Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
"Overall, the voter identification requirements trialled in May 2018 worked well. Nearly everyone in the five pilot scheme areas who went to vote in their polling station was able to show identification without difficulty. The number of people who did not vote because they couldn’t show identification was very small."
I imagine it is mainly undesirable groups who will have their democratic rights blocked anyway, no need to kick up too much of a fuss about a small minority.
If they have the right to vote then that won't be blocked, so where's the problem?
I never saw Rees Mogg as a leader. Don't know anyone who did.
The interesting question about Rees Mogg is whether he might blink. Accept that there is no better deal going to be offered -and that ERG should bank May's Deal and try to ensure maximum independence from the EU in the Trade Deal.
M It would be some climb down and might not seem at all likely. But then, No Deal Brexit didn't seem at all likely a couple of weeks back.....
(If this speech would just stick in Rees Mogg's craw too much to enable him to talk, then I could yet imagine Boris delivering it....)
As Ivan Rogers explains, the mini-deals are a safety mechanism to try and protect the EU in those areas where there is most risk to them, or mutually. They aren't going to happen in areas of specifically British concern.
I agree but they certainly reduce the pain of no deal. No lorry parks in Dover, no problems with derivative contracts, no problems with food supply, no problems with drugs, planes flying, etc. The EU destroyed all the arguments of remainers yesterday. Why? is a question I would like to know the answer to.
What did the EU do yesterday?
Edit. Never mind I see the EU agreed to make no deal preparations with the UK.
Kind of blows the fallacy that there is no such thing as preparing for no deal out the water that remainers have been peddling on here.
I still don't get the problem with asking people to provide some form of ID to confirm their right to vote.
We ask a lot more to get a library card
It is not at all unreasonable to require people to demonstrate their right to vote. It works in Northern Ireland - with a free voting ID card which works if people don't have access to any other acceptable form of ID.
There is no evidence at all of a voter suppression plan. That is just scaremongering.
I would personally like to see a roll back of permanent postal voting and the clear fraud potential that exists with the postal vote system as currently set up.
But I think the principle that you have to prove who you are so that you can vote is a perfectly legitimate one.
At the last GE I turned up to vote to be told that I had already voted.
How was that resolved for you? I am guessing it was an error on the part of whoever was marking up the register but I may be wrong
They did get all hot and bothered and made telephone calls. And then, after some lighthearted jesting by me about, ahem, calling the police, I had to fill in a form, can't remember its name something like 15a-6... and all the polling booth staff nervously joked about it being human error.
I still don't get the problem with asking people to provide some form of ID to confirm their right to vote.
We ask a lot more to get a library card
It is not at all unreasonable to require people to demonstrate their right to vote. It works in Northern Ireland - with a free voting ID card which works if people don't have access to any other acceptable form of ID.
There is no evidence at all of a voter suppression plan. That is just scaremongering.
I would personally like to see a roll back of permanent postal voting and the clear fraud potential that exists with the postal vote system as currently set up.
But I think the principle that you have to prove who you are so that you can vote is a perfectly legitimate one.
At the last GE I turned up to vote to be told that I had already voted.
How was that resolved for you? I am guessing it was an error on the part of whoever was marking up the register but I may be wrong
They did get all hot and bothered and made telephone calls. And then, after some lighthearted jesting by me about, ahem, calling the police, I had to fill in a form, can't remember its name something like 15a-6... and all the polling booth staff nervously joked about it being human error.
At least you weren't denied your right to vote.
A couple of elections ago, I turned up with my housemate's polling card - and was still allowed to vote. I don't look much like a Katharine!
An interesting page - the Electoral Commission explicitly called for these trials that Labour is condemning for transparently partisan reasons.
Indeed - but I'm still really nervous about the move. I don't like it, I don't think it's been well thought through, and think it may well ave undesirable consequences.
There is a debate to be had over which forms of ID are accepted. But, as a principle, having voting restricted to those people on the electoral register is a legitimate one. And that requires some proof that the person voting is who they say they are when they arrive at the polling station.
Whether that is a polling card, some additional paperwork with your address or some form of card like in NI is what these trials are set up to help determine.
1) define the problem. 2) judge the scale of the problem. 3) decide different ways the problem might be fixed 4) work out the consequences (side effects) of each potential change 5) decide if the consequences are worth fixing the problem. 6) choose one, or decide the original problem has to be lived with.
This is the way it should be done. I fail to see anything has been done aside from the first point, and there seems to be an unholy rush towards a mechanism that may, or may not, be fit for purpose.
I really don't like our electoral process and system being mucked about with in this way.
Rees Mogg has made a fool of himself in recent days and has no credibility. He seems more in the Boris camp anyway which seems appropriate. Gove has no credibility left with either Remainers or Leavers. Javid and Hunt are straw men - all mouth and nothing else. Rudd and Lidlington are just EU apparatchiks and would just revoke A50 so they have no chance with the membership. Davis is too old so that leaves either Raab or Mordaunt as the only two credible choices.
The best bet of course would be someone outside Cabinet to come through untainted by the fiasco this Cabinet have made of Brexit but that seems highly unlikely based on history.
"leaves...Mordaunt as the only credible choice[s]."
bwahahahahahaha
haha
hahahahahahaha
ha
I think Mourdant has burned her bridges with a lot of the ERG / membership types by not resigning when others did.
If Mordaunt is the answer, you are asking the wrong question.
Rees Mogg has made a fool of himself in recent days and has no credibility. He seems more in the Boris camp anyway which seems appropriate. Gove has no credibility left with either Remainers or Leavers. Javid and Hunt are straw men - all mouth and nothing else. Rudd and Lidlington are just EU apparatchiks and would just revoke A50 so they have no chance with the membership. Davis is too old so that leaves either Raab or Mordaunt as the only two credible choices.
The best bet of course would be someone outside Cabinet to come through untainted by the fiasco this Cabinet have made of Brexit but that seems highly unlikely based on history.
"leaves...Mordaunt as the only credible choice[s]."
bwahahahahahaha
haha
hahahahahahaha
ha
I think Mourdant has burned her bridges with a lot of the ERG / membership types by not resigning when others did.
What is Mogg up to? I am lost now. Are the ERG going to swing behind May's deal at last moment?
I still don't get the problem with asking people to provide some form of ID to confirm their right to vote.
We ask a lot more to get a library card
It is not at all unreasonable to require people to demonstrate their right to vote. It works in Northern Ireland - with a free voting ID card which works if people don't have access to any other acceptable form of ID.
There is no evidence at all of a voter suppression plan. That is just scaremongering.
I would personally like to see a roll back of permanent postal voting and the clear fraud potential that exists with the postal vote system as currently set up.
But I think the principle that you have to prove who you are so that you can vote is a perfectly legitimate one.
At the last GE I turned up to vote to be told that I had already voted.
How was that resolved for you? I am guessing it was an error on the part of whoever was marking up the register but I may be wrong
They did get all hot and bothered and made telephone calls. And then, after some lighthearted jesting by me about, ahem, calling the police, I had to fill in a form, can't remember its name something like 15a-6... and all the polling booth staff nervously joked about it being human error.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Any level of fraud in unacceptable. Why should it be harder to get a resident's parking permit or a library card that it is to vote?
A No Deal Brexit leaves open the future possibility of negotiating a trade deal with the EU in parallel with the divorce bill.
Taking such a position originally, the Uk and the EU would have avoided the Irish border problem because trade arrangements would have been in place before we left the EU.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Any level of fraud in unacceptable. Why should it be harder to get a resident's parking permit or a library card that it is to vote?
"Any level of fraud in unacceptable."
If you really, truly believe that, are you prepared for the process that would have to be enacted to enable it?
I never saw Rees Mogg as a leader. Don't know anyone who did.
The interesting question about Rees Mogg is whether he might blink. Accept that there is no better deal going to be offered -and that ERG should bank May's Deal and try to ensure maximum independence from the EU in the Trade Deal.
My preferred route would have been to start preparing for a No Deal Brexit two years ago. Those who blocked such preparations must examine their conscience as to whether their actions have been in the best interests of the negotiations and of this country. But I look at our current preparedness and must conclude that today we are ill-equipped to launch ourselves into the world without guarantees that our economy will not suffer disproportionate turbulence.
I have tthe initial Referendum result."
It would be some climb down and might not seem at all likely. But then, No Deal Brexit didn't seem at all likely a couple of weeks back.....
(If this speech would just stick in Rees Mogg's craw too much to enable him to talk, then I could yet imagine Boris delivering it....)
I think the announcement by the EU yesterday that they will do mini-deals to stop the major effects of a sudden no deal Brexit will be key to the Tory leavers. We get the detail on Weds but if the detail is sensible in the areas they proposed then I can see this route becoming the preferred position of the Tory leavers, which leaves May's deal dead. Which is why I am surprised the EU announced them when they did.
As Ivan Rogers explains, the mini-deals are a safety mechanism to try and protect the EU in those areas where there is most risk to them, or mutually. They aren't going to happen in areas of specifically British concern.
I agree but they certainly reduce the pain of no deal. No lorry parks in Dover, no problems with derivative contracts, no problems with food supply, no problems with drugs, planes flying, etc. The EU destroyed all the arguments of remainers yesterday. Why? is a question I would like to know the answer to.
What did the EU do yesterday?
Edit. Never mind I see the EU agreed to make no deal preparations with the UK.
Kind of blows the fallacy that there is no such thing as preparing for no deal out the water that remainers have been peddling on here.
Of course you can prepare for a No Deal. No-one has said any different. The argument is that there is no such thing called a managed No Deal in which both sides sit down and work out a series of mutually beneficial arrangements. That will not happen.
The EU does not care if there are long tailbacks at Dover. Their concern is in preventing tailbacks at Calais.
The headline assumes what it is trying to prove...
I mean, seriously? You don't have photo ID? Do you (a) get photo ID or, (b) start a court case?
If you think the court case is about one man not being able to vote I think you might have spectacularly missed the point...
Bizarre that the party of ID cards is so against voter ID at elections..
Corbyn has a long track record of trying to enforce ID cards of course...
One man isn't the party of course. As we saw yesterday.
Yes I'm still not sure how that quite swings around to not wanting voters blocked from voting being worthy of complaint or hypocritical.
Try and keep up with me here.
Labour (at the time) proposed giving people ID cards. It didn't happen.
The Conservatives are now trialling people having to show ID to vote. They have no proposals to give people ID cards.
Labour are opposed to people not being able to vote without ID.
This is a completely consistent position, the only potential inconsistency would be the Conservatives not being in favour of ID cards but demanding ID to vote. Labour wanting to give people ID cards, it not happening and being against ID needed for voting makes a lot of sense. Even if ID cards did happen they could make an argument for it but especially without.
And then obviously Corbyn himself and probably a fair majority of the party currently wouldn't want ID cards.
Apart from all that it makes perfect sense as a complaint....
I still don't get the problem with asking people to provide some form of ID to confirm their right to vote.
We ask a lot more to get a library card
It is not at all unreasonable to require people to demonstrate their right to vote. It works in Northern Ireland - with a free voting ID card which works if people don't have access to any other acceptable form of ID.
There is no evidence at all of a voter suppression plan. That is just scaremongering.
I would personally like to see a roll back of permanent postal voting and the clear fraud potential that exists with the postal vote system as currently set up.
But I think the principle that you have to prove who you are so that you can vote is a perfectly legitimate one.
At the last GE I turned up to vote to be told that I had already voted.
The memory is the first to go...
At the last GE I turned up to vote to be be told that I had already voted.
The headline assumes what it is trying to prove...
I mean, seriously? You don't have photo ID? Do you (a) get photo ID or, (b) start a court case?
If you think the court case is about one man not being able to vote I think you might have spectacularly missed the point...
Bizarre that the party of ID cards is so against voter ID at elections..
Corbyn has a long track record of trying to enforce ID cards of course...
One man isn't the party of course. As we saw yesterday.
Yes I'm still not sure how that quite swings around to not wanting voters blocked from voting being worthy of complaint or hypocritical.
Try and keep up with me here.
Labour (at the time) proposed giving people ID cards. It didn't happen.
The Conservatives are now trialling people having to show ID to vote. They have no proposals to give people ID cards.
Labour are opposed to people not being able to vote without ID.
This is a completely consistent position, the only potential inconsistency would be the Conservatives not being in favour of ID cards but demanding ID to vote. Labour wanting to give people ID cards, it not happening and being against ID needed for voting makes a lot of sense. Even if ID cards did happen they could make an argument for it but especially without.
And then obviously Corbyn himself and probably a fair majority of the party currently wouldn't want ID cards.
Apart from all that it makes perfect sense as a complaint....
Is it possible to have a postal vote and vote in person at the local polling station?
I never saw Rees Mogg as a leader. Don't know anyone who did.
The interesting question about Rees Mogg is whether he might blink. Accept that there is no better deal going to be offered -and that ERG should bank May's Deal and try to ensure maximum independence from the EU in the Trade Deal.
My preferred route would have been to start preparing for a No Deal Brexit two years ago. Those who blocked such preparations must examine their conscience as to whether their actions have been in the best interests of the negotiations and of this country. But I look at our current preparedness and must conclude that today we are ill-equipped to launch ourselves into the world without guarantees that our economy will not suffer disproportionate turbulence.
I have tthe initial Referendum result."
It would be some climb down and might not seem at all likely. But then, No Deal Brexit didn't seem at all likely a couple of weeks back.....
(If this speech would just stick in Rees Mogg's craw too much to enable him to talk, then I could yet imagine Boris delivering it....)
.
As Ivan Rogers explains, the mini-deals are a safety mechanism to try and protect the EU in those areas where there is most risk to them, or mutually. They aren't going to happen in areas of specifically British concern.
I agree but they certainly reduce the pain of no deal. No lorry parks in Dover, no problems with derivative contracts, no problems with food supply, no problems with drugs, planes flying, etc. The EU destroyed all the arguments of remainers yesterday. Why? is a question I would like to know the answer to.
What did the EU do yesterday?
Edit. Never mind I see the EU agreed to make no deal preparations with the UK.
Kind of blows the fallacy that there is no such thing as preparing for no deal out the water that remainers have been peddling on here.
Of course you can prepare for a No Deal. No-one has said any different. The argument is that there is no such thing called a managed No Deal in which both sides sit down and work out a series of mutually beneficial arrangements. That will not happen.
The EU does not care if there are long tailbacks at Dover. Their concern is in preventing tailbacks at Calais.
So given yesterday's announcement - there is already a deal in place. Therefore there cannot be a no deal Brexit.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Any level of fraud in unacceptable. Why should it be harder to get a resident's parking permit or a library card that it is to vote?
"Any level of fraud in unacceptable."
If you really, truly believe that, are you prepared for the process that would have to be enacted to enable it?
When you know there is a risk of fraud - which there clearly is with our voting system as currently set up - it is perfectly reasonable to take steps to reduce the potential for fraud to as close to zero as you can manage. No system is perfectly secure. But a Voter ID system is not unreasonable - as is demonstrated by the fact that one operates in Northern Ireland.
I am really struggling to understand this liking for Raab. For me, he has made a series of ignorant statements, he had a brief time at DexEU where he seems to have a very limited understanding of what was going on, when he found out he resigned in a somewhat incoherent way and I have yet to see him make an intelligent contribution since.
Is it just that he remains a blank canvas onto which people can paint their hopes or am I really missing something?
Can't see it either - he'll have his Dover quote hung around his neck.
"Overall, the voter identification requirements trialled in May 2018 worked well. Nearly everyone in the five pilot scheme areas who went to vote in their polling station was able to show identification without difficulty. The number of people who did not vote because they couldn’t show identification was very small."
I imagine it is mainly undesirable groups who will have their democratic rights blocked anyway, no need to kick up too much of a fuss about a small minority.
What I don't understand is why don't these voters hand over their postal ballots as their community leaders have asked them to?
Clearly they lack the intelligence that come with your superior melanin levels.
"Overall, the voter identification requirements trialled in May 2018 worked well. Nearly everyone in the five pilot scheme areas who went to vote in their polling station was able to show identification without difficulty. The number of people who did not vote because they couldn’t show identification was very small."
I imagine it is mainly undesirable groups who will have their democratic rights blocked anyway, no need to kick up too much of a fuss about a small minority.
They'll all be in safe Labour seats anyway.....
I truly doubt any Westminster MP sits as an MP due to electoral fraud. The bigger problem is local elections. I can see a better case being made for implementing it there, where a handful of dodgy votes could risk the democratic process being bent all out of whack.
Rees Mogg has made a fool of himself in recent days and has no credibility. He seems more in the Boris camp anyway which seems appropriate. Gove has no credibility left with either Remainers or Leavers. Javid and Hunt are straw men - all mouth and nothing else. Rudd and Lidlington are just EU apparatchiks and would just revoke A50 so they have no chance with the membership. Davis is too old so that leaves either Raab or Mordaunt as the only two credible choices.
The best bet of course would be someone outside Cabinet to come through untainted by the fiasco this Cabinet have made of Brexit but that seems highly unlikely based on history.
"leaves...Mordaunt as the only credible choice[s]."
bwahahahahahaha
haha
hahahahahahaha
ha
I think Mourdant has burned her bridges with a lot of the ERG / membership types by not resigning when others did.
What is Mogg up to? I am lost now. Are the ERG going to swing behind May's deal at last moment?
I never saw Rees Mogg as a leader. Don't know anyone who did.
The interesting question about Rees Mogg is whether he might blink. Accept that there is no better deal going to be offered -and that ERG should bank May's Deal and try to ensure maximum independence from the EU in the Trade Deal.
"We have all witnessed the way the EU has interacted in its dealings with the Prime Minister. Above all, the process has confirmed that our continuing position within the EU is untenable and the first - indeed only - priority for the United Kingdom is to depart its clutches.
My preferred route would have been to start preparing for a No Deal Brexit two years ago. Those who blocked such preparations must examine their conscience as to whether their actions have been in the best interests of the negotiations and of this country. But I look at our current preparedness and must conclude that today we are ill-equipped to launch ourselves into the world without guarantees that our economy will not suffer disproportionate turbulence.
I have therefore informed the Prime Minister that when the Meaningful Vote is taken in January, I shall be voting to implement her deal. Having taken soundings, I can assure her that many of my fellow members of the ERG have reached the same conclusion. If her deal falls, the consequences that follow will be down to those seeking to undermine the initial Referendum result."
It would be some climb down and might not seem at all likely. But then, No Deal Brexit didn't seem at all likely a couple of weeks back.....
(If this speech would just stick in Rees Mogg's craw too much to enable him to talk, then I could yet imagine Boris delivering it....)
I think the announcement by the EU yesterday that they will do mini-deals to stop the major effects of a sudden no deal Brexit will be key to the Tory leavers. We get the detail on Weds but if the detail is sensible in the areas they proposed then I can see this route becoming the preferred position of the Tory leavers, which leaves May's deal dead. Which is why I am surprised the EU announced them when they did.
As Ivan Rogers explains, the mini-deals are a safety mechanism to try and protect the EU in those areas where there is most risk to them, or mutually. They aren't going to happen in areas of specifically British concern.
They're not mini-deals as far as I can see, they are short-term, unilateral EU actions. They do not involve discussion or negotiation, they involve the EU doing stuff which it believes will mitigate difficulties for EU member states. These may or may not also benefit the UK, but the UK will have absolutely no control over them, except the ability to say no and to harm itself even more.
I never saw Rees Mogg as a leader. Don't know anyone who did.
The interesting question about Rees Mogg is whether he might blink. Accept that there is no better deal going to be offered -and that ERG should bank May's Deal and try to ensure maximum independence from the EU in the Trade Deal.
M It would be some climb down and might not seem at all likely. But then, No Deal Brexit didn't seem at all likely a couple of weeks back.....
(If this speech would just stick in Rees Mogg's craw too much to enable him to talk, then I could yet imagine Boris delivering it....)
As Ivan Rogers explains, the mini-deals are a safety mechanism to try and protect the EU in those areas where there is most risk to them, or mutually. They aren't going to happen in areas of specifically British concern.
I agree but they certainly reduce the pain of no deal. No lorry parks in Dover, no problems with derivative contracts, no problems with food supply, no problems with drugs, planes flying, etc. The EU destroyed all the arguments of remainers yesterday. Why? is a question I would like to know the answer to.
What did the EU do yesterday?
Edit. Never mind I see the EU agreed to make no deal preparations with the UK.
Kind of blows the fallacy that there is no such thing as preparing for no deal out the water that remainers have been peddling on here.
They announced the sectors yesterday, details coming tomorrow.
Good for them. Thankfully the EU aren't as completely useless as our government if we end up with no deal.
May would have just sat there gibbering doing nothing right up to crashing out in March.
We've spent quite a lot of money preparing for no deal and Hammond is releasing another couple of billion shortly. May is woeful, I do agree, but I don't expect to see her in a hard hat steamrolling Kent, she has her numberless minions for all that.
"Overall, the voter identification requirements trialled in May 2018 worked well. Nearly everyone in the five pilot scheme areas who went to vote in their polling station was able to show identification without difficulty. The number of people who did not vote because they couldn’t show identification was very small."
I imagine it is mainly undesirable groups who will have their democratic rights blocked anyway, no need to kick up too much of a fuss about a small minority.
They'll all be in safe Labour seats anyway.....
I truly doubt any Westminster MP sits as an MP due to electoral fraud. The bigger problem is local elections. I can see a better case being made for implementing it there, where a handful of dodgy votes could risk the democratic process being bent all out of whack.
You can't really have a different system of Voter ID for local and general elections - particularly as they often coincide.
A system - such as the one that operates in Northern Ireland - would be workable for the rest of the UK
I still don't get the problem with asking people to provide some form of ID to confirm their right to vote.
We ask a lot more to get a library card
It is not at all unreasonable to require people to demonstrate their right to vote. It works in Northern Ireland - with a free voting ID card which works if people don't have access to any other acceptable form of ID.
There is no evidence at all of a voter suppression plan. That is just scaremongering.
I would personally like to see a roll back of permanent postal voting and the clear fraud potential that exists with the postal vote system as currently set up.
But I think the principle that you have to prove who you are so that you can vote is a perfectly legitimate one.
At the last GE I turned up to vote to be told that I had already voted.
How was that resolved for you? I am guessing it was an error on the part of whoever was marking up the register but I may be wrong
They did get all hot and bothered and made telephone calls. And then, after some lighthearted jesting by me about, ahem, calling the police, I had to fill in a form, can't remember its name something like 15a-6... and all the polling booth staff nervously joked about it being human error.
At least you weren't denied your right to vote.
A couple of elections ago, I turned up with my housemate's polling card - and was still allowed to vote. I don't look much like a Katharine!
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
"Overall, the voter identification requirements trialled in May 2018 worked well. Nearly everyone in the five pilot scheme areas who went to vote in their polling station was able to show identification without difficulty. The number of people who did not vote because they couldn’t show identification was very small."
I imagine it is mainly undesirable groups who will have their democratic rights blocked anyway, no need to kick up too much of a fuss about a small minority.
They'll all be in safe Labour seats anyway.....
I truly doubt any Westminster MP sits as an MP due to electoral fraud. The bigger problem is local elections. I can see a better case being made for implementing it there, where a handful of dodgy votes could risk the democratic process being bent all out of whack.
The South Yorkshire police commissioner vote was quite eyebrow raising with almost 80% of votes cast by postal ballot.
I would be interested to see the breakdown of votes per party of postal votes compared to voting in person.
I am really struggling to understand this liking for Raab. For me, he has made a series of ignorant statements, he had a brief time at DexEU where he seems to have a very limited understanding of what was going on, when he found out he resigned in a somewhat incoherent way and I have yet to see him make an intelligent contribution since.
Is it just that he remains a blank canvas onto which people can paint their hopes or am I really missing something?
Can't see it either - he'll have his Dover quote hung around his neck.
Brexit will be a success if we deserve it to be a success was surely even more stupid.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
"Overall, the voter identification requirements trialled in May 2018 worked well. Nearly everyone in the five pilot scheme areas who went to vote in their polling station was able to show identification without difficulty. The number of people who did not vote because they couldn’t show identification was very small."
I imagine it is mainly undesirable groups who will have their democratic rights blocked anyway, no need to kick up too much of a fuss about a small minority.
They'll all be in safe Labour seats anyway.....
I truly doubt any Westminster MP sits as an MP due to electoral fraud. The bigger problem is local elections. I can see a better case being made for implementing it there, where a handful of dodgy votes could risk the democratic process being bent all out of whack.
You can't really have a different system of Voter ID for local and general elections - particularly as they often coincide.
A system - such as the one that operates in Northern Ireland - would be workable for the rest of the UK
The last GE didn't coincide with locals (more is the pity) and the next might not either.....
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
It does make their turnout appear to be lower then it actually is, though.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
What a twat he probably wrote that sitting in his union jack underpants with land of hope and glory playing in the background.
"Overall, the voter identification requirements trialled in May 2018 worked well. Nearly everyone in the five pilot scheme areas who went to vote in their polling station was able to show identification without difficulty. The number of people who did not vote because they couldn’t show identification was very small."
I imagine it is mainly undesirable groups who will have their democratic rights blocked anyway, no need to kick up too much of a fuss about a small minority.
They'll all be in safe Labour seats anyway.....
I truly doubt any Westminster MP sits as an MP due to electoral fraud. The bigger problem is local elections. I can see a better case being made for implementing it there, where a handful of dodgy votes could risk the democratic process being bent all out of whack.
You can't really have a different system of Voter ID for local and general elections - particularly as they often coincide.
A system - such as the one that operates in Northern Ireland - would be workable for the rest of the UK
The last GE didn't coincide with locals (more is the pity) and the next might not either.....
But as a principle, we should have one system that works for all elections - otherwise you are risking confusion. Turn up with ID (whatever that might be) and vote. Simples.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
That's quite impressive. I got 2 which is pretty much what one might expect on an entirely random basis.
Yes I got four simply by randomising my answers. If I had had the patience to work out "likely" answers (ie - "assuming annual inflation of x..." etc) I might have got the same or lower or higher.
And I gave up at Q7 as I realised it was boring guessing.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Any level of fraud in unacceptable. Why should it be harder to get a resident's parking permit or a library card that it is to vote?
"Any level of fraud in unacceptable."
If you really, truly believe that, are you prepared for the process that would have to be enacted to enable it?
When you know there is a risk of fraud - which there clearly is with our voting system as currently set up - it is perfectly reasonable to take steps to reduce the potential for fraud to as close to zero as you can manage. No system is perfectly secure. But a Voter ID system is not unreasonable - as is demonstrated by the fact that one operates in Northern Ireland.
It may, or may not, be unreasonable, depending on the system decided upon and the reasoning behind it. Implementation matters, as does trust in the system.
There are some fundamental principles in the public electoral process, such as the opportunity for everyone eligible to vote, that everyone who votes has their vote fairly counted, that their vote is kept secret, that the system is perceived as being fair, etc, etc. Sometimes these principles are slightly contradictory: it would be easy to ensure there was no personation if everyone's vote was published on a website for everyone to see.
There's also the matter of scale. Personation would be very hard to pull off on a big scale - particularly at a scale large enough to influence an election - without detection. Because of this, PV and voter registration are of a much greater concern to me than personation, and electronic voting gives me the heebygebbies.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
Whether it is ok or not is irrelevant. It is Jones' invocation of the two world wars which is moronic.
I am really struggling to understand this liking for Raab. For me, he has made a series of ignorant statements, he had a brief time at DexEU where he seems to have a very limited understanding of what was going on, when he found out he resigned in a somewhat incoherent way and I have yet to see him make an intelligent contribution since.
Is it just that he remains a blank canvas onto which people can paint their hopes or am I really missing something?
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
Whether it is ok or not is irrelevant. It is Jones' invocation of the two world wars which is moronic.
Why is it irrelevant? Apart from the fact that criticising the EU is impossible for you.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
Third country nationals, like Americans, pay €7.
Waiving the fee for Brits is special treatment - it's for us to justify that, not them.
The obvious justification would be a mutual waiver of fees, but we aren't close to being able to determine that.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
And they will probably drop the charge if it looks like it has an effect, as it might. Despite €7 being a fairly trivial amount in the context of a holiday, the inconvenience and the message it sends may well hit the weekend break market in particular.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
Imagine the Uk had invented this visa charge - Southham would be frothing about little Englanders and turning our back on the world.
Brexit is a battle between optimistic leavers and misanthrope remainers.
They're not mini-deals as far as I can see, they are short-term, unilateral EU actions. They do not involve discussion or negotiation, they involve the EU doing stuff which it believes will mitigate difficulties for EU member states. These may or may not also benefit the UK, but the UK will have absolutely no control over them, except the ability to say no and to harm itself even more.
Precisely. And of course they won't cover things like meat or fish exports to the EU, which will collapse overnight in the case of no deal. The proposed measure on derivative contracts looks as though it is designed to give EU traders and companies up to nine months to exit their positions.
'Managed no deal' is a complete absurdity, a contradiction in terms. Still, it's a useful litmus test for voting in future Conservative leadership contests, as anyone who has proposed it can immediately be ruled out.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
What a twat he probably wrote that sitting in his union jack underpants with land of hope and glory playing in the background.
You are going to have to explain to me why that makes him a twat.
I know somebody who voted twice in the GE of 2005. Somebody very close to me actually. This person voted once in a West London constituency and once in a North London one. Don't see the problem with it. If voting is a good thing (and surely it is) then the more of it you can do the better. About the only exception to that that I can think of is the 2016 EU referendum where rather less of it would have been preferable.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
And they will probably drop the charge if it looks like it has an effect, as it might. Despite €7 being a fairly trivial amount in the context of a holiday, the inconvenience and the message it sends may well hit the weekend break market in particular.
I often find I have to pay a city tax when I go abroad to watch Arsenal. This sort of thing is not that much of an issue for your holiday maker. Might be a bit more of an issue for regular travellers.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
Whether it is ok or not is irrelevant. It is Jones' invocation of the two world wars which is moronic.
Why is it irrelevant? Apart from the fact that criticising the EU is impossible for you.
I know somebody who voted twice in the GE of 2005. Somebody very close to me actually. This person voted once in a West London constituency and once in a North London one. Don't see the problem with it.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
What a twat he probably wrote that sitting in his union jack underpants with land of hope and glory playing in the background.
You are going to have to explain to me why that makes him a twat.
a) you are being ironic in which case good post; or b) you are not being ironic in which case god help us.
Edit: apologies for not knowing which (I suspect a) ) but it's difficult to tell when @Xenon is at large.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I am surprised anyone listens to Digby Jones given his business career. He is lucky to have avoided regulatory action against him, if not worse.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
And they will probably drop the charge if it looks like it has an effect, as it might. Despite €7 being a fairly trivial amount in the context of a holiday, the inconvenience and the message it sends may well hit the weekend break market in particular.
I often find I have to pay a city tax when I go abroad to watch Arsenal. This sort of thing is not that much of an issue for your holiday maker. Might be a bit more of an issue for regular travellers.
Have you seen the Thomas Cook share price over the last 6 months. £1.20 to 30p.
Next summer isn't going to be a bumper year for Uk tourists heading for the EU.
I know somebody who voted twice in the GE of 2005. Somebody very close to me actually. This person voted once in a West London constituency and once in a North London one. Don't see the problem with it.
Isn't that err.. illegal ?
For about fifty years I think; I'm pretty certain for GE although some people have options they are only options and not additive.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
No one checks.
You do realise they aren't the only group that can register in 2 different places?
No one checks that either, but no, alleging mass cheating without proof isn't a good reason to advance ID checks which disenfranchise people and certainly not without a parliamentary debate on it.
That's quite impressive. I got 2 which is pretty much what one might expect on an entirely random basis.
I got four. The only one that I was confident of knowing the answer was the Euro question - UK, Denmark and Sweden had opt outs, is that right?
Not sure that is right because the likes of Poland did not qualify either but I did get that one right with some confidence. Which means I am a lousy guesser for the other 9!
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
No one checks.
You do realise they aren't the only group that can register in 2 different places?
No one checks that either, but no, alleging mass cheating without proof isn't a good reason to advance ID checks which disenfranchise people and certainly not without a parliamentary debate on it.
That's quite impressive. I got 2 which is pretty much what one might expect on an entirely random basis.
I got four. The only one that I was confident of knowing the answer was the Euro question - UK, Denmark and Sweden had opt outs, is that right?
Not sure that is right because the likes of Poland did not qualify either but I did get that one right with some confidence. Which means I am a lousy guesser for the other 9!
Poland wasn't an EU member when the euro launched.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
No one checks.
You do realise they aren't the only group that can register in 2 different places?
No one checks that either, but no, alleging mass cheating without proof isn't a good reason to advance ID checks which disenfranchise people and certainly not without a parliamentary debate on it.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
What a twat he probably wrote that sitting in his union jack underpants with land of hope and glory playing in the background.
You are going to have to explain to me why that makes him a twat.
a) you are being ironic in which case good post; or b) you are not being ironic in which case god help us.
Edit: apologies for not knowing which (I suspect a) ) but it's difficult to tell when @Xenon is at large.
It's quite tragic you think that you're being really witty and intelligent with these comments, when you actually come across as a complete bell end.
I am really struggling to understand this liking for Raab. For me, he has made a series of ignorant statements, he had a brief time at DexEU where he seems to have a very limited understanding of what was going on, when he found out he resigned in a somewhat incoherent way and I have yet to see him make an intelligent contribution since.
Is it just that he remains a blank canvas onto which people can paint their hopes or am I really missing something?
You’re not. He’s an empty suit.
"Raab attended Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, where he read Law, and won the Clive Parry Prize for International Law.
After graduating, he gained a master's degree at Jesus College, Cambridge.
Raab was initially a solicitor at Linklaters in London. He spent the summer of 1998 at Birzeit University near Ramallah where he worked for one of the principal Palestinian negotiators of the Oslo peace accords, assessing World Bank projects on the West Bank.
In 2000, Raab joined the Foreign Office, covering a range of briefs including leading a team at the British Embassy in The Hague, dedicated to bringing war criminals to justice. After returning to London, he advised on the Arab–Israeli conflict, the European Union, and Gibraltar."
He may be wrong on many things but he is hardly an empty suit. I actually went looking for evidence that he was another of these career politicians who had never done a proper job. Turns out to be far from the truth.
I know somebody who voted twice in the GE of 2005. Somebody very close to me actually. This person voted once in a West London constituency and once in a North London one. Don't see the problem with it. If voting is a good thing (and surely it is) then the more of it you can do the better. About the only exception to that that I can think of is the 2016 EU referendum where rather less of it would have been preferable.
You must be a troll? How is voting more than once in a GE ever acceptable?
I am really struggling to understand this liking for Raab. For me, he has made a series of ignorant statements, he had a brief time at DexEU where he seems to have a very limited understanding of what was going on, when he found out he resigned in a somewhat incoherent way and I have yet to see him make an intelligent contribution since.
Is it just that he remains a blank canvas onto which people can paint their hopes or am I really missing something?
You’re not. He’s an empty suit.
"Raab attended Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, where he read Law, and won the Clive Parry Prize for International Law.
After graduating, he gained a master's degree at Jesus College, Cambridge.
Raab was initially a solicitor at Linklaters in London. He spent the summer of 1998 at Birzeit University near Ramallah where he worked for one of the principal Palestinian negotiators of the Oslo peace accords, assessing World Bank projects on the West Bank.
In 2000, Raab joined the Foreign Office, covering a range of briefs including leading a team at the British Embassy in The Hague, dedicated to bringing war criminals to justice. After returning to London, he advised on the Arab–Israeli conflict, the European Union, and Gibraltar."
He may be wrong on many things but he is hardly an empty suit. I actually went looking for evidence that he was another of these career politicians who had never done a proper job. Turns out to be far from the truth.
And you certainly wouldn't want to call him an empty suit to his face.
They're not mini-deals as far as I can see, they are short-term, unilateral EU actions. They do not involve discussion or negotiation, they involve the EU doing stuff which it believes will mitigate difficulties for EU member states. These may or may not also benefit the UK, but the UK will have absolutely no control over them, except the ability to say no and to harm itself even more.
Precisely. And of course they won't cover things like meat or fish exports to the EU, which will collapse overnight in the case of no deal. The proposed measure on derivative contracts looks as though it is designed to give EU traders and companies up to nine months to exit their positions.
'Managed no deal' is a complete absurdity, a contradiction in terms. Still, it's a useful litmus test for voting in future Conservative leadership contests, as anyone who has proposed it can immediately be ruled out.
It is an oxymoron but like many an oxymoron it does actually mean something. Given no deal has come to mean going to WTO terms (a better phrase may be no grand deal etc) then a managed no deal is a deal that leads to WTO terms but includes minor deals on case by case issues - eg planes, air space, pet passports etc
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I am surprised anyone listens to Digby Jones given his business career. He is lucky to have avoided regulatory action against him, if not worse.
Curious to know what his Dad or Mum were up to. Sound conspicuous by their absence.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
What a twat he probably wrote that sitting in his union jack underpants with land of hope and glory playing in the background.
You are going to have to explain to me why that makes him a twat.
a) you are being ironic in which case good post; or b) you are not being ironic in which case god help us.
Edit: apologies for not knowing which (I suspect a) ) but it's difficult to tell when @Xenon is at large.
It's quite tragic you think that you're being really witty and intelligent with these comments, when you actually come across as a complete bell end.
I need proof you are old enough to have access to the internet. Nothing in your entire posting history makes me think you aren't a seven yr old sitting in the back of your parents' car on your iPad.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
The EU could quite easily decide not to charge 7 euros, they are doing it out of spite.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
And they will probably drop the charge if it looks like it has an effect, as it might. Despite €7 being a fairly trivial amount in the context of a holiday, the inconvenience and the message it sends may well hit the weekend break market in particular.
I often find I have to pay a city tax when I go abroad to watch Arsenal. This sort of thing is not that much of an issue for your holiday maker. Might be a bit more of an issue for regular travellers.
The €7 charge isn't an issue. The max 45 days in 90 could be. I think I hit 65 days in Europe in 3 months at times last year...
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
No one checks.
You do realise they aren't the only group that can register in 2 different places?
No one checks that either, but no, alleging mass cheating without proof isn't a good reason to advance ID checks which disenfranchise people and certainly not without a parliamentary debate on it.
No one checks unless there's evidence.
FWIW, I'm fairly ambivalent about requiring voters to showing ID. In principle, I'm in favour as there are instances of personation and more instances of false registration. I don't accept the argument that it 'disenfranchises' people, as it's perfectly possible to prepare and arrange for those without e.g. driving licenses.
However, the problems of false voting in person is relatively small. In terms of priority, sorting out the problems with postal voting should rank much higher. Indeed, I'd end postal-voting-on-demand entirely. The pre-1999(?) reasons were sufficient to enable access for those with difficulties in voting in person.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
No one checks.
You do realise they aren't the only group that can register in 2 different places?
No one checks that either, but no, alleging mass cheating without proof isn't a good reason to advance ID checks which disenfranchise people and certainly not without a parliamentary debate on it.
Why do ID checks disenfranchise people?
Did you read the article?
They stop them voting.
Only if they are too stupid to get proof of ID, which is trivial (see the NI example).
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
Citation needed on them being allies.
I see nothing ally like about how they have approached these negotiations. Hostile is more like it and if they want to treat us in a hostile manner trying to divide up our country then it takes two to tango.
That's quite impressive. I got 2 which is pretty much what one might expect on an entirely random basis.
I got four. The only one that I was confident of knowing the answer was the Euro question - UK, Denmark and Sweden had opt outs, is that right?
Not sure that is right because the likes of Poland did not qualify either but I did get that one right with some confidence. Which means I am a lousy guesser for the other 9!
Poland wasn't an EU member when the euro launched.
They're not mini-deals as far as I can see, they are short-term, unilateral EU actions. They do not involve discussion or negotiation, they involve the EU doing stuff which it believes will mitigate difficulties for EU member states. These may or may not also benefit the UK, but the UK will have absolutely no control over them, except the ability to say no and to harm itself even more.
Precisely. And of course they won't cover things like meat or fish exports to the EU, which will collapse overnight in the case of no deal. The proposed measure on derivative contracts looks as though it is designed to give EU traders and companies up to nine months to exit their positions.
'Managed no deal' is a complete absurdity, a contradiction in terms. Still, it's a useful litmus test for voting in future Conservative leadership contests, as anyone who has proposed it can immediately be ruled out.
It is an oxymoron but like many an oxymoron it does actually mean something. Given no deal has come to mean going to WTO terms (a better phrase may be no grand deal etc) then a managed no deal is a deal that leads to WTO terms but includes minor deals on case by case issues - eg planes, air space, pet passports etc
Which is why you see that "no deal" can't ever be an option to be enshrined in law, either by parliament or the public.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
What a twat he probably wrote that sitting in his union jack underpants with land of hope and glory playing in the background.
You are going to have to explain to me why that makes him a twat.
a) you are being ironic in which case good post; or b) you are not being ironic in which case god help us.
Edit: apologies for not knowing which (I suspect a) ) but it's difficult to tell when @Xenon is at large.
It's quite tragic you think that you're being really witty and intelligent with these comments, when you actually come across as a complete bell end.
I need proof you are old enough to have access to the internet. Nothing in your entire posting history makes me think you aren't a seven yr old sitting in the back of your parents' car on your iPad.
You're on here every day acting like an immature fool whenever you disagree with anyone. Why?
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
I think British business does ok overseas compared to most countries.
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
There's a lot wrong with invoking, John Cleese-like, our times of war with our current allies. Plus it is illogical as many EU members would not only have liked to have charged the Jones family €7 but to have shot them through the head also.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
Citation needed on them being allies.
I see nothing ally like about how they have approached these negotiations. Hostile is more like it and if they want to treat us in a hostile manner trying to divide up our country then it takes two to tango.
Voter ID does feel unnecessary. is there any evidence of widespread voter fraud outside of a few small cases? younger voters(single mothers), benefits claimants, students already do not vote in the same number as over 50s so this will divide society even further..
Students get two votes since they can vote in their Uni constituency and their parents constituency.
No they don't.
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
No one checks.
You do realise they aren't the only group that can register in 2 different places?
No one checks that either, but no, alleging mass cheating without proof isn't a good reason to advance ID checks which disenfranchise people and certainly not without a parliamentary debate on it.
Why do ID checks disenfranchise people?
Did you read the article?
They stop them voting.
Only if they are too stupid to get proof of ID, which is trivial (see the NI example).
People who aren't capable of finding the polling station are disenfranchised. As are those who forget when the election is.
Digby Jones encapsulates absolutely everything that is wrong about British business management. Why do we so often struggle in overseas markets? Because there are far too many Digby Jones's sitting on our company boards. https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
What a twat he probably wrote that sitting in his union jack underpants with land of hope and glory playing in the background.
You are going to have to explain to me why that makes him a twat.
a) you are being ironic in which case good post; or b) you are not being ironic in which case god help us.
Edit: apologies for not knowing which (I suspect a) ) but it's difficult to tell when @Xenon is at large.
It's quite tragic you think that you're being really witty and intelligent with these comments, when you actually come across as a complete bell end.
I need proof you are old enough to have access to the internet. Nothing in your entire posting history makes me think you aren't a seven yr old sitting in the back of your parents' car on your iPad.
You're on here every day acting like an immature fool whenever you disagree with anyone. Why?
I need a basic level of intelligence before I engage seriously. You don't appear to possess it.
Not every day, sweetheart, sometimes real life gets in the way. Try to, though.
I am really struggling to understand this liking for Raab. For me, he has made a series of ignorant statements, he had a brief time at DexEU where he seems to have a very limited understanding of what was going on, when he found out he resigned in a somewhat incoherent way and I have yet to see him make an intelligent contribution since.
Is it just that he remains a blank canvas onto which people can paint their hopes or am I really missing something?
You’re not. He’s an empty suit.
"Raab attended Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, where he read Law, and won the Clive Parry Prize for International Law.
After graduating, he gained a master's degree at Jesus College, Cambridge.
Raab was initially a solicitor at Linklaters in London. He spent the summer of 1998 at Birzeit University near Ramallah where he worked for one of the principal Palestinian negotiators of the Oslo peace accords, assessing World Bank projects on the West Bank.
In 2000, Raab joined the Foreign Office, covering a range of briefs including leading a team at the British Embassy in The Hague, dedicated to bringing war criminals to justice. After returning to London, he advised on the Arab–Israeli conflict, the European Union, and Gibraltar."
He may be wrong on many things but he is hardly an empty suit. I actually went looking for evidence that he was another of these career politicians who had never done a proper job. Turns out to be far from the truth.
Maybe his skill set is just not suitable for politics. His contributions have been pretty pitiful to date.
That's quite impressive. I got 2 which is pretty much what one might expect on an entirely random basis.
I got four. The only one that I was confident of knowing the answer was the Euro question - UK, Denmark and Sweden had opt outs, is that right?
The five that I was right on were: inflation since 1843, sprouts, most southerly cash machine, bank run film and number of Euro countries at the start.
I'm disappointed that I missed out on the jumper question and GDP per capita in AD1.
Comments
May would have just sat there gibbering doing nothing right up to crashing out in March.
A couple of elections ago, I turned up with my housemate's polling card - and was still allowed to vote. I don't look much like a Katharine!
2) judge the scale of the problem.
3) decide different ways the problem might be fixed
4) work out the consequences (side effects) of each potential change
5) decide if the consequences are worth fixing the problem.
6) choose one, or decide the original problem has to be lived with.
This is the way it should be done. I fail to see anything has been done aside from the first point, and there seems to be an unholy rush towards a mechanism that may, or may not, be fit for purpose.
I really don't like our electoral process and system being mucked about with in this way.
Taking such a position originally, the Uk and the EU would have avoided the Irish border problem because trade arrangements would have been in place before we left the EU.
If you really, truly believe that, are you prepared for the process that would have to be enacted to enable it?
The EU does not care if there are long tailbacks at Dover. Their concern is in preventing tailbacks at Calais.
Try and keep up with me here.
Labour (at the time) proposed giving people ID cards. It didn't happen.
The Conservatives are now trialling people having to show ID to vote. They have no proposals to give people ID cards.
Labour are opposed to people not being able to vote without ID.
This is a completely consistent position, the only potential inconsistency would be the Conservatives not being in favour of ID cards but demanding ID to vote. Labour wanting to give people ID cards, it not happening and being against ID needed for voting makes a lot of sense. Even if ID cards did happen they could make an argument for it but especially without.
And then obviously Corbyn himself and probably a fair majority of the party currently wouldn't want ID cards.
Apart from all that it makes perfect sense as a complaint....
The question is now the scale of the deal.
I truly doubt any Westminster MP sits as an MP due to electoral fraud. The bigger problem is local elections. I can see a better case being made for implementing it there, where a handful of dodgy votes could risk the democratic process being bent all out of whack.
https://twitter.com/spectator/status/1074695716235165697
A system - such as the one that operates in Northern Ireland - would be workable for the rest of the UK
Who do you want as Prime Minister?
1. May
2. Not May.
Not May was the other contestant.
I would be interested to see the breakdown of votes per party of postal votes compared to voting in person.
https://twitter.com/Digbylj/status/1074683987338190848
They can register in two places, they can vote in local elections in both places but in national elections they have one vote the same as everyone else.
Jose out (out out).
And there's nothing wrong with being proud of our involvement in WW2.
See what a stupid line of discussion it is?
Oh yes but it's @Xenon so obvs that is about the right level.
My final score was five. I should have known about the jumper.
And I gave up at Q7 as I realised it was boring guessing.
Obviously that's ok though according to you.
There are some fundamental principles in the public electoral process, such as the opportunity for everyone eligible to vote, that everyone who votes has their vote fairly counted, that their vote is kept secret, that the system is perceived as being fair, etc, etc. Sometimes these principles are slightly contradictory: it would be easy to ensure there was no personation if everyone's vote was published on a website for everyone to see.
There's also the matter of scale. Personation would be very hard to pull off on a big scale - particularly at a scale large enough to influence an election - without detection. Because of this, PV and voter registration are of a much greater concern to me than personation, and electronic voting gives me the heebygebbies.
Thank-you so much TSE you did us a great turn!
Waiving the fee for Brits is special treatment - it's for us to justify that, not them.
The obvious justification would be a mutual waiver of fees, but we aren't close to being able to determine that.
Brexit is a battle between optimistic leavers and misanthrope remainers.
'Managed no deal' is a complete absurdity, a contradiction in terms. Still, it's a useful litmus test for voting in future Conservative leadership contests, as anyone who has proposed it can immediately be ruled out.
b) you are not being ironic in which case god help us.
Edit: apologies for not knowing which (I suspect a) ) but it's difficult to tell when @Xenon is at large.
Next summer isn't going to be a bumper year for Uk tourists heading for the EU.
No one checks that either, but no, alleging mass cheating without proof isn't a good reason to advance ID checks which disenfranchise people and certainly not without a parliamentary debate on it.
They stop them voting.
After graduating, he gained a master's degree at Jesus College, Cambridge.
Raab was initially a solicitor at Linklaters in London. He spent the summer of 1998 at Birzeit University near Ramallah where he worked for one of the principal Palestinian negotiators of the Oslo peace accords, assessing World Bank projects on the West Bank.
In 2000, Raab joined the Foreign Office, covering a range of briefs including leading a team at the British Embassy in The Hague, dedicated to bringing war criminals to justice. After returning to London, he advised on the Arab–Israeli conflict, the European Union, and Gibraltar."
He may be wrong on many things but he is hardly an empty suit. I actually went looking for evidence that he was another of these career politicians who had never done a proper job. Turns out to be far from the truth.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3cswj9j
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/17/poll-klobuchar-rising-in-iowa-1067256
FWIW, I'm fairly ambivalent about requiring voters to showing ID. In principle, I'm in favour as there are instances of personation and more instances of false registration. I don't accept the argument that it 'disenfranchises' people, as it's perfectly possible to prepare and arrange for those without e.g. driving licenses.
However, the problems of false voting in person is relatively small. In terms of priority, sorting out the problems with postal voting should rank much higher. Indeed, I'd end postal-voting-on-demand entirely. The pre-1999(?) reasons were sufficient to enable access for those with difficulties in voting in person.
I see nothing ally like about how they have approached these negotiations. Hostile is more like it and if they want to treat us in a hostile manner trying to divide up our country then it takes two to tango.
It's OUTRAGEOUS.
Not every day, sweetheart, sometimes real life gets in the way. Try to, though.
I'm disappointed that I missed out on the jumper question and GDP per capita in AD1.