""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
If China is outputting over 20% more than us per capita then well and truly whatever the UK does is a drop in the ocean.
Someone should tell Corbyn the two accused Russians are zionists, just to watch his mind malfunction as he tries to work out what to think.
Mr. Song, mildly amused you agreed with almost everything I said, then ended by indicating you thought I was stupid.
(Agree with you on MMR. At most, on man-made global warming I'm unpersuaded. The alignment of the left, the green movement, and the religious fervour rather than scientific rigour with which debates are often had does more to put me off than persuade me).
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
If China is outputting over 20% more than us per capita then well and truly whatever the UK does is a drop in the ocean.
Quite
we should really be shifting on to other environmental priorities instead of hammering the crap out of our energy users
Whose dream holiday day trip to Salisbury, which they did on more than one occasion...
I know this is a bit old news but why on earth did the Russian government and or their security services feel the need to bump off some old Russian spy (or traitor in their eyes) who lived in Salisbury with a chemical weapon. Why not just wait for him and shoot him or - wait for him to visit London - and acid attack him. He would have just been another statistic then and would almost certainly be dead now or at least maimed for life.
They arguably put their own lives and risk for what point - when Skripal could have been disposed off with minimal risk to them with a bullet etc. I don't deny it happened but I still don't know why on earth they decided to pursue that risky course. It just doesn't make any sense?
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
If China is outputting over 20% more than us per capita then well and truly whatever the UK does is a drop in the ocean.
Like the whole war on plastic stuff - where it is overwhemingly an Asian problem, I'd say we're doing our bit for carbon. Interesting Germany is almost double our output per person, they've a similiar climate, living standard and aren't an oil or mineral economy.
Mr. 16, might have been to make a point that it was definitely them who took out Skripal, pour encourager les autres.
It reminds me somewhat (in terms of trying to dissuade behaviour disapproved of by the state) of the idiotic actions of the Athenians when they killed all (who went back, a few didn't) of their admirals after they won a naval battle. Some dead Athenian sailors hadn't been retrieved due to the conditions, and this was deemed sufficiently wrong for the admirals to be executed.
Turns out massacring your own military leadership in the middle of a war isn't the smartest move in the world.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Pulpstar, agree entirely with your plastic comments.
Whose dream holiday day trip to Salisbury, which they did on more than one occasion...
I know this is a bit old news but why on earth did the Russian government and or their security services feel the need to bump off some old Russian spy (or traitor in their eyes) who lived in Salisbury with a chemical weapon. Why not just wait for him and shoot him or - wait for him to visit London - and acid attack him. He would have just been another statistic then and would almost certainly be dead now or at least maimed for life.
They arguably put their own lives and risk for what point - when Skripal could have been disposed off with minimal risk to them with a bullet etc. I don't deny it happened but I still don't know why on earth they decided to pursue that risky course. It just doesn't make any sense?
The point of the operation wasn’t to kill the person per se but to demonstrate Russian power and reach.
Whose dream holiday day trip to Salisbury, which they did on more than one occasion...
I know this is a bit old news but why on earth did the Russian government and or their security services feel the need to bump off some old Russian spy (or traitor in their eyes) who lived in Salisbury with a chemical weapon. Why not just wait for him and shoot him or - wait for him to visit London - and acid attack him. He would have just been another statistic then and would almost certainly be dead now or at least maimed for life.
They arguably put their own lives and risk for what point - when Skripal could have been disposed off with minimal risk to them with a bullet etc. I don't deny it happened but I still don't know why on earth they decided to pursue that risky course. It just doesn't make any sense?
You could say the same about the murder of Alexander Litvenenko.
Given the context of the Salisbury attack being in the middle of the Russian election campaign, Putin wanted to let Russians at home and abroad know that he can still do stuff like this and get away with it.
Thankfully, and quite surprisingly, the international reaction has been quite overwhelming in terms of action and sanctions. Hopefully Europe has also received a wake-up call that they need to get fracking and look at energy security as a major issue.
Whose dream holiday day trip to Salisbury, which they did on more than one occasion...
I know this is a bit old news but why on earth did the Russian government and or their security services feel the need to bump off some old Russian spy (or traitor in their eyes) who lived in Salisbury with a chemical weapon. Why not just wait for him and shoot him or - wait for him to visit London - and acid attack him. He would have just been another statistic then and would almost certainly be dead now or at least maimed for life.
They arguably put their own lives and risk for what point - when Skripal could have been disposed off with minimal risk to them with a bullet etc. I don't deny it happened but I still don't know why on earth they decided to pursue that risky course. It just doesn't make any sense?
It just adds to the narrative. TM already quoted Chuka at PMQ to Corbyn
Corbyn won't be bothered in the slightest by criticism from Mandelson. Practically a Tory or Blairite as they used to be known, rich and working for bankers.
Why, he's the sort of person that might be painted on a mural! (Sarcasm alert).
It's not that Lord whose said it I believe.... ie wasn't Mandy.
He'll be even less bothered by criticism from this Lord, given what is in his register of interests. I think he would be classified as a Zionist and therefore his views would be automatically discounted by Corbyn and co.
Whose dream holiday day trip to Salisbury, which they did on more than one occasion...
I know this is a bit old news but why on earth did the Russian government and or their security services feel the need to bump off some old Russian spy (or traitor in their eyes) who lived in Salisbury with a chemical weapon. Why not just wait for him and shoot him or - wait for him to visit London - and acid attack him. He would have just been another statistic then and would almost certainly be dead now or at least maimed for life.
They arguably put their own lives and risk for what point - when Skripal could have been disposed off with minimal risk to them with a bullet etc. I don't deny it happened but I still don't know why on earth they decided to pursue that risky course. It just doesn't make any sense?
To make it totally obvious it was Russia.
Presumably also to further dissuade other possible defectors within the Russian security services: if you're found, don't think that you'll eventually be swapped off and live out a comfortable retirement in the West.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Someone should tell Corbyn the two accused Russians are zionists, just to watch his mind malfunction as he tries to work out what to think.
Mr. Song, mildly amused you agreed with almost everything I said, then ended by indicating you thought I was stupid.
(Agree with you on MMR. At most, on man-made global warming I'm unpersuaded. The alignment of the left, the green movement, and the religious fervour rather than scientific rigour with which debates are often had does more to put me off than persuade me).
On man-made global warning Morris, which part of the cause and effect sequence: human activity as caused increased atmospheric CO2 which has led to higher global temperatures do you not agree with?
What I'm not sure about is whether Putin is currently humiliating or promoting the two cackhanded assassins, by making them do this interview.
I'm not entirely clear why we haven't reopened investigations into all the other suspicious Russian-related deaths on British soil in the last couple of decades; many of them look like obvious murders. Presumably there are reasons.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
Countries who produce lots of oil & gas have high carbon emissions shocker.
I once spent under 24 hours in Russia travelling on a tourist visa. The guy who checked my passport as I left clearly knew that I wasn't there primarily to see the sights and had a few stern words for me (in Russian), but let me through. I don't think I'd be repeating that wheeze these days.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
Mr. Eagles, you're saying that Conservative MEPs don't always either abstain or vote against such motions?
If that's the case, then fair enough.
Mr. Pointer, it's not proven. Temperature records also showed signs of being revised consistently upwards (not sure if they're still publicly available), and the false prophecies (most infamously on the future scarcity of snow, before we had two of the worst winters in decades) doesn't persuade me in the predictive power of those who believe.
What's the increase been? From 0.03% to...? 0.04%?
The climate certainly seems more volatile recently. But climate change itself as natural and normal as can be. The climate has always and will always change, it's not some static thing that remains as it ever was. Assuming it's down to us is as human-centric as assuming we're at the centre of the universe.
Anyway, time for me to be off. Be nice, kids, and if you're off to visit a cathedral, don't forget your chemical weapons.
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
Countries who produce lots of oil & gas have high carbon emissions shocker.
If you included the embedded CO2 emissions of imports (and deducted them from exports) the UK would be significantly higher up the list.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
Mr. Pubgoer, I recall Sega at one time had three out at once (Master System, Mega Drive, and Game Gear, although the latter was a hand-held).
Sorry MD, I was driving home. MSX machines were around in the mid to late 80's timeframe, which may be a tad before your time as iirc you're a bit younger than me. Made by companies like Toshiba and Hitachi etc.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
Mr. 16, might have been to make a point that it was definitely them who took out Skripal, pour encourager les autres.
It reminds me somewhat (in terms of trying to dissuade behaviour disapproved of by the state) of the idiotic actions of the Athenians when they killed all (who went back, a few didn't) of their admirals after they won a naval battle. Some dead Athenian sailors hadn't been retrieved due to the conditions, and this was deemed sufficiently wrong for the admirals to be executed.
Turns out massacring your own military leadership in the middle of a war isn't the smartest move in the world.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Pulpstar, agree entirely with your plastic comments.
I think it's also important that they chose a target in the UK rather than the US or France. It shows that they are not afraid of anything we might do or say in response. We really are a mangy old lion these days.
Went to the democracy road show last night. 57 in favour of open selection 1 against. Newsnight tonight will fail to report that. Desperate to get negative quotes. The young bloke with glasses provided them with an alternative opinion. You couldn't go for a piss without them sticking a microphone in your face. Very bad idea to invite them along methinks.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
If China is outputting over 20% more than us per capita then well and truly whatever the UK does is a drop in the ocean.
Like the whole war on plastic stuff - where it is overwhemingly an Asian problem, I'd say we're doing our bit for carbon. Interesting Germany is almost double our output per person, they've a similiar climate, living standard and aren't an oil or mineral economy.
Don't the Germans burn a lot of lignite for energy? Seem to recall reading that somewhere a while ago.
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
If China is outputting over 20% more than us per capita then well and truly whatever the UK does is a drop in the ocean.
Like the whole war on plastic stuff - where it is overwhemingly an Asian problem, I'd say we're doing our bit for carbon. Interesting Germany is almost double our output per person, they've a similiar climate, living standard and aren't an oil or mineral economy.
Don't the Germans burn a lot of lignite for energy? Seem to recall reading that somewhere a while ago.
Mr. 16, might have been to make a point that it was definitely them who took out Skripal, pour encourager les autres.
It reminds me somewhat (in terms of trying to dissuade behaviour disapproved of by the state) of the idiotic actions of the Athenians when they killed all (who went back, a few didn't) of their admirals after they won a naval battle. Some dead Athenian sailors hadn't been retrieved due to the conditions, and this was deemed sufficiently wrong for the admirals to be executed.
Turns out massacring your own military leadership in the middle of a war isn't the smartest move in the world.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Pulpstar, agree entirely with your plastic comments.
I think it's also important that they chose a target in the UK rather than the US or France. It shows that they are not afraid of anything we might do or say in response. We really are a mangy old lion these days.
I think they've underestimated our diplomatic clout - there are more US sanctions due to come in, and in an issue that will hurt a lot of Putin backers:
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
Mr. 16, might have been to make a point that it was definitely them who took out Skripal, pour encourager les autres.
It reminds me somewhat (in terms of trying to dissuade behaviour disapproved of by the state) of the idiotic actions of the Athenians when they killed all (who went back, a few didn't) of their admirals after they won a naval battle. Some dead Athenian sailors hadn't been retrieved due to the conditions, and this was deemed sufficiently wrong for the admirals to be executed.
Turns out massacring your own military leadership in the middle of a war isn't the smartest move in the world.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Pulpstar, agree entirely with your plastic comments.
I think it's also important that they chose a target in the UK rather than the US or France. It shows that they are not afraid of anything we might do or say in response. We really are a mangy old lion these days.
To be fair we managed to rustle up a pretty damn good international response to what happened in Salisbury. Even Chelski FC is now up for sale.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
westminster bubble stuff, most voters wont even know who he is
Plus voters expect the Tories to be best mates with the far right. Just look at Thatcher and Pinochet.
they cant even get that right - Jobbik are the far right in Hungary
Though Orban is an anti semite too.
Or is it OK to support anti-semites abroad if you have a common enemy?
the UK has been allying itself with all sorts of unsavoury characters for years and will continue to do so. The current hand wringing is just westminster nonsense.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
Countries who produce lots of oil & gas have high carbon emissions shocker.
If you included the embedded CO2 emissions of imports (and deducted them from exports) the UK would be significantly higher up the list.
Yes, just as we have off shored our manufacturing and mining, we have off shored our pollution.
You have to wonder about the person or committee whose job it is to spot these terrors. Still upset that I am not allowed to have TT05 SER for my 2005 Mk1 Audi TT. No sense of humour these people!
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
Countries who produce lots of oil & gas have high carbon emissions shocker.
If you included the embedded CO2 emissions of imports (and deducted them from exports) the UK would be significantly higher up the list.
Yes, just as we have off shored our manufacturing and mining, we have off shored our pollution.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
You have to wonder about the person or committee whose job it is to spot these terrors. Still upset that I am not allowed to have TT05 SER for my 2005 Mk1 Audi TT. No sense of humour these people!
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
westminster bubble stuff, most voters wont even know who he is
Plus voters expect the Tories to be best mates with the far right. Just look at Thatcher and Pinochet.
they cant even get that right - Jobbik are the far right in Hungary
Though Orban is an anti semite too.
Or is it OK to support anti-semites abroad if you have a common enemy?
the UK has been allying itself with all sorts of unsavoury characters for years and will continue to do so. The current hand wringing is just westminster nonsense.
Just sweet to see the Tories joining Momentumites in the dock.
You have to wonder about the person or committee whose job it is to spot these terrors. Still upset that I am not allowed to have TT05 SER for my 2005 Mk1 Audi TT. No sense of humour these people!
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
westminster bubble stuff, most voters wont even know who he is
Plus voters expect the Tories to be best mates with the far right. Just look at Thatcher and Pinochet.
they cant even get that right - Jobbik are the far right in Hungary
Though Orban is an anti semite too.
Or is it OK to support anti-semites abroad if you have a common enemy?
the UK has been allying itself with all sorts of unsavoury characters for years and will continue to do so. The current hand wringing is just westminster nonsense.
Just sweet to see the Tories joining Momentumites in the dock.
In simply stating the obvious and no UK government will do different.
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
Countries who produce lots of oil & gas have high carbon emissions shocker.
If you included the embedded CO2 emissions of imports (and deducted them from exports) the UK would be significantly higher up the list.
Yes, just as we have off shored our manufacturing and mining, we have off shored our pollution.
and in all instances we shouldnt have.
Why not? We can breath better and the impoverished across the globe can live better. Win/win.
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
westminster bubble stuff, most voters wont even know who he is
Plus voters expect the Tories to be best mates with the far right. Just look at Thatcher and Pinochet.
they cant even get that right - Jobbik are the far right in Hungary
Though Orban is an anti semite too.
Or is it OK to support anti-semites abroad if you have a common enemy?
the UK has been allying itself with all sorts of unsavoury characters for years and will continue to do so. The current hand wringing is just westminster nonsense.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
You have to wonder about the person or committee whose job it is to spot these terrors. Still upset that I am not allowed to have TT05 SER for my 2005 Mk1 Audi TT. No sense of humour these people!
They must so be looking forward to the 69 plates
69 plates - will they lead to nose to tail traffic?
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
westminster bubble stuff, most voters wont even know who he is
Plus voters expect the Tories to be best mates with the far right. Just look at Thatcher and Pinochet.
they cant even get that right - Jobbik are the far right in Hungary
Though Orban is an anti semite too.
Or is it OK to support anti-semites abroad if you have a common enemy?
the UK has been allying itself with all sorts of unsavoury characters for years and will continue to do so. The current hand wringing is just westminster nonsense.
Just sweet to see the Tories joining Momentumites in the dock.
Hang on. We're the one leaving the EU. It's remainers who want us to stay in a union with Hungary.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
It's all going to be an irrelevance since we're heading for BINO.
You have to wonder about the person or committee whose job it is to spot these terrors. Still upset that I am not allowed to have TT05 SER for my 2005 Mk1 Audi TT. No sense of humour these people!
They must so be looking forward to the 69 plates
69 plates - will they lead to nose to tail traffic?
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
It's all going to be an irrelevance since we're heading for BINO.
""People who deny climate change... I just think it's the most stupid thing ever," Paul Mc Cartney Can't argue with that.
I thought it was the anthropogenic part that was denied?
Still the most stupid thing ever.
I've just taken a look and UK carbon output per person really isn't so bad. Here are the top nations by absolute output ranked on a per capita basis (+ Qatar)
47.9 Qatar 19.6 Saudi Arabia 16.5 Australia 16.5 USA 15.5 Canada 11.7 South Korea 11.4 Russia 9.8 Germany 9.5 Japan 8.4 S Africa 8.2 Iran 7.2 China 6 Italy 5.9 UK 5.3 France 5.1 Turkey Source: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions Poland is 8.3 tonnes/person, Sweden 4.6, Croatia 4.3, Iceland and Norway both over 10.
Turning of nuclear and replacing it with lignite really is the greening of Germany.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
It's all going to be an irrelevance since we're heading for BINO.
You think?
It's a not inconsiderable carrot......and why shouldn't (for example) Australians have the same rights as Romanians - assuming both countries are parties to comprehensive trade deals?
Mr. Eagles, could be wrong, but isn't the Conservative MEP vote on Orban etc down to not wanting the EU to interfere with domestic politics, rather than agreeing/disagreeing with the domestic politics themselves?
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
Yes wrong.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
westminster bubble stuff, most voters wont even know who he is
Plus voters expect the Tories to be best mates with the far right. Just look at Thatcher and Pinochet.
they cant even get that right - Jobbik are the far right in Hungary
Though Orban is an anti semite too.
Or is it OK to support anti-semites abroad if you have a common enemy?
the UK has been allying itself with all sorts of unsavoury characters for years and will continue to do so. The current hand wringing is just westminster nonsense.
Just sweet to see the Tories joining Momentumites in the dock.
I did tell everyone just how hypocritical they were being on the subject. I shall await the acknowledgement of my correctness at my leisure.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
That's called making a virtue of necessity. Counterparties will insist on good access for their citizens in FTAs with us, particularly for GATS mode 4 exports of services.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
I presume it would have to be reciprocal - although who knows with this government. As you say its possibly rather academic.
In anycase we already offer visa free travel for 3-6 months for tourism purposes for pretty much every nation we might think it worthwhile doing a deal with (nearly 60 non EU states) from Nicaragua to Vanuatu to Mauritius - so what exactly would these extra travel rights be?
Whose dream holiday day trip to Salisbury, which they did on more than one occasion...
I know this is a bit old news but why on earth did the Russian government and or their security services feel the need to bump off some old Russian spy (or traitor in their eyes) who lived in Salisbury with a chemical weapon. Why not just wait for him and shoot him or - wait for him to visit London - and acid attack him. He would have just been another statistic then and would almost certainly be dead now or at least maimed for life.
They arguably put their own lives and risk for what point - when Skripal could have been disposed off with minimal risk to them with a bullet etc. I don't deny it happened but I still don't know why on earth they decided to pursue that risky course. It just doesn't make any sense?
To make it totally obvious it was Russia.
Who else would want to kill a Russian double agent turned UK retiree?
Note sure if following already discussed over last two days on here.
Did anyone watch BBC2 Politics Live on Tue / Wed - Caroline Flint (Tue) and Lisa Nandy (Wed) both said pretty clearly that they might well vote for a Govt EU deal if it was broadly in line with Chequers.
Maybe not surprising re Flint but I wouldn't have expected Nandy to say something like that.
Does this suggest a whole pile of Lab moderates will ignore party line and vote for a "soft" EU deal? If so, it would basically be game over for the ERG.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
That's called making a virtue of necessity. Counterparties will insist on good access for their citizens in FTAs with us, particularly for GATS mode 4 exports of services.
But better than Labour, who make no link to trade:
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
That's called making a virtue of necessity. Counterparties will insist on good access for their citizens in FTAs with us, particularly for GATS mode 4 exports of services.
Considering that Brexit was (supposedly) about reducing immigration, is the govt now saying that as a result of Brexit it will have to go up?
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
I presume it would have to be reciprocal - although who knows with this government. As you say its possibly rather academic.
In anycase we already offer visa free travel for 3-6 months for tourism purposes for pretty much every nation we might think it worthwhile doing a deal with (nearly 60 non EU states) from Nicaragua to Vanuatu to Mauritius - so what exactly would these extra travel rights be?
The point is, people want to come to Britain - we should leverage that.
Labour would be 'trade deal blind' in their approach.
Major incident declared on Cambridge Guided Busway between Trumpington and Addenbrookes.
Source: BBC News
I don’t think a bus running to schedule deserves that.
Someone has died after being hit by a bus.
The Cambridge guided bus has been an absolute debacle in a whole host of ways. Massively over budget, massively under predicted passenger numbers, a little chaotic in operation and IMO operationally unsafe. Worse, the concrete beams are cracking up after only about a decade and many need replacing.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
It's all going to be an irrelevance since we're heading for BINO.
You think?
It's a not inconsiderable carrot......and why shouldn't (for example) Australians have the same rights as Romanians - assuming both countries are parties to comprehensive trade deals?
I can't see it working that way in the case of, say, China or India - the fears across middle England that we might be inudated would be too strong.
I think it's irrelevant because I think we will remain closely tied to the EU for the forseeable (thankfully) and striking our own trade deals will be forever aspirational-unachievable (a bit like the goal of bringing immigration down to <100k has been for the Tories).
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
It's all going to be an irrelevance since we're heading for BINO.
You think?
It's a not inconsiderable carrot......and why shouldn't (for example) Australians have the same rights as Romanians - assuming both countries are parties to comprehensive trade deals?
We are supposed to be keeping the forriners out so that they do not bleed the NHS dry, occupy all the houses and take all the jobs that Brits do not want to do cos they'd 'ave no one to moan about in the dole queue...
Major incident declared on Cambridge Guided Busway between Trumpington and Addenbrookes.
Source: BBC News
I don’t think a bus running to schedule deserves that.
Someone has died after being hit by a bus.
The Cambridge guided bus has been an absolute debacle in a whole host of ways. Massively over budget, massively under predicted passenger numbers, a little chaotic in operation and IMO operationally unsafe. Worse, the concrete beams are cracking up after only about a decade and many need replacing.
They should have reopened the full-fat railway route IMHO
Nice video, but I have a fundamental issue with how the life expectancy figures are presented.
People didn't get born, live and "drop-dead" in their late 30s in the 17th or 18th or 19th Centuries, as it suggests. There was a very high infant mortality rate but, if you survived to the age of 16, you stood a good chance of making it to aged 60.
So, I'd far prefer for life expectancy figures to be split and presented into infant mortality, and life expectancy for those who made it in adulthood which, I suspect, was probably the mid-late 50s/early 60s for the working class, and late 60s/early 70s for the middle-upper classes.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements. https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
It's all going to be an irrelevance since we're heading for BINO.
You think?
It's a not inconsiderable carrot......and why shouldn't (for example) Australians have the same rights as Romanians - assuming both countries are parties to comprehensive trade deals?
We are supposed to be keeping the forriners out so that they do not bleed the NHS dry, occupy all the houses and take all the jobs that Brits do not want to do cos they'd 'ave no one to moan about in the dole queue...
Note sure if following already discussed over last two days on here.
Did anyone watch BBC2 Politics Live on Tue / Wed - Caroline Flint (Tue) and Lisa Nandy (Wed) both said pretty clearly that they might well vote for a Govt EU deal if it was broadly in line with Chequers.
Maybe not surprising re Flint but I wouldn't have expected Nandy to say something like that.
Does this suggest a whole pile of Lab moderates will ignore party line and vote for a "soft" EU deal? If so, it would basically be game over for the ERG.
I didn't listen, but this is just sort of realistic. Some form of Brexit needs to take place, and if the spectrum of opinion is bleating equally loudly on both sides then you may as well go with that.
I imagine that this 'noone's happy, but noones very very unhappy' sort of deal is what will happen, and the Chequers' plan is roughly that. However there is the complete unknown of the EU - they're not quite positioned such that the least bad solution will be accepted.
Comments
Mr. Song, mildly amused you agreed with almost everything I said, then ended by indicating you thought I was stupid.
(Agree with you on MMR. At most, on man-made global warming I'm unpersuaded. The alignment of the left, the green movement, and the religious fervour rather than scientific rigour with which debates are often had does more to put me off than persuade me).
Call a by-election please:
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1040271583250665472
we should really be shifting on to other environmental priorities instead of hammering the crap out of our energy users
They arguably put their own lives and risk for what point - when Skripal could have been disposed off with minimal risk to them with a bullet etc. I don't deny it happened but I still don't know why on earth they decided to pursue that risky course. It just doesn't make any sense?
It reminds me somewhat (in terms of trying to dissuade behaviour disapproved of by the state) of the idiotic actions of the Athenians when they killed all (who went back, a few didn't) of their admirals after they won a naval battle. Some dead Athenian sailors hadn't been retrieved due to the conditions, and this was deemed sufficiently wrong for the admirals to be executed.
Turns out massacring your own military leadership in the middle of a war isn't the smartest move in the world.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Pulpstar, agree entirely with your plastic comments.
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1040273700212420610
Given the context of the Salisbury attack being in the middle of the Russian election campaign, Putin wanted to let Russians at home and abroad know that he can still do stuff like this and get away with it.
Thankfully, and quite surprisingly, the international reaction has been quite overwhelming in terms of action and sanctions. Hopefully Europe has also received a wake-up call that they need to get fracking and look at energy security as a major issue.
Brexit really has demeaned the Tory party.
does blood sausage ooze blood if you stab it?
Never had it, but blood sausage fits a section rather nicely.
Edited extra bit: I am genuinely interested in the answer, but depending how things go might use artistic licence to bend the truth.
As an aside, I have had beef in lukewarm blood. I do not recommend it, as the blood coagulating does not feel pleasant.
Read on Twitter (so, obviously, could be wrong) that that was the reason.
human activity as caused increased atmospheric CO2 which has led to higher global temperatures
do you not agree with?
I'm not entirely clear why we haven't reopened investigations into all the other suspicious Russian-related deaths on British soil in the last couple of decades; many of them look like obvious murders. Presumably there are reasons.
The Tories are allying themselves with an anti-Semite
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1040275247080132608?s=21
Beef in lukewarm blood - how is that different to a rare steak, which has much to recommend it?
the blood is cooked to make it a sausage, but if you stab it while it is being prepared it will
If that's the case, then fair enough.
Mr. Pointer, it's not proven. Temperature records also showed signs of being revised consistently upwards (not sure if they're still publicly available), and the false prophecies (most infamously on the future scarcity of snow, before we had two of the worst winters in decades) doesn't persuade me in the predictive power of those who believe.
What's the increase been? From 0.03% to...? 0.04%?
The climate certainly seems more volatile recently. But climate change itself as natural and normal as can be. The climate has always and will always change, it's not some static thing that remains as it ever was. Assuming it's down to us is as human-centric as assuming we're at the centre of the universe.
Anyway, time for me to be off. Be nice, kids, and if you're off to visit a cathedral, don't forget your chemical weapons.
https://twitter.com/rosscolquhoun/status/1040263635690508288
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6162861/Russian-Debutante-Ball-Mayfair-cancelled.html
Bad news Eagles your number plate has been banned
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6163685/Naughtiest-number-plates-BANNED-Britains-roads-revealed.html
Or is it OK to support anti-semites abroad if you have a common enemy?
Is very sober.
Happy new year by the way.
That’s how good a Muslim boy I am.
The UK is preparing a post-Brexit immigration regime that will give preferential access to citizens from countries that strike comprehensive trade deals with Britain, according to people briefed on the government’s plans.
The overhaul by the Home Office is partly intended to honour the government’s pledge to end the free movement of people to Britain from the European Economic Area — the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
However, for countries that strike deep trade deals with the UK, the new immigration regime is expected to offer preferential access rights to their citizens — when seeking to work in Britain, or just visit — compared with people from nations with less comprehensive agreements.
https://www.ft.com/content/e585ee9a-b75f-11e8-b3ef-799c8613f4a1
Source: BBC News
They don't seem to have done much in the way of vegetation clearance.
In the case of Ethiopia the important point to bear in mind is that the west, east and north are all very different.
It's a not inconsiderable carrot......and why shouldn't (for example) Australians have the same rights as Romanians - assuming both countries are parties to comprehensive trade deals?
In anycase we already offer visa free travel for 3-6 months for tourism purposes for pretty much every nation we might think it worthwhile doing a deal with (nearly 60 non EU states) from Nicaragua to Vanuatu to Mauritius - so what exactly would these extra travel rights be?
Did anyone watch BBC2 Politics Live on Tue / Wed - Caroline Flint (Tue) and Lisa Nandy (Wed) both said pretty clearly that they might well vote for a Govt EU deal if it was broadly in line with Chequers.
Maybe not surprising re Flint but I wouldn't have expected Nandy to say something like that.
Does this suggest a whole pile of Lab moderates will ignore party line and vote for a "soft" EU deal? If so, it would basically be game over for the ERG.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/13/diane-abbott-to-announce-labour-plans-to-overhaul-visa-policy
Labour would be 'trade deal blind' in their approach.
The Cambridge guided bus has been an absolute debacle in a whole host of ways. Massively over budget, massively under predicted passenger numbers, a little chaotic in operation and IMO operationally unsafe. Worse, the concrete beams are cracking up after only about a decade and many need replacing.
I think it's irrelevant because I think we will remain closely tied to the EU for the forseeable (thankfully) and striking our own trade deals will be forever aspirational-unachievable (a bit like the goal of bringing immigration down to <100k has been for the Tories).
It's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Duh!
People didn't get born, live and "drop-dead" in their late 30s in the 17th or 18th or 19th Centuries, as it suggests. There was a very high infant mortality rate but, if you survived to the age of 16, you stood a good chance of making it to aged 60.
So, I'd far prefer for life expectancy figures to be split and presented into infant mortality, and life expectancy for those who made it in adulthood which, I suspect, was probably the mid-late 50s/early 60s for the working class, and late 60s/early 70s for the middle-upper classes.
Otherwise, it doesn't mean very much.
I imagine that this 'noone's happy, but noones very very unhappy' sort of deal is what will happen, and the Chequers' plan is roughly that. However there is the complete unknown of the EU - they're not quite positioned such that the least bad solution will be accepted.