It'd be mildly interesting to see what defections take place if we did participate in the European elections. I could imagine a Labour MEP like Seb Dance jumping ship to TIG, for example.
But the EU elections run on a party list system. there's no room for a bunch of random independents to stand there, unless they have a registered party.
BTW does Sarah Wollaston lose her position as Chair of the Health Select Committee - given that she was only present on the committee by virtue of being a Tory MP?
No, I don't think so. Membership is decided by vote at (IIRC) at the start of each Parliament, and certainly not normally on a day-to-day basis. If there was a substantial defection on one committee which meant that there was an Opposition majority on the Committee then I expect the Whips would want to look if they could do something about it, but there's nothing automatic about it.
But there is a quota system as regards which parties get control of which select committees - so I suspect there will be some change here - as it affects that overall balance.
Problem: Need to have the elections Solution: Have the elections
This was the easiest thing about brexit so far.
Everything is lined up around us not having those elections as I suspect no one wants to see the result for what would almost be a referendum by proxy..
The Brexit Party would get lots of seats. This is what the Brexit Party exists for, I guess.
But maybe there's a case for making the first extension either very short or very long, so you don't end up with the British making up their minds whether they need the election or not right before it's supposed to happen.
That wasn't that runway. BB 1-3 and 7 interdicted the 3,500ft runway at Stanley not the new 8,500ft runway (10/26) at RAF Mount Pleasant. The Stanley runway was too short for Argentinean fast jet operations which is the reason that retaking the FI was (only just) possible in 1982.
With Argentinean access to the 8,500ft and 5,000ft runways at MPA the FI would be impossible to retake today. Bear in mind that, even when it reaches full operational capacity 5 years hence, the QNLZ air wing will have zero offensive electronic warfare or suppression of enemy air defence capability.
BTW does Sarah Wollaston lose her position as Chair of the Health Select Committee - given that she was only present on the committee by virtue of being a Tory MP?
No, I don't think so. Membership is decided by vote at (IIRC) at the start of each Parliament, and certainly not normally on a day-to-day basis. If there was a substantial defection on one committee which meant that there was an Opposition majority on the Committee then I expect the Whips would want to look if they could do something about it, but there's nothing automatic about it.
But the change with the SNP gaining a place at Labour's expense is already announced AIR
MPs have made their minds up. Drop the bloody backstop.
Just because he doesn't like that doesn't mean MPs haven't made a decision.
This is a minor linguitic irritation of mine. Europeans, for example, often accuse the British of not being able to make up our minds. When the reality us we are reasonably good at making up oyr minds. What we are bad at is agreeing with each other.
I don't know whether this represents imprecise language (a hazard when you have a bloc without a common first language) or lazy thinking or a reflection of a political culture which expects a higher degree of consensus than is the case in the UK.
That wasn't that runway. BB 1-3 and 7 interdicted the 3,500ft runway at Stanley not the new 8,500ft runway (10/26) at RAF Mount Pleasant. The Stanley runway was too short for Argentinean fast jet operations which is the reason that retaking the FI was (only just) possible in 1982.
With Argentinean access to the 8,500ft and 5,000ft runways at MPA the FI would be impossible to retake today. Bear in mind that, even when it reaches full operational capacity 5 years hence, the QNLZ air wing will have zero offensive electronic warfare or suppression of enemy air defence capability.
10/26 would be a very funny looking runway!
The difference today is that we have a few more of our own there in the first place, and it might be easier to ask the Septics to help out than it was in 1982.
Edit: Surely even you'll admit that BB was a f***ing genius plan, even if there was a big chance of it failing?
I have long been skeptical about the point of another party, but I think I was wrong.
At the very least, they’ve surely already triggered the beginning of the end of Corbyn’s leadership for which we must all be grateful.
As far as I’m concerned the TIGs are heroes. If they can see off Corbyn *and* Brexit, we should put up statues to them in Parliament Square.
If anything I think the presence of TIG means the Tories will wave through Theresa's deal with some face saving minor change. Look at how JRM reacted when he got shot down over the Malthouse amendment, he didn't throw his toys out of the pram, that's what the Tiggers have achieved IMO, they will force the ERG chumps back in line because we risk losing our majority of they stay on their current path.
Not really because the Drum Bashers will VoNC May's confederacy of dunces if the deal passes.
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
MPs have made their minds up. Drop the bloody backstop.
Just because he doesn't like that doesn't mean MPs haven't made a decision.
And how is this 'decision' to be attested, Telegraph opinion pieces and social media?
Or a vote in Parliament on the 29th January.
And what is that alternative arrangement to the backstop upon which MPs have made up their minds?
That needs negotiating with the EU, but Juncker has refused to negotiate on that.
'Slightly more than half of us don't want this thing that we negotiated. We don't know what we do want, but if you sling us a few suggestions we'll see if we want any of them. Come on Jean-Claude, get yer finger out!'
That wasn't that runway. BB 1-3 and 7 interdicted the 3,500ft runway at Stanley not the new 8,500ft runway (10/26) at RAF Mount Pleasant. The Stanley runway was too short for Argentinean fast jet operations which is the reason that retaking the FI was (only just) possible in 1982.
With Argentinean access to the 8,500ft and 5,000ft runways at MPA the FI would be impossible to retake today. Bear in mind that, even when it reaches full operational capacity 5 years hence, the QNLZ air wing will have zero offensive electronic warfare or suppression of enemy air defence capability.
10/26 would be a very funny looking runway!
The difference today is that we have a few more of our own there in the first place, and it might be easier to ask the Septics to help out than it was in 1982.
I have long been skeptical about the point of another party, but I think I was wrong.
At the very least, they’ve surely already triggered the beginning of the end of Corbyn’s leadership for which we must all be grateful.
As far as I’m concerned the TIGs are heroes. If they can see off Corbyn *and* Brexit, we should put up statues to them in Parliament Square.
If anything I think the presence of TIG means the Tories will wave through Theresa's deal with some face saving minor change. Look at how JRM reacted when he got shot down over the Malthouse amendment, he didn't throw his toys out of the pram, that's what the Tiggers have achieved IMO, they will force the ERG chumps back in line because we risk losing our majority of they stay on their current path.
Not really because the Drum Bashers will VoNC May's confederacy of dunces if the deal passes.
they may try but far from clear they would succeed now - quite clear TIG won't vote to bring May down and I suspect a few other LAB MPs would also find themselves unaccountably busy tidying their sock drawer
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
I have long been skeptical about the point of another party, but I think I was wrong.
At the very least, they’ve surely already triggered the beginning of the end of Corbyn’s leadership for which we must all be grateful.
As far as I’m concerned the TIGs are heroes. If they can see off Corbyn *and* Brexit, we should put up statues to them in Parliament Square.
If anything I think the presence of TIG means the Tories will wave through Theresa's deal with some face saving minor change. Look at how JRM reacted when he got shot down over the Malthouse amendment, he didn't throw his toys out of the pram, that's what the Tiggers have achieved IMO, they will force the ERG chumps back in line because we risk losing our majority of they stay on their current path.
Not really because the Drum Bashers will VoNC May's confederacy of dunces if the deal passes.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
Some of us said this would happen from the start. Control of the party is the most important thing to the hard left, not winning a GE too soon. The assumption is that a crisis, or just the natural pendulum of worn-out-governments, combined with FPTP, will eventually deliver power to a purist party.
So, as a Conservative, I wish the TIG well in replacing the rotten and institutionally racist Labour Party.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
That wasn't that runway. BB 1-3 and 7 interdicted the 3,500ft runway at Stanley not the new 8,500ft runway (10/26) at RAF Mount Pleasant. The Stanley runway was too short for Argentinean fast jet operations which is the reason that retaking the FI was (only just) possible in 1982.
With Argentinean access to the 8,500ft and 5,000ft runways at MPA the FI would be impossible to retake today. Bear in mind that, even when it reaches full operational capacity 5 years hence, the QNLZ air wing will have zero offensive electronic warfare or suppression of enemy air defence capability.
10/26 would be a very funny looking runway!
The difference today is that we have a few more of our own there in the first place, and it might be easier to ask the Septics to help out than it was in 1982.
This is what did for MacShane in the end, isn't it?
8,000 majority over the Lib Dems in Brecon & Radnorshire. 52% Leave. Could be one where the TIG give the LDs a clear run, in return for Newport & Peterborough?
My, er, friend tells me he fancies her like crazy, but he is seriously conflicted about this whole defection malarkey. Remember, this is my, er, friend we're talking about.
If Greening et al. are saying they'll quit the blues if there's no deal, that's an incentive for Labour (and maybe some on the opposite wing in the Conservatives) to oppose a deal.
Those who still want revocation might also reject a deal.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
But that's moot.
If they skip a by-election, they will need to face a General Election when it happens. If they win at a by-election they still need to face a General Election when it happens.
Their best chance is surely a 2022 election giving a couple of years to build up momentum (ha!) behind their new Party.
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
Some of us said this would happen from the start. Control of the party is the most important thing to the hard left, not winning a GE too soon. The assumption is that a crisis, or just the natural pendulum of worn-out-governments, combined with FPTP, will eventually deliver power to a purist party.
So, as a Conservative, I wish the TIG well in replacing the rotten and institutionally racist Labour Party.
In broad terms, I think 20-25% of the voters very much like what Corbyn is offering. Some of them are to be found in parties like the Greens or SNP. Conversely, about one third are right wingers who support Brexit. About 5% support UKIP, and 28% support the Conservatives.
That leaves just over 40% who would potentially be receptive to the new group, although you should probably knock off a few percent to cover Scottish and Welsh Nationalists, Greens and Northern Irish.
Realistically, that probably gives a ceiling of about one third who would be willing to vote for TIG and Lib Dems combined.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
Reckless won his by-election, but lost at GE2015.
Exactly, defectors are usually swept aside by the main party battle of general elections.
There was however a build up to the war - it wasn't a complete surprise - and the complete switch in the news agenda helped puncture the SDP's balloon.
Edit/ but you are certainly right that psephological analysis suggests that without the SDP the Tory landslide could well have been bigger
You are suggesting that the Thatcher government's chronic mishandling of Galtieri's much-telegraphed intentions to assault the Falklands boosted their support?
I have to say I feel this is a novel conclusion.
I am saying that the news focus was turning towards the Falklands before the actual invasion. As I recall there was that incident with the scrap metal merchants occupying one of the uninhabited islands a few weeks prior. And all the sabre rattling in Argentina.
And the discussions 'in principle' with the Argentines over some sort of joint sovereignty. There was a Parliamentary row in IIRC, late 1981, when it came out, led by Bernard Braine (Cons) and Peter Shore (Lab) over what our diplomats appeared to be up to.
If it gets invaded again the autopsy won't be so mild because Britain won't be getting it back now it's got a 8,500ft runway.
The way they got hold of that runway the first time was one of the greatest military operations of all time though!
MPs have made their minds up. Drop the bloody backstop.
Just because he doesn't like that doesn't mean MPs haven't made a decision.
And how is this 'decision' to be attested, Telegraph opinion pieces and social media?
Or a vote in Parliament on the 29th January.
And what is that alternative arrangement to the backstop upon which MPs have made up their minds?
That needs negotiating with the EU, but Juncker has refused to negotiate on that.
'Slightly more than half of us don't want this thing that we negotiated. We don't know what we do want, but if you sling us a few suggestions we'll see if we want any of them. Come on Jean-Claude, get yer finger out!'
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
Some of us said this would happen from the start. Control of the party is the most important thing to the hard left, not winning a GE too soon. The assumption is that a crisis, or just the natural pendulum of worn-out-governments, combined with FPTP, will eventually deliver power to a purist party.
So, as a Conservative, I wish the TIG well in replacing the rotten and institutionally racist Labour Party.
In broad terms, I think 20-25% of the voters very much like what Corbyn is offering. Some of them are to be found in parties like the Greens or SNP. Conversely, about one third are right wingers who support Brexit. About 5% support UKIP, and 28% support the Conservatives.
That leaves just over 40% who would potentially be receptive to the new group, although you should probably knock off a few percent to cover Scottish and Welsh Nationalists, Greens and Northern Irish.
Realistically, that probably gives a ceiling of about one third who would be willing to vote for TIG and Lib Dems combined.
There's a huge difference between 30% and 40% with a nationwide vote under FPTP.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
And they would have political legitimacy until that General Election.
Currently they all come a poor second to Mark Reckless. Which is not a great look.....
This is what did for MacShane in the end, isn't it?
8,000 majority over the Lib Dems in Brecon & Radnorshire. 52% Leave. Could be one where the TIG give the LDs a clear run, in return for Newport & Peterborough?
And Brecon & Radnorshire is held by the Lib Dems in the Assembly (Kirsty Williams). Given the developing farming angle to Brexit - see recent pronouncements by Gove and Minette Batters - then the Lib Dems must fancy their chances.
BTW does Sarah Wollaston lose her position as Chair of the Health Select Committee - given that she was only present on the committee by virtue of being a Tory MP?
No, I don't think so. Membership is decided by vote at (IIRC) at the start of each Parliament, and certainly not normally on a day-to-day basis. If there was a substantial defection on one committee which meant that there was an Opposition majority on the Committee then I expect the Whips would want to look if they could do something about it, but there's nothing automatic about it.
Nick, I asked you a question about Soubry on the old thread (just as it withered on the vine). I had understood you were on good terms with her, despite her being a former opponent of yours. What is it about her that you don't like?
Grieve and Greening's statement seems misjudged. By implying they will only leave the Tories if there is a no deal Brexit they have removed any immediate pressure on May (as let's face it I doubt that will be her biggest issue in the event of no deal). I'm surprised they didn't stay silent to give their views more leverage and leave May pondering that they might join TIG any day now.
It was so much easier before the internet for politicians who change their minds, wasn't it.
She'll just shrug her shoulders and tell dinosaurs like Guido to move on. Someone put it to her on the telly last night that Soubry and Gapes wouldn't agree on welfare, and had voted differently. Her response was basically, "so what? this is a fresh start, people are entitled to they own views, Tig is about values."
Like it or not, it worked. The journalist gave in and moved on.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
Reckless won his by-election, but lost at GE2015.
Exactly, defectors are usually swept aside by the main party battle of general elections.
OTOH Carswell won both his by-election and at GE2015.
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
They aren't ex-Communists - not in their hearts.
Corbyn is barely Labour, frankly, given that he was on the side of Militant Tendency in the 1980's and was a serial rebel against every Labour government while he was a backbench MP.
As I have said before, Labour under Corbyn is being turned into a combination of the SWP and Respect.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
And they would have political legitimacy until that General Election.
Currently they all come a poor second to Mark Reckless. Which is not a great look.....
If they don't put up a candidate in Newport they'll look slightly ridiculous IMO. A political movement that isn't interested in votes is an interesting concept.
This is what did for MacShane in the end, isn't it?
8,000 majority over the Lib Dems in Brecon & Radnorshire. 52% Leave. Could be one where the TIG give the LDs a clear run, in return for Newport & Peterborough?
And Brecon & Radnorshire is held by the Lib Dems in the Assembly (Kirsty Williams). Given the developing farming angle to Brexit - see recent pronouncements by Gove and Minette Batters - then the Lib Dems must fancy their chances.
But then the LDs are currently hampered by having Cable as leader.
I have long been skeptical about the point of another party, but I think I was wrong.
At the very least, they’ve surely already triggered the beginning of the end of Corbyn’s leadership for which we must all be grateful.
As far as I’m concerned the TIGs are heroes. If they can see off Corbyn *and* Brexit, we should put up statues to them in Parliament Square.
If anything I think the presence of TIG means the Tories will wave through Theresa's deal with some face saving minor change. Look at how JRM reacted when he got shot down over the Malthouse amendment, he didn't throw his toys out of the pram, that's what the Tiggers have achieved IMO, they will force the ERG chumps back in line because we risk losing our majority of they stay on their current path.
Not really because the Drum Bashers will VoNC May's confederacy of dunces if the deal passes.
After these last few days the DUP do not have the same ability to succeed in a vonc and the lid dems have said they will not support another vonc. The lib dems and TIG account for 23 votes with more defections likely increasing the number opposed to a GE. A GE in the next few months would terminate TIGs ambitions
Government finances were in surplus by £14.9bn last month, the largest January surplus since records began in 1993, official figures showed. The figure was £5.6bn greater than a year ago.
The bumper surplus was driven by an increase in self-assessment income tax and capital gains tax receipts.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) data also showed that borrowing in the current financial year to January was £21.2bn, £18.5bn less than the same period last year and the lowest year-to-date figure for 17 years.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
Reckless won his by-election, but lost at GE2015.
Exactly, defectors are usually swept aside by the main party battle of general elections.
OTOH Carswell won both his by-election and at GE2015.
He defected to what was then a national Party on the up.
Whatever TIG is, it isn't a Party. It doesn't have a platform, it doesn't have a structure, it doesn't have party status.
Grieve and Greening's statement seems misjudged. By implying they will only leave the Tories if there is a no deal Brexit they have removed any immediate pressure on May (as let's face it I doubt that will be her biggest issue in the event of no deal). I'm surprised they didn't stay silent to give their views more leverage and leave May pondering that they might join TIG any day now.
Grieve has said for some time now that while he is a loyal Conservative he will always put the interests of the country first. In his view a No Deal Brexit is not putting the country's interests first, something he has said for some time now. So what he said last night is not news.
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
Some of us said this would happen from the start. Control of the party is the most important thing to the hard left, not winning a GE too soon. The assumption is that a crisis, or just the natural pendulum of worn-out-governments, combined with FPTP, will eventually deliver power to a purist party.
So, as a Conservative, I wish the TIG well in replacing the rotten and institutionally racist Labour Party.
In broad terms, I think 20-25% of the voters very much like what Corbyn is offering. Some of them are to be found in parties like the Greens or SNP. Conversely, about one third are right wingers who support Brexit. About 5% support UKIP, and 28% support the Conservatives.
That leaves just over 40% who would potentially be receptive to the new group, although you should probably knock off a few percent to cover Scottish and Welsh Nationalists, Greens and Northern Irish.
Realistically, that probably gives a ceiling of about one third who would be willing to vote for TIG and Lib Dems combined.
There's a huge difference between 30% and 40% with a nationwide vote under FPTP.
That's right. The SNP, for example, would be slaughtered if their vote share fell from 36% to 30%.
Government finances were in surplus by £14.9bn last month, the largest January surplus since records began in 1993, official figures showed. The figure was £5.6bn greater than a year ago.
The bumper surplus was driven by an increase in self-assessment income tax and capital gains tax receipts.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) data also showed that borrowing in the current financial year to January was £21.2bn, £18.5bn less than the same period last year and the lowest year-to-date figure for 17 years.
Government finances were in surplus by £14.9bn last month, the largest January surplus since records began in 1993, official figures showed. The figure was £5.6bn greater than a year ago.
The bumper surplus was driven by an increase in self-assessment income tax and capital gains tax receipts.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) data also showed that borrowing in the current financial year to January was £21.2bn, £18.5bn less than the same period last year and the lowest year-to-date figure for 17 years.
Discussed down thread. The interesting thing is that Hammond probably has £10-15bn of unexpected funds to play with in his Spring Statement next month. If the deal has gone through I expect him to pocket it in his usual dismal way but if we have no deal or serious disruption expect a blast of additional government spending.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
Reckless won his by-election, but lost at GE2015.
Exactly, defectors are usually swept aside by the main party battle of general elections.
OTOH Carswell won both his by-election and at GE2015.
He defected to what was then a national Party on the up.
Whatever TIG is, it isn't a Party. It doesn't have a platform, it doesn't have a structure, it doesn't have party status.
You do realise that that's all by design?
It allows it to develop organically until such a time that they want to put a stake in the ground.
At present, there is no route to that job for her. None at all. Even a Government of National Unity would be lead by someone from a major party.
If, say, a third* of Conservative MPs were to join TIG (105 MPs) and four-fifths** of Labour MPs were to do likewise (198 MPs) then TIG would have the support of 314 MPs, plus potentially the 11 (12?) Liberal Democrats - and a small majority. Whoever lead them would be PM.
* One-third is the proportion of MPs that Heidi Allen says share her frustration with the 'BLUKIP' infiltration of the Conservative Party that has the aim of deselecting MPs who are not hard Leavers.
** Four-fifths is the proportion of Labour MPs who voted no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn's leadership in 2016.
Grieve and Greening's statement seems misjudged. By implying they will only leave the Tories if there is a no deal Brexit they have removed any immediate pressure on May (as let's face it I doubt that will be her biggest issue in the event of no deal). I'm surprised they didn't stay silent to give their views more leverage and leave May pondering that they might join TIG any day now.
Grieve has said for some time now that while he is a loyal Conservative he will always put the interests of the country first. In his view a No Deal Brexit is not putting the country's interests first, something he has said for some time now. So what he said last night is not news.
But, his own actions increase the chance of No Deal.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
And they would have political legitimacy until that General Election.
Currently they all come a poor second to Mark Reckless. Which is not a great look.....
If they don't put up a candidate in Newport they'll look slightly ridiculous IMO. A political movement that isn't interested in votes is an interesting concept.
They aren't yet a political movement. They have no party status or infrastructure. There is no leadership or policy platform.
They can cobble something together to get through a three week by-election process - but that is about it.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
And they would have political legitimacy until that General Election.
Currently they all come a poor second to Mark Reckless. Which is not a great look.....
Just wondering we are all confused by the fall in unemployment vs gdp and now a load of “unexpected” self assessment income has arrived. Could it be that due to the changing nature of employment that the traditional ways of estimating gdp etc aren’t capturing the complete picture?
There was however a build up to the war - it wasn't a complete surprise - and the complete switch in the news agenda helped puncture the SDP's balloon.
Edit/ but you are certainly right that psephological analysis suggests that without the SDP the Tory landslide could well have been bigger
You are suggesting that the Thatcher government's chronic mishandling of Galtieri's much-telegraphed intentions to assault the Falklands boosted their support?
I have to say I feel this is a novel conclusion.
I am saying that the news focus was turning towards the Falklands before the actual invasion. As I recall there was that incident with the scrap metal merchants occupying one of the uninhabited islands a few weeks prior. And all the sabre rattling in Argentina.
And the discussions 'in principle' with the Argentines over some sort of joint sovereignty. There was a Parliamentary row in IIRC, late 1981, when it came out, led by Bernard Braine (Cons) and Peter Shore (Lab) over what our diplomats appeared to be up to.
If it gets invaded again the autopsy won't be so mild because Britain won't be getting it back now it's got a 8,500ft runway.
The way they got hold of that runway the first time was one of the greatest military operations of all time though!
Grieve and Greening's statement seems misjudged. By implying they will only leave the Tories if there is a no deal Brexit they have removed any immediate pressure on May (as let's face it I doubt that will be her biggest issue in the event of no deal). I'm surprised they didn't stay silent to give their views more leverage and leave May pondering that they might join TIG any day now.
Grieve has said for some time now that while he is a loyal Conservative he will always put the interests of the country first. In his view a No Deal Brexit is not putting the country's interests first, something he has said for some time now. So what he said last night is not news.
But, his own actions increase the chance of No Deal.
Yawn.
"Eat this shit sandwich, or I will force you and all your friends to eat ten shit sandwiches."
"But, I don't want your shit sandwich."
"Ah, so you are increasing the chance of an enforced banquet of faeces."
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
Reckless won his by-election, but lost at GE2015.
Exactly, defectors are usually swept aside by the main party battle of general elections.
OTOH Carswell won both his by-election and at GE2015.
He defected to what was then a national Party on the up.
Whatever TIG is, it isn't a Party. It doesn't have a platform, it doesn't have a structure, it doesn't have party status.
You do realise that that's all by design?
It allows it to develop organically until such a time that they want to put a stake in the ground.
It is exactly the right strategy.
Exactly. People are stuck in the 24-hr rolling news cycle.
There is plenty of time to work out a strategy, etc.
In fact it is the barmy I want it and I want it now mentality that is helping to mess up Brexit. A sane country would set itself a 5-10 year timeframe to extract itself from the EU. The ERG, and I daresay @Philip_Thompson want it done by a week on Tuesday.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
Reckless won his by-election, but lost at GE2015.
Exactly, defectors are usually swept aside by the main party battle of general elections.
OTOH Carswell won both his by-election and at GE2015.
He defected to what was then a national Party on the up.
Whatever TIG is, it isn't a Party. It doesn't have a platform, it doesn't have a structure, it doesn't have party status.
You do realise that that's all by design?
It allows it to develop organically until such a time that they want to put a stake in the ground.
It is exactly the right strategy.
Exactly. People are stuck in the 24-hr rolling news cycle.
There is plenty of time to work out a strategy, etc.
In fact it is the barmy I want it and I want it now mentality that is helping to mess up Brexit. A sane country would set itself a 5-10 year timeframe to extract itself from the EU. The ERG, and I daresay @Philip_Thompson want it done by a week on Tuesday.
Grieve and Greening's statement seems misjudged. By implying they will only leave the Tories if there is a no deal Brexit they have removed any immediate pressure on May (as let's face it I doubt that will be her biggest issue in the event of no deal). I'm surprised they didn't stay silent to give their views more leverage and leave May pondering that they might join TIG any day now.
Grieve has said for some time now that while he is a loyal Conservative he will always put the interests of the country first. In his view a No Deal Brexit is not putting the country's interests first, something he has said for some time now. So what he said last night is not news.
But, his own actions increase the chance of No Deal.
Yawn.
"Eat this shit sandwich, or I will force you and all your friends to eat ten shit sandwiches."
"But, I don't want your shit sandwich."
"Ah, so you are increasing the chance of an enforced banquet of faeces."
If you refuse to compromise, you increase the chance of getting what you least want. The same goes for the ERG.
This is a man who says it is his "sacred duty" to oppose Brexit.
Just wondering we are all confused by the fall in unemployment vs gdp and now a load of “unexpected” self assessment income has arrived. Could it be that due to the changing nature of employment that the traditional ways of estimating gdp etc aren’t capturing the complete picture?
Yes. Official statistics are getting screwed. Construction numbers keep being revised upwards, and employment stats don't come close to correlation with GDP stats.
The irony of the defectors refusing by-elections is that they would probably have a far higher change of being elected under their new colours at a by-election than they ever would do at a general election.
Reckless won his by-election, but lost at GE2015.
Exactly, defectors are usually swept aside by the main party battle of general elections.
OTOH Carswell won both his by-election and at GE2015.
He defected to what was then a national Party on the up.
Whatever TIG is, it isn't a Party. It doesn't have a platform, it doesn't have a structure, it doesn't have party status.
You do realise that that's all by design?
It allows it to develop organically until such a time that they want to put a stake in the ground.
It is exactly the right strategy.
Exactly. People are stuck in the 24-hr rolling news cycle.
There is plenty of time to work out a strategy, etc.
In fact it is the barmy I want it and I want it now mentality that is helping to mess up Brexit. A sane country would set itself a 5-10 year timeframe to extract itself from the EU. The ERG, and I daresay @Philip_Thompson want it done by a week on Tuesday.
The timetable for our departure was set by the Lisbon Treaty which we (didn't) vote to accept. We cheated by delaying the service of the notice to buy ourselves a bit more time although I am not sure we made the best use of it.
Just wondering we are all confused by the fall in unemployment vs gdp and now a load of “unexpected” self assessment income has arrived. Could it be that due to the changing nature of employment that the traditional ways of estimating gdp etc aren’t capturing the complete picture?
Yes. Official statistics are getting screwed. Construction numbers keep being revised upwards, and employment stats don't come close to correlation with GDP stats.
Shhhh!! We don't want the EU to know how well we're doing, or they'll stiff us for another £20 billion exit fees......
If Greening et al. are saying they'll quit the blues if there's no deal, that's an incentive for Labour (and maybe some on the opposite wing in the Conservatives) to oppose a deal.
Those who still want revocation might also reject a deal.
More importantly, Mr.D, you might want to consider a trading bet on Ferrari for the championship: “They do seem very strong,” said Bottas at the Circuit de Catalunya today. “No matter which kind of fuel load or engine modes they’re running, whatever you try to correct that for in any case that they are quick. Both short runs and long run.
“So I think we feel at this point they’re going to be a bit ahead.”
Who orders something that won't be here by the end of the week - let alone five?
Well, me, for instance.
I had decided on a new kitchen for my house. Part of it is made to measure in Holland with other bits coming from Germany. An order time of 4-5 weeks. So I ordered it before Xmas - long before the house will be ready for its installation - to avoid it either being caught up in delays at the border or extra tariffs. It is now here. Which gives me peace of mind.
I can't be the only person who has brought forward purchases from Europe in light of the general faffing about in Westminster.
There was however a build up to the war - it wasn't a complete surprise - and the complete switch in the news agenda helped puncture the SDP's balloon.
Edit/ but you are certainly right that psephological analysis suggests that without the SDP the Tory landslide could well have been bigger
You are suggesting that the Thatcher government's chronic mishandling of Galtieri's much-telegraphed intentions to assault the Falklands boosted their support?
I have to say I feel this is a novel conclusion.
I am saying that the news focus was turning towards the Falklands before the actual invasion. As I recall there was that incident with the scrap metal merchants occupying one of the uninhabited islands a few weeks prior. And all the sabre rattling in Argentina.
And the discussions 'in principle' with the Argentines over some sort of joint sovereignty. There was a Parliamentary row in IIRC, late 1981, when it came out, led by Bernard Braine (Cons) and Peter Shore (Lab) over what our diplomats appeared to be up to.
If it gets invaded again the autopsy won't be so mild because Britain won't be getting it back now it's got a 8,500ft runway.
The way they got hold of that runway the first time was one of the greatest military operations of all time though!
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
Some of us said this would happen from the start. Control of the party is the most important thing to the hard left, not winning a GE too soon. The assumption is that a crisis, or just the natural pendulum of worn-out-governments, combined with FPTP, will eventually deliver power to a purist party.
So, as a Conservative, I wish the TIG well in replacing the rotten and institutionally racist Labour Party.
In broad terms, I think 20-25% of the voters very much like what Corbyn is offering. Some of them are to be found in parties like the Greens or SNP. Conversely, about one third are right wingers who support Brexit. About 5% support UKIP, and 28% support the Conservatives.
That leaves just over 40% who would potentially be receptive to the new group, although you should probably knock off a few percent to cover Scottish and Welsh Nationalists, Greens and Northern Irish.
Realistically, that probably gives a ceiling of about one third who would be willing to vote for TIG and Lib Dems combined.
Using Electoral Calculus with: Con 30% Lab 24% TIG/LD 33% UKIP/Brexit Party 7% All other parties unchanged results in: Con 275 MPs Lab 225 MPs TIG/LD 80 MPs SNP 46 MPs That really would be a mess.
The problem I have with long term bets on favourites is it takes 9 months or so for a shot at roughly evens to come in. Ties up money for a while and the return is either red or modest.
Leclerc to be top 3 might offer slightly better odds, and better value. He was 7.5 last time I checked (fifth the odds for top 3).
If Greening et al. are saying they'll quit the blues if there's no deal, that's an incentive for Labour (and maybe some on the opposite wing in the Conservatives) to oppose a deal.
Those who still want revocation might also reject a deal.
More importantly, Mr.D, you might want to consider a trading bet on Ferrari for the championship: “They do seem very strong,” said Bottas at the Circuit de Catalunya today. “No matter which kind of fuel load or engine modes they’re running, whatever you try to correct that for in any case that they are quick. Both short runs and long run.
“So I think we feel at this point they’re going to be a bit ahead.”
Lay Ferrari then.
Headline testing laptimes are bollocks, there's no scrutineering so cars can be whatever they want to be.
In response to this which @edmundintokyo wrote on a previous thread:
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
Some of us said this would happen from the start. Control of the party is the most important thing to the hard left, not winning a GE too soon. The assumption is that a crisis, or just the natural pendulum of worn-out-governments, combined with FPTP, will eventually deliver power to a purist party.
So, as a Conservative, I wish the TIG well in replacing the rotten and institutionally racist Labour Party.
In broad terms, I think 20-25% of the voters very much like what Corbyn is offering. Some of them are to be found in parties like the Greens or SNP. Conversely, about one third are right wingers who support Brexit. About 5% support UKIP, and 28% support the Conservatives.
That leaves just over 40% who would potentially be receptive to the new group, although you should probably knock off a few percent to cover Scottish and Welsh Nationalists, Greens and Northern Irish.
Realistically, that probably gives a ceiling of about one third who would be willing to vote for TIG and Lib Dems combined.
Using Electoral Calculus with: Con 30% Lab 24% TIG/LD 33% UKIP/Brexit Party 7% All other parties unchanged results in: Con 275 MPs Lab 225 MPs TIG/LD 80 MPs SNP 46 MPs That really would be a mess.
Government finances were in surplus by £14.9bn last month, the largest January surplus since records began in 1993, official figures showed. The figure was £5.6bn greater than a year ago.
The bumper surplus was driven by an increase in self-assessment income tax and capital gains tax receipts.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) data also showed that borrowing in the current financial year to January was £21.2bn, £18.5bn less than the same period last year and the lowest year-to-date figure for 17 years.
Discussed down thread. The interesting thing is that Hammond probably has £10-15bn of unexpected funds to play with in his Spring Statement next month. If the deal has gone through I expect him to pocket it in his usual dismal way but if we have no deal or serious disruption expect a blast of additional government spending.
Does this mean I can dust off my Hammond for next PM betting slips? Hammond might be unpopular with the Brexiteers but after Javid's and Hunt's last few days, not to mention Williamson's gunboat diplomacy, Hammond might look to backbenchers like the only grown-up left when Theresa May steps down. Gove has perhaps recovered a bit but is still not fully trusted, and falls foul of the old popes principle, whereas Hammond looks more like a one-term premier.
Paradox: If defections to TIG surge, then they could become a critical mass that is able to achieve their critical goals of (a) stopping Brexit, (b) becoming a new force in British politics. But if even a few more Conservative MPs defect, then the Government loses its tenuous majority, a General Election becomes a certainty, and most of the TIGs will be wiped out, never to be heard from again.
Just wondering we are all confused by the fall in unemployment vs gdp and now a load of “unexpected” self assessment income has arrived. Could it be that due to the changing nature of employment that the traditional ways of estimating gdp etc aren’t capturing the complete picture?
Yes. Official statistics are getting screwed. Construction numbers keep being revised upwards, and employment stats don't come close to correlation with GDP stats.
Shhhh!! We don't want the EU to know how well we're doing, or they'll stiff us for another £20 billion exit fees......
I know it's an unpopular idea, but no deal and £20bn of mitigation has a good chance of ending up like the UK economy after the 1992 ERM exit, even if there's a pile of sh!t to wade through in the first couple of months.
Comments
But maybe there's a case for making the first extension either very short or very long, so you don't end up with the British making up their minds whether they need the election or not right before it's supposed to happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDAPWxZQZHo
With Argentinean access to the 8,500ft and 5,000ft runways at MPA the FI would be impossible to retake today. Bear in mind that, even when it reaches full operational capacity 5 years hence, the QNLZ air wing will have zero offensive electronic warfare or suppression of enemy air defence capability.
I don't know whether this represents imprecise language (a hazard when you have a bloc without a common first language) or lazy thinking or a reflection of a political culture which expects a higher degree of consensus than is the case in the UK.
The difference today is that we have a few more of our own there in the first place, and it might be easier to ask the Septics to help out than it was in 1982.
Edit: Surely even you'll admit that BB was a f***ing genius plan, even if there was a big chance of it failing?
“Taking a step back the weird thing about this is that Corbyn his broken his party for no particular gain. There's factional control, but there's no bold left-wing agenda - just nationalizing trains and other tinkering, and a position on Brexit that he apparently doesn't particularly care about either way. It's like a supercharged version of the TB-GB stupids.”
I think this is to misunderstand the Corbyn project.
Once control over the party has been obtained then the Far Left will unleash its full programme. McDonnell has already said, I believe, that the next manifesto will be far more radical. We should not underestimate how radical Corbyn and McDonnell intend to be. Some of their advisors are ex-Communists. They do not believe in the sanctity of private property.
From Corbyn’s perspective driving out the moderates, the Blairites, Jews etc is not breaking the party but making it more in line with his views and more suitable to achieve his aims.
So, as a Conservative, I wish the TIG well in replacing the rotten and institutionally racist Labour Party.
At present, there is no route to that job for her. None at all. Even a Government of National Unity would be lead by someone from a major party.
8,000 majority over the Lib Dems in Brecon & Radnorshire. 52% Leave. Could be one where the TIG give the LDs a clear run, in return for Newport & Peterborough?
Those who still want revocation might also reject a deal.
If they skip a by-election, they will need to face a General Election when it happens.
If they win at a by-election they still need to face a General Election when it happens.
Their best chance is surely a 2022 election giving a couple of years to build up momentum (ha!) behind their new Party.
That leaves just over 40% who would potentially be receptive to the new group, although you should probably knock off a few percent to cover Scottish and Welsh Nationalists, Greens and Northern Irish.
Realistically, that probably gives a ceiling of about one third who would be willing to vote for TIG and Lib Dems combined.
Currently they all come a poor second to Mark Reckless. Which is not a great look.....
Like it or not, it worked. The journalist gave in and moved on.
As I have said before, Labour under Corbyn is being turned into a combination of the SWP and Respect.
The bumper surplus was driven by an increase in self-assessment income tax and capital gains tax receipts.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) data also showed that borrowing in the current financial year to January was £21.2bn, £18.5bn less than the same period last year and the lowest year-to-date figure for 17 years.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47318862
Whatever TIG is, it isn't a Party. It doesn't have a platform, it doesn't have a structure, it doesn't have party status.
It allows it to develop organically until such a time that they want to put a stake in the ground.
It is exactly the right strategy.
* One-third is the proportion of MPs that Heidi Allen says share her frustration with the 'BLUKIP' infiltration of the Conservative Party that has the aim of deselecting MPs who are not hard Leavers.
** Four-fifths is the proportion of Labour MPs who voted no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn's leadership in 2016.
"The waiting list for a car is approximately six months, and has sometimes been as long as ten years."
They can cobble something together to get through a three week by-election process - but that is about it.
Who looks at this picture and says "Okay, let's go"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Black_Buck#/media/File:Refuelling.plan.black.buck.svg
"Eat this shit sandwich, or I will force you and all your friends to eat ten shit sandwiches."
"But, I don't want your shit sandwich."
"Ah, so you are increasing the chance of an enforced banquet of faeces."
There is plenty of time to work out a strategy, etc.
In fact it is the barmy I want it and I want it now mentality that is helping to mess up Brexit. A sane country would set itself a 5-10 year timeframe to extract itself from the EU. The ERG, and I daresay @Philip_Thompson want it done by a week on Tuesday.
This is a man who says it is his "sacred duty" to oppose Brexit.
So she ought to be on the radar I would have thought.
“They do seem very strong,” said Bottas at the Circuit de Catalunya today. “No matter which kind of fuel load or engine modes they’re running, whatever you try to correct that for in any case that they are quick. Both short runs and long run.
“So I think we feel at this point they’re going to be a bit ahead.”
I had decided on a new kitchen for my house. Part of it is made to measure in Holland with other bits coming from Germany. An order time of 4-5 weeks. So I ordered it before Xmas - long before the house will be ready for its installation - to avoid it either being caught up in delays at the border or extra tariffs. It is now here. Which gives me peace of mind.
I can't be the only person who has brought forward purchases from Europe in light of the general faffing about in Westminster.
Con 30%
Lab 24%
TIG/LD 33%
UKIP/Brexit Party 7%
All other parties unchanged results in:
Con 275 MPs
Lab 225 MPs
TIG/LD 80 MPs
SNP 46 MPs
That really would be a mess.
The problem I have with long term bets on favourites is it takes 9 months or so for a shot at roughly evens to come in. Ties up money for a while and the return is either red or modest.
Leclerc to be top 3 might offer slightly better odds, and better value. He was 7.5 last time I checked (fifth the odds for top 3).
Headline testing laptimes are bollocks, there's no scrutineering so cars can be whatever they want to be.
https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/1098550912765837313