Davis, Fallon or Cox would be offered Foreign Secretary, Hunt would be offered Business Secretary the Sun reports
I dislike Boris, and the things said during the campaign would be a petty reason for it (and with Boris, as per Trump, I get the impression the pettier things are what drive him), but moving Hunt at the least seems reasonable whether he wins by a large margin or a stonkingly large margin. They are probably not as far apart on Brexit as some think, but Boris should reasonably have someone in tune with him on the subject at the Foreign Office. If not for the current situation I feel like it wouldn't even be in doubt.
Hunt should tell him to get stuffed. Has he no self-respect? Why should he agree to be demoted? And if the reason is because Boris is too petty to take criticism all the more reason not to have such a man as his boss.
Is democracy an alien concept? Hunt is in a contest to determine the path the party takes. If he wins he gets promoted. If he loses then the winner gets to determine it.
Hunt doesn't determine if he wins or loses, voters do. He doesn't have to agree to get demoted, if he loses Boris has every right to tell him to get stuffed.
Democracy has little to do with it when far less than 1% of the electorate are determining the next PM.
The electorate are party members and far more than 1% of them will vote.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway.
Well, if we are not going to impose a hard border in Ireland we will not have control as we will not be monitoring who or what can enter the UK. And who is talking about invasion?
Of course, for the UK as a whole the most important border points are on the south and east coasts. That’s where the real pain will be felt.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
We'll be scrabbling around offering all sorts of concessions in an increasingly desperate attempt to recover the terms we currently have.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
Even Johnson isn’t claiming that there will be a “technological solution” available on October 31st, so how can it be put in place “instead”?
As Jo Grimond wasn't on the ballot again I decided not to cast a ballot ....
Like the Tory Party, you favour Old Etonians as Leaders.
I don't regard attendance at Slough Comprehensive as a disqualification from public office, although I minded to review that opinion in short measure on Wednesday afternoon.
Boris will be the first genuine classicist as PM since Gladstone too
Asquith, Campbell-Bannerman and Macmillan all studied Classics at university. Admittedly: Campbell-Bannerman studied at newer universities and Macmillan never actually graduated (though he did do Classical Moderations, which is at least equivalent to a degree anywhere else).
But all three showed in their subsequent careers - unlike the fat thug up for election right now - that they'd actually thought about the issues an education in classics raises.
David Davis or Sir Michael Fallon look increasingly likely according to the latest reports with Geoffrey Cox an outside bet. Hunt will be offered Business Secretary instead plus possibly DPM too
Boris will be the first genuine classicist as PM since Gladstone too
Asquith, Campbell-Bannerman and Macmillan all studied Classics at university. Admittedly: Campbell-Bannerman studied at newer universities and Macmillan never actually graduated (though he did do Classical Moderations, which is at least equivalent to a degree anywhere else).
But all three showed in their subsequent careers - unlike the fat thug up for election right now - that they'd actually thought about the issues an education in classics raises.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway.
Well, if we are not going to impose a hard border in Ireland we will not have control as we will not be monitoring who or what can enter the UK. And who is talking about invasion?
Of course, for the UK as a whole the most important border points are on the south and east coasts. That’s where the real pain will be felt.
Boris will be the first genuine classicist as PM since Gladstone too
Asquith, Campbell-Bannerman and Macmillan all studied Classics at university. Admittedly: Campbell-Bannerman studied at newer universities and Macmillan never actually graduated (though he did do Classical Moderations, which is at least equivalent to a degree anywhere else).
But all three showed in their subsequent careers - unlike the fat thug up for election right now - that they'd actually thought about the issues an education in classics raises.
Trinity College Cambridge is a 'newer' university?
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
Totally agree.
But Johnson has told us repeatedly No Deal is no problem. We will only leave on 31st October if he decides we should. As a result he and those who back him will own what happens next.
Boris will be the first genuine classicist as PM since Gladstone too
Asquith, Campbell-Bannerman and Macmillan all studied Classics at university. Admittedly: Campbell-Bannerman studied at newer universities and Macmillan never actually graduated (though he did do Classical Moderations, which is at least equivalent to a degree anywhere else).
But all three showed in their subsequent careers - unlike the fat thug up for election right now - that they'd actually thought about the issues an education in classics raises.
Stuff and nonsense, you can sail through Mods without doing a stroke if you have had the kind of previous education Macmillan had - he started the serious study of Greek and Latin at 6 or 7 (per wikipedia.)
The Sun reports rumours that Boris will sack Hunt if he scores more than 60 per cent; that Saj has fallen out of favour because he is said to be preparing a new leadership bid in case Boris falls early; that Liz Truss reckons she can still be Chancellor (see Saj); and many more that I can't be bothered to type because I do not believe any of them but I've often been wrong before. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9553021/boris-johnson-sack-jeremy-hunt/
Gove seems a possibility at 10-1 as it's rumoured that Boris plans to promote him as a signal that old hostilities are forgotten. JRM would be an amusing choice - very much the idea of the typical Brit that some people abroad still have. I'm not sure the EU would take him very seriously, though.
My guesses, though: Mordaunt to FS, Gove to Home, Zac to Defra, Saj to Chancellor (despite the rumour), IDS to defence. Spin will be "diversity under Boris, open to the world".
IDS to Defence. And subcontract UK defence policy to the United States? Apparently they’re going to lends us some assets to protect our shipping don’t you know?
I suppose not such a problem for those on the left who believe that the U.K. doesn’t operate an independent defence policy anyway, but we’ve surely at least got to pretend?
Since Conservative defence policy has been to scrap ships, sell off planes and sack soldiers until all that is left are the SAS and some lorries in Catterick, pretending is all we can do.
The Sun reports rumours that Boris will sack Hunt if he scores more than 60 per cent; that Saj has fallen out of favour because he is said to be preparing a new leadership bid in case Boris falls early; that Liz Truss reckons she can still be Chancellor (see Saj); and many more that I can't be bothered to type because I do not believe any of them but I've often been wrong before. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9553021/boris-johnson-sack-jeremy-hunt/
Gove seems a possibility at 10-1 as it's rumoured that Boris plans to promote him as a signal that old hostilities are forgotten. JRM would be an amusing choice - very much the idea of the typical Brit that some people abroad still have. I'm not sure the EU would take him very seriously, though.
My guesses, though: Mordaunt to FS, Gove to Home, Zac to Defra, Saj to Chancellor (despite the rumour), IDS to defence. Spin will be "diversity under Boris, open to the world".
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway.
Well, if we are not going to impose a hard border in Ireland we will not have control as we will not be monitoring who or what can enter the UK. And who is talking about invasion?
Of course, for the UK as a whole the most important border points are on the south and east coasts. That’s where the real pain will be felt.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
Even Johnson isn’t claiming that there will be a “technological solution” available on October 31st, so how can it be put in place “instead”?
Boris in the Telegraph today says a technological solution can be found by Brexit Day
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
Even Johnson isn’t claiming that there will be a “technological solution” available on October 31st, so how can it be put in place “instead”?
Boris in the Telegraph today says a technological solution can be found by Brexit Day
Found is a million miles away from being in service.
This will give the Chinese the excuse they need to put a lot more police onto the streets - to protect public order. I’d be very surprised if this wasn’t co-ordinated.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway.
Well, if we are not going to impose a hard border in Ireland we will not have control as we will not be monitoring who or what can enter the UK. And who is talking about invasion?
Of course, for the UK as a whole the most important border points are on the south and east coasts. That’s where the real pain will be felt.
Control doesn't occur at entry points anyway.
Yep, I breeze into the US every time I get there.
Yep I do too. I've been into the US repeatedly without ever getting a Green Card entitling me to work there.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
Even Johnson isn’t claiming that there will be a “technological solution” available on October 31st, so how can it be put in place “instead”?
Boris in the Telegraph today says a technological solution can be found by Brexit Day
Don't be a dick again so early in the morning. If you don't understand the mechanism of how a hard border could come about then stop spouting off bollocks about it.
Typical Remoaner playing fast and loose with the facts.
Mr. Observer, I agree. Boris is a moron. May was a fool (if she genuinely was going to play hardball and had Parliamentary backing to do it, that would've made sense. Instead she put no deal on the agenda whilst having no plan to go that route, and putting forward the idea that if her deal wasn't good enough then opposing it with no alternative was legitimate).
However, none of that removes responsibility from every MP to behave in a rational manner in the national interest. Those who claim to like the EU the most have behaved in the most delinquent fashion, endorsing the referendum result then refusing to implement it or offer a credible alternative.
Now they bleat because the consequences of their actions have appeared. Like a man addicted to pies, they're shocked and appalled at not looking as pretty as they'd like.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
David Davis or Sir Michael Fallon look increasingly likely according to the latest reports with Geoffrey Cox an outside bet. Hunt will be offered Business Secretary instead plus possibly DPM too
Surely even someone with the scruples of Johnson would baulk at giving such a sensitive job to someone who would touch Hartley-Brewer with a barge poll let alone his hand.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
Even Johnson isn’t claiming that there will be a “technological solution” available on October 31st, so how can it be put in place “instead”?
Boris in the Telegraph today says a technological solution can be found by Brexit Day
Boris says a lot of things in the Telegraph. Sometimes, although not often, they have a loose, but achievable, connection with the truth.
Mr. Observer, I agree. Boris is a moron. May was a fool (if she genuinely was going to play hardball and had Parliamentary backing to do it, that would've made sense. Instead she put no deal on the agenda whilst having no plan to go that route, and putting forward the idea that if her deal wasn't good enough then opposing it with no alternative was legitimate).
However, none of that removes responsibility from every MP to behave in a rational manner in the national interest. Those who claim to like the EU the most have behaved in the most delinquent fashion, endorsing the referendum result then refusing to implement it or offer a credible alternative.
Now they bleat because the consequences of their actions have appeared. Like a man addicted to pies, they're shocked and appalled at not looking as pretty as they'd like.
Many will share responsibility. The Tories will have sole ownership.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
Even Johnson isn’t claiming that there will be a “technological solution” available on October 31st, so how can it be put in place “instead”?
Boris in the Telegraph today says a technological solution can be found by Brexit Day
Boris says a lot of things in the Telegraph. Sometimes, although not often, they have a loose, but achievable, connection with the truth.
Kennedy said the US would put a man on the moon in September 1962. In July 1969, having spent the equivalent of tens of billions of dollars on the project, it did. The UK is scheduled to leave the EU in just over three months’ time.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
Even Johnson isn’t claiming that there will be a “technological solution” available on October 31st, so how can it be put in place “instead”?
Boris in the Telegraph today says a technological solution can be found by Brexit Day
'Found' is an interesting word, as if a solution could be discovered by rummaging about in his sock drawer rather than putting in the hard yards to work something out in the previous 3 years. What tangible solutions has Boris actually put forward, or will he be relying on experts to magick something up?
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
Mr D, who Norman Davies?
He's a historian. Not sure he is on topic.
Was it you who recommended his book 'Vanished Kingdoms' on here?
Mr. B2, hmm. Odd. Did Lamb just defy the whip, then? I'm sure one Lib Dem ignored a three line whip on the deal (and was pretty sure they left the party too).
Mr. B2, hmm. Odd. Did Lamb just defy the whip, then? I'm sure one Lib Dem ignored a three line whip on the deal (and was pretty sure they left the party too).
There were rumours about his dropping the whip that never came to pass.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
Mr D, who Norman Davies?
He's a historian. Not sure he is on topic.
Was it you who recommended his book 'Vanished Kingdoms' on here?
You have a good memory! His Europe history is now a classic, and his various Eastern European and wartime histories are also excellent.
The EU will abide by its WTO obligations and will seek to protect the integrity of the Single Market. It will provide Ireland with financial help - as will the US. The UK will be on its own. We’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough, humiliated and emasculated, and being told what to do. The Tories will own it all. Good luck!
We will regain sovereignty, border control and do our own free trade deals, including ultimately with the USA.
I repeat, Boris will not impose a hard border in Ireland but use a technical solution instead, the WTO is hardly going to invade Northern Ireland to impose one is it and given Trump had little time for the WTO at present it does not exactly have much strength to impose its will anyway
Even Johnson isn’t claiming that there will be a “technological solution” available on October 31st, so how can it be put in place “instead”?
Boris in the Telegraph today says a technological solution can be found by Brexit Day
Boris says a lot of things in the Telegraph. Sometimes, although not often, they have a loose, but achievable, connection with the truth.
Kennedy said the US would put a man on the moon in September 1962. In July 1969, having spent the equivalent of tens of billions of dollars on the project, it did. The UK is scheduled to leave the EU in just over three months’ time.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
Mr D, who Norman Davies?
He's a historian. Not sure he is on topic.
Was it you who recommended his book 'Vanished Kingdoms' on here?
You have a good memory!
One of the kindest hings you can say to an old man! Actually, I've got a copy from the library and am reading it. Can be heavy going, but very interesting, and sheds light on ancient animosities.
David Davis or Sir Michael Fallon look increasingly likely according to the latest reports with Geoffrey Cox an outside bet. Hunt will be offered Business Secretary instead plus possibly DPM too
Surely even someone with the scruples of Johnson would baulk at giving such a sensitive job to someone who would touch Hartley-Brewer with a barge poll let alone his hand.
PS Did I forget to mention his expenses racket? A fiddler in in more ways than one. Perhaps Boris will consider him Chancellor material?
Ministers can write as many columns as they like, but they won’t be getting paid for them - certainly not the £5k a column he supposedly gets paid now, for an hour’s work.
For similar reasons, there’s no chance of JRM ever becoming a minister. He runs his own fund, which relies on his personal skills and can’t be put to one side to allow him to join the government, it would be a massive conflict of interest. His paper on housing, released today by the IEA, sounds like it should be at the top of the inbox of whoever is the new housing minister though. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/20/build-green-belt-cut-tax-end-home-crisis-urges-jacob-rees-mogg/
But I agree with you, it is hard to disagree with it. If you treat Trump like a normal candidate he will win. If you treat him like a racist and actually energise the Dem base he will lose and lose badly.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
Mr D, who Norman Davies?
He's a historian. Not sure he is on topic.
Was it you who recommended his book 'Vanished Kingdoms' on here?
You have a good memory! His Europe history is now a classic, and his various Eastern European and wartime histories are also excellent.
Edit/ I get him confused with Norman Stone
Reading Vanished Kingdoms now - brilliant stuff.
I can also thoroughly recommend Beneath Another Sky, another by him which came out last year. A world tour mixing travelogue, history and a whole lot more. A true tour de force.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
Mr D, who Norman Davies?
He's a historian. Not sure he is on topic.
Was it you who recommended his book 'Vanished Kingdoms' on here?
You have a good memory!
One of the kindest hings you can say to an old man! Actually, I've got a copy from the library and am reading it. Can be heavy going, but very interesting, and sheds light on ancient animosities.
Basically Dem Leadership is fooling themselves into thinking that their healthcare messaging is what drove the highest midterm turnout in a century rather than the big old racist in the white House.
If they think that then they are morons who deserve to get beat in 2020.
Boris will be the first genuine classicist as PM since Gladstone too
Asquith, Campbell-Bannerman and Macmillan all studied Classics at university. Admittedly: Campbell-Bannerman studied at newer universities and Macmillan never actually graduated (though he did do Classical Moderations, which is at least equivalent to a degree anywhere else).
But all three showed in their subsequent careers - unlike the fat thug up for election right now - that they'd actually thought about the issues an education in classics raises.
I assume you mean what to do when your wife (or brother's wife) gets pinched by a foreign dignitary. No wonder Johnson has it in for Turkey.
But I agree with you, it is hard to disagree with it. If you treat Trump like a normal candidate he will win. If you treat him like a racist and actually energise the Dem base he will lose and lose badly.
Trump will beat the Democrats with independents and suburbanites if all they do is go on an anti Trump left-wing rant
Ministers can write as many columns as they like, but they won’t be getting paid for them - certainly not the £5k a column he supposedly gets paid now, for an hour’s work.
For similar reasons, there’s no chance of JRM ever becoming a minister. He runs his own fund, which relies on his personal skills and can’t be put to one side to allow him to join the government, it would be a massive conflict of interest. His paper on housing, released today by the IEA, sounds like it should be at the top of the inbox of whoever is the new housing minister though. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/20/build-green-belt-cut-tax-end-home-crisis-urges-jacob-rees-mogg/
JRM could have phoned that in; perhaps he did. We need to rebalance the economy away from London and stimulate (including with new or refurbished, cheap housing) the north, south-west and our coastal towns. We need to revisit the new towns of the 20th Century. Encourage companies and entrepreneurs to look beyond the M25. Instead we get this tired old mantra of building a million more homes on London's green belt.
But I agree with you, it is hard to disagree with it. If you treat Trump like a normal candidate he will win. If you treat him like a racist and actually energise the Dem base he will lose and lose badly.
Trump will beat the Democrats with independents and suburbanites if all they do is go on an anti Trump left-wing rant
Independents and sububanites are exactly who swung away from Trump in 2018.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
Mr D, who Norman Davies?
He's a historian. Not sure he is on topic.
Was it you who recommended his book 'Vanished Kingdoms' on here?
You have a good memory! His Europe history is now a classic, and his various Eastern European and wartime histories are also excellent.
Edit/ I get him confused with Norman Stone
Reading Vanished Kingdoms now - brilliant stuff.
I can also thoroughly recommend Beneath Another Sky, another by him which came out last year. A world tour mixing travelogue, history and a whole lot more. A true tour de force.
Thanks. 28% off the paperback on Amazon, so it's on its way.
Mr. Observer, I agree. Boris is a moron. May was a fool (if she genuinely was going to play hardball and had Parliamentary backing to do it, that would've made sense. Instead she put no deal on the agenda whilst having no plan to go that route, and putting forward the idea that if her deal wasn't good enough then opposing it with no alternative was legitimate).
However, none of that removes responsibility from every MP to behave in a rational manner in the national interest. Those who claim to like the EU the most have behaved in the most delinquent fashion, endorsing the referendum result then refusing to implement it or offer a credible alternative.
Now they bleat because the consequences of their actions have appeared. Like a man addicted to pies, they're shocked and appalled at not looking as pretty as they'd like.
Many will share responsibility. The Tories will have sole ownership.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit they will be overtaken by the Brexit Party certainly
Basically Dem Leadership is fooling themselves into thinking that their healthcare messaging is what drove the highest midterm turnout in a century rather than the big old racist in the white House.
If they think that then they are morons who deserve to get beat in 2020.
I think the public have got there all by themselves:
Someone said the other day that at its height, NASA was consuming something like 10% of US GDP.
So where there's a will & 10% of your GDP, there's a way.
Good grief. Are we actually not all clear that GDP isn't "consumed"?
Absolutely, whatever figure it was, NASA consumed $x which was equivalent to y% of US GDP might be a better way to put it.
Otoh if the BoE forecasts are in any way correct that No Deal Brexit would mean a 9.3% reduction in UK GDP over 15 years, it might be reasonably accurate to say in 2034 that Brexit had 'consumed' 9.3% of GDP.
Of course the sage of NE Somerset has said ND Brexit would provide an £80b boost to the economy, so other views are available.
Yes, that seems fair enough. I guess my point was more that the space program almost certainly produced increases to US GDP that might not have occurred if the capital had been ploughed into some other research area.
It's possible I should have responded to the comment above yours.
But I agree with you, it is hard to disagree with it. If you treat Trump like a normal candidate he will win. If you treat him like a racist and actually energise the Dem base he will lose and lose badly.
Trump will beat the Democrats with independents and suburbanites if all they do is go on an anti Trump left-wing rant
Independents and sububanites are exactly who swung away from Trump in 2018.
To mainly more centrist, bluedog Democrats ideologically close to Biden
Ministers can write as many columns as they like, but they won’t be getting paid for them - certainly not the £5k a column he supposedly gets paid now, for an hour’s work.
For similar reasons, there’s no chance of JRM ever becoming a minister. He runs his own fund, which relies on his personal skills and can’t be put to one side to allow him to join the government, it would be a massive conflict of interest. His paper on housing, released today by the IEA, sounds like it should be at the top of the inbox of whoever is the new housing minister though. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/20/build-green-belt-cut-tax-end-home-crisis-urges-jacob-rees-mogg/
JRM could have phoned that in; perhaps he did. We need to rebalance the economy away from London and stimulate (including with new or refurbished, cheap housing) the north, south-west and our coastal towns. We need to revisit the new towns of the 20th Century. Encourage companies and entrepreneurs to look beyond the M25. Instead we get this tired old mantra of building a million more homes on London's green belt.
Travelling through Manchester on the way to the airport last night it's booming. Likewise Leeds is full of cranes.
Boris was talking about building HS2 North to South rather than south to North. What he needs to do is scrap it and start HS3 / Northern Powerhouse Rail immediately...
But I agree with you, it is hard to disagree with it. If you treat Trump like a normal candidate he will win. If you treat him like a racist and actually energise the Dem base he will lose and lose badly.
Suspicious of this tbh. The writer is very confident his approach is right, and it seems to be based on drawing a parallel between trump and duke, California and the US and the 1990s and today. Maybe he's right, but he seems overconfident given the limitations of his comparison.
I'd add that having one of your candidates for nomination attack another - front running - candidate as not being anti-racist enough, is not smart.
Why? If he's the nominee it'll for sure come up in the presidential election because the GOP will use anything they can against him. Better for it to come up now when it has a chance of preventing the dems from picking him.
On the Twitter thread, I agree with some of what he says but it's fundamentally all about being anti-Trump rather than being pro anything. How are you supposed to raise turnout and excitement without a positive vision to sell? And is replacing Trump with "nothing will change" Biden who'll fight to keep people dying because they can't afford insulin, who'll do nothing to address the massively racist justice system and who might- if we're really lucky- splash out on some nicer furniture for the concentration camps really that big a win? Is that really as ambiguous as we can be?
Ministers can write as many columns as they like, but they won’t be getting paid for them - certainly not the £5k a column he supposedly gets paid now, for an hour’s work.
For similar reasons, there’s no chance of JRM ever becoming a minister. He runs his own fund, which relies on his personal skills and can’t be put to one side to allow him to join the government, it would be a massive conflict of interest. His paper on housing, released today by the IEA, sounds like it should be at the top of the inbox of whoever is the new housing minister though. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/20/build-green-belt-cut-tax-end-home-crisis-urges-jacob-rees-mogg/
JRM could have phoned that in; perhaps he did. We need to rebalance the economy away from London and stimulate (including with new or refurbished, cheap housing) the north, south-west and our coastal towns. We need to revisit the new towns of the 20th Century. Encourage companies and entrepreneurs to look beyond the M25. Instead we get this tired old mantra of building a million more homes on London's green belt.
Travelling through Manchester on the way to the airport last night it's booming. Likewise Leeds is full of cranes.
Boris was talking about building HS2 North to South rather than south to North. What he needs to do is scrap it and start HS3 / Northern Powerhouse Rail immediately...
How you can you start immediately what hasn't even been fully developed yet, yet alone been through parliament?
And that's leaving aside the insanity of not actually fixing the problem that HS2 was designed to fix. This is just another lets-cancel-HS2-without-saying-we-want-to-cancel-it argument.
Now I could go into the details of why what Boris wants is very difficult and will cost billions. But given the article he wrote I doubt he would understand the issue.
The Apollo software worked because it had 1 task and everyone was focused on achieving that task. A border will have millions of people trying to bypass and cheat it..
Ministers can write as many columns as they like, but they won’t be getting paid for them - certainly not the £5k a column he supposedly gets paid now, for an hour’s work.
For similar reasons, there’s no chance of JRM ever becoming a minister. He runs his own fund, which relies on his personal skills and can’t be put to one side to allow him to join the government, it would be a massive conflict of interest. His paper on housing, released today by the IEA, sounds like it should be at the top of the inbox of whoever is the new housing minister though. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/20/build-green-belt-cut-tax-end-home-crisis-urges-jacob-rees-mogg/
JRM could have phoned that in; perhaps he did. We need to rebalance the economy away from London and stimulate (including with new or refurbished, cheap housing) the north, south-west and our coastal towns. We need to revisit the new towns of the 20th Century. Encourage companies and entrepreneurs to look beyond the M25. Instead we get this tired old mantra of building a million more homes on London's green belt.
Travelling through Manchester on the way to the airport last night it's booming. Likewise Leeds is full of cranes.
Boris was talking about building HS2 North to South rather than south to North. What he needs to do is scrap it and start HS3 / Northern Powerhouse Rail immediately...
How you can you start immediately what hasn't even been fully developed yet, yet alone been through parliament?
And that's leaving aside the insanity of not actually fixing the problem that HS2 was designed to fix. This is just another lets-cancel-HS2-without-saying-we-want-to-cancel-it argument.
Commiting the money required for it to be built would be enough at the moment (a tunnel through the Pennines isn't going to be cheap).
As for HS2 if he's cancelling it, he really should just cancel it. I don't agree with it but if the new cost projections are true even I don't think it's worth the effort.
A fast railway from Manchester to Birmingham doesn't fix anything - a faster railway across the north gives Manchester the best chance of getting the critical mass the North needs..
Ministers can write as many columns as they like, but they won’t be getting paid for them - certainly not the £5k a column he supposedly gets paid now, for an hour’s work.
For similar reasons, there’s no chance of JRM ever becoming a minister. He runs his own fund, which relies on his personal skills and can’t be put to one side to allow him to join the government, it would be a massive conflict of interest. His paper on housing, released today by the IEA, sounds like it should be at the top of the inbox of whoever is the new housing minister though. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/20/build-green-belt-cut-tax-end-home-crisis-urges-jacob-rees-mogg/
JRM could have phoned that in; perhaps he did. We need to rebalance the economy away from London and stimulate (including with new or refurbished, cheap housing) the north, south-west and our coastal towns. We need to revisit the new towns of the 20th Century. Encourage companies and entrepreneurs to look beyond the M25. Instead we get this tired old mantra of building a million more homes on London's green belt.
The immediate housing affordability problem is in London and the South East though. The only way it’s getting fixed is with lots of building and encouragements for people to downsize.
I agree with you completely about the need for regeneration in Northern towns, I have suggested here before that tax breaks on employment and economic “Free Zones” around ports could bring huge number of jobs to these areas once we leave the EU.
I presume @HYUFD is off on a "border...Irish...WTO..." google.
Boris will not impose a hard border in Northern Ireland, unless the WTO invades Northern Ireland they cannot force him to do so.
If the Republic and EU do that is up to them on their side
It sure is. It will be imposed in the knowledge that it is a legal obligation and necessary to protect the integrity of the Single Market (see, also, the Channel and North Sea ports). With significant EU aid and support from the US, too, Ireland will be cushioned. And with no hard border on the UK side Irish goods will still be able to enter the UK freely. What’s not to like?
@AndreaParma_82 will be distraught. His much favoured MP - "Hunky Dinky Dunky" the Miniature of Parliament for Rutland falls on his sword .... actually a small fruit knife ....
I presume @HYUFD is off on a "border...Irish...WTO..." google.
Boris will not impose a hard border in Northern Ireland, unless the WTO invades Northern Ireland they cannot force him to do so.
If the Republic and EU do that is up to them on their side
It sure is. It will be imposed in the knowledge that it is a legal obligation and necessary to protect the integrity of the Single Market (see, also, the Channel and North Sea ports). With significant EU aid and support from the US, too, Ireland will be cushioned. And with no hard border on the UK side Irish goods will still be able to enter the UK freely. What’s not to like?
The RoI won't put up a border. It would be the antithesis of what they hope to achieve politically.
As @IanB2 has pointed out previously, the most likely route to a border would be a challenge under WTO MFN.
Oh if only someone would write a post about it. But wait...
I'd add that having one of your candidates for nomination attack another - front running - candidate as not being anti-racist enough, is not smart.
Why? If he's the nominee it'll for sure come up in the presidential election because the GOP will use anything they can against him. Better for it to come up now when it has a chance of preventing the dems from picking him.
On the Twitter thread, I agree with some of what he says but it's fundamentally all about being anti-Trump rather than being pro anything. How are you supposed to raise turnout and excitement without a positive vision to sell? And is replacing Trump with "nothing will change" Biden who'll fight to keep people dying because they can't afford insulin, who'll do nothing to address the massively racist justice system and who might- if we're really lucky- splash out on some nicer furniture for the concentration camps really that big a win? Is that really as ambiguous as we can be?
Indeed. They’re not fighting Trump yet, they’re fighting each other. Save the calling him a big fat orange racist arguments for this time next year (if that’s the route they want to go down*) and concentrate this year on policy and appeal to swing voters.
*I’m really not sure that is the right route to go down in a national election against an incumbent, there’s a big risk of it backfiring.
Boris will be the first genuine classicist as PM since Gladstone too
Asquith, Campbell-Bannerman and Macmillan all studied Classics at university. Admittedly: Campbell-Bannerman studied at newer universities and Macmillan never actually graduated (though he did do Classical Moderations, which is at least equivalent to a degree anywhere else).
But all three showed in their subsequent careers - unlike the fat thug up for election right now - that they'd actually thought about the issues an education in classics raises.
I assume you mean what to do when your wife (or brother's wife) gets pinched by a foreign dignitary. No wonder Johnson has it in for Turkey.
Tell the Trojans she is there to teach journalism?
Ministers can write as many columns as they like, but they won’t be getting paid for them - certainly not the £5k a column he supposedly gets paid now, for an hour’s work.
For similar reasons, there’s no chance of JRM ever becoming a minister. He runs his own fund, which relies on his personal skills and can’t be put to one side to allow him to join the government, it would be a massive conflict of interest. His paper on housing, released today by the IEA, sounds like it should be at the top of the inbox of whoever is the new housing minister though. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/20/build-green-belt-cut-tax-end-home-crisis-urges-jacob-rees-mogg/
JRM could have phoned that in; perhaps he did. We need to rebalance the economy away from London and stimulate (including with new or refurbished, cheap housing) the north, south-west and our coastal towns. We need to revisit the new towns of the 20th Century. Encourage companies and entrepreneurs to look beyond the M25. Instead we get this tired old mantra of building a million more homes on London's green belt.
Travelling through Manchester on the way to the airport last night it's booming. Likewise Leeds is full of cranes.
Boris was talking about building HS2 North to South rather than south to North. What he needs to do is scrap it and start HS3 / Northern Powerhouse Rail immediately...
How you can you start immediately what hasn't even been fully developed yet, yet alone been through parliament?
And that's leaving aside the insanity of not actually fixing the problem that HS2 was designed to fix. This is just another lets-cancel-HS2-without-saying-we-want-to-cancel-it argument.
HS" is just another 100B being splurged on London. Cut the crap and start regenerating the regions. Force them to stop putting everything in London and just making bigger problems. First thing should be clearout of government departments across the country, give someone other than London a chance to benefit from the taxes they paid.
Comments
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-22/boris-johnson-memorable-moments-of-uks-likely-new/11328258
Of course, for the UK as a whole the most important border points are on the south and east coasts. That’s where the real pain will be felt.
Possibly. Although if leaving at all is so bad, why did Labour MPs support it after the referendum result? And why did they then repeatedly refuse to back the deal on the table?
"We should never leave without a deal, even though we voted for that to happen" won't get the airtime it should, but that is the current state of play from the Opposition.
Including the Lib Dems. Norman Davies left them to support the deal, the rest opposed it.
It's the act of an infant to cry that leaving with no deal is unacceptable, whilst failing to back the alternative on the multiple occasions it was offered.
If said opposition parties had put together an alternative (revocation/referendum) that would make some semblance of sense. But they have not (yet, at least). Their every action has made no deal likelier, and that was obviously the case. They're not alone in this, but preferring purity to reality they're clinging to precious principles and throwing pragmatism over the cliff.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/21/need-can-do-spirit-1960s-america-help-us-get-eu/
Admittedly: Campbell-Bannerman studied at newer universities and Macmillan never actually graduated (though he did do Classical Moderations, which is at least equivalent to a degree anywhere else).
But all three showed in their subsequent careers - unlike the fat thug up for election right now - that they'd actually thought about the issues an education in classics raises.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-49066982
The sheer weight of the job is going to crush Boris. He'll be a wreck within a few weeks.
But Johnson has told us repeatedly No Deal is no problem. We will only leave on 31st October if he decides we should. As a result he and those who back him will own what happens next.
Typical Remoaner playing fast and loose with the facts.
Mr. Observer, I agree. Boris is a moron. May was a fool (if she genuinely was going to play hardball and had Parliamentary backing to do it, that would've made sense. Instead she put no deal on the agenda whilst having no plan to go that route, and putting forward the idea that if her deal wasn't good enough then opposing it with no alternative was legitimate).
However, none of that removes responsibility from every MP to behave in a rational manner in the national interest. Those who claim to like the EU the most have behaved in the most delinquent fashion, endorsing the referendum result then refusing to implement it or offer a credible alternative.
Now they bleat because the consequences of their actions have appeared. Like a man addicted to pies, they're shocked and appalled at not looking as pretty as they'd like.
https://twitter.com/timjacobwise/status/1152930670093787141?s=21
Something tells me you are not a morning person?
Edit/ I get him confused with Norman Stone
I'd add that having one of your candidates for nomination attack another - front running - candidate as not being anti-racist enough, is not smart.
For similar reasons, there’s no chance of JRM ever becoming a minister. He runs his own fund, which relies on his personal skills and can’t be put to one side to allow him to join the government, it would be a massive conflict of interest. His paper on housing, released today by the IEA, sounds like it should be at the top of the inbox of whoever is the new housing minister though.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/20/build-green-belt-cut-tax-end-home-crisis-urges-jacob-rees-mogg/
But I agree with you, it is hard to disagree with it. If you treat Trump like a normal candidate he will win. If you treat him like a racist and actually energise the Dem base he will lose and lose badly.
Surprised I don't make mistakes more often, to be honest
I can also thoroughly recommend Beneath Another Sky, another by him which came out last year. A world tour mixing travelogue, history and a whole lot more. A true tour de force.
Also highly recommended, for a perspective on European history that we don't normally get
If they think that then they are morons who deserve to get beat in 2020.
If the Republic and EU do that is up to them on their side
Anyhow, your list of things Boris will or wont do is expanding so fast it is difficult to keep up.
https://twitter.com/pewresearch/status/1152660956830425088
It's possible I should have responded to the comment above yours.
Mr. HYUFD, I think that is far from certain.
Come a General Election we'd be deciding who governs the country. BP could certainly cost the Conservatives a lot, but the choice is blue or red.
Boris was talking about building HS2 North to South rather than south to North. What he needs to do is scrap it and start HS3 / Northern Powerhouse Rail immediately...
In the new politics, the choice is orange or turquoise.
On the Twitter thread, I agree with some of what he says but it's fundamentally all about being anti-Trump rather than being pro anything. How are you supposed to raise turnout and excitement without a positive vision to sell? And is replacing Trump with "nothing will change" Biden who'll fight to keep people dying because they can't afford insulin, who'll do nothing to address the massively racist justice system and who might- if we're really lucky- splash out on some nicer furniture for the concentration camps really that big a win? Is that really as ambiguous as we can be?
And that's leaving aside the insanity of not actually fixing the problem that HS2 was designed to fix. This is just another lets-cancel-HS2-without-saying-we-want-to-cancel-it argument.
https://twitter.com/garius/status/1153161784125263873
Now I could go into the details of why what Boris wants is very difficult and will cost billions. But given the article he wrote I doubt he would understand the issue.
The Apollo software worked because it had 1 task and everyone was focused on achieving that task. A border will have millions of people trying to bypass and cheat it..
As for HS2 if he's cancelling it, he really should just cancel it. I don't agree with it but if the new cost projections are true even I don't think it's worth the effort.
A fast railway from Manchester to Birmingham doesn't fix anything - a faster railway across the north gives Manchester the best chance of getting the critical mass the North needs..
I agree with you completely about the need for regeneration in Northern towns, I have suggested here before that tax breaks on employment and economic “Free Zones” around ports could bring huge number of jobs to these areas once we leave the EU.
@AndreaParma_82 will be distraught. His much favoured MP - "Hunky Dinky Dunky" the Miniature of Parliament for Rutland falls on his sword .... actually a small fruit knife ....
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1153220855423520768
Bye, flunky Duncy.
As @IanB2 has pointed out previously, the most likely route to a border would be a challenge under WTO MFN.
Oh if only someone would write a post about it. But wait...
www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/12/01/a-message-to-moggsy-on-northern-ireland-from-an-ex-british-army-officer-who-served-there-during-the-troubles/
(incorrect title btw)
The establishment is full of quick thinkers, not deep thinkers
Peter Franklin"
https://unherd.com/2019/07/do-leaders-bluff-their-way-to-the-top/
*I’m really not sure that is the right route to go down in a national election against an incumbent, there’s a big risk of it backfiring.
First thing should be clearout of government departments across the country, give someone other than London a chance to benefit from the taxes they paid.