I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
But surely her conviction is not for a driving offence. It is perverting the course of justice. I don't see why a new special offence should be created for people who try to pass driving offences onto another driver. I do agree a jail sentence is pointless in this, and the Huhne/Pryce case. Community Service and a night time curfew would be a more appropriate payback.
+1 on the special offence, and I tend to disagree on the sentence in this case.
Keep some shoplifters out and create the space for criminals such as Onasanya who have committed the serious crimes. Perverting the course of justice is not a game of leapfrog when you seek to incriminate an innocent party.
F.O.'s offence is aggravated by the nature of her profession as one requiring utmost good faith, and that she has an intimate knowledge of the law and knew exactly what she was doing.
F.O. is fortunate that this does not come under the review procedures (aiui).
Of course, she'll probably end up in the Lords on the crooks' bench!
As predicted, the LDs gave the Tories a run for their money in yesterday's Surrey CC by-election, the Tories winning by 48% to 40%, much closer than before.
,,but still lost
I don't think anyone expected otherwise, it's a rich part of Surrey and was very safe.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Given most Tory voters are Leave voters if the LDs are going to get a protest vote from anywhere it will be Labour Remainers pushing Corbyn for EUref2 with a Remain option
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
2 year driving and house arrest via tag. Onasunya needs punishment, but doesn't need the prisons clogging up.
I think we’ve all agreed on here before that the only people who should really be in prison are those who are violent or from whom the public need protection.
Perjury is an offence that’s close to the line, she’s clearly not violent nor a danger to anyone, but the justice system must have respect, and to come down hard on those who fail to show it. See ‘Tommy Robinson’ for a similar but more blatant example.
IMO the correct punishment for this offence is probably something like two years’ curfew or several hundred hours’ community service, but Ms Onasanya would have argued that she couldn’t accept this sort of punishment as it would stop her doing her job as an MP.
The real punishment for her in this case is that she’s likely to be struck off as a lawyer and lose her job as an MP. She’s going to be reduced to low-level admin jobs rather than anything important.
It would have been grossly unfair to put the perpetrator in jail for causing someone else permanently disfiguring injuries and trauma - because he got good GCSE results.
Make sure you pass your exams - and judges will let you off.
I don't know anything about this case specifically but British newspaper reporting of court judgements is consistently astonishingly terrible, so it's worth chasing up the original judgement and reading that before you try the GCSE defence.
Apparently according to the Stsndard Sir Christopher pushed past this chap and called him a "bastard" he then lost his temper and pushed Sir Christopher over however stayed until the police arrived and has tried to apologise to the former Ambassador since but even so he still got off leniently with a £500 fine and community service order
As predicted, the LDs gave the Tories a run for their money in yesterday's Surrey CC by-election, the Tories winning by 48% to 40%, much closer than before.
,,but still lost
I don't think anyone expected otherwise, it's a rich part of Surrey and was very safe.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Apply the same swing in May and the Tories will earn your reward.
The May locals are going to be fascinating. Brexit has rather drowned them out but I can easily imagine the Conservatives dropping significant numbers of seats. There’s three or four on our district which I think might fall, generally the small towns rather than the more rural wards.
There's talk of a summit about a week before the deadline, isn't there?
It seems quite likely Theresa May would return from that with the offer of a short extension provided the deal passes the Commons by the deadline, but not otherwise.
There might be more flexibility than that, it's not like the British actually *need* Gibraltar.
Funnily enough we believe in democracy
The Gibraltarians voted to remain close to the U.K. we won’t give them to Spain unless they request it. They’re not some fucking chess piece to hand over in a negotiation
They voted 96% to remain in the EU.
You don’t get to redefine the electorate into chunks that supported you.
The U.K. including Gibraltar voted to leave the EU
Gibraltar votes to remain in the U.K.
If you wanted to give them a forced choice between joining Spain / staying in the EU vs staying in the U.K. that would be legitimate but it’s up to them
As predicted, the LDs gave the Tories a run for their money in yesterday's Surrey CC by-election, the Tories winning by 48% to 40%, much closer than before.
,,but still lost
I don't think anyone expected otherwise, it's a rich part of Surrey and was very safe.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Apply the same swing in May and the Tories will earn your reward.
The May locals are going to be fascinating. Brexit has rather drowned them out but I can easily imagine the Conservatives dropping significant numbers of seats. There’s three or four on our district which I think might fall, generally the small towns rather than the more rural wards.
Given the Tories had a 7% lead last time they were fought in 2015 as it coincided with Cameron's general election win that is no surprise
Off topic, is Beto O'Rourke really trying to sabotage his own presidential ambitions? "I'm tired" is hardly the most compelling of political messages.
A simpler explanation is that he's not running.
In which case just effing say it!
People who don't tend to run often seem to just leave the possibility out there. 1) Builds your stature to be talked about as a potential president 2) Keeps your options open in case the front-runners fall over 3) You can make money betting against yourself
Off topic, is Beto O'Rourke really trying to sabotage his own presidential ambitions? "I'm tired" is hardly the most compelling of political messages.
A simpler explanation is that he's not running.
In which case just effing say it!
People who don't tend to run often seem to just leave the possibility out there. 1) Builds your stature to be talked about as a potential president 2) Keeps your options open in case the front-runners fall over 3) You can make money betting against yourself
You don't build your stature by saying "I'm tired".
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
If there is no deterrent, everyone would do it, as it is people get away with it all the time..
Would a ban from driving not be a stronger deterrent?
Ha, I like your optimism.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists are consistently given ridiculously lenient sentences. Judges appear to view driving as a fundamental human right which must never be taken away and which absolves the motorist of all responsibility for their actions. There’s not much that gets me genuinely angry, but this does.
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
If there is no deterrent, everyone would do it, as it is people get away with it all the time..
Would a ban from driving not be a stronger deterrent?
Ha, I like your optimism.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists are consistently given ridiculously lenient sentences. Judges appear to view driving as a fundamental human right which must never be taken away and which absolves the motorist of all responsibility for their actions. There’s not much that gets me genuinely angry, but this does.
Careful, I don't think they could nail him for using his phone when he hit Mrs Boardman - I think the evidence suggested he had been using his mobile phone prior to the collision (they should punish him severely for that anyway). And I can see why they might have been a bit lenient in that case as she'd fallen off her bike.
My favourite case of leniency in this regard was Tony Pulis:
In particular, Pulis claimed the presence of a chauffeur in his car would jeopardise his transfer negotiations, as their interest would be in danger of being leaked to the benefit of rival clubs.
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
If there is no deterrent, everyone would do it, as it is people get away with it all the time..
Would a ban from driving not be a stronger deterrent?
Ha, I like your optimism.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists are consistently given ridiculously lenient sentences. Judges appear to view driving as a fundamental human right which must never be taken away and which absolves the motorist of all responsibility for their actions. There’s not much that gets me genuinely angry, but this does.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
What a load of cock. I'm just starting a 6 month ban for 102mph. I was only in 3rd gear.
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
But surely her conviction is not for a driving offence. It is perverting the course of justice. I don't see why a new special offence should be created for people who try to pass driving offences onto another driver. I do agree a jail sentence is pointless in this, and the Huhne/Pryce case. Community Service and a night time curfew would be a more appropriate payback.
+1 on the special offence, and I tend to disagree on the sentence in this case.
Keep some shoplifters out and create the space for criminals such as Onasanya who have committed the serious crimes. Perverting the course of justice is not a game of leapfrog when you seek to incriminate an innocent party.
F.O.'s offence is aggravated by the nature of her profession as one requiring utmost good faith, and that she has an intimate knowledge of the law and knew exactly what she was doing.
F.O. is fortunate that this does not come under the review procedures (aiui).
Of course, she'll probably end up in the Lords on the crooks' bench!
Another aspect I haven't seen referenced is that the only reason this offence was picked up in the first plce was that there were a significant number of other instances of speeding offences being put down to people at this address/in this vehicle (it wasn't made clear) who were then said to be people no longer in the country.
Someone was taking the piss, on a regular basis. Plod had had enough.
If the leave date moves in the June / July we need to run in EU elections, which will in itself be completely untenable; considering the EU parliament has already passed legislation reducing the numbers of MEPs. Also, from a public perception point, people will (arguably rightfully) freak out at the expenditure of a vote for an institution we hope to leave in only months. And if we haven't left and haven't elected MEPs, then we alone bring the legitimacy of the entire EU parliament into question.
So latest we can leave is May 26, when elections are over, or, at a push, whenever the parliament first sits.
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
If there is no deterrent, everyone would do it, as it is people get away with it all the time..
Would a ban from driving not be a stronger deterrent?
Ha, I like your optimism.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists are consistently given ridiculously lenient sentences. Judges appear to view driving as a fundamental human right which must never be taken away and which absolves the motorist of all responsibility for their actions. There’s not much that gets me genuinely angry, but this does.
Equally, many cyclists and pedestrians do not take responsibility for their own behaviour. Headphone wearing while cycling. Traffic lights optional. Cycling into obvious blind spots. Crossing the road with head down looking at smartphone. It’s obvious that not all drivers take care but (a) some accidents are accidents; and (b) the MAMIL class are a hazard to everybody.
It’s rarely as a black and white as some suggest.
Edit: to be clear, the MAMIL class in urban areas and London in particular. Club rides at the weekend excluded.
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
2 year driving and house arrest via tag. Onasunya needs punishment, but doesn't need the prisons clogging up.
I think we’ve all agreed on here before that the only people who should really be in prison are those who are violent or from whom the public need protection.
Perjury is an offence that’s close to the line, she’s clearly not violent nor a danger to anyone, but the justice system must have respect, and to come down hard on those who fail to show it. See ‘Tommy Robinson’ for a similar but more blatant example.
IMO the correct punishment for this offence is probably something like two years’ curfew or several hundred hours’ community service, but Ms Onasanya would have argued that she couldn’t accept this sort of punishment as it would stop her doing her job as an MP.
The real punishment for her in this case is that she’s likely to be struck off as a lawyer and lose her job as an MP. She’s going to be reduced to low-level admin jobs rather than anything important.
If the leave date moves in the June / July we need to run in EU elections, which will in itself be completely untenable; considering the EU parliament has already passed legislation reducing the numbers of MEPs. Also, from a public perception point, people will (arguably rightfully) freak out at the expenditure of a vote for an institution we hope to leave in only months. And if we haven't left and haven't elected MEPs, then we alone bring the legitimacy of the entire EU parliament into question.
So latest we can leave is May 26, when elections are over, or, at a push, whenever the parliament first sits.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
What a load of cock. I'm just starting a 6 month ban for 102mph. I was only in 3rd gear.
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
But surely her conviction is not for a driving offence. It is perverting the course of justice. I don't see why a new special offence should be created for people who try to pass driving offences onto another driver. I do agree a jail sentence is pointless in this, and the Huhne/Pryce case. Community Service and a night time curfew would be a more appropriate payback.
+1 on the special offence, and I tend to disagree on the sentence in this case.
Keep some shoplifters out and create the space for criminals such as Onasanya who have committed the serious crimes. Perverting the course of justice is not a game of leapfrog when you seek to incriminate an innocent party.
F.O.'s offence is aggravated by the nature of her profession as one requiring utmost good faith, and that she has an intimate knowledge of the law and knew exactly what she was doing.
F.O. is fortunate that this does not come under the review procedures (aiui).
Of course, she'll probably end up in the Lords on the crooks' bench!
Another aspect I haven't seen referenced is that the only reason this offence was picked up in the first plce was that there were a significant number of other instances of speeding offences being put down to people at this address/in this vehicle (it wasn't made clear) who were then said to be people no longer in the country.
Someone was taking the piss, on a regular basis. Plod had had enough.
Festus got convicted of two other counts - but it's worth noting that he got 10 months for each count (served concurrently), so his punishment was quite a bit stronger than his sister's.
The real punishment for her in this case is that she’s likely to be struck off as a lawyer and lose her job as an MP. She’s going to be reduced to low-level admin jobs rather than anything important.
Pound to a penny says she lands a cushy well-paid job with a quango or a charity that thinks "she was punished by the system".....
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
If there is no deterrent, everyone would do it, as it is people get away with it all the time..
Would a ban from driving not be a stronger deterrent?
Ha, I like your optimism.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists are consistently given ridiculously lenient sentences. Judges appear to view driving as a fundamental human right which must never be taken away and which absolves the motorist of all responsibility for their actions. There’s not much that gets me genuinely angry, but this does.
The co-leader of the English Green Party, Mr Jonathan Bartley, killed someone with his car. He did not face charges.
It can be hard to assess whether the driver is really at fault. (Bartley was found not at fault by the police).
Many of us have lapses of concentration when driving. We're just lucky that the lapse did not take a life.
But that argument is negated by the fact that in Rosney's case he HAD been found guilty. He was the person at fault through criminal negligence. The argument is not over whether he is guilty or not but that, having been found guilty, the sentencing does not reflect the severity of the crime.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
What a load of cock. I'm just starting a 6 month ban for 102mph. I was only in 3rd gear.
What sort of push-bike have you got?
At the moment a Canyon Aeroad (among others). I did my crime against humanity in a 996 911 Carrera with a remap, illegal exhaust with a cat delete and the diff out of a Turbo.
If the leave date moves in the June / July we need to run in EU elections, which will in itself be completely untenable; considering the EU parliament has already passed legislation reducing the numbers of MEPs. Also, from a public perception point, people will (arguably rightfully) freak out at the expenditure of a vote for an institution we hope to leave in only months. And if we haven't left and haven't elected MEPs, then we alone bring the legitimacy of the entire EU parliament into question.
So latest we can leave is May 26, when elections are over, or, at a push, whenever the parliament first sits.
If Britain hasn't brexited they just carry on using the existing seat allocation, it's already explicitly covered in the rule setting the new allocation.
The cost of running the elections doesn't sound like a sensible thing to worry about when the alternative is to set your entire trading system on fire, but see Nick Palmer's post upthread for the option of saying, "we're not doing the election, sue us".
As predicted, the LDs gave the Tories a run for their money in yesterday's Surrey CC by-election, the Tories winning by 48% to 40%, much closer than before.
,,but still lost
I don't think anyone expected otherwise, it's a rich part of Surrey and was very safe.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Given most Tory voters are Leave voters if the LDs are going to get a protest vote from anywhere it will be Labour Remainers pushing Corbyn for EUref2 with a Remain option
Given the voting system there are sufficient seats vulnerable if the Tories just lose their remain voters. If the harder leavers stay at home as well, things get very interesting.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
What a load of cock. I'm just starting a 6 month ban for 102mph. I was only in 3rd gear.
What sort of push-bike have you got?
At the moment a Canyon Aeroad (among others). I did my crime against humanity in a 996 911 Carrera with a remap, illegal exhaust with a cat delete and the diff out of a Turbo.
Well, look out for those driver blind spots for the next six months.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Tempted to quote you in my election literature (Waveney Godalming Binscombe - Tories 50 out of 53 seats on the council in this Surrey heartland, but this one's marginal...ish). I'm making a certain amount of headway arguing that one-party monopoly is ALWAYS bad.
The irritating thing is that regardless of such local factors we may get beaten because May has called Juncker a bounder or some other popular unrelated development. The idea that all politics is local is not my experience - voters almost never mention local issues.
So it seems like the UK will want an extension, and not have any obvious alternative move. The key question is whether the EU end will agree. OK, the EU has 28 ends, but simplifying...
1) They could say yes. At the end of the first extension nothing will have changed, so it probably leads to another extension. This could literally go on for years. Eventually the UK either gives up on Brexit, changes its government or agrees to the the deal, any of which is fine. In the meantime it's still a member, but you can make decisions pretty much without it. The uncertainty isn't good for anyone, but it's not terrible, and business investment is gradually draining from the UK to surrounding countries, which is good for surrounding countries.
2) They could say no, you only get an extension if something changes. Hopefully that something will be a Deal vs Remain referendum, but it's not at all clear that TMay would do that, and if she did whether she'd have the votes. Alternatively maybe the opposition MPs blink and agree to the deal, but the British parliament seems quite disfunctional, so that's not something you can rely on. The PM could unilaterally revoke, but she probably won't, and if she did you risk the Brexiters setting bombs off in Brussels. No Deal is terrible for everyone, especially Ireland, so I don't think any of the member states will want to risk getting the blame.
3) They could say yes, but only if they get other concessions. In terms of pure national interest hardball this might seem attractive, but since this is most likely the first of a series of extensions, you're opening the door to constant negotiation drama: If Spain want to get X, they have to let Estonia try to get Y, and somebody might accidentally paint themselves into demanding something and blow the whole thing up. So I think people will prefer not to open that door.
You can't quite be sure of something that needs unanimity but I think they'd pick (1).
I think it depends on the level of bluff in the statements from the EU. At least one head of government has said No Deal might be preferable to extension (though they will try to help the UK and so on).
I assume that if the EU are going to insist on the agreement being passed as a precondition for an extension, at some point they will state that formally to remove the scope for No Deal by accident.
I agree that the Onasanya sentence does seem odd compared to the Huhne/Pryce sentences.
On the other hand, I feel sorry for all of them. And I would not have sent any of them to prison.
I have wondered if a specific offence should be created with a penalty of something like a three year ban from driving.
If there is no deterrent, everyone would do it, as it is people get away with it all the time..
Would a ban from driving not be a stronger deterrent?
Ha, I like your optimism.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists are consistently given ridiculously lenient sentences. Judges appear to view driving as a fundamental human right which must never be taken away and which absolves the motorist of all responsibility for their actions. There’s not much that gets me genuinely angry, but this does.
The co-leader of the English Green Party, Mr Jonathan Bartley, killed someone with his car. He did not face charges.
It can be hard to assess whether the driver is really at fault. (Bartley was found not at fault by the police).
Many of us have lapses of concentration when driving. We're just lucky that the lapse did not take a life.
But that argument is negated by the fact that in Rosney's case he HAD been found guilty. He was the person at fault through criminal negligence. The argument is not over whether he is guilty or not but that, having been found guilty, the sentencing does not reflect the severity of the crime.
I think my point (it is not really dignified enough to be an argument) is the same as tig86 -- it is rarely black and white with motoring offences.
As both a cyclist and a motorist, I am just pleased it has become much safer to cycle over the years.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Tempted to quote you in my election literature (Waveney Godalming Binscombe - Tories 50 out of 53 seats on the council in this Surrey heartland, but this one's marginal...ish). I'm making a certain amount of headway arguing that one-party monopoly is ALWAYS bad.
The irritating thing is that regardless of such local factors we may get beaten because May has called Juncker a bounder or some other popular unrelated development. The idea that all politics is local is not my experience - voters almost never mention local issues.
But then Labour isn't actually very good (or indeed very interested) in campaigning on local issues, unless they fit into one of its predetermined narratives such as hospital closures or council cuts.
As predicted, the LDs gave the Tories a run for their money in yesterday's Surrey CC by-election, the Tories winning by 48% to 40%, much closer than before.
,,but still lost
I don't think anyone expected otherwise, it's a rich part of Surrey and was very safe.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Given most Tory voters are Leave voters if the LDs are going to get a protest vote from anywhere it will be Labour Remainers pushing Corbyn for EUref2 with a Remain option
Most Tory voters are leave voters. The problem for the Tories is when they stop supporting leave will they also stop supporting the Tories.
The real punishment for her in this case is that she’s likely to be struck off as a lawyer and lose her job as an MP. She’s going to be reduced to low-level admin jobs rather than anything important.
Pound to a penny says she lands a cushy well-paid job with a quango or a charity that thinks "she was punished by the system".....
It's not the offence per se that annoys me (it's very easy to tell a lie, and then keep telling lies out of panic). It's her insistence that she did nothing wrong.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Tempted to quote you in my election literature (Waveney Godalming Binscombe - Tories 50 out of 53 seats on the council in this Surrey heartland, but this one's marginal...ish). I'm making a certain amount of headway arguing that one-party monopoly is ALWAYS bad.
The irritating thing is that regardless of such local factors we may get beaten because May has called Juncker a bounder or some other popular unrelated development. The idea that all politics is local is not my experience - voters almost never mention local issues.
They do in local elections, certainly planning and development issues, crime and anti social behaviour, council tax, potholes etc
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
What a load of cock. I'm just starting a 6 month ban for 102mph. I was only in 3rd gear.
What sort of push-bike have you got?
At the moment a Canyon Aeroad (among others). I did my crime against humanity in a 996 911 Carrera with a remap, illegal exhaust with a cat delete and the diff out of a Turbo.
Speeding points/bans are an occupational hazard for twitchers. At one point, the highest speed ever convicted for in the UK was by a twitcher, from memory 147 mph on the A9. Local Plod had to send a helicopter up to stop him - none of their vehicles had sufficient speed. (Or more like, none of the local woodentops felt comfortable doing that speed.)
So where is all this snow we were promised? Just when I could really do with a day off, there's not even any ice on the car!
Plenty of snow covering the fields in Essex on my tube journey in this morning though not too thick
Around 33 degrees C by day and around 22 degrees by night here in southern India
Where in India are you?
Kerala. But only for another couple of weeks.
I'm planning on going there at the end of this year.
Yes, I think December to February probably the best time of year to go. Earlier and you might get a few showers tail-ending the monsoon, and any later and you get temperatures approaching 40 in the run-up to the monsoon. The monsoon itself lasts from June to October.
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
As predicted, the LDs gave the Tories a run for their money in yesterday's Surrey CC by-election, the Tories winning by 48% to 40%, much closer than before.
,,but still lost
I don't think anyone expected otherwise, it's a rich part of Surrey and was very safe.
but still LD's NOT winning here !! (Frankly the Tories do need a good kick up the arse.)
Given most Tory voters are Leave voters if the LDs are going to get a protest vote from anywhere it will be Labour Remainers pushing Corbyn for EUref2 with a Remain option
Given the voting system there are sufficient seats vulnerable if the Tories just lose their remain voters. If the harder leavers stay at home as well, things get very interesting.
Only in the case of No Deal and mainly in the wealthy parts of West London and a few patches of the Home Counties. Far more seats are at risk to UKIP or a new Farage party if the Tories revoke Brexit as the vast majority of Tory seats voted Leave.
Labour is also at risk from the LDs if Corbyn refuses to back EUref2 with a Remain option as most Labour voters voted Remain while if Brexit is revoked as most Labour seats voted Leave that also makes them vulnerable to UKIP or a new Farage party
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
LOL @ Farage not wanting Brexit to happen. As we always suspected.
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
But then Labour isn't actually very good (or indeed very interested) in campaigning on local issues, unless they fit into one of its predetermined narratives such as hospital closures or council cuts.
Not my experience so far - a typical conversation is:
Me: "I'm working to provide an effective alternative on the housing and roads issues here, like the controversy over (local issue)." Constituent: "Yes, but what do you think about Brexit?"
This is a very affluent area and it's possible that the effect of that is that most people just don't worry much about local issues.
But then Labour isn't actually very good (or indeed very interested) in campaigning on local issues, unless they fit into one of its predetermined narratives such as hospital closures or council cuts.
Not my experience so far - a typical conversation is:
Me: "I'm working to provide an effective alternative on the housing and roads issues here, like the controversy over (local issue)." Constituent: "Yes, but what do you think about Brexit?"
This is a very affluent area and it's possible that the effect of that is that most people just don't worry much about local issues.
*coughs politely and notes that said @NickPalmer had previously been sceptical that people were that bothered about Brexit*
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
Are they running on a Sinn Fein-style abstentionist platform?
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
Are they running on a Sinn Fein-style abstentionist platform?
I suspect it's more an SNP in Westminster approach - turn up and be a pain in everyone's neck.
When I was young I abstained from sweets and chocolate a couple of times for Lent - that was tough and I did lapse a couple of times by nibbling on cooking chocolate. Wish me luck!
So where is all this snow we were promised? Just when I could really do with a day off, there's not even any ice on the car!
Plenty of snow covering the fields in Essex on my tube journey in this morning though not too thick
Around 33 degrees C by day and around 22 degrees by night here in southern India
Where in India are you?
Kerala. But only for another couple of weeks.
I'm planning on going there at the end of this year.
Yes, I think December to February probably the best time of year to go. Earlier and you might get a few showers tail-ending the monsoon, and any later and you get temperatures approaching 40 in the run-up to the monsoon. The monsoon itself lasts from June to October.
We visited Kerala in June - hardly any tourists. But serious rain!
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
Are they running on a Sinn Fein-style abstentionist platform?
SF abstain from Westminster but not from the hated Stormont?
When I was young I abstained from sweets and chocolate a couple of times for Lent - that was tough and I did lapse a couple of times by nibbling on cooking chocolate. Wish me luck!
To keep the balance in the Force I will bake a cake in your honour this weekend. I think I fancy chocolate orange.
So it seems like the UK will want an extension, and not have any obvious alternative move. The key question is whether the EU end will agree. OK, the EU has 28 ends, but simplifying...
1) They could say yes. At the end of the first extension nothing will have changed, so it probably leads to another extension. This could literally go on for years. Eventually the UK either gives up on Brexit, changes its government or agrees to the the deal, any of which is fine. In the meantime it's still a member, but you can make decisions pretty much without it. The uncertainty isn't good for anyone, but it's not terrible, and business investment is gradually draining from the UK to surrounding countries, which is good for surrounding countries.
2) They could say no, you only get an extension if something changes. Hopefully that something will be a Deal vs Remain referendum, but it's not at all clear that TMay would do that, and if she did whether she'd have the votes. Alternatively maybe the opposition MPs blink and agree to the deal, but the British parliament seems quite disfunctional, so that's not something you can rely on. The PM could unilaterally revoke, but she probably won't, and if she did you risk the Brexiters setting bombs off in Brussels. No Deal is terrible for everyone, especially Ireland, so I don't think any of the member states will want to risk getting the blame.
3) They could say yes, but only if they get other concessions. In terms of pure national interest hardball this might seem attractive, but since this is most likely the first of a series of extensions, you're opening the door to constant negotiation drama: If Spain want to get X, they have to let Estonia try to get Y, and somebody might accidentally paint themselves into demanding something and blow the whole thing up. So I think people will prefer not to open that door.
You can't quite be sure of something that needs unanimity but I think they'd pick (1).
If they pick 1) would it run up against Euro elections?
As usual EiT's analysis looks sound. I think they'll pick 1) at first, and that May will keep kicking the can down the road until (a) enough Labour MPs can be induced by pork barrel to switch or (b) the EU gets fed up.
The position about Euro elections is not as difficult as it looks. It is technically possible for Britain to simply to fail to hold elections. That could and probably would result in a complaint to the ECJ, but they are aware of the dynamics and will probably not rush to judgment. In the meantime, the UK seats would simply sit empty.
In that case we might get Farage lobbying for the UK to continue holding EU elections and therefore keep sending him to Bruxelles.
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
Are they running on a Sinn Fein-style abstentionist platform?
Cameron's Grand Strategy to deal with the UKIP fringe eating away at his party and its vote has been an absolute triumph hasn't it.
When I was young I abstained from sweets and chocolate a couple of times for Lent - that was tough and I did lapse a couple of times by nibbling on cooking chocolate. Wish me luck!
To keep the balance in the Force I will bake a cake in your honour this weekend. I think I fancy chocolate orange.
Well done and good luck.
My tactic for Dry January was not to tell anyone I was doing it until it was over. Obviously I'm taking a different approach to the choccie. I expect this to be much tougher.
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
Are they running on a Sinn Fein-style abstentionist platform?
Cameron's Grand Strategy to deal with the UKIP fringe eating away at his party and its vote has been an absolute triumph hasn't it.
I note they aren't planning to stand in council elections.
That anti-elite, populist Brexit party consists of:
"Ms Blaiklock said an “amazing number of people who have never been in the political process” including “QCs, directors, business people, all sorts of highly professional people” have come forward."
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
Are they running on a Sinn Fein-style abstentionist platform?
Cameron's Grand Strategy to deal with the UKIP fringe eating away at his party and its vote has been an absolute triumph hasn't it.
I note they aren't planning to stand in council elections.
They will stand in GE, if Brexit isn't good enough for them i.e. the full English unicorn
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
Are they running on a Sinn Fein-style abstentionist platform?
SF abstain from Westminster but not from the hated Stormont?
Stormont is in Northern Ireland, so it's not a foreign Parliament claiming jurisdiction over part of their country in what SF see as a colonial manner.
That anti-elite, populist Brexit party consists of:
"Ms Blaiklock said an “amazing number of people who have never been in the political process” including “QCs, directors, business people, all sorts of highly professional people” have come forward."
{Telegraph)
It's MEP list votes - you could stand a shaved chimpanzee and the voters wouldn't notice.
For a while a substantial chunk of the Gibraltarian Leave vote posted on pb.
Geoff is still on Twitter, but I think was banned from here.
Could Britain not give Gibraltar to Spain as an in specie payment of Britain's obligations to the EU? It would solve so many problems simultaneously.
Valuation might be tricky. How would you even start?
The "Donkey's Flipflop" pub has a net negative value for a start. If you're a fan of chips, getting punched and having an itchy bush the next morning it's the place to be.
That anti-elite, populist Brexit party consists of:
"Ms Blaiklock said an “amazing number of people who have never been in the political process” including “QCs, directors, business people, all sorts of highly professional people” have come forward."
{Telegraph)
It's MEP list votes - you could stand a shaved chimpanzee and the voters wouldn't notice.
There's talk of a summit about a week before the deadline, isn't there?
It seems quite likely Theresa May would return from that with the offer of a short extension provided the deal passes the Commons by the deadline, but not otherwise.
There might be more flexibility than that, it's not like the British actually *need* Gibraltar.
Funnily enough we believe in democracy
The Gibraltarians voted to remain close to the U.K. we won’t give them to Spain unless they request it. They’re not some fucking chess piece to hand over in a negotiation
They voted 96% to remain in the EU.
You don’t get to redefine the electorate into chunks that supported you.
The U.K. including Gibraltar voted to leave the EU
Gibraltar votes to remain in the U.K.
If you wanted to give them a forced choice between joining Spain / staying in the EU vs staying in the U.K. that would be legitimate but it’s up to them
Gibraliar isn't in the UK. The electorate for the EU referendum included them purely as a courtesy, bur also disenfranchised many UK citizens who were directly affected, as well as EU citizens living in the UK.
For a while a substantial chunk of the Gibraltarian Leave vote posted on pb.
Geoff is still on Twitter, but I think was banned from here.
Could Britain not give Gibraltar to Spain as an in specie payment of Britain's obligations to the EU? It would solve so many problems simultaneously.
And then encourage them to hold an independence referendum?
Given how the Spanish react to independence referendums that would be irresponsible.
Wouldn't it be better to describe the reaction of the Spanish as irresponsible?
Allowing people to express a view on the governance they live under I consider to be responsible.
Yes, though something stronger would be better to describe the actions of the Madrid government.
I was suggesting it would be irresponsible for the British government to put Gibraltar in that position and then encourage them to suffer the consequences of that. It wouldn't be British ministers facing the risk of violence or long prison terms.
The real punishment for her in this case is that she’s likely to be struck off as a lawyer and lose her job as an MP. She’s going to be reduced to low-level admin jobs rather than anything important.
Pound to a penny says she lands a cushy well-paid job with a quango or a charity that thinks "she was punished by the system".....
And her CV will call her a “qualified solicitor (non practicing)”
For a while a substantial chunk of the Gibraltarian Leave vote posted on pb.
Geoff is still on Twitter, but I think was banned from here.
Could Britain not give Gibraltar to Spain as an in specie payment of Britain's obligations to the EU? It would solve so many problems simultaneously.
Gibraltar is a total dump but it employs thousands of Spaniards in an area of already very high unemployment. If it was incorporated I think most of that wealth would simply disappear.
The real punishment for her in this case is that she’s likely to be struck off as a lawyer and lose her job as an MP. She’s going to be reduced to low-level admin jobs rather than anything important.
Pound to a penny says she lands a cushy well-paid job with a quango or a charity that thinks "she was punished by the system".....
And her CV will call her a “qualified solicitor (non practicing)”
For a while a substantial chunk of the Gibraltarian Leave vote posted on pb.
Geoff is still on Twitter, but I think was banned from here.
Could Britain not give Gibraltar to Spain as an in specie payment of Britain's obligations to the EU? It would solve so many problems simultaneously.
Gibraltar is a total dump but it employs thousands of Spaniards in an area of already very high unemployment. If it was incorporated I think most of that wealth would simply disappear.
For a while a substantial chunk of the Gibraltarian Leave vote posted on pb.
Geoff is still on Twitter, but I think was banned from here.
Could Britain not give Gibraltar to Spain as an in specie payment of Britain's obligations to the EU? It would solve so many problems simultaneously.
Gibraltar is a total dump but it employs thousands of Spaniards in an area of already very high unemployment. If it was incorporated I think most of that wealth would simply disappear.
I quite like it, actually.
Somewhere else for Leavers to throw under the bus to ease the path of Brexit? Scotland, NI and now Gib?
For a while a substantial chunk of the Gibraltarian Leave vote posted on pb.
Geoff is still on Twitter, but I think was banned from here.
Could Britain not give Gibraltar to Spain as an in specie payment of Britain's obligations to the EU? It would solve so many problems simultaneously.
Gibraltar is a total dump but it employs thousands of Spaniards in an area of already very high unemployment. If it was incorporated I think most of that wealth would simply disappear.
I quite like it, actually.
Each to his own - we visited it after a trip to Jerez and Cadiz. After that Gib High Street was something of a let down - tack is one thing but very expensive tack no thanks.
Comments
Keep some shoplifters out and create the space for criminals such as Onasanya who have committed the serious crimes. Perverting the course of justice is not a game of leapfrog when you seek to incriminate an innocent party.
F.O.'s offence is aggravated by the nature of her profession as one requiring utmost good faith, and that she has an intimate knowledge of the law and knew exactly what she was doing.
F.O. is fortunate that this does not come under the review procedures (aiui).
Of course, she'll probably end up in the Lords on the crooks' bench!
Perjury is an offence that’s close to the line, she’s clearly not violent nor a danger to anyone, but the justice system must have respect, and to come down hard on those who fail to show it. See ‘Tommy Robinson’ for a similar but more blatant example.
IMO the correct punishment for this offence is probably something like two years’ curfew or several hundred hours’ community service, but Ms Onasanya would have argued that she couldn’t accept this sort of punishment as it would stop her doing her job as an MP.
The real punishment for her in this case is that she’s likely to be struck off as a lawyer and lose her job as an MP. She’s going to be reduced to low-level admin jobs rather than anything important.
The U.K. including Gibraltar voted to leave the EU
Gibraltar votes to remain in the U.K.
If you wanted to give them a forced choice between joining Spain / staying in the EU vs staying in the U.K. that would be legitimate but it’s up to them
1) Builds your stature to be talked about as a potential president
2) Keeps your options open in case the front-runners fall over
3) You can make money betting against yourself
But I do take point 3.
The driver who killed Chris Boardman’s mother, as a result of using a phone while driving, was sentenced the other day to 30 weeks in jail, 18 months driving ban.
Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists are consistently given ridiculously lenient sentences. Judges appear to view driving as a fundamental human right which must never be taken away and which absolves the motorist of all responsibility for their actions. There’s not much that gets me genuinely angry, but this does.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/chris-boardman-mother-carol-cyclist-death-jailed-driver-liam-rosney-crash-a8756006.html?amp
My favourite case of leniency in this regard was Tony Pulis:
https://tinyurl.com/ybxcept6
In particular, Pulis claimed the presence of a chauffeur in his car would jeopardise his transfer negotiations, as their interest would be in danger of being leaked to the benefit of rival clubs.
It can be hard to assess whether the driver is really at fault. (Bartley was found not at fault by the police).
Many of us have lapses of concentration when driving. We're just lucky that the lapse did not take a life.
Someone was taking the piss, on a regular basis. Plod had had enough.
If the leave date moves in the June / July we need to run in EU elections, which will in itself be completely untenable; considering the EU parliament has already passed legislation reducing the numbers of MEPs. Also, from a public perception point, people will (arguably rightfully) freak out at the expenditure of a vote for an institution we hope to leave in only months. And if we haven't left and haven't elected MEPs, then we alone bring the legitimacy of the entire EU parliament into question.
So latest we can leave is May 26, when elections are over, or, at a push, whenever the parliament first sits.
(I thank you!)
It’s rarely as a black and white as some suggest.
Edit: to be clear, the MAMIL class in urban areas and London in particular. Club rides at the weekend excluded.
In fact, there is huge inertia in the political system (and indeed in most organisations).
We can confidently predict that the Labour Party and the Tory Party will long outlive Andrew Adonis, or indeed anyone currently posting on pb.com.
Adonis' tweets are a long and tedious hissy fit against a political world who have not accepted him as a Messiah.
The cost of running the elections doesn't sound like a sensible thing to worry about when the alternative is to set your entire trading system on fire, but see Nick Palmer's post upthread for the option of saying, "we're not doing the election, sue us".
The irritating thing is that regardless of such local factors we may get beaten because May has called Juncker a bounder or some other popular unrelated development. The idea that all politics is local is not my experience - voters almost never mention local issues.
I assume that if the EU are going to insist on the agreement being passed as a precondition for an extension, at some point they will state that formally to remove the scope for No Deal by accident.
As both a cyclist and a motorist, I am just pleased it has become much safer to cycle over the years.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/01/new-brexit-party-has-1m-pledges-slate-200-candidates-including/
A new Brexit party backed by Nigel Farage has received pledges worth more than £1million and is lining up a slate of candidates to fight in elections.
Catherine Blaiklock registered the Brexit Party on Jan 11 with the Electoral Commission and is hoping it can stand candidates in the May European Parliament elections if Brexit is delayed past that date.
Labour is also at risk from the LDs if Corbyn refuses to back EUref2 with a Remain option as most Labour voters voted Remain while if Brexit is revoked as most Labour seats voted Leave that also makes them vulnerable to UKIP or a new Farage party
Me: "I'm working to provide an effective alternative on the housing and roads issues here, like the controversy over (local issue)."
Constituent: "Yes, but what do you think about Brexit?"
This is a very affluent area and it's possible that the effect of that is that most people just don't worry much about local issues.
"Constituent: "Yes, but what do you think about Brexit?""
I hope you were honest and told them they were a thick, racist Neanderthal (assuming they were a Leaver). That's the way to change minds.
Now for a tougher challenge - Dechox
https://www.bhf.org.uk/how-you-can-help/fundraise/dechox
When I was young I abstained from sweets and chocolate a couple of times for Lent - that was tough and I did lapse a couple of times by nibbling on cooking chocolate. Wish me luck!
Well done and good luck.
"Ms Blaiklock said an “amazing number of people who have never been in the political process” including “QCs, directors, business people, all sorts of highly professional people” have come forward."
{Telegraph)
Which means they will be standing in a GE.
"Jeremy Hardy: Comedian and Radio 4 panel star dies aged 57"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47056671
"I come from a large family.
Mammals..."
Allowing people to express a view on the governance they live under I consider to be responsible.
I'm glad you saw him live...… The opposite wouldn't be a riveting performance.
I was suggesting it would be irresponsible for the British government to put Gibraltar in that position and then encourage them to suffer the consequences of that. It wouldn't be British ministers facing the risk of violence or long prison terms.
https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/1091271885625745408
We've been banging on about the RoI/NI border 24/7, but what about the Gib/Spain border?
Surely just as problematic?