> @Selebian said: > Quiet at the polling station > > As they were crossing off my name I noticed that I was the first one on the page to be crossed off, and that nobody was crossed off on the two pages before the one my name appeared on. There must have been about 30 names on the sheet, so turnout at 8:15am can be estimated at just over 1%. > > I don't know if that is typical. > > > > For the first time in 19 years of being able to vote, through all the local, Euro and general elections, I'm not going to in this election. There are no local pressing issues (to me) to make me vote on that basis - council, Conservative led, seems fine, I'm fairly happy with it and our ward is a mix of longstanding Labour and Conservative candidates. Nationally, votes will be interpreted as supporting party policy and with today's choice of Conservative, Labour and Socialist Labour (they still exist?) I'm not willing to support any. I'd turn out and vote LD, Green or a local independent for sure. > > In the Euros of course there is a much greater choice. Just submitted my postal vote application for that as I'm out of the country on 23rd May. Haven't decided where my vote is going, but I will certainly vote. > > On a more positive note, the Tour de Yorkshire's coming past our house today, time to put out the bunting!
I am in a similar position. I always vote, yet i can;t stir myself. If it;s sunny tonight I will go and vote Lib Dem - against the tories. if it;s raining, i will watch the Uefa Cup
Why on earth is it called the Tour "de" Yorkshire by the way, that's absurd! I nearly spat my coffee out it sounds so ridiculous
I continue to believe that writing off Theresa May is a schoolboy error. And there are a lot of those around in the Conservative Party. Schoolboys I mean.
We all know she has made mistakes. But she was dealt an impossible hand by Cameron, made worse by the disastrous General Election. The Conservatives are totally unruly on Europe. They always have been and it only took Cameron's ill-judged decision to lift the lid on Pandora's Box.
Whatever Piers Morgan might think, I doubt anyone would have done better than Theresa May. An unpopular viewpoint perhaps, but I believe it's true. It's very easy in hindsight to say, 'she should have done this or that.'
The disastrous GE was entirely down to her. Not Cameron. He bequeathed her a majority.
And she chose to stand for the leadership, having been in the Cabinet for 6 years. So one would have hoped that she had an idea of (a) how difficult things were likely to be; and (b) what she planned to do about it.
Instead she had neither and has simply gone from bad to worse.
> @kjh said: > I don't agree with Mike (I usually do). The electorate isn't that sophisticated. They will just see another Tory bad news story. I think it is negative not positive.
If the Tories do better than expected (which is possible) then it won't be down to the Williamson sacking. Nor will it be down to the Williamson sacking if they do worse than expected (which is also possible).
> @Cyclefree said: > I continue to believe that writing off Theresa May is a schoolboy error. And there are a lot of those around in the Conservative Party. Schoolboys I mean. > > > > We all know she has made mistakes. But she was dealt an impossible hand by Cameron, made worse by the disastrous General Election. The Conservatives are totally unruly on Europe. They always have been and it only took Cameron's ill-judged decision to lift the lid on Pandora's Box. > > > > Whatever Piers Morgan might think, I doubt anyone would have done better than Theresa May. An unpopular viewpoint perhaps, but I believe it's true. It's very easy in hindsight to say, 'she should have done this or that.' > > The disastrous GE was entirely down to her.
I think it's a little unfair to state that it was entirely down to her. A lot of it was but she was very badly advised, especially during the campaign. I think Nick Timothy had rather a lot to do with the errors ...
There were some other factors too, such as the Corbyn honeymoon which was still in play but Timothy's strategy was wrong at almost every turn.
Sacking Williamson to appear decisive and strong for the locals implies a degree of political strategy and cunning. I think it's already well established that may is utterly deficient when it comes to that.
The disastrous GE was entirely down to her. Not Cameron. He bequeathed her a majority.
And she chose to stand for the leadership, having been in the Cabinet for 6 years. So one would have hoped that she had an idea of (a) how difficult things were likely to be; and (b) what she planned to do about it.
Instead she had neither and has simply gone from bad to worse.
Yes.
But you are both right. Given where we are, May has done if not well then certainly as least badly as possible. Certainly there is no other course of action that could have been pursued to avoid significant damage to the country and hence @Mysticrose's post is well-observed.
But, as you say, it is absolutely her fault we are here in the first place.
Heading out for a walk but I wanted to add that one of the many things I've loved about being on this site is the way Mike Smithson called out Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG for what they really are months and months before any other commentator.
> I continue to believe that writing off Theresa May is a schoolboy error. And there are a lot of those around in the Conservative Party. Schoolboys I mean.
>
>
>
> We all know she has made mistakes. But she was dealt an impossible hand by Cameron, made worse by the disastrous General Election. The Conservatives are totally unruly on Europe. They always have been and it only took Cameron's ill-judged decision to lift the lid on Pandora's Box.
>
>
>
> Whatever Piers Morgan might think, I doubt anyone would have done better than Theresa May. An unpopular viewpoint perhaps, but I believe it's true. It's very easy in hindsight to say, 'she should have done this or that.'
>
> The disastrous GE was entirely down to her.
I think it's a little unfair to state that it was entirely down to her. A lot of it was but she was very badly advised, especially during the campaign. I think Nick Timothy had rather a lot to do with the errors ...
There were some other factors too, such as the Corbyn honeymoon which was still in play but Timothy's strategy was wrong at almost every turn.
Such a disaster that Corbyn was still 55 behind in seats, and won only 4 more seats than Brown did in 2010?
> @MikeSmithson said: > > @TheWhiteRabbit said: > > What do we think par is for the Tories? > > > > >1000 disaster > > 600-1000 defeat > > 400-600 a hit > > <400 a mere flesh wound > > > > Closer to 600 losses than 1000 will be an OK result. These seats were last fought on GE2015 day when the blue team exceeded expectations. > > I wonder how LAB is going to do.
Seats won and lost is a zero-sum game. With all parties unpopular, turnout may be down but councillors will still get elected. Tomorrow's spin will be all about how X or Y exceeded expectations.
> @Mysticrose said: > Heading out for a walk but I wanted to add that one of the many things I've loved about being on this site is the way Mike Smithson called out Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG for what they really are months and months before any other commentator. > > 'Piss and wind' will live long in the memory.
Yet they aren't in the cabinet running the country.
> I continue to believe that writing off Theresa May is a schoolboy error. And there are a lot of those around in the Conservative Party. Schoolboys I mean.
>
>
>
> We all know she has made mistakes. But she was dealt an impossible hand by Cameron, made worse by the disastrous General Election. The Conservatives are totally unruly on Europe. They always have been and it only took Cameron's ill-judged decision to lift the lid on Pandora's Box.
>
>
>
> Whatever Piers Morgan might think, I doubt anyone would have done better than Theresa May. An unpopular viewpoint perhaps, but I believe it's true. It's very easy in hindsight to say, 'she should have done this or that.'
>
> The disastrous GE was entirely down to her.
I think it's a little unfair to state that it was entirely down to her. A lot of it was but she was very badly advised, especially during the campaign. I think Nick Timothy had rather a lot to do with the errors ...
There were some other factors too, such as the Corbyn honeymoon which was still in play but Timothy's strategy was wrong at almost every turn.
Such a disaster that Corbyn was still 55 behind in seats, and won only 4 more seats than Brown did in 2010?
He is nonetheless seen as more credible as a possible PM than he was beforehand.
And, yes, she may have been badly advised. But she chose the advisors and whether to listen to them. So she is ultimately responsible.
If she did not realise by the age of 60 that she is a shy person who is not good with people or rallies or meeting strangers in the way that PMs, especially if the campaign is made all about her, have to, then really she has no business thinking that she ought to be PM.
> @Ploppikins said: > Sacking Williamson to appear decisive and strong for the locals implies a degree of political strategy and cunning. I think it's already well established that may is utterly deficient when it comes to that.
The other thing that occurred about this sacking is whether it is connected to the suggestions May is set to do a deal imminently with Labour on a Customs Union. First, it distracts attention (as with the Locals) but, secondly, it has enabled her to bring in a loyalist such as Stewart into the Cabinet.
Also, Williamson's denials look pretty categorical. We all can have a view on their worth but I would personally wouldn't be using such words as he has used if I had the slightest doubt I could be proven wrong.
She explains at length in that NewsLetter article.
Does she? She didn’t refer at all to the pro IRA candidates, and Otto English etc are suggesting she didn’t even know of them
OIC no she doesn't mention them. Perhaps that was important also.
The Brexit Party - bringing communities together everywhere.
btw are we the only two fuckers actually using the blockquote system properly?
I assumed everyone always used the system you and I do, maybe we are Betamax and everyone else is VHS!
It seemed to me to be the point of The Brexit Party at this stage to be a collection of people who had only anger at the handling of Brexit in common, and any widely contrasting opinions were a positive example of that. This case could be a good selling point, or it could end in tears I guess
No it's a great selling point and looks like it is supplanting UKIP as the pro-Brexit pressure group.
But given where we are and that MPs have so far refused to vote for Brexit I suppose we will find out whether the country feels strongly enough about it to make them the government.
It’s looks like that people such as Otto English are trying to start a fight between people on opposing sides of the Irish troubles that might have found common ground
I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
@JonCisBack said: Why on earth is it called the Tour "de" Yorkshire by the way, that's absurd! I nearly spat my coffee out it sounds so ridiculous
Aye, it looks ridiculous. Started (I think) the year after the Tour de France first stages were in Yorkshire so trying to cash in on the name of the more famous race. Sounds surprisingly well though when said in a broad Yorkshire accent: "t' Tour d' Yorkshire". Could be worse, had it been the Italian tour in 2014 we might have ended up with Giro di Yorkshire!
> @TheKitchenCabinet said: > > @Ploppikins said: > > Sacking Williamson to appear decisive and strong for the locals implies a degree of political strategy and cunning. I think it's already well established that may is utterly deficient when it comes to that. > > The other thing that occurred about this sacking is whether it is connected to the suggestions May is set to do a deal imminently with Labour on a Customs Union. First, it distracts attention (as with the Locals) but, secondly, it has enabled her to bring in a loyalist such as Stewart into the Cabinet. > > Also, Williamson's denials look pretty categorical. We all can have a view on their worth but I would personally wouldn't be using such words as he has used if I had the slightest doubt I could be proven wrong.
Categorical denials on behalf of his team also which seems bold.
> @tlg86 said: > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
> @tlg86 said: > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
Who is the "they" who know where you live? The LibDems or Facebook?
> I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
> I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
> @rkrkrk said: > > @TheKitchenCabinet said: > > > @Ploppikins said: > > > Sacking Williamson to appear decisive and strong for the locals implies a degree of political strategy and cunning. I think it's already well established that may is utterly deficient when it comes to that. > > > > The other thing that occurred about this sacking is whether it is connected to the suggestions May is set to do a deal imminently with Labour on a Customs Union. First, it distracts attention (as with the Locals) but, secondly, it has enabled her to bring in a loyalist such as Stewart into the Cabinet. > > > > Also, Williamson's denials look pretty categorical. We all can have a view on their worth but I would personally wouldn't be using such words as he has used if I had the slightest doubt I could be proven wrong. > > Categorical denials on behalf of his team also which seems bold.
Yes. I noted he also said that at the very start of the affair. My immediate reaction was you just can't know that.
> @Selebian said: > @JonCisBack said: > Why on earth is it called the Tour "de" Yorkshire by the way, that's absurd! I nearly spat my coffee out it sounds so ridiculous > > Aye, it looks ridiculous. Started (I think) the year after the Tour de France first stages were in Yorkshire so trying to cash in on the name of the more famous race. Sounds surprisingly well though when said in a broad Yorkshire accent: "t' Tour d' Yorkshire". Could be worse, had it been the Italian tour in 2014 we might have ended up with Giro di Yorkshire!
It is a French race that just happens to be held in Yorkshire. That's why they give all of the hills French names, for example. The organisers are the Tour de France organisers.
It has been a massive success - I expect massive crowds again this year - with anti-fracking protesters adding to the gaiety.
> @SandyRentool said: > > @Morris_Dancer said: > > Mr. Rentool, I voted for a local party. > > Fair play, you've surprised me. > > Clearly the Tory core vote is abandoning the party.
First time in 10 elections that I haven't voted Con. Or at all.
That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
> @isam said: > Plus, what sort of an absolute twat swears "on my children's lives". What is he, 10yrs old? > > Would be quite impressive if he was!
Thought the same. People who swear on their children's or mother's or grandmother's lives don't always fare well when tested against reality. Not saying he is not telling the truth as he sees it, but as a character Pike comes out better than Williamson.
> @Cyclefree said: > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770 > > > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was? > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
Agree with that and when it looks like Hammond has been a strong pusher of the deal on accounting grounds, that is another cause for concern. I naturally vote Conservative but I won't vote for them again until the current leadership goes.
> @tlg86 said: > > @tlg86 said: > > > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward. > > > > Do you have a 5G phone ? > > No. > @tlg86 said: > > > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward. > > > > Who is the "they" who know where you live? > > The LibDems or Facebook? > > Both.
So what is the mystery? The LibDems know because they've seen the electoral register and Facebook knows because you told them. Which one is relevant depends on whether the LibDems wrote to you personally or paid Facebook to send adverts to everyone in your ward or constituency or who collects stamps and wears sandals.
> @Cyclefree said: > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770 > > > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was? > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison.
Lord Prescott, the former Deputy Prime Minister, ranted aggressively at a Jewish journalist that Labour’s antisemitism crisis under Jeremy Corbyn was all “about Israel” and asked her what she would do as a British Jew to change Israel’s behaviour.
After interviewing Lord Prescott, the former MP for Hull East, the journalist – a well-established reporter who wishes to remain anonymous – asked for his opinion on how best to resolve Labour antisemitism.
.....
When the JC asked Lord Prescott about his comments he responded: “F**k off.” Asked why he was using foul language he replied: “Because you are a journalist – F**k off.”
Been and voted in my Norwich south ward. A hopeful pair of old dears out front from labour and green taking turnout, looking at their sheets turnout is..... sluggish 3 candidates from each of green, lab, con and LD, vote any 3 from 12. Should be labour safely but given their issues greens might nick some back. I helped them try anyway.
> Why on earth is it called the Tour "de" Yorkshire by the way, that's absurd! I nearly spat my coffee out it sounds so ridiculous
>
> Aye, it looks ridiculous. Started (I think) the year after the Tour de France first stages were in Yorkshire so trying to cash in on the name of the more famous race. Sounds surprisingly well though when said in a broad Yorkshire accent: "t' Tour d' Yorkshire". Could be worse, had it been the Italian tour in 2014 we might have ended up with Giro di Yorkshire!
It is a French race that just happens to be held in Yorkshire. That's why they give all of the hills French names, for example. The organisers are the Tour de France organisers.
It has been a massive success - I expect massive crowds again this year - with anti-fracking protesters adding to the gaiety.
The need to move the ToY to later in the year. It clashes with the vastly more important Tour of Romandie which is a World Tour race. (ToY is only a 2.HC race.)
> @GIN1138 said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770 > > > > > > > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was? > > > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace. > > If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately. > > On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison. > > The stakes are very high now...
Williamson doesn't have to prove his innocence - Plod have to prove his guilt.
> Plus, what sort of an absolute twat swears "on my children's lives". What is he, 10yrs old?
>
> Would be quite impressive if he was!
Thought the same. People who swear on their children's or mother's or grandmother's lives don't always fare well when tested against reality. Not saying he is not telling the truth as he sees it, but as a character Pike comes out better than Williamson.
Is it actually him who has said this? Or was it friends who reported him saying it? Or is there no difference?
It does feel as if both sides are upping the ante here in ways which make me wonder what's really going on.
Sacking Williamson to appear decisive and strong for the locals implies a degree of political strategy and cunning. I think it's already well established that may is utterly deficient when it comes to that.
The other thing that occurred about this sacking is whether it is connected to the suggestions May is set to do a deal imminently with Labour on a Customs Union. First, it distracts attention (as with the Locals) but, secondly, it has enabled her to bring in a loyalist such as Stewart into the Cabinet.
Also, Williamson's denials look pretty categorical. We all can have a view on their worth but I would personally wouldn't be using such words as he has used if I had the slightest doubt I could be proven wrong.
Categorical denials on behalf of his team also which seems bold.
The denials on behalf of his team are pure weaseldom; their intention is not to exonerate them but to bring them into the pool of potential suspects.
> @Cyclefree said: > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770 > > > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was? > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
Given he swore on his kids lives if convincing evidence or conviction were forthcoming hed make Jonathon Aitken look popular.
Lord Prescott, the former Deputy Prime Minister, ranted aggressively at a Jewish journalist that Labour’s antisemitism crisis under Jeremy Corbyn was all “about Israel” and asked her what she would do as a British Jew to change Israel’s behaviour.
After interviewing Lord Prescott, the former MP for Hull East, the journalist – a well-established reporter who wishes to remain anonymous – asked for his opinion on how best to resolve Labour antisemitism.
When the JC asked Lord Prescott about his comments he responded: “F**k off.” Asked why he was using foul language he replied: “Because you are a journalist – F**k off.”
> @GIN1138 said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770 > > > > > > > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was? > > > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace. > > If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately. > > On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison. > > The stakes are very high now...
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this issue I wouldn’t trust Gavin Williamson with getting a round in in the pub.
> @TGOHF said: > > @GIN1138 said: > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770 > > > > > > > > > > > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was? > > > > > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace. > > > > If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately. > > > > On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison. > > > > The stakes are very high now... > > Williamson doesn't have to prove his innocence - Plod have to prove his guilt. > >
I was thinking more that is someone (say the reporter himself) was to come out and categorically say the leak didn't come from Williamson then obviously Theresa May would be in pretty deep shit.
Williamson's defence probably depends on the Telegraph's (and the reporter's) desire to protect their source. The paper cannot even deny it is Williamson without endangering their other source (if indeed there is one).
Though as the Guardian showed, sometimes papers can be unexpectedly helpful to the boys in blue.
> > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
> >
> > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
>
> If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
>
> On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison.
>
> The stakes are very high now...
Williamson doesn't have to prove his innocence - Plod have to prove his guilt.
Yes. They have to get sufficient evidence on which a jury could convict with a better than 50/50 probability, in reality very much higher and the CPS has to decide that it would be in the public interest to have a trial. That's a pretty high bar, especially in such a case, juries can be cussed and think of the people who might need to give evidence.
Meta data showing a call to a journalist - without the substance of that call - may be enough for a sacking but it is not enough for a conviction.
I'm not yet sure whether I'll bother voting in the local elections. I caught the train before 7am so couldn't vote this morning and I probably won't be back in the village until after 9pm. None of the candidates have inspired and I have no important national message to send. The concept of a civic duty is really being stretched for me today.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was? > > > > > > > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace. > > > > > > If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately. > > > > > > On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison. > > > > > > The stakes are very high now... > > > > Williamson doesn't have to prove his innocence - Plod have to prove his guilt. > > Yes. They have to get sufficient evidence on which a jury could convict with a better than 50/50 probability, in reality very much higher and the CPS has to decide that it would be in the public interest to have a trial. That's a pretty high bar, especially in such a case, juries can be cussed and think of the people who might need to give evidence. > > Meta data showing a call to a journalist - without the substance of that call - may be enough for a sacking but it is not enough for a conviction.
IANAL but iirc after Clive Ponting, the Official Secrets Act was changed to remove the public interest defence.
Isn't it quite unusual for the BBC to be giving such prominence to the Williamson story at the moment? Isn't there meant to be a blackout on political news while voting is going on?
> @geoffw said: > If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately. > > > > > Proving his innocence, as in proving a negative, is a pretty tall order.
He could sue in defamation and force Lidlington to prove his case on the balance of probabilities.
From what is in the public domain, it looks like May had enough evidence on the balance of probabilities but not necessary on a criminal standard. The reality is she wasn't going to authorise additional evidence gathering against a sitting Cabinet member and why would she. That's for the Police.
> > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
> > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
>
>
>
> Who is the "they" who know where you live?
>
> The LibDems or Facebook?
>
> Both.
So what is the mystery? The LibDems know because they've
seen the electoral register and Facebook knows because you
told them. Which one is relevant depends on whether the
LibDems wrote to you personally or paid Facebook to send
adverts to everyone in your ward or constituency or who
collects stamps and wears sandals.
Fair enough. I've not really paid much attention to the arguments about what Vote Leave were doing, but I guess it's okay for a political party to pay for adverts on Facebook which target specific users.
I don't really care, except that some people in politics seem to think this sort of thing can be used to discredit a democratic vote that didn't go their way.
> > If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
>
> >
>
> > On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison.
>
> >
>
> > The stakes are very high now...
>
>
>
> Williamson doesn't have to prove his innocence - Plod have to prove his guilt.
>
> Yes. They have to get sufficient evidence on which a jury could convict with a better than 50/50 probability, in reality very much higher and the CPS has to decide that it would be in the public interest to have a trial. That's a pretty high bar, especially in such a case, juries can be cussed and think of the people who might need to give evidence.
>
> Meta data showing a call to a journalist - without the substance of that call - may be enough for a sacking but it is not enough for a conviction.
IANAL but iirc after Clive Ponting, the Official Secrets Act was
changed to remove the public interest defence.
But as you know, juries can simply ignore the judge and come to their own verdict.
I wonder, though, whether that works in an era when there are various whistleblowing directives which do - for the moment - apply in the UK. It may well be that under the HRA etc the government cannot outlaw such a defence. Lots of ironies if that's where this case ends up.
My guess is that the last thing the government needs is the criminal authorities getting their hands on it. They lose control and all sorts of stuff risks coming out which will be displeasing to more than Mr W.
> @Cyclefree said: > Williamson's defence probably depends on the Telegraph's > > (and the reporter's) desire to protect their source. The paper > > cannot even deny it is Williamson without endangering > > their other source (if indeed there is one). > > > > Though as the Guardian showed, sometimes papers > > can be unexpectedly helpful to the boys in blue. > > If they wanted to be naughty, they could say - or imply - that there was more than one source........
Shouldn't there be more than one source to print the story?
> @TheWhiteRabbit said: > What do we think par is for the Tories? > > >1000 disaster > 600-1000 defeat > 400-600 a hit > <400 a mere flesh wound >
The Conservatives lost 1,000 seats in this round of elections in 1991, but were still level-pegging, in terms of NEV, with Labour. That was a blow, but certainly not a disaster.
Four years later, in the same round, they lost 2,000 seats. That was a disaster. The kind of election where Labour won Aldenham West (the slightly less posh part of Radlett, and Letchmore Heath) Potters Bar West, South, and East, and the Lib Dems won everything in Bushey bar Bushey Heath.
Four years on, the Conservatives regained 1,100 seats.
So, big seat changes are nothing unusual in this round of elections, where so many are being contested.
The Conservatives are starting from what is still quite a high point in terms of local government representation.
My benchmarks would be:-
No losses: An outstanding night for the Conservatives.
0 -500 losses a good night for the Conservatives.
500 - 800 losses, par for the course for a government in mid-term,
800 - 1,200 losses, bad for the Conservatives, but not outside the usual parameters of bad.
> @Cyclefree said: > Williamson's defence probably depends on the Telegraph's > > (and the reporter's) desire to protect their source. The paper > > cannot even deny it is Williamson without endangering > > their other source (if indeed there is one). > > > > Though as the Guardian showed, sometimes papers > > can be unexpectedly helpful to the boys in blue. > > If they wanted to be naughty, they could say - or imply - that there was more than one source........
Given the magnitude of the story, it wouldnt be surprising for the telegraph to have a second source, at least along the lines of asking a friendly minister we hear the decision is yes, would we look stupid if we ran that...with a reply of i couldn't possibly comment with body language making it clear one way or another.
I am delighted Williamson has gone. He was a liability and was promoted far too quickly
I expect the story will be lost in the locals and the lead upto the EU elections
As far as TM is concerned she seems demob happy and I expect her to seek an election to her post in early June. I do not see Williamson taking her down at all, Brexit will define her.
I am delighted Penny and Rory have been promoted and I expect I will be changing my reference from TM to PM PM by the late summer
> @AlastairMeeks said: > I'm not yet sure whether I'll bother voting in the local elections. I caught the train before 7am so couldn't vote this morning and I probably won't be back in the village until after 9pm. None of the candidates have inspired and I have no important national message to send. The concept of a civic duty is really being stretched for me today.
Write a message to spoil your ballot - the candidates get to read them and it might raise a smile.
> @TOPPING said: > Lord Prescott, the former Deputy Prime Minister, ranted aggressively at a Jewish journalist that Labour’s antisemitism crisis under Jeremy Corbyn was all “about Israel” and asked her what she would do as a British Jew to change Israel’s behaviour. > > After interviewing Lord Prescott, the former MP for Hull East, the journalist – a well-established reporter who wishes to remain anonymous – asked for his opinion on how best to resolve Labour antisemitism. > > When the JC asked Lord Prescott about his comments he responded: “F**k off.” Asked why he was using foul language he replied: “Because you are a journalist – F**k off.” > > https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/lord-prescott-former-deputy-pm-ranted-at-jewish-journalist-labour-antisemitism-all-about-israel-1.483611 > > That will sort out Labour problems with the Jewish community. > > Paging @TheJezziah to explain why the real problem is with Conservative Councillors in Guildford.
Oh something I know about. What do you want to know Topping? This could go into pages
> @Danny565 said: > > @nunuone said: > > A bad night tonight would be 1,000 Tory losses. > > No way they'll lose that many. > > Think Labour & the Tories will be tied in the national voteshares, which I think would mean about 300-400 losses.
Thrasher was predicting 400, but news is moving fast (both brexit and leak)
<blockquote> > @Big_G_NorthWales said: > I am delighted Williamson has gone. He was a liability and was promoted far too quickly > > I expect the story will be lost in the locals and the lead upto the EU elections > > As far as TM is concerned she seems demob happy and I expect her to seek an election to her post in early June. I do not see Williamson taking her down at all, Brexit will define her. > > I am delighted Penny and Rory have been promoted and I expect I will be changing my reference from TM to PM PM by the late summer
> @AlastairMeeks said: > I'm not yet sure whether I'll bother voting in the local elections. I caught the train before 7am so couldn't vote this morning and I probably won't be back in the village until after 9pm. None of the candidates have inspired and I have no important national message to send. The concept of a civic duty is really being stretched for me today.
the village ?
youre going all blazer brigade on us young Meeks, next youll be voting Brexit
Looking at YouGov's weighted voting intention numbers, it looks as if they have the Conservatives and Labour level-pegging, albeit, at a very low level.
Traditional voting patterns seem to be reasserting themselves for the euros, with 34% of 18-24 year olds certain to vote, but 54% of voters aged over 65. The gap in certainty to vote between Remainers and Leavers is now 58% to 50%.
It could be that CHUK, the Lib Dems, and Greens, who poll a combined 28% are beginning to eat into the Labour vote.
> @TOPPING said: > Oh something I know about. What do you want to know Topping? This could go into pages > > Didn't they say they would only cut bin collections for Muslims? In which case Prescott's actions and comments are wholly justified.
That means absolutely nothing to me, but there has been a scandal going on here for several year re the local plan (and I don't mean like the usual stuff on local plans). This isn't party political. To put it mildly the neighbouring Tories, Mole Valley, who have some wards in Guildford Borough do not get on with the Guildford Tories (and that really is putting it mildly). The Mole Valley MP used parliamentary privilege to accuse the Leader of the Guildford Tories to be under the influence of Russians, throw in a Cayman Islands development company, a fraud conviction, 80,000 objections to a local plan that still goes through and you get the gist. I could type until next next week.
> I'm not yet sure whether I'll bother voting in the local elections. I caught the train before 7am so couldn't vote this morning and I probably won't be back in the village until after 9pm. None of the candidates have inspired and I have no important national message to send. The concept of a civic duty is really being stretched for me today.
the village ?
youre going all blazer brigade on us young Meeks, next youll be voting Brexit
I'm not going to identify exactly where I live!
You may rest assured that I will not be voting Brexit. Or worse, wearing a blazer.
That means absolutely nothing to me, but there has been a scandal going on here for several year re the local plan (and I don't mean like the usual stuff on local plans). This isn't party political. To put it mildly the neighbouring Tories, Mole Valley, who have some wards in Guildford Borough do not get on with the Guildford Tories (and that really is putting it mildly). The Mole Valley MP used parliamentary privilege to accuse the Leader of the Guildford Tories to be under the influence of Russians, throw in a Cayman Islands development company, a fraud conviction, 80,000 objections to a local plan that still goes through and you get the gist. I could type until next next week.
Bloody hell that is extraordinary. Plus Councils usually dislike neighbourhood plans.
Shouldn't there be more than one source to print the story?
No. That's a practice followed by some US newspapers but not generally standard practice in Fleet Street. Even in the US, they'll generally make an exception if the anonymous source is a "golden source" like, for example, the Secretary of State for Defence.
> @Sean_F said: > > @TheWhiteRabbit said: > > What do we think par is for the Tories? > > > > >1000 disaster > > 600-1000 defeat > > 400-600 a hit > > <400 a mere flesh wound > > > > The Conservatives lost 1,000 seats in this round of elections in 1991, but were still level-pegging, in terms of NEV, with Labour. That was a blow, but certainly not a disaster. > > Four years later, in the same round, they lost 2,000 seats. That was a disaster. The kind of election where Labour won Aldenham West (the slightly less posh part of Radlett, and Letchmore Heath) Potters Bar West, South, and East, and the Lib Dems won everything in Bushey bar Bushey Heath. > > Four years on, the Conservatives regained 1,100 seats. > > So, big seat changes are nothing unusual in this round of elections, where so many are being contested. > > The Conservatives are starting from what is still quite a high point in terms of local government representation. > > My benchmarks would be:- > > No losses: An outstanding night for the Conservatives. > > 0 -500 losses a good night for the Conservatives. > > 500 - 800 losses, par for the course for a government in mid-term, > > 800 - 1,200 losses, bad for the Conservatives, but not outside the usual parameters of bad. > > 1,200 - 1,500 losses, very bad. > > 1,500 + losses, disastrously bad. > > > >
Why this talk of Gav's career being over? Liam had to go for being a threat to national security and now he's back negotiating squillions of post-Brexit trade deals on our behalf.
> @Jonathan said: > <blockquote> > @Big_G_NorthWales said: > > I am delighted Williamson has gone. He was a liability and was promoted far too quickly > > > > I expect the story will be lost in the locals and the lead upto the EU elections > > > > As far as TM is concerned she seems demob happy and I expect her to seek an election to her post in early June. I do not see Williamson taking her down at all, Brexit will define her. > > > > I am delighted Penny and Rory have been promoted and I expect I will be changing my reference from TM to PM PM by the late summer > > </blockquote> > Shudders at thought of PM PM.
> @Danny565 said: > Isn't it quite unusual for the BBC to be giving such prominence to the Williamson story at the moment? Isn't there meant to be a blackout on political news while voting is going on?
Yes, I thought so. Normally the politicians cooperate by not creating any political news though.
> @AlastairMeeks said: > I'm not yet sure whether I'll bother voting in the local elections. I caught the train before 7am so couldn't vote this morning and I probably won't be back in the village until after 9pm. None of the candidates have inspired and I have no important national message to send. The concept of a civic duty is really being stretched for me today.
I'll be spending longer than usual in the voting booth, making a new box and labelling it NotA. I'll vote for that.
Yes I know it's a spoilt ballot but it's how I feel.
> @tlg86 said: > > @tlg86 said: > > > > @tlg86 said: > > > > > > > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have a 5G phone ? > > > > > > No. > @tlg86 said: > > > > > > > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward. > > > > > > > > > > > > Who is the "they" who know where you live? > > > > > > The LibDems or Facebook? > > > > > > Both. > > > > So what is the mystery? The LibDems know because they've > > seen the electoral register and Facebook knows because you > > told them. Which one is relevant depends on whether the > > LibDems wrote to you personally or paid Facebook to send > > adverts to everyone in your ward or constituency or who > > collects stamps and wears sandals. > > Fair enough. I've not really paid much attention to the arguments about what Vote Leave were doing, but I guess it's okay for a political party to pay for adverts on Facebook which target specific users. > > I don't really care, except that some people in politics seem to think this sort of thing can be used to discredit a democratic vote that didn't go their way.
Is it OK though? This is the sort of micro-targeted advertising the Conservatives imported from America in 2010. There are two concerns.
1) it is unregulated (as are the videos both main parties use to get round restrictions on PPBs and PEBs). 2) there is effectively an auction so if the Tories or Labour want to send adverts to sandal wearing pigeon fanciers in your ward, they can outbid the LibDems for the relevant advertising slots.
One reason there is no appetite to investigate Russian troll farms is that our political parties benefit from some of the same techniques.
Looking at YouGov's weighted voting intention numbers, it looks as if they have the Conservatives and Labour level-pegging, albeit, at a very low level.
Traditional voting patterns seem to be reasserting themselves for the euros, with 34% of 18-24 year olds certain to vote, but 54% of voters aged over 65. The gap in certainty to vote between Remainers and Leavers is now 58% to 50%.
It could be that CHUK, the Lib Dems, and Greens, who poll a combined 28% are beginning to eat into the Labour vote.
Yougov polls at the same time in 2014 had 60+ at 65% turnout, and this grew towards polling day. A 65+ Interval would likely have been even higher, so currently this group is at least 10 points down. There’s plenty of room for this segment to grow, and they are currently breaking ~50% to TBP...
> @brokenwheel said: > Looking at YouGov's weighted voting intention numbers, it looks as if they have the Conservatives and Labour level-pegging, albeit, at a very low level. > > Traditional voting patterns seem to be reasserting themselves for the euros, with 34% of 18-24 year olds certain to vote, but 54% of voters aged over 65. The gap in certainty to vote between Remainers and Leavers is now 58% to 50%. > > It could be that CHUK, the Lib Dems, and Greens, who poll a combined 28% are beginning to eat into the Labour vote. > > Yougov polls at the same time in 2014 had 60+ at 65% turnout, and this grew towards polling day. A 65+ Interval would likely have been even higher, so currently this group is at least 10 points down. There’s plenty of room for this segment to grow, and they are currently breaking ~50% to TBP...
That's my view too. By 23rd May, I'd expect certainty to vote to be at similar levels among Leavers and Remainers. Without the Brexit Party, I think more Leavers would have stayed at home.
Closer to 600 losses than 1000 will be an OK result. These seats were last fought on GE2015 day when the blue team exceeded expectations.
I wonder how LAB is going to do.
It might be so that 600 is not absurdly bad, but I think in terms of man on the street assessment anything over 500 looks disastrous even if it is bad but not terrible.
Comments
> Quiet at the polling station
>
> As they were crossing off my name I noticed that I was the first one on the page to be crossed off, and that nobody was crossed off on the two pages before the one my name appeared on. There must have been about 30 names on the sheet, so turnout at 8:15am can be estimated at just over 1%.
>
> I don't know if that is typical.
>
>
>
> For the first time in 19 years of being able to vote, through all the local, Euro and general elections, I'm not going to in this election. There are no local pressing issues (to me) to make me vote on that basis - council, Conservative led, seems fine, I'm fairly happy with it and our ward is a mix of longstanding Labour and Conservative candidates. Nationally, votes will be interpreted as supporting party policy and with today's choice of Conservative, Labour and Socialist Labour (they still exist?) I'm not willing to support any. I'd turn out and vote LD, Green or a local independent for sure.
>
> In the Euros of course there is a much greater choice. Just submitted my postal vote application for that as I'm out of the country on 23rd May. Haven't decided where my vote is going, but I will certainly vote.
>
> On a more positive note, the Tour de Yorkshire's coming past our house today, time to put out the bunting!
I am in a similar position. I always vote, yet i can;t stir myself. If it;s sunny tonight I will go and vote Lib Dem - against the tories. if it;s raining, i will watch the Uefa Cup
Why on earth is it called the Tour "de" Yorkshire by the way, that's absurd! I nearly spat my coffee out it sounds so ridiculous
> I don't really understand this argument. Why would a Tory firing another Tory be good for the Tories?
Snap, but as usual said more succinctly than me.
And she chose to stand for the leadership, having been in the Cabinet for 6 years. So one would have hoped that she had an idea of (a) how difficult things were likely to be; and (b) what she planned to do about it.
Instead she had neither and has simply gone from bad to worse.
> I don't agree with Mike (I usually do). The electorate isn't that sophisticated. They will just see another Tory bad news story. I think it is negative not positive.
If the Tories do better than expected (which is possible) then it won't be down to the Williamson sacking. Nor will it be down to the Williamson sacking if they do worse than expected (which is also possible).
> I continue to believe that writing off Theresa May is a schoolboy error. And there are a lot of those around in the Conservative Party. Schoolboys I mean.
>
>
>
> We all know she has made mistakes. But she was dealt an impossible hand by Cameron, made worse by the disastrous General Election. The Conservatives are totally unruly on Europe. They always have been and it only took Cameron's ill-judged decision to lift the lid on Pandora's Box.
>
>
>
> Whatever Piers Morgan might think, I doubt anyone would have done better than Theresa May. An unpopular viewpoint perhaps, but I believe it's true. It's very easy in hindsight to say, 'she should have done this or that.'
>
> The disastrous GE was entirely down to her.
I think it's a little unfair to state that it was entirely down to her. A lot of it was but she was very badly advised, especially during the campaign. I think Nick Timothy had rather a lot to do with the errors ...
There were some other factors too, such as the Corbyn honeymoon which was still in play but Timothy's strategy was wrong at almost every turn.
But you are both right. Given where we are, May has done if not well then certainly as least badly as possible. Certainly there is no other course of action that could have been pursued to avoid significant damage to the country and hence @Mysticrose's post is well-observed.
But, as you say, it is absolutely her fault we are here in the first place.
'Piss and wind' will live long in the memory.
> > @TheWhiteRabbit said:
> > What do we think par is for the Tories?
> >
> > >1000 disaster
> > 600-1000 defeat
> > 400-600 a hit
> > <400 a mere flesh wound
> >
>
> Closer to 600 losses than 1000 will be an OK result. These seats were last fought on GE2015 day when the blue team exceeded expectations.
>
> I wonder how LAB is going to do.
Seats won and lost is a zero-sum game. With all parties unpopular,
turnout may be down but councillors will still get elected. Tomorrow's
spin will be all about how X or Y exceeded expectations.
> Heading out for a walk but I wanted to add that one of the many things I've loved about being on this site is the way Mike Smithson called out Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG for what they really are months and months before any other commentator.
>
> 'Piss and wind' will live long in the memory.
Yet they aren't in the cabinet running the country.
And, yes, she may have been badly advised. But she chose the advisors and whether to listen to them. So she is ultimately responsible.
If she did not realise by the age of 60 that she is a shy person who is not good with people or rallies or meeting strangers in the way that PMs, especially if the campaign is made all about her, have to, then really she has no business thinking that she ought to be PM.
> Sacking Williamson to appear decisive and strong for the locals implies a degree of political strategy and cunning. I think it's already well established that may is utterly deficient when it comes to that.
The other thing that occurred about this sacking is whether it is connected to the suggestions May is set to do a deal imminently with Labour on a Customs Union. First, it distracts attention (as with the Locals) but, secondly, it has enabled her to bring in a loyalist such as Stewart into the Cabinet.
Also, Williamson's denials look pretty categorical. We all can have a view on their worth but I would personally wouldn't be using such words as he has used if I had the slightest doubt I could be proven wrong.
> Facebook telling me its election day....I'm still waiting for the Russian bots to tell me who to vote for.
Deja vu from last night's fred imo.
> > @Ploppikins said:
> > Sacking Williamson to appear decisive and strong for the locals implies a degree of political strategy and cunning. I think it's already well established that may is utterly deficient when it comes to that.
>
> The other thing that occurred about this sacking is whether it is connected to the suggestions May is set to do a deal imminently with Labour on a Customs Union. First, it distracts attention (as with the Locals) but, secondly, it has enabled her to bring in a loyalist such as Stewart into the Cabinet.
>
> Also, Williamson's denials look pretty categorical. We all can have a view on their worth but I would personally wouldn't be using such words as he has used if I had the slightest doubt I could be proven wrong.
Categorical denials on behalf of his team also which seems bold.
It was very quiet, although it was fairly early.
> I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
Do you have a 5G phone ?
> I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
Who is the "they" who know where you live?
The LibDems or Facebook?
> > @TheKitchenCabinet said:
> > > @Ploppikins said:
> > > Sacking Williamson to appear decisive and strong for the locals implies a degree of political strategy and cunning. I think it's already well established that may is utterly deficient when it comes to that.
> >
> > The other thing that occurred about this sacking is whether it is connected to the suggestions May is set to do a deal imminently with Labour on a Customs Union. First, it distracts attention (as with the Locals) but, secondly, it has enabled her to bring in a loyalist such as Stewart into the Cabinet.
> >
> > Also, Williamson's denials look pretty categorical. We all can have a view on their worth but I would personally wouldn't be using such words as he has used if I had the slightest doubt I could be proven wrong.
>
> Categorical denials on behalf of his team also which seems bold.
Yes. I noted he also said that at the very start of the affair. My immediate reaction was you just can't know that.
> Tories are PeePee shock.
>
>
>
> twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1123871698460213249
>
>
>
> Brexit parties on 68% of the vote...
It feels like it is going to be the Leavers equivalent to the big Remain petition.
"WHAT!!! ANOTHER ONE????"
> I have voted.
>
> It was very quiet, although it was fairly early.
Go on then - surprise us with your choice of candidate...
> Tories are PeePee shock.
>
> https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1123871698460213249
Tories could conceivably come in behind everyone except UKIP in the EU elections?
its kicking off...or is it another MP just mouthing off.
> It'll be funny if there is now another NSC leak.
Will Tom Watson be able to find a peado angle to the NSC leak though?
> @JonCisBack said:
> Why on earth is it called the Tour "de" Yorkshire by the way, that's absurd! I nearly spat my coffee out it sounds so ridiculous
>
> Aye, it looks ridiculous. Started (I think) the year after the Tour de France first stages were in Yorkshire so trying to cash in on the name of the more famous race. Sounds surprisingly well though when said in a broad Yorkshire accent: "t' Tour d' Yorkshire". Could be worse, had it been the Italian tour in 2014 we might have ended up with Giro di Yorkshire!
It is a French race that just happens to be held in Yorkshire. That's why they give all of the hills French names, for example. The organisers are the Tour de France organisers.
It has been a massive success - I expect massive crowds again this year - with anti-fracking protesters adding to the gaiety.
> https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
If that's true Theresa doesn't exactly come out of this smelling of roses as the person who appointed him to the role in the first place...
> Mr. Rentool, I voted for a local party.
Fair play, you've surprised me.
Clearly the Tory core vote is abandoning the party.
> https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
Spin -- Lidington's line that "if cops want to investigate, govt
will cooperate fully" is disingenuous nonsense.
If cops want to investigate it will be only because Theresa May
has personally dialled 999 and asked for Inspector Morse.
> > @Morris_Dancer said:
> > Mr. Rentool, I voted for a local party.
>
> Fair play, you've surprised me.
>
> Clearly the Tory core vote is abandoning the party.
First time in 10 elections that I haven't voted Con. Or at all.
Will be voting in the Euros though - for BP.
I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
> Plus, what sort of an absolute twat swears "on my children's lives". What is he, 10yrs old?
>
> Would be quite impressive if he was!
Thought the same. People who swear on their children's or mother's or grandmother's lives don't always fare well when tested against reality. Not saying he is not telling the truth as he sees it, but as a character Pike comes out better than Williamson.
> https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
>
>
>
> That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
>
> I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
Agree with that and when it looks like Hammond has been a strong pusher of the deal on accounting grounds, that is another cause for concern. I naturally vote Conservative but I won't vote for them again until the current leadership goes.
> > @tlg86 said:
>
> > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
>
>
>
> Do you have a 5G phone ?
>
> No. > @tlg86 said:
>
> > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
>
>
>
> Who is the "they" who know where you live?
>
> The LibDems or Facebook?
>
> Both.
So what is the mystery? The LibDems know because they've
seen the electoral register and Facebook knows because you
told them. Which one is relevant depends on whether the
LibDems wrote to you personally or paid Facebook to send
adverts to everyone in your ward or constituency or who
collects stamps and wears sandals.
> https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
>
>
>
> That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
>
> I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison.
The stakes are very high now...
After interviewing Lord Prescott, the former MP for Hull East, the journalist – a well-established reporter who wishes to remain anonymous – asked for his opinion on how best to resolve Labour antisemitism.
.....
When the JC asked Lord Prescott about his comments he responded: “F**k off.” Asked why he was using foul language he replied: “Because you are a journalist – F**k off.”
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/lord-prescott-former-deputy-pm-ranted-at-jewish-journalist-labour-antisemitism-all-about-israel-1.483611
That will sort out Labour problems with the Jewish community.
3 candidates from each of green, lab, con and LD, vote any 3 from 12. Should be labour safely but given their issues greens might nick some back. I helped them try anyway.
> > @Cyclefree said:
> > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
> >
> >
> >
> > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
> >
> > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
>
> If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
>
> On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison.
>
> The stakes are very high now...
Williamson doesn't have to prove his innocence - Plod have to prove his guilt.
It does feel as if both sides are upping the ante here in ways which make me wonder what's really going on.
> https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
>
>
>
> That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
>
> I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
Given he swore on his kids lives if convincing evidence or conviction were forthcoming hed make Jonathon Aitken look popular.
> > @Cyclefree said:
> > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
> >
> >
> >
> > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
> >
> > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
>
> If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
>
> On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison.
>
> The stakes are very high now...
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this issue I wouldn’t trust Gavin Williamson with getting a round in in the pub.
> > @GIN1138 said:
> > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
> > >
> > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
> >
> > If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
> >
> > On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison.
> >
> > The stakes are very high now...
>
> Williamson doesn't have to prove his innocence - Plod have to prove his guilt.
>
>
I was thinking more that is someone (say the reporter himself) was to come out and categorically say the leak didn't come from Williamson then obviously Theresa May would be in pretty deep shit.
> > @Theuniondivvie said:
> > Tories are PeePee shock.
> >
> > https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1123871698460213249
>
> Tories could conceivably come in behind everyone except UKIP in the EU elections?
4th is a strong possibility if change or the lds get the big MO
(and the reporter's) desire to protect their source. The paper
cannot even deny it is Williamson without endangering
their other source (if indeed there is one).
Though as the Guardian showed, sometimes papers
can be unexpectedly helpful to the boys in blue.
Meta data showing a call to a journalist - without the substance of that call - may be enough for a sacking but it is not enough for a conviction.
> > @GIN1138 said:
>
> > > @Cyclefree said:
>
> > > https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1123885152604704770
>
>
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > That's a pretty serious accusation to make. If I were on the receiving end I'd be bloody livid. They'd better have the evidence. If Williamson retaliates, some people are going to look bloody stupid. Not least those who appointed Williamson to such a position if he indeed was such a risk. Or are we supposed to believe that he started being such a risk last week or whenever it was?
>
> > >
>
> > > I don't care about Williamson. But thinking that involving an authoritarian illiberal non-democratic Communist country in vital infrastructure does not fill me with trust in this government's ability to make sensible decisions about war and peace.
>
> >
>
> > If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
>
> >
>
> > On the other hand if Williamson is guilty he could well end up in prison.
>
> >
>
> > The stakes are very high now...
>
>
>
> Williamson doesn't have to prove his innocence - Plod have to prove his guilt.
>
> Yes. They have to get sufficient evidence on which a jury could convict with a better than 50/50 probability, in reality very much higher and the CPS has to decide that it would be in the public interest to have a trial. That's a pretty high bar, especially in such a case, juries can be cussed and think of the people who might need to give evidence.
>
> Meta data showing a call to a journalist - without the substance of that call - may be enough for a sacking but it is not enough for a conviction.
IANAL but iirc after Clive Ponting, the Official Secrets Act was
changed to remove the public interest defence.
> If Williamson can actually prove his innocence I would say this is what will bring down Theresa May ultimately.
>
>
>
>
> Proving his innocence, as in proving a negative, is a pretty tall order.
He could sue in defamation and force Lidlington to prove his case on the balance of probabilities.
From what is in the public domain, it looks like May had enough evidence on the balance of probabilities but not necessary on a criminal standard. The reality is she wasn't going to authorise additional evidence gathering against a sitting Cabinet member and why would she. That's for the Police.
Pushing george osborne out of the tent went well....
I don't really care, except that some people in politics seem to think this sort of thing can be used to discredit a democratic vote that didn't go their way.
I wonder, though, whether that works in an era when there are various whistleblowing directives which do - for the moment - apply in the UK. It may well be that under the HRA etc the government cannot outlaw such a defence. Lots of ironies if that's where this case ends up.
My guess is that the last thing the government needs is the criminal authorities getting their hands on it. They lose control and all sorts of stuff risks coming out which will be displeasing to more than Mr W.
> Williamson's defence probably depends on the Telegraph's
>
> (and the reporter's) desire to protect their source. The paper
>
> cannot even deny it is Williamson without endangering
>
> their other source (if indeed there is one).
>
>
>
> Though as the Guardian showed, sometimes papers
>
> can be unexpectedly helpful to the boys in blue.
>
> If they wanted to be naughty, they could say - or imply - that there was more than one source........
Shouldn't there be more than one source to print the story?
> What do we think par is for the Tories?
>
> >1000 disaster
> 600-1000 defeat
> 400-600 a hit
> <400 a mere flesh wound
>
The Conservatives lost 1,000 seats in this round of elections in 1991, but were still level-pegging, in terms of NEV, with Labour. That was a blow, but certainly not a disaster.
Four years later, in the same round, they lost 2,000 seats. That was a disaster. The kind of election where Labour won Aldenham West (the slightly less posh part of Radlett, and Letchmore Heath) Potters Bar West, South, and East, and the Lib Dems won everything in Bushey bar Bushey Heath.
Four years on, the Conservatives regained 1,100 seats.
So, big seat changes are nothing unusual in this round of elections, where so many are being contested.
The Conservatives are starting from what is still quite a high point in terms of local government representation.
My benchmarks would be:-
No losses: An outstanding night for the Conservatives.
0 -500 losses a good night for the Conservatives.
500 - 800 losses, par for the course for a government in mid-term,
800 - 1,200 losses, bad for the Conservatives, but not outside the usual parameters of bad.
1,200 - 1,500 losses, very bad.
1,500 + losses, disastrously bad.
> A bad night tonight would be 1,000 Tory losses.
No way they'll lose that many.
Think Labour & the Tories will be tied in the national voteshares, which I think would mean about 300-400 losses.
> Williamson's defence probably depends on the Telegraph's
>
> (and the reporter's) desire to protect their source. The paper
>
> cannot even deny it is Williamson without endangering
>
> their other source (if indeed there is one).
>
>
>
> Though as the Guardian showed, sometimes papers
>
> can be unexpectedly helpful to the boys in blue.
>
> If they wanted to be naughty, they could say - or imply - that there was more than one source........
Given the magnitude of the story, it wouldnt be surprising for the telegraph to have a second source, at least along the lines of asking a friendly minister we hear the decision is yes, would we look stupid if we ran that...with a reply of i couldn't possibly comment with body language making it clear one way or another.
I expect the story will be lost in the locals and the lead upto the EU elections
As far as TM is concerned she seems demob happy and I expect her to seek an election to her post in early June. I do not see Williamson taking her down at all, Brexit will define her.
I am delighted Penny and Rory have been promoted and I expect I will be changing my reference from TM to PM PM by the late summer
> I'm not yet sure whether I'll bother voting in the local elections. I caught the train before 7am so couldn't vote this morning and I probably won't be back in the village until after 9pm. None of the candidates have inspired and I have no important national message to send. The concept of a civic duty is really being stretched for me today.
Write a message to spoil your ballot - the candidates get to read them and it might raise a smile.
> Lord Prescott, the former Deputy Prime Minister, ranted aggressively at a Jewish journalist that Labour’s antisemitism crisis under Jeremy Corbyn was all “about Israel” and asked her what she would do as a British Jew to change Israel’s behaviour.
>
> After interviewing Lord Prescott, the former MP for Hull East, the journalist – a well-established reporter who wishes to remain anonymous – asked for his opinion on how best to resolve Labour antisemitism.
>
> When the JC asked Lord Prescott about his comments he responded: “F**k off.” Asked why he was using foul language he replied: “Because you are a journalist – F**k off.”
>
> https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/lord-prescott-former-deputy-pm-ranted-at-jewish-journalist-labour-antisemitism-all-about-israel-1.483611
>
> That will sort out Labour problems with the Jewish community.
>
> Paging @TheJezziah to explain why the real problem is with Conservative Councillors in Guildford.
Oh something I know about. What do you want to know Topping? This could go into pages
> > @nunuone said:
> > A bad night tonight would be 1,000 Tory losses.
>
> No way they'll lose that many.
>
> Think Labour & the Tories will be tied in the national voteshares, which I think would mean about 300-400 losses.
Thrasher was predicting 400, but news is moving fast (both brexit and leak)
> I am delighted Williamson has gone. He was a liability and was promoted far too quickly
>
> I expect the story will be lost in the locals and the lead upto the EU elections
>
> As far as TM is concerned she seems demob happy and I expect her to seek an election to her post in early June. I do not see Williamson taking her down at all, Brexit will define her.
>
> I am delighted Penny and Rory have been promoted and I expect I will be changing my reference from TM to PM PM by the late summer
</blockquote>
Shudders at thought of PM PM.
> I'm not yet sure whether I'll bother voting in the local elections. I caught the train before 7am so couldn't vote this morning and I probably won't be back in the village until after 9pm. None of the candidates have inspired and I have no important national message to send. The concept of a civic duty is really being stretched for me today.
the village ?
youre going all blazer brigade on us young Meeks, next youll be voting Brexit
Traditional voting patterns seem to be reasserting themselves for the euros, with 34% of 18-24 year olds certain to vote, but 54% of voters aged over 65. The gap in certainty to vote between Remainers and Leavers is now 58% to 50%.
It could be that CHUK, the Lib Dems, and Greens, who poll a combined 28% are beginning to eat into the Labour vote.
> Oh something I know about. What do you want to know Topping? This could go into pages
>
> Didn't they say they would only cut bin collections for Muslims? In which case Prescott's actions and comments are wholly justified.
That means absolutely nothing to me, but there has been a scandal going on here for several year re the local plan (and I don't mean like the usual stuff on local plans). This isn't party political. To put it mildly the neighbouring Tories, Mole Valley, who have some wards in Guildford Borough do not get on with the Guildford Tories (and that really is putting it mildly). The Mole Valley MP used parliamentary privilege to accuse the Leader of the Guildford Tories to be under the influence of Russians, throw in a Cayman Islands development company, a fraud conviction, 80,000 objections to a local plan that still goes through and you get the gist. I could type until next next week.
You may rest assured that I will not be voting Brexit. Or worse, wearing a blazer.
> > @TheWhiteRabbit said:
> > What do we think par is for the Tories?
> >
> > >1000 disaster
> > 600-1000 defeat
> > 400-600 a hit
> > <400 a mere flesh wound
> >
>
> The Conservatives lost 1,000 seats in this round of elections in 1991, but were still level-pegging, in terms of NEV, with Labour. That was a blow, but certainly not a disaster.
>
> Four years later, in the same round, they lost 2,000 seats. That was a disaster. The kind of election where Labour won Aldenham West (the slightly less posh part of Radlett, and Letchmore Heath) Potters Bar West, South, and East, and the Lib Dems won everything in Bushey bar Bushey Heath.
>
> Four years on, the Conservatives regained 1,100 seats.
>
> So, big seat changes are nothing unusual in this round of elections, where so many are being contested.
>
> The Conservatives are starting from what is still quite a high point in terms of local government representation.
>
> My benchmarks would be:-
>
> No losses: An outstanding night for the Conservatives.
>
> 0 -500 losses a good night for the Conservatives.
>
> 500 - 800 losses, par for the course for a government in mid-term,
>
> 800 - 1,200 losses, bad for the Conservatives, but not outside the usual parameters of bad.
>
> 1,200 - 1,500 losses, very bad.
>
> 1,500 + losses, disastrously bad.
>
>
>
>
I agree with this
> <blockquote> > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > I am delighted Williamson has gone. He was a liability and was promoted far too quickly
> >
> > I expect the story will be lost in the locals and the lead upto the EU elections
> >
> > As far as TM is concerned she seems demob happy and I expect her to seek an election to her post in early June. I do not see Williamson taking her down at all, Brexit will define her.
> >
> > I am delighted Penny and Rory have been promoted and I expect I will be changing my reference from TM to PM PM by the late summer
>
> </blockquote>
> Shudders at thought of PM PM.
Give Corbyn a run for his money.
> Isn't it quite unusual for the BBC to be giving such prominence to the Williamson story at the moment? Isn't there meant to be a blackout on political news while voting is going on?
Yes, I thought so. Normally the politicians cooperate by not creating any political news though.
> I'm not yet sure whether I'll bother voting in the local elections. I caught the train before 7am so couldn't vote this morning and I probably won't be back in the village until after 9pm. None of the candidates have inspired and I have no important national message to send. The concept of a civic duty is really being stretched for me today.
I'll be spending longer than usual in the voting booth, making a new box and labelling it NotA. I'll vote for that.
Yes I know it's a spoilt ballot but it's how I feel.
> > @tlg86 said:
>
> > > @tlg86 said:
>
> >
>
> > > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Do you have a 5G phone ?
>
> >
>
> > No. > @tlg86 said:
>
> >
>
> > > I received notifications from the local Lib Dem candidate on Facebook this morning. I'd be interested to know how they know I live in the particular ward.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Who is the "they" who know where you live?
>
> >
>
> > The LibDems or Facebook?
>
> >
>
> > Both.
>
>
>
> So what is the mystery? The LibDems know because they've
>
> seen the electoral register and Facebook knows because you
>
> told them. Which one is relevant depends on whether the
>
> LibDems wrote to you personally or paid Facebook to send
>
> adverts to everyone in your ward or constituency or who
>
> collects stamps and wears sandals.
>
> Fair enough. I've not really paid much attention to the arguments about what Vote Leave were doing, but I guess it's okay for a political party to pay for adverts on Facebook which target specific users.
>
> I don't really care, except that some people in politics seem to think this sort of thing can be used to discredit a democratic vote that didn't go their way.
Is it OK though? This is the sort of micro-targeted advertising
the Conservatives imported from America in 2010. There are
two concerns.
1) it is unregulated (as are the videos both main parties use
to get round restrictions on PPBs and PEBs).
2) there is effectively an auction so if the Tories or Labour
want to send adverts to sandal wearing pigeon fanciers in
your ward, they can outbid the LibDems for the relevant
advertising slots.
One reason there is no appetite to investigate Russian
troll farms is that our political parties benefit from some
of the same techniques.
> Looking at YouGov's weighted voting intention numbers, it looks as if they have the Conservatives and Labour level-pegging, albeit, at a very low level.
>
> Traditional voting patterns seem to be reasserting themselves for the euros, with 34% of 18-24 year olds certain to vote, but 54% of voters aged over 65. The gap in certainty to vote between Remainers and Leavers is now 58% to 50%.
>
> It could be that CHUK, the Lib Dems, and Greens, who poll a combined 28% are beginning to eat into the Labour vote.
>
> Yougov polls at the same time in 2014 had 60+ at 65% turnout, and this grew towards polling day. A 65+ Interval would likely have been even higher, so currently this group is at least 10 points down. There’s plenty of room for this segment to grow, and they are currently breaking ~50% to TBP...
That's my view too. By 23rd May, I'd expect certainty to vote to be at similar levels among Leavers and Remainers. Without the Brexit Party, I think more Leavers would have stayed at home.