The market capitalisation at the current share price is £24 million so why on earth would anyone lend them £200 million. It's not exactly an up and coming start up either. Why would anyone lend them the money ?!
To launder it?
Ashley wants to buy their Danish business for £100m, so some of it is worth some cash
Yep - it's the only bit that is worth anything - Magasin du Nord are very different and rather nicer stores than your typical Debenhams
in terms of next PM. If May quits voluntarily and goes before a new Tory leader is elected then cabinet agree the next PM who will step down when the Tories select their new leader in whatever fashion. That's the process. Liz is only prepared to hold personal hold of the prerogative for the time May's car leaves and the replacement arrives immediately after.
Which would be fine if we had the luxuary of time. The worst thing is if may resigns, but 'stuck' in office whilst the tories then tear each other apart.
the cabinet could lock themselves away and elect a new leader. that could happen but it required forces outside the cabinet to plat ball. but who..if someone like Hammond or Rudd then the ERG would throw a paddy. if someone like Boris or another No-dealer it would similarly be case on the Remainer side.
Gove is possible.
It needs to be a temporary candidate with an election to follow. Liddington would be the best bet...
the problem though isn't the person. it's the policy. Would Liddington go for No-Deal, or new (softer) deal or referendum?
Just replacing the personnel at the top does nothing.
No Conservative leader could support a second referendum and remain Conservative leader.
in terms of next PM. If May quits voluntarily and goes before a new Tory leader is elected then cabinet agree the next PM who will step down when the Tories select their new leader in whatever fashion. That's the process. Liz is only prepared to hold personal hold of the prerogative for the time May's car leaves and the replacement arrives immediately after.
Which would be fine if we had the luxuary of time. The worst thing is if may resigns, but 'stuck' in office whilst the tories then tear each other apart.
the cabinet could lock themselves away and elect a new leader. that could happen but it required forces outside the cabinet to plat ball. but who..if someone like Hammond or Rudd then the ERG would throw a paddy. if someone like Boris or another No-dealer it would similarly be case on the Remainer side.
Gove is possible.
Cabinet has to select someone, that's the constitutional convention in this situation. They are only in place until the Tories elect their new leader then step down. Or in the unprecedented situation they refuse to step down then immediate VONC to stop the effective coup d'etat. The ERG might hate it but it's what happens. If may resigns as PM but not as Tory leader then we have problems
in terms of next PM. If May quits voluntarily and goes before a new Tory leader is elected then cabinet agree the next PM who will step down when the Tories select their new leader in whatever fashion. That's the process. Liz is only prepared to hold personal hold of the prerogative for the time May's car leaves and the replacement arrives immediately after.
Which would be fine if we had the luxuary of time. The worst thing is if may resigns, but 'stuck' in office whilst the tories then tear each other apart.
the cabinet could lock themselves away and elect a new leader. that could happen but it required forces outside the cabinet to plat ball. but who..if someone like Hammond or Rudd then the ERG would throw a paddy. if someone like Boris or another No-dealer it would similarly be case on the Remainer side.
Gove is possible.
It needs to be a temporary candidate with an election to follow. Liddington would be the best bet...
the problem though isn't the person. it's the policy. Would Liddington go for No-Deal, or new (softer) deal or referendum?
Just replacing the personnel at the top does nothing.
Interesting fact.
In 2010 David Cameron wanted to make Mark Francois Europe Minister, Nick Clegg vetoed that, so the job went to David Lidington who stayed there for six years.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
It's ridiculous to say anyone could have done better: Brexit is a mess, and would have been a mess whoever was in charge of negotiations. The sides are too far apart for any meaningful compromise to be easily reached.
Give would have faced just as many problems as May; they might have been different problems, but problems nonetheless.
And the reason the sides are so far apart? The leave campaigns who lied about Brexit, and promised everything to everyone.
It'd be good for leavers to take some responsibility instead of pathetically moaning: "If my person was in charge it would have been different!"
Norway is a meaningful compromise, which could have been, and might just still be reached.
It would mean pissing off most people, but to a lesser extent overall than any other likely solution.
Norway does everything except deliver on the mandate obtained, which was an anti-immigration platform.
Norway is damage limitation. It is better than any other form of Brexit, but it doesn't offer any advantages to anyone over the status quo. Which is why noone much has gone for it.
Other than, of course, being outside the CAP.
Oh, and the CFP.
Apart from that, then... oh, what about being outside the Justice Pillar? And the Home Affairs and the Foreign Affairs Pillars? Those are advantages, as well, I'd guess.
The permanent and unconditional exemption from ever-closer-union might be seen as an advantage by some.
And, of course, a reduction in fees from £350 million per week to £100 million per week or so. That's a benefit, definitely.
Being outside the majority of the EU acquis of law is definitely a plus on the Brexit side, when you look at it.
Whilst retaining the benefits of the Single Market and access to whatever EU institutions we desire and being involved in the initial shaping of all Single Market legislation.
On reflection, I can see some advantages.
What is the mechanism for leaving "Norway"?
Article 127 of the EEA Agreement:
"Article 127 Each Contracting Party may withdraw from this Agreement provided it gives at least twelve months' notice in writing to the other Contracting Parties. Immediately after the notification of the intended withdrawal, the other Contracting Parties shall convene a diplomatic conference in order to envisage the necessary modifications to bring to the Agreement."
in terms of next PM. If May quits voluntarily and goes before a new Tory leader is elected then cabinet agree the next PM who will step down when the Tories select their new leader in whatever fashion. That's the process. Liz is only prepared to hold personal hold of the prerogative for the time May's car leaves and the replacement arrives immediately after.
Which would be fine if we had the luxuary of time. The worst thing is if may resigns, but 'stuck' in office whilst the tories then tear each other apart.
the cabinet could lock themselves away and elect a new leader. that could happen but it required forces outside the cabinet to plat ball. but who..if someone like Hammond or Rudd then the ERG would throw a paddy. if someone like Boris or another No-dealer it would similarly be case on the Remainer side.
Gove is possible.
It needs to be a temporary candidate with an election to follow. Liddington would be the best bet...
the problem though isn't the person. it's the policy. Would Liddington go for No-Deal, or new (softer) deal or referendum?
Just replacing the personnel at the top does nothing.
No Conservative leader could support a second referendum and remain Conservative leader.
I agree exactly, so we're now down to no-deal or 'new deal'. New deal means long-extention.
A No-dealer would in all likelihood drive MPs to TIG.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I don't have much time for all the bleating about Russian bot farms, but one aspect worth noting is that the petition site states "Only British citizens or UK residents have the right to sign".
That is not the same as "Are you on the electoral roll?". In particular, I suspect lots of 16 and 17 years olds will have signed this petition. Personally I don't see that as a problem - 16-year olds should have had the vote in the referendum - but it's another apples vs oranges point.
In theory Parliament could do a sampling exercise with (say) 2000 signatories to see if they're on the electoral roll in/near the postcode they've supplied, and then extrapolate from there. I'm not sure whether the terms of use permit them to do that.
Regardless, if it does reach 17.4m (which would be a massive stretch), that would be the best application of the banter heuristic yet. Particularly if it does so on 29th March 12th April.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
In what way is twitter representative of the nation?
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
She's nearly right. They voted for other people to have some pain.
Madness. If she genuinely thinks that, even more of a need to ask people again.
Depends on the context. I don't trust crusty cable. For example 'No deal will cause pain' 'Yes it may, but leaving is what we voted for, pain or not, I must respect that'
Edit- if however she said it verbatim like that then she is insane and needs immediate removal
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
The argument made last night was more compelling - that the Parliamentary recall mechanism provides a useful precedent, i.e. 10% of the electorate.
That's 47 million, so 10% would be 4.7 million. That doesn't overturn the result, but it provides a good point to ask the question again.
Of course, recall can only be triggered in certain circumstances, such as the MP in question being convicted. Hmmm... remind me how the Leave campaigns are doing in the courts right now...
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
In what way is twitter representative of the nation?
I think you're losing the plot.
It's probably more representative than online polls or shouty old blokes you've met down the pub. I think the poll indicates a big swing of opinion behind revoking Article 50 right now. But I am very happy to get out the pencils and ballot boxes to test the point.
in terms of next PM. If May quits voluntarily and goes before a new Tory leader is elected then cabinet agree the next PM who will step down when the Tories select their new leader in whatever fashion. That's the process. Liz is only prepared to hold personal hold of the prerogative for the time May's car leaves and the replacement arrives immediately after.
Which would be fine if we had the luxuary of time. The worst thing is if may resigns, but 'stuck' in office whilst the tories then tear each other apart.
the cabinet could lock themselves away and elect a new leader. that could happen but it required forces outside the cabinet to plat ball. but who..if someone like Hammond or Rudd then the ERG would throw a paddy. if someone like Boris or another No-dealer it would similarly be case on the Remainer side.
Gove is possible.
It needs to be a temporary candidate with an election to follow. Liddington would be the best bet...
the problem though isn't the person. it's the policy. Would Liddington go for No-Deal, or new (softer) deal or referendum?
Just replacing the personnel at the top does nothing.
No Conservative leader could support a second referendum and remain Conservative leader.
I agree exactly, so we're now down to no-deal or 'new deal'. New deal means long-extention.
A No-dealer would in all likelihood drive MPs to TIG.
More than 60% of the Parliamentary Conservative Party prefer No Deal to delaying Brexit; one can assume that the proportion of Conservative members and voters who do so is higher. That's who any new leader will have to pitch his or her appeal to.
in terms of next PM. If May quits voluntarily and goes before a new Tory leader is elected then cabinet agree the next PM who will step down when the Tories select their new leader in whatever fashion. That's the process. Liz is only prepared to hold personal hold of the prerogative for the time May's car leaves and the replacement arrives immediately after.
Which would be fine if we had the luxuary of time. The worst thing is if may resigns, but 'stuck' in office whilst the tories then tear each other apart.
the cabinet could lock themselves away and elect a new leader. that could happen but it required forces outside the cabinet to plat ball. but who..if someone like Hammond or Rudd then the ERG would throw a paddy. if someone like Boris or another No-dealer it would similarly be case on the Remainer side.
Gove is possible.
It needs to be a temporary candidate with an election to follow. Liddington would be the best bet...
the problem though isn't the person. it's the policy. Would Liddington go for No-Deal, or new (softer) deal or referendum?
Just replacing the personnel at the top does nothing.
Interesting fact.
In 2010 David Cameron wanted to make Mark Francois Europe Minister, Nick Clegg vetoed that, so the job went to David Lidington who stayed there for six years.
If may resigns as PM but not as Tory leader then we have problems
That's the only course of action that makes sense. We can't have an unelected PM, being promoted by a Cabinet of Remainers, overturning a democratic referendum result to leave the EU.
The optics would be shocking and if they tried it I think Tory leavers would be justified in resigning the whip and VONC the government,
If may resigns as PM but not as Tory leader then we have problems
That's the only course of action that makes sense. We can't have an unelected PM, being promoted by a Cabinet of Remainers, overturning a democratic referendum result to leave the EU.
The optics would be shocking and if they tried it I think Tory leavers would be justified in resigning the whip and VONC the government,
Agreed. It would be the end of the Tories. It might already be anyway tbh
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
In what way is twitter representative of the nation?
I think you're losing the plot.
It's probably more representative than online polls or shouty old blokes you've met down the pub. I think the poll indicates a big swing of opinion behind revoking Article 50 right now. But I am very happy to get out the pencils and ballot boxes to test the point.
Online polls are weighted by demography/likelihood to vote etc. I would be very surprised if they were to show more than 20-25% of voters in favour of revoking A50. Twitter is a left wing echo chamber.
In what way is twitter representative of the nation?
I think you're losing the plot.
It's not. If Twitter was representative, Remain would have won and Corbyn would be PM.
This site perhaps more than any other should recognise the problems with trying to deduce "what the people think" from self-selecting petitions and social media.
Mr. Recidivist, Twitter tends to be more left wing (and pro-EU, following from that) than the nation. 52% of Twitter uses wouldn't equate to 52% of the wider electorate.
The idea a petition overrides an actual vote is delinquent madness. It might be used as an argument for a second referendum, with sufficiently high numbers, but no more than that.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
The argument made last night was more compelling - that the Parliamentary recall mechanism provides a useful precedent, i.e. 10% of the electorate.
That's 47 million, so 10% would be 4.7 million. That doesn't overturn the result, but it provides a good point to ask the question again.
Of course, recall can only be triggered in certain circumstances, such as the MP in question being convicted. Hmmm... remind me how the Leave campaigns are doing in the courts right now...
Mr. Recidivist, Twitter tends to be more left wing (and pro-EU, following from that) than the nation. 52% of Twitter uses wouldn't equate to 52% of the wider electorate.
The idea a petition overrides an actual vote is delinquent madness....
Up there with the concept of "respecting the spirit" of the referendum.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
That is not the same as "Are you on the electoral roll?". In particular, I suspect lots of 16 and 17 years olds will have signed this petition. Personally I don't see that as a problem - 16-year olds should have had the vote in the referendum - but it's another apples vs oranges point.
There are also millions of non-UK-citizens who live in the UK. Most of them have paid taxes in the UK for many years, but do not have a say in who their MP is, and were not allowed to vote in Brexit referendums.
More importantly, they currently hold it in Assembly. Kirsty Williams is very popular and if she decided to stand for Westminster she would walk it - especially in current climate. But on the oether hand she has another 2 years in Cardiff Bay - she might only get a few months at Westminster...
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
The argument made last night was more compelling - that the Parliamentary recall mechanism provides a useful precedent, i.e. 10% of the electorate.
That's 47 million, so 10% would be 4.7 million. That doesn't overturn the result, but it provides a good point to ask the question again.
Of course, recall can only be triggered in certain circumstances, such as the MP in question being convicted. Hmmm... remind me how the Leave campaigns are doing in the courts right now...
Tell me precisely, how mamy of that 10% would not be eligible to vote, either as not on the electoral roll, under age, or Putin's playthings having a larf?
I think the Sackler are trashed. Most of my US friends (even apolitical ones) are outraged by their sh1tty behaviour pushing opioids.
The Universities and Museums and Galleries are disowning their money as too dirty -- rightly too.
I’m always conflicted about that
I don’t think with a situation like this the donations help their reputation (and in any event that wasn’t Maurice’s intention).
So why not take the money and use it for good?
What level or type of behaviour from a possible donor do you think should stop a recipient from accepting their money?
Fundamentally if the money isn’t legitimately their’s to give
In the case of the Sacklers for example, they pushed the envelope very aggressively in marketing but not more than other forms have done in different areas. AstraZeneca, for example, paid a $1bn fine for it (oncology I think)
Clearly opioid abuse is particularly damaging but that’s not Purdue’s fault - it’s the responsibility of the pill factories.
They should be fined heavily and forced to disgorge, plus be enjoined and probably have a DPA imposed. But the money left after all the above is itself is legitimate and can be given away
Though gifts of well scrubbed money may not be helping the Sacklers' reputation (dunno about that), the museums & galleries may be thinking of their own reputations. Those reputations won't last long if prestigious artists are boycotting them and protesting outside them, and no amount of donations can really make up for that.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
I was unclear - if you can only control part of the potential immigration flows (ie while in the EU) you have no control over the whole
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
If Leavers don’t want immigration they have the ability to vote for a government that will actually (as opposed to pretend to) reduce it
That option isn’t available while we are members of the EU
Democratic control of our politicians is important
That isn't true though is it. We've always had and continue to have control over non-EU migration. If leavers don't like Romanians and prefer Somalis they might be happy. But the complaints seem to be about numbers coming rather than where they come from.
Meanwhile, the revoke article 50 petition has now been signed by over 5% of the electorate.
One side-effect of Macron's new deadline is that it will very possibly reach 17.4 million in time, now.
I suspect not, but reaching 52% of Twitter's UK user base doesn't seem impossible. Twitter's UK user base is estimated at 7.5M by one source. So 52% would be 3.9M. So that's the sort of figure where we can start to say it overturns the referendum result.
Comments
The ERG might hate it but it's what happens.
If may resigns as PM but not as Tory leader then we have problems
In 2010 David Cameron wanted to make Mark Francois Europe Minister, Nick Clegg vetoed that, so the job went to David Lidington who stayed there for six years.
"Article 127
Each Contracting Party may withdraw from this Agreement provided it gives at least twelve months' notice in writing to the other Contracting Parties.
Immediately after the notification of the intended withdrawal, the other Contracting Parties shall convene a diplomatic conference in order to envisage the necessary modifications to bring to the Agreement."
A No-dealer would in all likelihood drive MPs to TIG.
That is not the same as "Are you on the electoral roll?". In particular, I suspect lots of 16 and 17 years olds will have signed this petition. Personally I don't see that as a problem - 16-year olds should have had the vote in the referendum - but it's another apples vs oranges point.
In theory Parliament could do a sampling exercise with (say) 2000 signatories to see if they're on the electoral roll in/near the postcode they've supplied, and then extrapolate from there. I'm not sure whether the terms of use permit them to do that.
Regardless, if it does reach 17.4m (which would be a massive stretch), that would be the best application of the banter heuristic yet. Particularly if it does so on 29th March 12th April.
I think you're losing the plot.
For example
'No deal will cause pain'
'Yes it may, but leaving is what we voted for, pain or not, I must respect that'
Edit- if however she said it verbatim like that then she is insane and needs immediate removal
That's 47 million, so 10% would be 4.7 million. That doesn't overturn the result, but it provides a good point to ask the question again.
Of course, recall can only be triggered in certain circumstances, such as the MP in question being convicted. Hmmm... remind me how the Leave campaigns are doing in the courts right now...
The optics would be shocking and if they tried it I think Tory leavers would be justified in resigning the whip and VONC the government,
This site perhaps more than any other should recognise the problems with trying to deduce "what the people think" from self-selecting petitions and social media.
Not good enough.
The idea a petition overrides an actual vote is delinquent madness. It might be used as an argument for a second referendum, with sufficiently high numbers, but no more than that.
https://twitter.com/campaignforleo/status/1109052038250463233
Although Kwarteng keeps on reminding us a lot of this is in Bercow's hands.
MV3 might not happen.
Pitiful and/or contemptible.
NEW THREAD