiations are over - one way or another - the PCP will be looking to move on, and therefore enough would vote against her to either make the threshold or make her position untenable. I also don't think with Javid and Hunt both now available and Boris out of the running, the majority will be too concerned about the identity of her successor. Either would do for them.
I notice however that while full of concern for those who due to their own efforts get kicked out (belatedly, in my experience) they don't make any mention of the potential negative impact on other children of keeping them in school.
And the rhetoric in that report gives scant attention to the lack of resources which lies at threat of the problem. The difficulty in getting EHCP funding for some of these kids is notorious, and many PRUs are running at capacity.
Schools are left with a perverse choice between the welfare of the few and the many, which is particularly acute with children displaying extreme behaviour problems.
I notice however that while full of concern for those who due to their own efforts get kicked out (belatedly, in my experience) they don't make any mention of the potential negative impact on other children of keeping them in school.
And the rhetoric in that report gives scant attention to the lack of resources which lies at threat of the problem. The difficulty in getting EHCP funding for some of these kids is notorious, and many PRUs are running at capacity.
Schools are left with a perverse choice between the welfare of the few and the many, which is particularly acute with children displaying extreme behaviour problems.
One teacher told me that such pupils were generally referred to as LFB's.
The first initial stands for "Little" the last for "Bastards" and I'm sure you can guess what the middle initial stands for.
This thread reminds me of Brown.. back in the day, everyone or pretty much everyone(including me) was predicting that Brown would be out, but it didn't happen. If it didn't happen to someone who really ought to have been summarily got rid of, its unlikely to happen to May, unless the Tories think they will lose the next election in which case she wall be booted. on this matter the Tories are ruthless. We are a long way from the next election IMHO>
Good analysis. The provisions of the fixed term Parliament Act make an early General Election very very difficult and the chances are that the Tories will hang on until 2022 which is an awful long way off. The political world could change dramatically in the ensuing.
Corbyn will be 73 in 2022. Cable would be approaching 80. If the election is really that date, surely we will see new leaders for all parties? (I'm assuming May will be ditched by next summer at the latest, even with her limpet like qualities.)
Just how are the Tories going to ditch her? The figure that we should be looking at is not just the 48 letters going into the chairman of the 1922 committee asking for a confidence motion but 155 the required total, if all MPs vote, for that confidence motion to go against her. Situation only gets dangerous for Mrs May if her successor becomes obvious because of wide support within the parliamentary party. That simply does not exist at the moment
My reading is that once the question gets asked - she loses. It's just that not enough want to ask the question - yet.
That changes if there is a real risk of an early election - the great majority of MPs will not countenance letting her front another election. The horror scenario for Tory MPs is a snap election without time to replace her.
And it changes if something close to Chequers can't be delivered.
Not even accurate, as Wales voted out. I know Carwyn Jones grumbles but he's out in two months anyway (looks like Drakeford will replace him).
You pick that out as the most noteworthy point?
Me, I'm most interested in the blue highlighter. Clearly there is a tune to go with these lyrics, a choral society lined up to sing it and Nancy is being pencilled in for a solo - lucky Nancy.
I'm unclear about the meaning of "Upminster?" My early thoughts is that it is a reference to the tube map and Thomasina is eight stops beyond Barking.
FPT on Type 31e... This is classic MoD bait and switch.
The RN actual gave up 2 x T45 (hulls #7 and #8) so that they could have 18 x FSC (as T26 was known at the time) comprising 10 x ASW and 8 x General Purpose. As the program progressed this was reduced by the tories to 13 x T26 (8 x ASW, 5 x GP) to 8 x T26 and 5 x T31 (ebay version of T26). Now T31 has been "suspended" (ie cancelled) we're left with the 8 x T26. Even if the RN get all 8, which is doubtful, that will leave the RN with an escort fleet of 14 ships!
But remember you can't trust Labour on defence...
Allowing for the fact that the Type 45's engines don't work, and the RFA is being gutted again, how many RN surface vessels are actually going to be deployable?
That story doesn't show what the BBC think it does. They think it looks bad for Banks - and, I admit, it's not good - but really it's much worse for the African politician on the take.
That's how things work in Africa. It's why it's the way it is.
Payments to Ministers to secure contracts are not just an African thing:
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
Not even accurate, as Wales voted out. I know Carwyn Jones grumbles but he's out in two months anyway (looks like Drakeford will replace him).
You pick that out as the most noteworthy point?
Me, I'm most interested in the blue highlighter. Clearly there is a tune to go with these lyrics, a choral society lined up to sing it and Nancy is being pencilled in for a solo - lucky Nancy.
I'm unclear about the meaning of "Upminster?" My early thoughts is that it is a reference to the tube map and Thomasina is eight stops beyond Barking.
I'm a Welshman. Having you metropolitan types misrepresent us always gets my hackles up!
Roll - does it mean a stockpiling of toilet roll?
Can't think what tune it would be set to. I've tried all the usual suspects and the metre simply doesn't work. The British Grenadiers comes closest but even so you have to do some fancy footwork in the middle lines and repeat the chorus.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
If Theresa May thought for a minute she'd win, she'd follow John Major and call one herself.
She can't. The rules have changed.
She can call a vote of no confidence. She simply asks MPs to submit letters with her blessing.
She’s have to be awfully confident to go down that route, as once letter 48 is delivered the process is completely out of her control. If she resigns or loses a VoNC she can’t stand in the resultant contest.
So, unless I blinked, BBC News at 10 did not mention the 'adequate food' stockpiling that Raab revealed.
WTF?
Perhaps most people are more level-headed than we are?
Most people, perhaps (at least in not overreacting to politics), but the media?
Newsnight leading on it.
Britain will be entering silly season headless chicken mode shortly.
The threat of food shortages could be a game changer. Particularly if the Mail and Sun run with it(perversely ).People will take note.
This was my theory earlier today. The consensus was the weather is too nice, everyone is drunk or on holiday, no one will care, it will be laughed off.
People are literally more worried about the pub running out of ice (I mean literally: I just went into Camden Marks and Sparks for a bag of ice and they said they hadn't had any for days, everyone was asking, please try tomorrow)
It's not going to register. Not now. The story has come at the wrong time for Remainers.
I think south Italy is making some incredible reds right now. The San Marzano 62 I linked to earlier has been number 1 on the *best wines from £20-£40 on sale in Britain* bracket, on Vivino, for months.
Vivino is right.
I had an absolutely superb British Columbia Pinot noir whilst out in Calgary. One of the best I’ve even tasted.
God knows how difficult it is to obtain here, though.
Not even accurate, as Wales voted out. I know Carwyn Jones grumbles but he's out in two months anyway (looks like Drakeford will replace him).
You pick that out as the most noteworthy point?
Me, I'm most interested in the blue highlighter. Clearly there is a tune to go with these lyrics, a choral society lined up to sing it and Nancy is being pencilled in for a solo - lucky Nancy.
I'm unclear about the meaning of "Upminster?" My early thoughts is that it is a reference to the tube map and Thomasina is eight stops beyond Barking.
Twitter is saying that Upminster is a psalm tune, which would make sense.
Or you have the money and space to be able to do so.
Porsches have lousy boot space for post apocalyptic looting. Their strength as a getaway vehicle will be diminished hundreds of burnt out Nespresso machines littering the road.
It will be raining soon enough and soon enough everyone will be complaining about the dismal weather. Enjoy the sun while you can.
I've been invited to an open-air play in Regent's Park on Friday evening. Weather forecast: 32 degrees, 60% chance of thunderstorm. What the hell do I wear?
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
May's great strength is that although there are dozen of Conservative MPs who would like to replace her there are probably none who would like to inherit the present issues that the job involves dealing with.
I suspect there is one person who believes he has the Chuchillian drive to do it. I'm just not sure that his colleagues trust him or think the situation is bad enough yet.
I don't think he does think that, or he'd publicly say he's put in hia letter and urge others to do the same.
FPT on Type 31e... This is classic MoD bait and switch.
The RN actual gave up 2 x T45 (hulls #7 and #8) so that they could have 18 x FSC (as T26 was known at the time) comprising 10 x ASW and 8 x General Purpose. As the program progressed this was reduced by the tories to 13 x T26 (8 x ASW, 5 x GP) to 8 x T26 and 5 x T31 (ebay version of T26). Now T31 has been "suspended" (ie cancelled) we're left with the 8 x T26. Even if the RN get all 8, which is doubtful, that will leave the RN with an escort fleet of 14 ships!
But remember you can't trust Labour on defence...
I’m not sure either party can be trusted on defence.
The Tories were good on defence in the early 1980s, investing properly, but have not impressed since the end of the Cold War.
Labour did a good job with the 1998 sdr and then comprehensively failed to fund it properly whilst making salami slices and adding new commitments all the way to 2010.
It will be raining soon enough and soon enough everyone will be complaining about the dismal weather. Enjoy the sun while you can.
I've been invited to an open-air play in Regent's Park on Friday evening. Weather forecast: 32 degrees, 60% chance of thunderstorm. What the hell do I wear?
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
That was one hot sticky night. Rain, a hearfelt message from us to you: We were wrong to be so unkind about you. We took you for granted. All we did was complain. But now we realise we can’t live without you. We are half of what we should be. Please come home. Love, the UK x
Ps
Bring your friend, cold air , with you as well. I'm sorry we said he was a jerk.
It will be raining soon enough and soon enough everyone will be complaining about the dismal weather. Enjoy the sun while you can.
I've been invited to an open-air play in Regent's Park on Friday evening. Weather forecast: 32 degrees, 60% chance of thunderstorm. What the hell do I wear?
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
It will be raining soon enough and soon enough everyone will be complaining about the dismal weather. Enjoy the sun while you can.
I've been invited to an open-air play in Regent's Park on Friday evening. Weather forecast: 32 degrees, 60% chance of thunderstorm. What the hell do I wear?
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
Not even accurate, as Wales voted out. I know Carwyn Jones grumbles but he's out in two months anyway (looks like Drakeford will replace him).
You pick that out as the most noteworthy point?
Me, I'm most interested in the blue highlighter. Clearly there is a tune to go with these lyrics, a choral society lined up to sing it and Nancy is being pencilled in for a solo - lucky Nancy.
I'm unclear about the meaning of "Upminster?" My early thoughts is that it is a reference to the tube map and Thomasina is eight stops beyond Barking.
Twitter is saying that Upminster is a psalm tune, which would make sense.
Well, I've found it, after a lot of research, and it fits the words with some slurring, but it's a very obscure tune and a quick study of it reveals why. It's not in any of my hymn books, including the nineteenth century ones, and I'm at a loss to know how anyone could have found it.
Or you have the money and space to be able to do so.
Porsches have lousy boot space for post apocalyptic looting. Their strength as a getaway vehicle will be diminished hundreds of burnt out Nespresso machines littering the road.
While planning for post Brexit Britain, I think one needs to consider certain contingencies. Perhaps a V8 Interceptor would be car of choice:
Who else is there? The alternatives are not obvious improvements.
Better question is, who else would want it now anyway ?
All of them. Better to get the job when you can than wait for the perfect moment that might never come.
That's why I don't believe they do want it, or are actually that opposed to the plan - the ones who claim to want a deal at least, since that requires more than just obstructing things - or they woukd have acted by now.
Miss Cyclefree, there's a philosophical question. What's the worse type of political fringe lunatic: someone who knows what they're doing, or someone who doesn't?
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
You're generous. You only went on his record on political violence. But that and anything else is separate from the fact he is undoubtedly able.
If Theresa May thought for a minute she'd win, she'd follow John Major and call one herself.
She can't. The rules have changed.
She can call a vote of no confidence. She simply asks MPs to submit letters with her blessing.
She’s have to be awfully confident to go down that route, as once letter 48 is delivered the process is completely out of her control. If she resigns or loses a VoNC she can’t stand in the resultant contest.
Not a question of confidence. Hell, she'd probably lose. But it would force the party to make a choice about what it wants to do, and either unite behind her or her successor, or just split already. At least the never ending sniping and plotting would be done.
It is sad and pathetic that people keep saying how dreadful and undemocratic her plan is, yet they won't stop her. Probably as they think the EU will, but if they believe what they say they should act. Or she should.
Miss Cyclefree, there's a philosophical question. What's the worse type of political fringe lunatic: someone who knows what they're doing, or someone who doesn't?
Depends on what the consequences of their actions are.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
I didn’t say I loved him. I said I preferred him to Corbyn. The bar is not high. I want neither of them in power.
But, frankly, we’re not facing a great choice, are we? The political equivalent of choosing between having a nest of rats or wasps lodging in your house. Both will cause expensive damage and have a nasty bite, in different ways. Neither are welcome.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
I didn’t say I loved him. I said I preferred him to Corbyn. The bar is not high. I want neither of them in power.
But, frankly, we’re not facing a great choice, are we? The political equivalent of choosing between having a nest of rats or wasps lodging in your house. Both will cause expensive damage and have a nasty bite, in different ways. Neither are welcome.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
You are far too charitable in your assessment of the man.
FPT on Type 31e... This is classic MoD bait and switch.
The RN actual gave up 2 x T45 (hulls #7 and #8) so that they could have 18 x FSC (as T26 was known at the time) comprising 10 x ASW and 8 x General Purpose. As the program progressed this was reduced by the tories to 13 x T26 (8 x ASW, 5 x GP) to 8 x T26 and 5 x T31 (ebay version of T26). Now T31 has been "suspended" (ie cancelled) we're left with the 8 x T26. Even if the RN get all 8, which is doubtful, that will leave the RN with an escort fleet of 14 ships!
But remember you can't trust Labour on defence...
Allowing for the fact that the Type 45's engines don't work, and the RFA is being gutted again, how many RN surface vessels are actually going to be deployable?
Well warships typically spend a significant proportion of their lives in refit so we'd definitely be down to single figures.
If you looked at what the tories actually do instead of what they say you could come to no other conclusion than that they absolutely despise the armed forces of the United Kingdom.
FPT on Type 31e... This is classic MoD bait and switch.
The RN actual gave up 2 x T45 (hulls #7 and #8) so that they could have 18 x FSC (as T26 was known at the time) comprising 10 x ASW and 8 x General Purpose. As the program progressed this was reduced by the tories to 13 x T26 (8 x ASW, 5 x GP) to 8 x T26 and 5 x T31 (ebay version of T26). Now T31 has been "suspended" (ie cancelled) we're left with the 8 x T26. Even if the RN get all 8, which is doubtful, that will leave the RN with an escort fleet of 14 ships!
But remember you can't trust Labour on defence...
Allowing for the fact that the Type 45's engines don't work, and the RFA is being gutted again, how many RN surface vessels are actually going to be deployable?
Well warships typically spend a significant proportion of their lives in refit so we'd definitely be down to single figures.
If you looked at what the tories actually do instead of what they say you could come to no other conclusion than that they absolutely despise the armed forces of the United Kingdom.
How many vessels are needed for a carrier escort group? Would it effectively be the whole fleet?
If Theresa May thought for a minute she'd win, she'd follow John Major and call one herself.
She can't. The rules have changed.
She can call a vote of no confidence. She simply asks MPs to submit letters with her blessing.
She’s have to be awfully confident to go down that route, as once letter 48 is delivered the process is completely out of her control. If she resigns or loses a VoNC she can’t stand in the resultant contest.
Not a question of confidence. Hell, she'd probably lose. But it would force the party to make a choice about what it wants to do, and either unite behind her or her successor, or just split already. At least the never ending sniping and plotting would be done.
It is sad and pathetic that people keep saying how dreadful and undemocratic her plan is, yet they won't stop her. Probably as they think the EU will, but if they believe what they say they should act. Or she should.
How ironic, the 'Take Back Control' brigade are hoping the EU will stop May's plan.
Miss Cyclefree, there's a philosophical question. What's the worse type of political fringe lunatic: someone who knows what they're doing, or someone who doesn't?
Both are equally bad in different ways. The former is a Pol Pot. The latter: JRM?
I am a bit sceptical that fringe lunatics don’t know what they are doing. They may be incompetent but they usually have an idea. It’s just that their idea is rubbish and/or even if the general idea is a good one they have no clue how to get there and/or lack the flexibility to adapt.
FPT on Type 31e... This is classic MoD bait and switch.
The RN actual gave up 2 x T45 (hulls #7 and #8) so that they could have 18 x FSC (as T26 was known at the time) comprising 10 x ASW and 8 x General Purpose. As the program progressed this was reduced by the tories to 13 x T26 (8 x ASW, 5 x GP) to 8 x T26 and 5 x T31 (ebay version of T26). Now T31 has been "suspended" (ie cancelled) we're left with the 8 x T26. Even if the RN get all 8, which is doubtful, that will leave the RN with an escort fleet of 14 ships!
But remember you can't trust Labour on defence...
You would have loved PB back in 2008 and 2009.
Every day you would read about how Labour had broken the 'military covenant' and promises to never vote Conservative again if the next government cut Britain's defences.
There was a distinct drop in concern about such issues after May 2010.
Or you have the money and space to be able to do so.
Porsches have lousy boot space for post apocalyptic looting. Their strength as a getaway vehicle will be diminished hundreds of burnt out Nespresso machines littering the road.
Proper Porsches have the “boot” at the wrong end. Engine at the back, storage at the front.
That was one hot sticky night. Rain, a hearfelt message from us to you: We were wrong to be so unkind about you. We took you for granted. All we did was complain. But now we realise we can’t live without you. We are half of what we should be. Please come home. Love, the UK x
I did a walk in Northamptonshire on Sunday, and encountered some light drizzle as I climbed up to the top of Honey Hill. I stretched out my arms and let the drops hit my face.
It was a marvellous 22 mile stroll on a very warm day (actually 24, because *ahem* I went wrong in a couple of places). But best of all was the drizzle - and it's not often I say that!
Back in May when Severn Trent reservoirs were at 96% capacity I foolishly said there would be no hosepipe ban this summer. Even then, I had a vaguely uneasy feeling that I could be inviting drought. Now I know. This is all my fault!!
I have mentioned that prediction to you on a couple of occasions.
As recently as the start of June, reservoir levels under Severn Trent were at 91% of capacity. It should also be noted that they have only one major reservoir chain - the Derwent - below 60% at the moment. By contrast Thirlmere is down to 48% (I'm guessing those fires had something to do with that). Annoyingly I can't find the details for Blithefield, but the Clywedog reservoir (our other major source of water) is still at 85%.
So it's not certain the Midlands will have a hosepipe ban, or even especially likely. A dry autumn and it might be a different story next year.
Bah. why let 'facts' get in the way of a gentle ribbing?
FPT on Type 31e... This is classic MoD bait and switch.
The RN actual gave up 2 x T45 (hulls #7 and #8) so that they could have 18 x FSC (as T26 was known at the time) comprising 10 x ASW and 8 x General Purpose. As the program progressed this was reduced by the tories to 13 x T26 (8 x ASW, 5 x GP) to 8 x T26 and 5 x T31 (ebay version of T26). Now T31 has been "suspended" (ie cancelled) we're left with the 8 x T26. Even if the RN get all 8, which is doubtful, that will leave the RN with an escort fleet of 14 ships!
But remember you can't trust Labour on defence...
Allowing for the fact that the Type 45's engines don't work, and the RFA is being gutted again, how many RN surface vessels are actually going to be deployable?
Well warships typically spend a significant proportion of their lives in refit so we'd definitely be down to single figures.
If you looked at what the tories actually do instead of what they say you could come to no other conclusion than that they absolutely despise the armed forces of the United Kingdom.
How many vessels are needed for a carrier escort group? Would it effectively be the whole fleet?
A US CSG is (at the very least, it's usually more) the carrier, a Tico guided missile destroyer, a destroyer squadron of two Arleigh Burkes, two hunter/killer subs and a tanker/replenishment vessel so at least 7. A UK only CSG outside a multi-national coalition would be almost impossible but it would probably be 1 x QEC, 1 x T45 (power plant permitting) , 1 x T23/T26 and 1 Wave class or Solid Support. However, in effort to deliver best value for the tax payer only one of the Solid Support ship is going be equipped for "heavy" replenishment (ie bombs and aircraft engines) so if that particular vessel is inconveniently unavailable the job's fucked.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
I didn’t say I loved him. I said I preferred him to Corbyn. The bar is not high. I want neither of them in power.
But, frankly, we’re not facing a great choice, are we? The political equivalent of choosing between having a nest of rats or wasps lodging in your house. Both will cause expensive damage and have a nasty bite, in different ways. Neither are welcome.
I thought that the rats were busy planning their emigration to Canada
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
I didn’t say I loved him. I said I preferred him to Corbyn. The bar is not high. I want neither of them in power.
But, frankly, we’re not facing a great choice, are we? The political equivalent of choosing between having a nest of rats or wasps lodging in your house. Both will cause expensive damage and have a nasty bite, in different ways. Neither are welcome.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
You're generous. You only went on his record on political violence. But that and anything else is separate from the fact he is undoubtedly able.
Why shouldn’t that be a dealbreaker? There have been many able men throughout history advocating such solutions who’ve - consequently - been extremely dangerous.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
He would be the one signing the gulag orders while he kept Jezza in his playroom reading another critique of Capitalism.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
You're generous. You only went on his record on political violence. But that and anything else is separate from the fact he is undoubtedly able.
Why shouldn’t that be a dealbreaker? There have been many able men throughout history advocating such solutions who’ve - consequently - been extremely dangerous.
Who said it isn't a deal breaker ? I think people were merely remarking he's all the more dangerous as he's smart.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
McDonnell is at least highly intelligent.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
True. I don’t trust him but there’s a shrewdness there.
Count me out of the McDonnell love in.
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
You are far too charitable in your assessment of the man.
Would be interesting to see how the media went after McDonnell if he looked like getting close to power.....
His Little Red Book stunt will come back to haunt him too.
That was one hot sticky night. Rain, a hearfelt message from us to you: We were wrong to be so unkind about you. We took you for granted. All we did was complain. But now we realise we can’t live without you. We are half of what we should be. Please come home. Love, the UK x
I did a walk in Northamptonshire on Sunday, and encountered some light drizzle as I climbed up to the top of Honey Hill. I stretched out my arms and let the drops hit my face.
It was a marvellous 22 mile stroll on a very warm day (actually 24, because *ahem* I went wrong in a couple of places). But best of all was the drizzle - and it's not often I say that!
Back in May when Severn Trent reservoirs were at 96% capacity I foolishly said there would be no hosepipe ban this summer. Even then, I had a vaguely uneasy feeling that I could be inviting drought. Now I know. This is all my fault!!
I have mentioned that prediction to you on a couple of occasions.
As recently as the start of June, reservoir levels under Severn Trent were at 91% of capacity. It should also be noted that they have only one major reservoir chain - the Derwent - below 60% at the moment. By contrast Thirlmere is down to 48% (I'm guessing those fires had something to do with that). Annoyingly I can't find the details for Blithefield, but the Clywedog reservoir (our other major source of water) is still at 85%.
So it's not certain the Midlands will have a hosepipe ban, or even especially likely. A dry autumn and it might be a different story next year.
Bah. why let 'facts' get in the way of a gentle ribbing?
It is of course disturbing to realise reservoir levels have fallen by a quarter in just two months. Six months without rain and we would be in the same situation as Cape Town was earlier this year.
Interesting that calling the issue food security, as some media is doing, rather than food shortages might easily take the sting out of the situation.
Not sure whether we should be more worried that the government has stockpiling food as a Brexit policy or that it's not doing it.
Some with a tin ear on here last night were lauding the govt for saying there would be no food shortages while missing the point that the government has got us into a situation where they are talking about food shortages.
If Theresa May thought for a minute she'd win, she'd follow John Major and call one herself.
She can't. The rules have changed.
She can call a vote of no confidence. She simply asks MPs to submit letters with her blessing.
She’s have to be awfully confident to go down that route, as once letter 48 is delivered the process is completely out of her control. If she resigns or loses a VoNC she can’t stand in the resultant contest.
Not a question of confidence. Hell, she'd probably lose. But it would force the party to make a choice about what it wants to do, and either unite behind her or her successor, or just split already. At least the never ending sniping and plotting would be done.
It is sad and pathetic that people keep saying how dreadful and undemocratic her plan is, yet they won't stop her. Probably as they think the EU will, but if they believe what they say they should act. Or she should.
How ironic, the 'Take Back Control' brigade are hoping the EU will stop May's plan.
Trimble was positively dancing a jig this morning on the radio, describing how the EU would have no option but to put up a border and how simply awful that would be*.
It will be raining soon enough and soon enough everyone will be complaining about the dismal weather. Enjoy the sun while you can.
I've been invited to an open-air play in Regent's Park on Friday evening. Weather forecast: 32 degrees, 60% chance of thunderstorm. What the hell do I wear?
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
I may be going mad, but I seem to recall that @TimB posted on here an extraordinary story about the time he bought a second-hand car not long after migrating to the New World.
And the former owner of the car turned out to be a retired but very senior Canadian politician.
Would appreciate it if someone can confirm whether or not the heat has completely addled me!!
Yes that is the case. It was a Cadillac previously owned by the leader of the socialist party in Canada. I am amazed that you remember that!
It had an 8.2 liter engine and went like a scalded dog.
Three legged dog, maybe! 500ci Caddy motors only make about 200hp when new...
This conversation reminds me of the LA Speed Check story. For those of you who have never heard it, well worth the five minutes:
FPT on Type 31e... This is classic MoD bait and switch.
The RN actual gave up 2 x T45 (hulls #7 and #8) so that they could have 18 x FSC (as T26 was known at the time) comprising 10 x ASW and 8 x General Purpose. As the program progressed this was reduced by the tories to 13 x T26 (8 x ASW, 5 x GP) to 8 x T26 and 5 x T31 (ebay version of T26). Now T31 has been "suspended" (ie cancelled) we're left with the 8 x T26. Even if the RN get all 8, which is doubtful, that will leave the RN with an escort fleet of 14 ships!
But remember you can't trust Labour on defence...
Allowing for the fact that the Type 45's engines don't work, and the RFA is being gutted again, how many RN surface vessels are actually going to be deployable?
Well warships typically spend a significant proportion of their lives in refit so we'd definitely be down to single figures.
If you looked at what the tories actually do instead of what they say you could come to no other conclusion than that they absolutely despise the armed forces of the United Kingdom.
How many vessels are needed for a carrier escort group? Would it effectively be the whole fleet?
A US CSG is (at the very least, it's usually more) the carrier, a Tico guided missile destroyer, a destroyer squadron of two Arleigh Burkes, two hunter/killer subs and a tanker/replenishment vessel so at least 7. A UK only CSG outside a multi-national coalition would be almost impossible but it would probably be 1 x QEC, 1 x T45 (power plant permitting) , 1 x T23/T26 and 1 Wave class or Solid Support. However, in effort to deliver best value for the tax payer only one of the Solid Support ship is going be equipped for "heavy" replenishment (ie bombs and aircraft engines) so if that particular vessel is inconveniently unavailable the job's fucked.
The carriers seem to be a luxury the rest of the navy has been sacrificed for.
If we really need them, would we have been better off rebuilding the rest of the fleet first and waiting until more funds were available (which would have had the added benefit of waiting to see if the F35 was ever going to be a reliable airframe for carrier operations before ordering it, and making an informed and less costly decision on what kind of catapult system to opt for...) ?
Honestly , food shortages???? What utter nonsense.
Talked about by the same people who expected that the crops would rot in the field in 2017 and then expected that the crops would rot in the field in 2018.
I notice however that while full of concern for those who due to their own efforts get kicked out (belatedly, in my experience) they don't make any mention of the potential negative impact on other children of keeping them in school.
And the rhetoric in that report gives scant attention to the lack of resources which lies at threat of the problem. The difficulty in getting EHCP funding for some of these kids is notorious, and many PRUs are running at capacity.
Schools are left with a perverse choice between the welfare of the few and the many, which is particularly acute with children displaying extreme behaviour problems.
Very true - Mrs Capitano has been going through exactly that over the last year, not helped by a pair of particularly truculent parents who (as is not particularly unusual with troubled kids) have not been ready to accept that there can be anything wrong with the kid.
For the Children's Commissioner to glibly dismiss this as "some schools are seeking to improve their overall exam results by removing some of their most vulnerable children from the school roll" is a spectacular exercise in missing the point. By and large, with a kid like this, SATs results are the least of the worries. It's the impact on the other kids, both directly through disruptive behaviour, and indirectly through the amount of staff time taken to deal with this.
No Safety Car at 2.2. Hungary is the circuit least likely to have one.
Hamilton win each way at 4.33. A little bit long without being too out there. Red Bull seem a bit more confident of their hopes, but still looks a bit long.
It will be raining soon enough and soon enough everyone will be complaining about the dismal weather. Enjoy the sun while you can.
I've been invited to an open-air play in Regent's Park on Friday evening. Weather forecast: 32 degrees, 60% chance of thunderstorm. What the hell do I wear?
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
As You Like It, I think. It's a treat (in return for a dinner at the Skylon, which I also recommend), so I'm not being told details.
Sounds like fun. We're off to see The Merchant of Venice in the grounds of Kingston Lacy tomorrow night, our second outdoor theatre this year. Hard to beat in this weather. Enjoy!
It will be raining soon enough and soon enough everyone will be complaining about the dismal weather. Enjoy the sun while you can.
I've been invited to an open-air play in Regent's Park on Friday evening. Weather forecast: 32 degrees, 60% chance of thunderstorm. What the hell do I wear?
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
FPT on Type 31e... This is classic MoD bait and switch.
The RN actual gave up 2 x T45 (hulls #7 and #8) so that they could have 18 x FSC (as T26 was known at the time) comprising 10 x ASW and 8 x General Purpose. As the program progressed this was reduced by the tories to 13 x T26 (8 x ASW, 5 x GP) to 8 x T26 and 5 x T31 (ebay version of T26). Now T31 has been "suspended" (ie cancelled) we're left with the 8 x T26. Even if the RN get all 8, which is doubtful, that will leave the RN with an escort fleet of 14 ships!
But remember you can't trust Labour on defence...
Allowing for the fact that the Type 45's engines don't work, and the RFA is being gutted again, how many RN surface vessels are actually going to be deployable?
Well warships typically spend a significant proportion of their lives in refit so we'd definitely be down to single figures.
If you looked at what the tories actually do instead of what they say you could come to no other conclusion than that they absolutely despise the armed forces of the United Kingdom.
How many vessels are needed for a carrier escort group? Would it effectively be the whole fleet?
A US CSG is (at the very least, it's usually more) the carrier, a Tico guided missile destroyer, a destroyer squadron of two Arleigh Burkes, two hunter/killer subs and a tanker/replenishment vessel so at least 7. A UK only CSG outside a multi-national coalition would be almost impossible but it would probably be 1 x QEC, 1 x T45 (power plant permitting) , 1 x T23/T26 and 1 Wave class or Solid Support. However, in effort to deliver best value for the tax payer only one of the Solid Support ship is going be equipped for "heavy" replenishment (ie bombs and aircraft engines) so if that particular vessel is inconveniently unavailable the job's fucked.
The carriers seem to be a luxury the rest of the navy has been sacrificed for.
If we really need them, would we have been better off rebuilding the rest of the fleet first and waiting until more funds were available (which would have had the added benefit of waiting to see if the F35 was ever going to be a reliable airframe for carrier operations before ordering it, and making an informed and less costly decision on what kind of catapult system to opt for...) ?
My impression always was that there was a community of interest. The Admiralty thought it would inevitably lead to refleeting and Brown saw Scottish metal bashing jobs. The military-industrial complex at a small scale.
It will be raining soon enough and soon enough everyone will be complaining about the dismal weather. Enjoy the sun while you can.
I've been invited to an open-air play in Regent's Park on Friday evening. Weather forecast: 32 degrees, 60% chance of thunderstorm. What the hell do I wear?
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
Honestly , food shortages???? What utter nonsense.
Talked about by the same people who expected that the crops would rot in the field in 2017 and then expected that the crops would rot in the field in 2018.
Talkwd about by the Government minister in charge of Brexit.
Comments
Excluded pupils 'abandoned by schools' in England
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-44941691
I notice however that while full of concern for those who due to their own efforts get kicked out (belatedly, in my experience) they don't make any mention of the potential negative impact on other children of keeping them in school.
Well, you can imagine how that worked out.
But how strong is the parallel with Gordon Brown? In style, perhaps, but was there a real policy difference between Brown and the Blairites? Certainly nothing on the scale of the Brexit chasm.
Brexit is remarkable: perhaps unparalleled in British history. The government has no fixed policy: it changes each week. The Cabinet is split. The ERG has no agreed policy, except it does not like where it thinks the government is heading. And that's betting without hardcore remainers. The only agreed point is that, handled wrongly, Brexit poses the biggest threat to our economy since the war -- possibly the Civil War.
Schools are left with a perverse choice between the welfare of the few and the many, which is particularly acute with children displaying extreme behaviour problems.
The first initial stands for "Little" the last for "Bastards" and I'm sure you can guess what the middle initial stands for.
That changes if there is a real risk of an early election - the great majority of MPs will not countenance letting her front another election. The horror scenario for Tory MPs is a snap election without time to replace her.
And it changes if something close to Chequers can't be delivered.
Me, I'm most interested in the blue highlighter. Clearly there is a tune to go with these lyrics, a choral society lined up to sing it and Nancy is being pencilled in for a solo - lucky Nancy.
I'm unclear about the meaning of "Upminster?" My early thoughts is that it is a reference to the tube map and Thomasina is eight stops beyond Barking.
https://youtu.be/BBi-KXc0CRk
"The first initial stands for "Little" the last for "Bastards" and I'm sure you can guess what the middle initial stands for."
Fat?
When it comes to family members benefiting from government deals, I'd add Cherie Blair and the Human Rights Act.
But in Africa, corruption is endemic. It is the way things are done there.
Interesting interview with John McDonnell on Radio 4 where he didn’t really deny very effectively that Labour’s economic programme was a British version of Trump’s America First.
And this is quite interesting on Corbyn’s approach - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/jeremy-corbyns-obsession-with-antizionism-is-poisoning-labour-srj2wgvlk. McDonnell sounded embarrassed by it all.
Despite myself and despite not trusting him an iota, I find myself preferring McDonnell to Corbyn. At least you know you are dealing with the political equivalent of one of those corrupt 1970’s Met detectives. Whereas Corbyn’s unjustified self-righteousness grates.
Roll - does it mean a stockpiling of toilet roll?
Can't think what tune it would be set to. I've tried all the usual suspects and the metre simply doesn't work. The British Grenadiers comes closest but even so you have to do some fancy footwork in the middle lines and repeat the chorus.
In a sense though that makes him more culpable for the rubbish he spouts. We can't say as we do with Corbyn or Pidcock or Rayner that it's because he doesn't have a clue what he's saying.
God knows how difficult it is to obtain here, though.
And by the way a blood moon, which sounds quite fun:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/jul/25/blood-moon-all-you-need-to-know-about-this-weeks-lunar-eclipse
The Tories were good on defence in the early 1980s, investing properly, but have not impressed since the end of the Cold War.
Labour did a good job with the 1998 sdr and then comprehensively failed to fund it properly whilst making salami slices and adding new commitments all the way to 2010.
Bring your friend, cold air , with you as well. I'm sorry we said he was a jerk.
What are you seeing?
The man barely attempts to camouflage his admiration of political violence, which he is happy to dogwhistle for too. I think he’s filth.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AMMox_zbTiQC&pg=PP26&lpg=PP26&dq=upminster+hymn+tune&source=bl&ots=s_PBDVW9_E&sig=f5Gt1ql8x2azJlvEWb2gnwB0-bE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiWycXI2rncAhWKJsAKHad8A9wQ6AEwDHoECAEQAQ#v=onepage&q=upminster hymn tune&f=false
(Third hit.)
https://youtu.be/k3E6uWoNPVo
Miss Cyclefree, there's a philosophical question. What's the worse type of political fringe lunatic: someone who knows what they're doing, or someone who doesn't?
Discuss.
It is sad and pathetic that people keep saying how dreadful and undemocratic her plan is, yet they won't stop her. Probably as they think the EU will, but if they believe what they say they should act. Or she should.
But, frankly, we’re not facing a great choice, are we? The political equivalent of choosing between having a nest of rats or wasps lodging in your house. Both will cause expensive damage and have a nasty bite, in different ways. Neither are welcome.
Actual food shortages is a different matter entirely.
If you looked at what the tories actually do instead of what they say you could come to no other conclusion than that they absolutely despise the armed forces of the United Kingdom.
Keeps talking about Britain then notes that “we” need to overpower the naysayers in Scotland, Wales and Ulster.
Talks of closing borders than goes to to claim that trade is the thing.
Paradox paradise.
I am a bit sceptical that fringe lunatics don’t know what they are doing. They may be incompetent but they usually have an idea. It’s just that their idea is rubbish and/or even if the general idea is a good one they have no clue how to get there and/or lack the flexibility to adapt.
Only massively stupid people will thank them for that.
Corbyn, McDonnell, May and Johnson - none of them deserve a vote.
Every day you would read about how Labour had broken the 'military covenant' and promises to never vote Conservative again if the next government cut Britain's defences.
There was a distinct drop in concern about such issues after May 2010.
I think people were merely remarking he's all the more dangerous as he's smart.
His Little Red Book stunt will come back to haunt him too.
But that is - hopefully - not likely to happen.
*not
If we really need them, would we have been better off rebuilding the rest of the fleet first and waiting until more funds were available (which would have had the added benefit of waiting to see if the F35 was ever going to be a reliable airframe for carrier operations before ordering it, and making an informed and less costly decision on what kind of catapult system to opt for...) ?
For the Children's Commissioner to glibly dismiss this as "some schools are seeking to improve their overall exam results by removing some of their most vulnerable children from the school roll" is a spectacular exercise in missing the point. By and large, with a kid like this, SATs results are the least of the worries. It's the impact on the other kids, both directly through disruptive behaviour, and indirectly through the amount of staff time taken to deal with this.
No Safety Car at 2.2. Hungary is the circuit least likely to have one.
Hamilton win each way at 4.33. A little bit long without being too out there. Red Bull seem a bit more confident of their hopes, but still looks a bit long.
That's a Jules & Sandy line, verbatim.