If anyone is still saying that no one is talking about Brexit except geeks they must be hiding in cellars. I went out for lunch with some advertising friends and they became quite heated. I know the word cu*ts is now de rigueur after it's multiple use in Golden Globes winner 'Favourites' but the number of public figures (and not so public) earning the epithet was alarming.
If anyone is still saying that no one is talking about Brexit except geeks they must be hiding in cellars. I went out for lunch with some advertising friends and they became quite heated. I know the word cu*ts is now acceptable after it's multiple use in Golden Globes winner 'Favourites' but the number of public figures (and not so public) earning the epithet was alarming.
If anyone is still saying that no one is talking about Brexit except geeks they must be hiding in cellars. I went out for lunch with some advertising friends and they became quite heated. I know the word cu*ts is now acceptable after it's multiple use in Golden Globes winner 'Favourites' but the number of public figures (and not so public) earning the epithet was alarming.
Roger youve had that noble title on PB for years :-)
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe. Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
Ocasio-Cortez is ineligible for 2020, and I think 2024 as well. Too young.
The 35 year minimum age limit is silly.
You can have wise, adept, talented, emotionally intelligent 34-year-olds.
And you can have stupid, incompetent, talentless, emotionally retarded 72-year-olds.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?
The DUP wanted Brexit to cleave NI away from the EU and Ireland and align it more closely with rUK. What the backstop does, and by extension, any future trading arrangement that can replace it, is almost exactly the opposite.
Honestly I think the DUP made a massive miscalculation supporting Brexit, are aware of it, but are happy to let May be the fall guy.
Well it keeps NI and the UK in the “customs territory” and that should be the emphasis. Whatever situation GB signs up to should apply to NI. De-emphasise the certain rules bit. Then it's only the ERG loons that she needs to worry about.
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe. Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
Ocasio-Cortez is ineligible for 2020, and I think 2024 as well. Too young.
The 35 year minimum age limit is silly.
You can have wise, adept, talented, emotionally intelligent 34-year-olds.
And you can have stupid, incompetent, talentless, emotionally retarded 72-year-olds.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?
Jonathan Powell, who knows DUP well after years of negotiating NI peace, says they have to be taken literally. When they say 'no' they mean 'no'.
Nothing on earth will move them now, seems to be his point.
Cameron must be one of the best assignments for the VIP protection squad. Much easier to work with a former minister who does very little work and travel, than a current one who's got 20 meetings a day from 6am until midnight.
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
If anyone is still saying that no one is talking about Brexit except geeks they must be hiding in cellars. I went out for lunch with some advertising friends and they became quite heated. I know the word cu*ts is now de rigueur after it's multiple use in Golden Globes winner 'Favourites' but the number of public figures (and not so public) earning the epithet was alarming.
I was particularly delighted by the resurrection of the term "c*nt-struck"......
Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
... apart from a few loopy Tory MPs and, it appears, most of the Tory party members.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
Yeah, an extension/temporary revocation of Article 50 is I think most likely. It suits almost everyone's interests to kick the can down the road: May because it means she doesn't have to perform a full U-turn (yet), Corbyn because he doesn't have to "get off the fence" (yet), the EU because after all the status quo is their preferred option.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Yes, it is baffling.
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
The backstop exists precisely because they don't trust that we'll have negotiated an FTA by 2020.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.
I doubt that's within her power to grant under the terms of the FTPA.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?
Forced extradition to ROI of all Catholics, gays and liberals?
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.
Calling an election is no longer the automatic gift of the PM though.
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.
I thought you approved of independent-minded parliamentarians.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Yes, it is baffling.
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.
I thought you approved of independent-minded parliamentarians.
I do. It is why I admire Clarke and Grieve for example. My dislike of Soubry is because she is an arrogant and offensive human being not because she is or is not independent. She fails to represent her own constituents and is all too willing to take offense when anyone disagrees with her. Phillips is of a similar model and equally unlikeable.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Yes, it is baffling.
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
May is Gordo in a skirt.
Their personalities are remarkably similar.
I suppose there's also a parallel between Hill/Timothy and McBride and the forces of hell.
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for example
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
Well for a start:
1. The EU would have to change their stance that we cannot negotiate the new trade agreement while we're in the EU. 2. The EU would have to change their stance that they want a no Irish hard border backstop befor the negitiate a trade deal. 3. We'd have to elect MEPs in May (not impossible but hardly desirable if we're leaving). 4. This government's track record of negotiating anything gives zero confidence they could negotiate a new trade agreement any way.
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for example
Great idea.
I'd just like to point out that Dorset is mainly populated (well, ok financed) by ex-Londoners now so should be considered part of the Greater London region in those refs.
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
The backstop exists precisely because they don't trust that we'll have negotiated an FTA by 2020.
Yes but the A50 deadline would still be there. We'd still exist within the same situation as we do now. Come 31/12/20 we either seek another extension (which they can veto), or no deal (as we might now), or enter the backstop (by ratifying this deal that's still there), or we have a deal in which case its moot.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Yes, it is baffling.
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
Richard, that is an excellent and entirely fair depiction.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.
Calling an election is no longer the automatic gift of the PM though.
True, but she could get one approved with the backing of the cabinet and most of her MPs. Labour would obviously support one.
The incentive for the Tories would be: "Brexit is delivered and we have a new leader, Corbyn's a disaster, now let us get on with running the country again."
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Yes, it is baffling.
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
As PM I agree that Gordon Brown is in a class of 1 for incompetence but my point was as a politician. There her failings are spectacular for exactly the reasons you have listed. Despite the present farce it is hard not to conclude the British people knew what the were doing when they denied May a majority. She would have been dangerous.
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for example
Great idea.
I'd just like to point out that Dorset is mainly populated (well, ok financed) by ex-Londoners now so should be considered part of the Greater London region in those refs.
Hey, the Cotswolds voted Remain. Can we stay? We're pretty and our farm-produce is nice.
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for example
Take it further - make everyone become their own region. I could choose to allocate funds to defence (GB Defence plc, or other possible providers) and foreign aid (everyone else) as I chose. Mostly my region wouldn't have trouble implementing any referenda.
@Mike great tip on Kamala Harris. Omnium funds went on Gabbard, and I feel that I've rather squandered them.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?
Jonathan Powell, who knows DUP well after years of negotiating NI peace, says they have to be taken literally. When they say 'no' they mean 'no'.
Nothing on earth will move them now, seems to be his point.
What was the line back in the days of Ian Paisley about the government holding private shouts with the DUP?
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Yes, it is baffling.
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
As PM I agree that Gordon Brown is in a class of 1 for incompetence but my point was as a politician. There her failings are spectacular for exactly the reasons you have listed. Despite the present farce it is hard not to conclude the British people knew what the were doing when they denied May a majority. She would have been dangerous.
I think May has been much nicer without a majority, but ineffectual.
With a majority she would have been a democratically elected dictator, effectual in whatever way she wished to go but inpervious to feedback.
"We have added Andrew Mitchell and Douglas Ross to the opposition column, on the basis of their contributions in Hansard, and removed George Freeman and Trudi Harrison, who have tweeted today that they will support the deal."
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition. That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for example
Great idea.
I'd just like to point out that Dorset is mainly populated (well, ok financed) by ex-Londoners now so should be considered part of the Greater London region in those refs.
Hey, the Cotswolds voted Remain. Can we stay? We're pretty and our farm-produce is nice.
I think the Thames Watershed is a good approximation to an ultra-London region.
Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
... apart from a few loopy Tory MPs and, it appears, most of the Tory party members.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
She is on course for the biggest Commons defeat in Parliamenary history - beating the minority Labour government's losing tally of 166 in 1924.
Labour's defeat in 1924 was soon followed by a general election and a Con landslide (this election also defined 20th century politics as it saw the decimation of the Liberals which cemented the Con/Lab duopoly that dominated 20th century politics)
Could we be about to see history repeat but in reverse? Lab landslide and Con split?
Labour were back in power by 1929 though, just 5 years later.
The only way the Tories get overtaken as Labour overtook the Liberals as the main party of the left is if they revoke Brexit and most of their voters move to UKIP or a new Farage led party which then becomes the main party of the right
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
Yeah, but America has gone tribal.
(Not that we can talk.)
Warren, Harris just repeat the Hillary coalition at best for the Democrats, though I could see Trump picking up Virginia or Nevada against either.
Either the Democrats pick a candidate who can challenge Trump in the rustbelt or they may as well hand him re election on a plate
She is on course for the biggest Commons defeat in Parliamenary history - beating the minority Labour government's losing tally of 166 in 1924.
Labour's defeat in 1924 was soon followed by a general election and a Con landslide (this election also defined 20th century politics as it saw the decimation of the Liberals which cemented the Con/Lab duopoly that dominated 20th century politics)
Could we be about to see history repeat but in reverse? Lab landslide and Con split?
Labour were back in power by 1929 though, just 5 years later.
The only way the Tories get overtaken as Labour overtook the Liberals as the main party of the left is if they revoke Brexit and most of their voters move to UKIP or a new Farage led party which then becomes the main party of the right
Labour even survived 1931. Parties can be destroyed by rivals on their own side, but not by opponents on the opposite side.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
Biden/ Beto ?
That would be the Democrats best bet and the ticket Trump would most fear yes and one that could challenge in the Midwest and parts of the South
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.
If we end up remaining, JRM would deserve the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur.
She is on course for the biggest Commons defeat in Parliamenary history - beating the minority Labour government's losing tally of 166 in 1924.
Labour's defeat in 1924 was soon followed by a general election and a Con landslide (this election also defined 20th century politics as it saw the decimation of the Liberals which cemented the Con/Lab duopoly that dominated 20th century politics)
Could we be about to see history repeat but in reverse? Lab landslide and Con split?
Labour were back in power by 1929 though, just 5 years later.
The only way the Tories get overtaken as Labour overtook the Liberals as the main party of the left is if they revoke Brexit and most of their voters move to UKIP or a new Farage led party which then becomes the main party of the right
Labour even survived 1931. Parties can be destroyed by rivals on their own side, but not by opponents on the opposite side.
And 1983 and the Tories 1997 and 1945, again as they remained the main party of the left or right respectively
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.
If we end up remaining, JRM would deserve the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur.
He'd certainly get off light in the ensuing show trials.
It appears the Chinese companies have underestimated what shits a lot of people are in the West compared to China. Maybe we need a social credit score ;-)
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.
If we end up remaining, JRM would deserve the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur.
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.
Soubry is gone whenever the next election is held (and she knows it which is why she doesn't care about the government or the Conservative Party anymore) but it's hard to see Phillips getting thrown out anytime soon.
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.
If we end up remaining, JRM would deserve the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur.
It appears the Chinese companies have underestimated what shits a lot of people are in the West compared to China. Maybe we need a social credit score ;-)
China is littered with bicycle graveyards from failed cycle hire companies.
Ofo was a data collection firm masquerading as a cycle hire service. Mobike's areas of operation aren't contiguous so useless unless you stay within a restricted area. Which leaves Boris. Which I quite like.
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?
I can’t see it being anything other than a net loser. Being part of the single market and aligning standards for Goods is controversial but we willingly sign up to global standards ISO and British Standards may move from alignment to European standards EN to global standards. Environmental and employment protection on the other hand are p9ltical decisions and it would be foolish to sign up to those without political representation
Perhaps May could try a reverse Barnier. She could say in a comfort letter that she has every intention of aligning environmental and employment protections and then claim to Labour and the EU that it is a concession.
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.
Brendan O'Neill is the perfect example of a snowflake.
He's the world's shittest troll, dishes it out but cannot take it.
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.
Soubry is gone whenever the next election is held (and she knows it which is why she doesn't care about the government or the Conservative Party anymore) but it's hard to see Phillips getting thrown out anytime soon.
I read the article not as a complaint from the author but an accusation of double standards to the two MPs who bot( complain about the tone and language of debate - if its from a man it’s misogynistic, but they are quite happy to give it out.
Surely this could be repealed or amended easily so there's nothing permanent about it?
Not if the executive supports it.
If the Government gets some more Labour MPs behind the Deal it can then focus on getting Tory Remain MPs fearful of No Deal and Tory No Deal MPs fearful of EUref2 and Remain
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.
Soubry is gone whenever the next election is held (and she knows it which is why she doesn't care about the government or the Conservative Party anymore) but it's hard to see Phillips getting thrown out anytime soon.
I read the article not as a complaint from the author but an accusation of double standards to the two MPs who bot( complain about the tone and language of debate - if its from a man it’s misogynistic, but they are quite happy to give it out.
That is so, although double standards are found across the political spectrum .
MP's on all sides face vile abuse, it 's disgusting, but I don't think one faction has it worse than another.
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending. 10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?
This is the point I do not understand, during the ref the criticism that Corbyn made of the EU was posted workers. With control back Labour could make whatever workers rights they wanted including no posted workers. Stay in the EU orbit for rights and posted workers stay. It is again illogical from Labour.
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending. 10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winter
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending. 10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winter
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending. 10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winter
The Mann amendment is as meaningless as the Swire amendment. The motion as amended has no legal force, doesn't commit the government to anything if it had and in any case no parliament can bind it's sucessor. For the purposes of the WA itself it's the international treaty text that matters not a HoC motion.
However this is about what MPs want to believe. If amendments like these give the Swires and Manns of this world psychological and political space to vote for May's deal then they are signifigant. Of course even the hint of moving from non regression to dynamic alignment on social/environmental legislation may well stiffen opposition at the Tory Brexiter end but that's now the game that's afoot.
Deal +. What's going to be bolted on to May's ( or sucessor's ) deal to bring in Labour votes/abstentions.
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending. 10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winter
And???
Your link does say things like
"being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged". It doesn't say who envisaged this.
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending. 10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winter
And???
Good news
Wheras the £2BN cut compared to what the Government previously announced isnt.
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?
This is the point I do not understand, during the ref the criticism that Corbyn made of the EU was posted workers. With control back Labour could make whatever workers rights they wanted including no posted workers. Stay in the EU orbit for rights and posted workers stay. It is again illogical from Labour.
It's the difference between old and new left. Old left see the EU as entrenching capitalism. New left see it as entrenching free migration, and minority rights.
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.
Soubry is gone whenever the next election is held (and she knows it which is why she doesn't care about the government or the Conservative Party anymore) but it's hard to see Phillips getting thrown out anytime soon.
I read the article not as a complaint from the author but an accusation of double standards to the two MPs who bot( complain about the tone and language of debate - if its from a man it’s misogynistic, but they are quite happy to give it out.
That is so, although double standards are found across the political spectrum .
MP's on all sides face vile abuse, it 's disgusting, but I don't think one faction has it worse than another.
Agreed one of my bosses gave me the advice that if you wouldn’t want it on the front of a newspaper, or read out in court then don’t write it. I use this as a mental check when I am responding to issues in my job! It means I have developed a cold but civil tone
Cameron must be one of the best assignments for the VIP protection squad. Much easier to work with a former minister who does very little work and travel, than a current one who's got 20 meetings a day from 6am until midnight.
Also despite the EU referendum and coalition, I don’t think he is targeted in the way thatcher or Blair was / are many years after they left power.
Hey, the Cotswolds voted Remain. Can we stay? We're pretty and our farm-produce is nice.
Quite. Walk from the station to the centre of our little Cotswold town and you'll see at least two houses still flying EU flags. I was going to suggest that our Town Council make a bid to remain a member of the EU (purely for the publicity, like Audlem bidding to become part of Wales) but Totnes beat us to it.
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending. 10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winter
And???
Your link does say things like
"being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged". It doesn't say who envisaged this.
improved (reduced) waiting times can't hurt.
It is £2bn less than the Governments high profile announcement last summer.
Cameron must be one of the best assignments for the VIP protection squad. Much easier to work with a former minister who does very little work and travel, than a current one who's got 20 meetings a day from 6am until midnight.
Also despite the EU referendum and coalition, I don’t think he is targeted in the way thatcher or Blair was / are many years after they left power.
Kind of reflective of the reduced status of the UK in global affairs, he did nothing internationally and made no real enemies
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending. 10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
The NHS will never receive adequate funding because:
1. It is a bottomless money pit, which grows progressively wider and blacker as the population ages and treatments become ever more numerous and expensive 2. Young people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're crippled by high rents 3. Middle-aged people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're crippled by gargantuan mortgages 4. Old people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're living on fixed incomes, and they resent being made to part with any of their immense stock of property wealth whether they're dead or alive (exhibit a: how much IHT is resented; exhibit b: the hysteria over the "dementia tax")
Voters want a Rolls Royce service from the NHS, but the vast bulk of them are unwilling or unable to part with anything more than the cost of a Reliant Robin. As ever, people expect all kinds of goodies, but they think it's somebody else's responsibility to shoulder the cost.
Cameron must be one of the best assignments for the VIP protection squad. Much easier to work with a former minister who does very little work and travel, than a current one who's got 20 meetings a day from 6am until midnight.
Also despite the EU referendum and coalition, I don’t think he is targeted in the way thatcher or Blair was / are many years after they left power.
Indeed. Gordon Brown or John Major would also be good postings. They, like DC, do a few well paid lectures and speeches but not a lot else. Blair, on the other hand, probably still does more travelling than the current foreign secretary, and still gets plenty of credible threats made against him. At least it's not the constant threats that it was only a couple of decades ago under the Troubles.
For retired senior politicians, it must be a right pain the arse to have a couple of policemen follow you absolutely everywhere, and certainly for former PMs knowing that it will always be the case. DC could well have 40 years left in him.
Comments
You can have wise, adept, talented, emotionally intelligent 34-year-olds.
And you can have stupid, incompetent, talentless, emotionally retarded 72-year-olds.
https://goo.gl/images/GzNcSq
Nothing on earth will move them now, seems to be his point.
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/04/most-tory-members-would-choose-no-deal-over-may-brexit-plan
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
Their personalities are remarkably similar.
1. The EU would have to change their stance that we cannot negotiate the new trade agreement while we're in the EU.
2. The EU would have to change their stance that they want a no Irish hard border backstop befor the negitiate a trade deal.
3. We'd have to elect MEPs in May (not impossible but hardly desirable if we're leaving).
4. This government's track record of negotiating anything gives zero confidence they could negotiate a new trade agreement any way.
I'd just like to point out that Dorset is mainly populated (well, ok financed) by ex-Londoners now so should be considered part of the Greater London region in those refs.
Hill and Timothy were shameless bullies.
Arrogant too.
You should patent it.
The incentive for the Tories would be: "Brexit is delivered and we have a new leader, Corbyn's a disaster, now let us get on with running the country again."
@Mike great tip on Kamala Harris. Omnium funds went on Gabbard, and I feel that I've rather squandered them.
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.
With a majority she would have been a democratically elected dictator, effectual in whatever way she wished to go but inpervious to feedback.
https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2019/01/our-estimate-of-how-many-conservative-mps-oppose-the-brexit-deal-not-100-but-64.html
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
(Not that we can talk.)
The only way the Tories get overtaken as Labour overtook the Liberals as the main party of the left is if they revoke Brexit and most of their voters move to UKIP or a new Farage led party which then becomes the main party of the right
Either the Democrats pick a candidate who can challenge Trump in the rustbelt or they may as well hand him re election on a plate
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?
Perhaps May could try a reverse Barnier. She could say in a comfort letter that she has every intention of aligning environmental and employment protections and then claim to Labour and the EU that it is a concession.
He's the world's shittest troll, dishes it out but cannot take it.
If the Government gets some more Labour MPs behind the Deal it can then focus on getting Tory Remain MPs fearful of No Deal and Tory No Deal MPs fearful of EUref2 and Remain
MP's on all sides face vile abuse, it 's disgusting, but I don't think one faction has it worse than another.
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
However this is about what MPs want to believe. If amendments like these give the Swires and Manns of this world psychological and political space to vote for May's deal then they are signifigant. Of course even the hint of moving from non regression to dynamic alignment on social/environmental legislation may well stiffen opposition at the Tory Brexiter end but that's now the game that's afoot.
Deal +. What's going to be bolted on to May's ( or sucessor's ) deal to bring in Labour votes/abstentions.
"being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged". It doesn't say who envisaged this.
improved (reduced) waiting times can't hurt.
a) The government simply accepting what it will have to agree to anyway.
b) Later repeal, while theoretically possible, will likely be too expensive ever to carry out.
https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1083458449780994049
The waiting time targets are still being missed.
The big question is, are they supporting the Benn amendment, which is in essence a wrecking amendment that renders the Meaningful Vote moot?
1. It is a bottomless money pit, which grows progressively wider and blacker as the population ages and treatments become ever more numerous and expensive
2. Young people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're crippled by high rents
3. Middle-aged people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're crippled by gargantuan mortgages
4. Old people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're living on fixed incomes, and they resent being made to part with any of their immense stock of property wealth whether they're dead or alive (exhibit a: how much IHT is resented; exhibit b: the hysteria over the "dementia tax")
Voters want a Rolls Royce service from the NHS, but the vast bulk of them are unwilling or unable to part with anything more than the cost of a Reliant Robin. As ever, people expect all kinds of goodies, but they think it's somebody else's responsibility to shoulder the cost.
For retired senior politicians, it must be a right pain the arse to have a couple of policemen follow you absolutely everywhere, and certainly for former PMs knowing that it will always be the case. DC could well have 40 years left in him.