A halfway competent opposition would destroy this government. Imagine what a John Smith could have done.
Instead we have a party which rivals the Tories for malicious incompetence.
There is such a big opportunity for the Lib Dems here - if only they have the ruthless focus to grab it.
It is not just ruthlessness that they need, it is imagination and an acceptance of moving to a broad based centre party that could house Tom Watson and David Gauke, not just Chuka and Rory Stewart. The prize is a reasonable shot at being the main party of govt over the next twenty years. The cost is the end of the Lib Dems in their current form. I have seen and heard nothing to suggest the LD leaders or members are willing to pay the cost.
Has anyone "resigned" who wasn't going to be sacked anyway?
Nope. But that isn't the point is it. They are making a very, very public point. Not sure why he has gone before the result. I can only assume because it wouldn't get noticed in the flood or more high profile resignations.
Perhaps they should get to know their party better.
It's not aimed at the loons in the party membership though, it's aimed at the wider public.
If the narrative for the first two weeks of a Johnson premiership is resignations, defections and the loss of a by-election in Brecon then it's not a good start. New leaders are generally met with a show of unity and optimism, some of the public will note that this one is different.
Except none of these have resigned during the Johnson premiership. If they had tried to after a week they wouldn't have been able to resign as they'd have been sacked in the reshuffle first.
Of course they would have been sacked, they are making the very public point that they are not prepared to serve under Johnson as PM. Some have been saying that before it was clear Johnson would be PM. However you spin it it is not a good look. Tomorrow's "coronation" will be competing on the news with more resignations.
That assumes anybody cares about these failures and tomorrow's victory won't be a coronation it will be based upon votes. Democracy and respecting votes isn't something you guys are familiar with is it?
PM chosen by the votes of 100,000+self-selecting loons just like the ones that elected Corbyn. Let's wait till the other 99% of us have a say before we dignify Johnson's elevation to PM with the word "democracy".
Not entirely fair. I'm no fan of Boris but he was in effect chosen by his MPs - the principle of which has been in operation since 1965. The membership were but bit players whose only power was to reverse the MPs' decision. Petsonally I favour a return to the Magic Circle, a system which has a far better track record.
The Magic Circle failed to promote R A Butler. Apart from that, I think it worked until that bloody woman was installed, arguably a case of right-wing entryism. Heath wasn't ideal but I seem to remember the field was limited in 1965; maybe Butler was a bit old by then.
Has anyone "resigned" who wasn't going to be sacked anyway?
Nope. But that isn't the point is it. They are making a very, very public point. Not sure why he has gone before the result. I can only assume because it wouldn't get noticed in the flood or more high profile resignations.
Perhaps they should get to know their party better.
It's not aimed at the loons in the party membership though, it's aimed at the wider public.
If the narrative for the first two weeks of a Johnson premiership is resignations, defections and the loss of a by-election in Brecon then it's not a good start. New leaders are generally met with a show of unity and optimism, some of the public will note that this one is different.
Except none of these have resigned during the Johnson premiership. If they had tried to after a week they wouldn't have been able to resign as they'd have been sacked in the reshuffle first.
Of course they would have been sacked, they are making the very public point that they are not prepared to serve under Johnson as PM. Some have been saying that before it was clear Johnson would be PM. However you spin it it is not a good look. Tomorrow's "coronation" will be competing on the news with more resignations.
That assumes anybody cares about these failures and tomorrow's victory won't be a coronation it will be based upon votes. Democracy and respecting votes isn't something you guys are familiar with is it?
PM chosen by the votes of 100,000+self-selecting loons just like the ones that elected Corbyn. Let's wait till the other 99% of us have a say before we dignify Johnson's elevation to PM with the word "democracy".
Not entirely fair. I'm no fan of Boris but he was in effect chosen by his MPs - the principle of which has been in operation since 1965. The membership were but bit players whose only power was to reverse the MPs' decision. Petsonally I favour a return to the Magic Circle, a system which has a far better track record.
I don't really see why the members should have any say at all. We have a Parliamentary democracy. MPs should decide on who is suitable to lead them in Parliament.
I wonder how many MPs voted for Boris because they were afraid of their members and felt they had to have him in the final two.
A halfway competent opposition would destroy this government. Imagine what a John Smith could have done.
Instead we have a party which rivals the Tories for malicious incompetence.
There is such a big opportunity for the Lib Dems here - if only they have the ruthless focus to grab it.
It is not just ruthlessness that they need, it is imagination and an acceptance of moving to a broad based centre party that could house Tom Watson and David Gauke, not just Chuka and Rory Stewart. The prize is a reasonable shot at being the main party of govt over the next twenty years. The cost is the end of the Lib Dems in their current form. I have seen and heard nothing to suggest the LD leaders or members are willing to pay the cost.
I agree, unfortunately post coalition government the Lib Dems have gotten all holier than thou again and do not seem interested in being accomodating to people who might normally fit within another party.
Forgive my ignorance on this but I have no idea what problem HS2 was supposed to fix. In my experience the London-west midlands-north west routes are quick and frequent. Bloody expensive but I don’t think that is the issue.
shave 15 mins off London to Birmingham, nothing else. Cheap at 100B
The primary reason for it is expanding rail freight capacity over currently full lines, nothing to do with journey times between London and Birmingham.
Same as the Heathrow runway, LHR is so far over capacity that any adverse weather costs billions in delays and cancellations, not to mention the environmental cost of having hundreds of thousands of planes that currently spend hours going around in circles at low level close to London so they can squeeze them so close together on approach.
I spent a few months in the mid-2000s modelling the cost of delays to flights of various factors affecting air traffic control, including adverse weather. I can state with some confidence that any given adverse weather event did not cost billions. Without digging out the models to remind myself, I’m also fairly confident that the aggregate cost of weather events in a given year was not billions. Finally, I’m sceptical that there are currently hundreds of thousands of planes in a holding pattern given that Heathrow has c. 1,350 movements per day. If there were, it would be to keep them spread out on landing not squeeze them together. Apart from that, good post.
There’s a difference in direct costs attributed to the aviation industry of weather events (diversions, overtime, pilots out of hours, hotels) and indirect costs to the U.K. economy of all the delayed and cancelled pax missing their meetings etc, plus the reputation of the airport as being somewhere that’s a nightmare to get to on a foggy day (because their usual spacing is way shorter than a standard Cat III approach allows).
Has anyone "resigned" who wasn't going to be sacked anyway?
Nope. But that isn't the point is it. They are making a very, very public point. Not sure why he has gone before the result. I can only assume because it wouldn't get noticed in the flood or more high profile resignations.
Perhaps they should get to know their party better.
It's not aimed at the loons in the party membership though, it's aimed at the wider public.
If the narrative for the first two weeks of a Johnson premiership is resignations, defections and the loss of a by-election in Brecon then it's not a good start. New leaders are generally met with a show of unity and optimism, some of the public will note that this one is different.
Except none of these have resigned during the Johnson premiership. If they had tried to after a week they wouldn't have been able to resign as they'd have been sacked in the reshuffle first.
Of course they would have been sacked, they are making the very public point that they are not prepared to serve under Johnson as PM. Some have been saying that before it was clear Johnson would be PM. However you spin it it is not a good look. Tomorrow's "coronation" will be competing on the news with more resignations.
That assumes anybody cares about these failures and tomorrow's victory won't be a coronation it will be based upon votes. Democracy and respecting votes isn't something you guys are familiar with is it?
At the last GE 1.8% voted for no deal, the other 98.2% voted for parties that wanted our relationship with the EU to at least be a deal. The likely new PM is taking us down a route that makes the likely destination one supported by just 1.8%. Who is not respecting votes here?
A halfway competent opposition would destroy this government. Imagine what a John Smith could have done.
Instead we have a party which rivals the Tories for malicious incompetence.
There is such a big opportunity for the Lib Dems here - if only they have the ruthless focus to grab it.
It is not just ruthlessness that they need, it is imagination and an acceptance of moving to a broad based centre party that could house Tom Watson and David Gauke, not just Chuka and Rory Stewart. The prize is a reasonable shot at being the main party of govt over the next twenty years. The cost is the end of the Lib Dems in their current form. I have seen and heard nothing to suggest the LD leaders or members are willing to pay the cost.
Agreed. They have the opportunity. Whether they have the vision is another matter.
I am pessimistic. I see very little hope for our politics these days.
The rule here is that if the client wouldn't be able to describe how the system would work if it was implemented (albeit slowly and inefficiently) using old-school paper forms, but still thinks it's somehow going to work once there are computers involved, don't take the job. Admittedly there may be different rules if you're a monster IT consultancy like Fujitsu and your lawyers can work out a way for you to get paid to *not* deliver a working system.
Many years ago I worked for a small company where the boss decided that a computer would be better than his extremely efficient and totally loyal bookkeeper. So he ordered a computer to be supplied and installed (this was the mid 80's) immediately after Christmas while he went away for his usual Christmas Caribbean holiday. Shortly after New Year he returned and asked for a complete computer print out of everything that had happened during his holiday. Bookkeeper told him that it wasn't available, the suppliers had only just finished and she wasn't fully up to speed with it yet. So he sacked her! He and I had a row shortly afterwards and I left, too. So I don't know how the whole thing ended up.
In the early 1990s, when the Polytechnics were removed from the control of local authorities and made into universities, they started what was called the MAC initiative, MAC being an acronym for management and administrative computing. I was working in the finance function in one of them at the time, and each institution was asked to specify what it wanted the new system to do. Committees were formed and several IT companies were brought in to write various different bits of this new system which was going to replace all the old systems and take us forward into the wonderful world in which the MAC system would solve all our administrative problems. But when the specs were submitted it became clear that it was quite impossible to design a system that could do everything that the specs asked of it. The IT companies backed out and the whole idea collapsed.
Mr. eek, they aren't paid to mindlessly oppose everything.
Miss Cyclefree, that's a pretext as wafer-thin as Boris' charm.
Opposing a deal, with no prospect (at the moment) of revoking/remaining, is to take action that makes no deal the only viable outcome. Then bleating about leaving with no deal, when one's own actions have helped to bring it about, is rancid hypocrisy.
The rule here is that if the client wouldn't be able to describe how the system would work if it was implemented (albeit slowly and inefficiently) using old-school paper forms, but still thinks it's somehow going to work once there are computers involved, don't take the job.
Admittedly there may be different rules if you're a monster IT consultancy like Fujitsu and your lawyers can work out a way for you to get paid to *not* deliver a working system.
Like!
If a client can’t produce a flowchart of what their system would do if done manually, then they can’t expect the computer programme to be able to do the same.
The vast majority of IT system failures come from a lack of mutual understanding of business process between the developer and customer.
Has anyone "resigned" who wasn't going to be sacked anyway?
Nope. But that isn't the point is it. They are making a very, very public point. Not sure why he has gone before the result. I can only assume because it wouldn't get noticed in the flood or more high profile resignations.
Perhaps they should get to know their party better.
It's not aimed at the loons in the party membership though, it's aimed at the wider public.
If the narrativd optimism, some of the public will note that this one is different.
Except none of these have resigned during the Johnson premiership. If they had tried to after a week they wouldn't have been able to resign as they'd have been sacked in the reshuffle first.
Of course they would have been sacked, they are making the very public point that they are not prepared to serve under Johnson as PM. Some have been saying that before it was clear Johnson would be PM. However you spin it it is not a good look. Tomorrow's "coronation" will be competing on the news with more resignations.
That assumes anybody cares about these failures and tomorrow's victory won't be a coronation it will be based upon votes. Democracy and respecting votes isn't something you guys are familiar with is it?
PM chosen by the votes of 100,000+self-selecting loons just like the ones that elected Corbyn. Let's wait till the other 99% of us have a say before we dignify Johnson's elevation to PM with the word "democracy".
Not entirely fair. I'm no fan of Boris but he was in effect chosen by his MPs - the principle of which has been in operation since 1965. The membership were but bit players whose only power was to reverse the MPs' decision. Petsonally I favour a return to the Magic Circle, a system which has a far better track record.
The Magic Circle failed to promote R A Butler. Apart from that, I think it worked until that bloody woman was installed, arguably a case of right-wing entryism. Heath wasn't ideal but I seem to remember the field was limited in 1965; maybe Butler was a bit old by then.
Yes - Butler was favourite in 1963. Home, who was chosen instead as a reflection of MacMillan's dislike of RAB, seemed like a no-hoper. He did perform far better than expected and almost denied Harold Wilson victory.
So, just to understand: the UK government is going for a policy to deliberately and explicitly break our treaty commitments under GATT 1994 and 1947?
When a case is brought by Uraguay about why its beef is treated differently to Ireland's (despite there being no WTO-sanctioned FTA between us and Ireland), and we lose that case, what then?
Has anyone "resigned" who wasn't going to be sacked anyway?
Nope. But that isn't the point is it. They are making a very, very public point. Not sure why he has gone before the result. I can only assume because it wouldn't get noticed in the flood or more high profile resignations.
Perhaps they should get to know their party better.
It's not aimed at the loons in the party membership though, it's aimed at the wider public.
If the narrative for the first two weeks of a Johnson premiership is resignations, defections and the loss of a by-election in Brecon then it's not a good start. New leaders are generally met with a show of unity and optimism, some of the public will note that this one is different.
Except none of these have resigned during the Johnson premiership. If they had tried to after a week they wouldn't have been able to resign as they'd have been sacked in the reshuffle first.
Of course they would have been sacked, they are making the very public point that they are not prepared to serve under Johnson as PM. Some have been saying that before it was clear Johnson would be PM. However you spin it it is not a good look. Tomorrow's "coronation" will be competing on the news with more resignations.
That assumes anybody cares about these failures and tomorrow's victory won't be a coronation it will be based upon votes. Democracy and respecting votes isn't something you guys are familiar with is it?
At the last GE 1.8% voted for no deal, the other 98.2% voted for parties that wanted our relationship with the EU to at least be a deal. The likely new PM is taking us down a route that makes the likely destination one supported by just 1.8%. Who is not respecting votes here?
Some of it is similar to what people have been saying on here but I think they are missing out a renegotiation without T May red lines. A transition period based on the current status quo (so not meeting existing UK red lines) but with a Boris govt doing the FTA might work for the ERG. If it does, it should work for everyone else too. It would also explain his confidence in leaving by Oct 31 (other explanations such as bravado, incompetence, short termism are available).
The rule here is that if the client wouldn't be able to describe how the system would work if it was implemented (albeit slowly and inefficiently) using old-school paper forms, but still thinks it's somehow going to work once there are computers involved, don't take the job.
Admittedly there may be different rules if you're a monster IT consultancy like Fujitsu and your lawyers can work out a way for you to get paid to *not* deliver a working system.
Like!
If a client can’t produce a flowchart of what their system would do if done manually, then they can’t expect the computer programme to be able to do the same.
The vast majority of IT system failures come from a lack of mutual understanding of business process between the developer and customer.
Actually these days there is often the opposite problem. You throw your data at AI (artificial intelligence) or ML (machine learning) and the computer works out some algorithms then whirrs away classifying tumours as malignant or benign, or moving pawns to king-three, but no-one knows why, which is fine when it works but not if it goes wrong and starts lopping the wrong leg off. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/604087/the-dark-secret-at-the-heart-of-ai/
So, just to understand: the UK government is going for a policy to deliberately and explicitly break our treaty commitments under GATT 1994 and 1947?
When a case is brought by Uraguay about why its beef is treated differently to Ireland's (despite there being no WTO-sanctioned FTA between us and Ireland), and we lose that case, what then?
The rule here is that if the client wouldn't be able to describe how the system would work if it was implemented (albeit slowly and inefficiently) using old-school paper forms, but still thinks it's somehow going to work once there are computers involved, don't take the job.
Admittedly there may be different rules if you're a monster IT consultancy like Fujitsu and your lawyers can work out a way for you to get paid to *not* deliver a working system.
Like!
If a client can’t produce a flowchart of what their system would do if done manually, then they can’t expect the computer programme to be able to do the same.
The vast majority of IT system failures come from a lack of mutual understanding of business process between the developer and customer.
Actually these days there is often the opposite problem. You throw your data at AI (artificial intelligence) or ML (machine learning) and the computer works out some algorithms then whirrs away classifying tumours as malignant or benign, or moving pawns to king-three, but no-one knows why, which is fine when it works but not if it goes wrong and starts lopping the wrong leg off. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/604087/the-dark-secret-at-the-heart-of-ai/
Fair point, and in most cases the AI and ML is little better than snake oil sold by highly-commissioned salesmen.
So, just to understand: the UK government is going for a policy to deliberately and explicitly break our treaty commitments under GATT 1994 and 1947?
When a case is brought by Uraguay about why its beef is treated differently to Ireland's (despite there being no WTO-sanctioned FTA between us and Ireland), and we lose that case, what then?
How long would that case take to be heard? What are the penalties we could suffer, especially if a FTA had been arranged by the time the court case was heard.
Antigua started a court case vs USA over gambling in 2003, eventually won the case, awarded $21m per year, still received nothing and still complaining.
A halfway competent opposition would destroy this government. Imagine what a John Smith could have done.
Instead we have a party which rivals the Tories for malicious incompetence.
There is such a big opportunity for the Lib Dems here - if only they have the ruthless focus to grab it.
It is not just ruthlessness that they need, it is imagination and an acceptance of moving to a broad based centre party that could house Tom Watson and David Gauke, not just Chuka and Rory Stewart. The prize is a reasonable shot at being the main party of govt over the next twenty years. The cost is the end of the Lib Dems in their current form. I have seen and heard nothing to suggest the LD leaders or members are willing to pay the cost.
What we need on transport is some serious balls. Make the HS3 Northern route as a maglev, so you can get from Liverpool to Newcastle in 90 minutes through Manchester and Leeds, with a branch to Sheffield. Even if we buy in the technology from Shanghai, making the North smaller will have a huge effect on how business works across the region. Yes, it’ll be expensive, but not doing it costs much more in the long term.
Sadly, high-speed Maglev's are a failure and a technological dead-end. Even the Chinese are not expanding their one line, and have chosen to build a conventional high-speed line instead.
The only hope is the Japanese system, which is technologically rather different from the German/Chinese system. But their system is expanding mind-boggilingly slowly.
A halfway competent opposition would destroy this government. Imagine what a John Smith could have done.
Instead we have a party which rivals the Tories for malicious incompetence.
There is such a big opportunity for the Lib Dems here - if only they have the ruthless focus to grab it.
It is not just ruthlessness that they need, it is imagination and an acceptance of moving to a broad based centre party that could house Tom Watson and David Gauke, not just Chuka and Rory Stewart. The prize is a reasonable shot at being the main party of govt over the next twenty years. The cost is the end of the Lib Dems in their current form. I have seen and heard nothing to suggest the LD leaders or members are willing to pay the cost.
How many countries have a genuine centre party that has won an election? Perhaps Ireland but their main parties have been shaped by the legacy of the civil war.
In general, FPTP tends towards one big right party, one big left party and a few smaller niche parties. In general, PR tends towards biggish centre right and centre left parties, smaller hard left and hard right parties, and perhaps a smallish party in the centre like Germany's FDP
If the LDs are ever to win an election then they need to replace Labour, which means staying firmly on the centre left.
Of course they would have been sacked, they are making the very public point that they are not prepared to serve under Johnson as PM. Some have been saying that before it was clear Johnson would be PM. However you spin it it is not a good look. Tomorrow's "coronation" will be competing on the news with more resignations.
That assumes anybody cares about these failures and tomorrow's victory won't be a coronation it will be based upon votes. Democracy and respecting votes isn't something you guys are familiar with is it?
The only real coronations in the last thirty years were Brown in 2007, and Howard in 2003.
A halfway competent opposition would destroy this government. Imagine what a John Smith could have done.
Instead we have a party which rivals the Tories for malicious incompetence.
There is such a big opportunity for the Lib Dems here - if only they have the ruthless focus to grab it.
It is not just ruthlessness that they need, it is imagination and an acceptance of moving to a broad based centre party that could house Tom Watson and David Gauke, not just Chuka and Rory Stewart. The prize is a reasonable shot at being the main party of govt over the next twenty years. The cost is the end of the Lib Dems in their current form. I have seen and heard nothing to suggest the LD leaders or members are willing to pay the cost.
I agree, unfortunately post coalition government the Lib Dems have gotten all holier than thou again and do not seem interested in being accomodating to people who might normally fit within another party.
The goal of all minor parties should be to do what they do to bring about PR, probably in return for C&S. Their aim isn't to accommodate views which don't coincide with theirs, unless that's necessary to achieve the main goal.
Without PR, most of the time they're as significant as ticks on the hide of an elephant. Only in 1974, 2010 and since 2017 have they had much influence, when FPTP gave them a hung parliament. In 1974, 2010 and 2017, the major parties managed to defeat any pressure for PR. The minor party they were dealing with in 2017 didn't want it.
What we need on transport is some serious balls. Make the HS3 Northern route as a maglev, so you can get from Liverpool to Newcastle in 90 minutes through Manchester and Leeds, with a branch to Sheffield. Even if we buy in the technology from Shanghai, making the North smaller will have a huge effect on how business works across the region. Yes, it’ll be expensive, but not doing it costs much more in the long term.
Sadly, high-speed Maglev's are a failure and a technological dead-end. Even the Chinese are not expanding their one line, and have chosen to build a conventional high-speed line instead.
The only hope is the Japanese system, which is technologically rather different from the German/Chinese system. But their system is expanding mind-boggilingly slowly.
What we need on transport is some serious balls. Make the HS3 Northern route as a maglev, so you can get from Liverpool to Newcastle in 90 minutes through Manchester and Leeds, with a branch to Sheffield. Even if we buy in the technology from Shanghai, making the North smaller will have a huge effect on how business works across the region. Yes, it’ll be expensive, but not doing it costs much more in the long term.
Sadly, high-speed Maglev's are a failure and a technological dead-end. Even the Chinese are not expanding their one line, and have chosen to build a conventional high-speed line instead.
The only hope is the Japanese system, which is technologically rather different from the German/Chinese system. But their system is expanding mind-boggilingly slowly.
So, just to understand: the UK government is going for a policy to deliberately and explicitly break our treaty commitments under GATT 1994 and 1947?
When a case is brought by Uraguay about why its beef is treated differently to Ireland's (despite there being no WTO-sanctioned FTA between us and Ireland), and we lose that case, what then?
How long would that case take to be heard? What are the penalties we could suffer, especially if a FTA had been arranged by the time the court case was heard.
Antigua started a court case vs USA over gambling in 2003, eventually won the case, awarded $21m per year, still received nothing and still complaining.
No WTO black helicopters - and as for the time it takes? No idea but swap out Antigua and replace with the USA and swap out the USA and replace with the UK. Then ponder whether minds might be concentrated.
The Magic Circle failed to promote R A Butler. Apart from that, I think it worked until that bloody woman was installed, arguably a case of right-wing entryism. Heath wasn't ideal but I seem to remember the field was limited in 1965; maybe Butler was a bit old by then.
The field was limited in 1965 - only three candidates:
What we need on transport is some serious balls. Make the HS3 Northern route as a maglev, so you can get from Liverpool to Newcastle in 90 minutes through Manchester and Leeds, with a branch to Sheffield. Even if we buy in the technology from Shanghai, making the North smaller will have a huge effect on how business works across the region. Yes, it’ll be expensive, but not doing it costs much more in the long term.
Sadly, high-speed Maglev's are a failure and a technological dead-end. Even the Chinese are not expanding their one line, and have chosen to build a conventional high-speed line instead.
The only hope is the Japanese system, which is technologically rather different from the German/Chinese system. But their system is expanding mind-boggilingly slowly.
(And on a personal note, my dad's company built the concrete foundations of the first ever Maglev test system at Derby BREL/RC.)
Real trains should run on rails!
BTW, are you going to be 'doing' Market Harborough again, since technically there's a new line through the newly-opened station?
I actually passed that way on the way back from Rotherham Parkgate last Tuesday
And they're electrifying the route south of Harborough, and also I saw an extra track built along the Sharnbrook tunnel diversionary route (used rarely or late at night).
What we need on transport is some serious balls. Make the HS3 Northern route as a maglev, so you can get from Liverpool to Newcastle in 90 minutes through Manchester and Leeds, with a branch to Sheffield. Even if we buy in the technology from Shanghai, making the North smaller will have a huge effect on how business works across the region. Yes, it’ll be expensive, but not doing it costs much more in the long term.
Sadly, high-speed Maglev's are a failure and a technological dead-end. Even the Chinese are not expanding their one line, and have chosen to build a conventional high-speed line instead.
The only hope is the Japanese system, which is technologically rather different from the German/Chinese system. But their system is expanding mind-boggilingly slowly.
Of course they would have been sacked, they are making the very public point that they are not prepared to serve under Johnson as PM. Some have been saying that before it was clear Johnson would be PM. However you spin it it is not a good look. Tomorrow's "coronation" will be competing on the news with more resignations.
That assumes anybody cares about these failures and tomorrow's victory won't be a coronation it will be based upon votes. Democracy and respecting votes isn't something you guys are familiar with is it?
The only real coronations in the last thirty years were Brown in 2007, and Howard in 2003.
Regarding Gordon Brown. John McDonnell his only challenger failed to secure enough nominations to get onto the ballot.
So, just to understand: the UK government is going for a policy to deliberately and explicitly break our treaty commitments under GATT 1994 and 1947?
When a case is brought by Uraguay about why its beef is treated differently to Ireland's (despite there being no WTO-sanctioned FTA between us and Ireland), and we lose that case, what then?
How long would that case take to be heard? What are the penalties we could suffer, especially if a FTA had been arranged by the time the court case was heard.
Antigua started a court case vs USA over gambling in 2003, eventually won the case, awarded $21m per year, still received nothing and still complaining.
No WTO black helicopters - and as for the time it takes? No idea but swap out Antigua and replace with the USA and swap out the USA and replace with the UK. Then ponder whether minds might be concentrated.
If we are in dispute with a Trump US govt the "punishment" will surely be via tariffs not the WTO.
There's a media perception problem at work here. Most journalists rely on MP contacts for information about how party members are feeling. But many Labour MPs are Corbyn-sceptics, as we've seen with the VONCs etc. So journalist X goes to MP Y, who says "Oh, God, this is awful, he really has to go", and the journalist duly reports that there is deep Labour unhappiness with Corbyn. But actually it's the same unhappiness as before - absolutely genuine, but not new.
Down in Snoddington West CLP, things haven't changed much either. Around 60% voted for Corbyn, 40% for all other candidates put together. The 60% don't see any special reason to change their minds - sure, they see the usual suspects are having another go at him, but what else is new? They never hear any members spouting anti-semitic rants (at least I've never heard any in 48 years) so they assume it's a relatively minor problem, no doubt exaggerated by the media - needs to be sorted, but not a reason to change leader. Some were unhappy about the Brexit stance, but largely feel it's been fixed.
"There's just no satisfying the critics" is a common complaint, and I know people who were against mandatory reselection but are now starting to feel it's needed: does it make sense, they grumble, to perpetuate a situation where a chunk of the PLP take every opportunity to start a new squabble? What would it be like in government?
Of course they would have been sacked, they are making the very public point that they are not prepared to serve under Johnson as PM. Some have been saying that before it was clear Johnson would be PM. However you spin it it is not a good look. Tomorrow's "coronation" will be competing on the news with more resignations.
That assumes anybody cares about these failures and tomorrow's victory won't be a coronation it will be based upon votes. Democracy and respecting votes isn't something you guys are familiar with is it?
The only real coronations in the last thirty years were Brown in 2007, and Howard in 2003.
Regarding Gordon Brown. John McDonnell his only challenger failed to secure enough nominations to get onto the ballot.
3 if he can attend parliament - 2 if he can’t, 1 if he ends up in jail.
Of course this assumes the DUP continue to support him.
I do wonder what they will ask for as the current Stormont extension bill gives Sinn Fein everything they would want so they have no incentive to return until November when that bill takes effect
What we need on transport is some serious balls. Make the HS3 Northern route as a maglev, so you can get from Liverpool to Newcastle in 90 minutes through Manchester and Leeds, with a branch to Sheffield. Even if we buy in the technology from Shanghai, making the North smaller will have a huge effect on how business works across the region. Yes, it’ll be expensive, but not doing it costs much more in the long term.
Sadly, high-speed Maglev's are a failure and a technological dead-end. Even the Chinese are not expanding their one line, and have chosen to build a conventional high-speed line instead.
The only hope is the Japanese system, which is technologically rather different from the German/Chinese system. But their system is expanding mind-boggilingly slowly.
(And on a personal note, my dad's company built the concrete foundations of the first ever Maglev test system at Derby BREL/RC.)
Real trains should run on rails!
And to think you trained at Imperial, home of Eric Laithwaite's maglev until the Conservative government (natch) cut off its funding!
I know you hate the Conservatives, but don't you think perhaps it was the right decision to cut off its funding? The technology hasn't exactly set the world alight over the last forty years.
So, just to understand: the UK government is going for a policy to deliberately and explicitly break our treaty commitments under GATT 1994 and 1947?
When a case is brought by Uraguay about why its beef is treated differently to Ireland's (despite there being no WTO-sanctioned FTA between us and Ireland), and we lose that case, what then?
How long would that case take to be heard? What are the penalties we could suffer, especially if a FTA had been arranged by the time the court case was heard.
Antigua started a court case vs USA over gambling in 2003, eventually won the case, awarded $21m per year, still received nothing and still complaining.
No WTO black helicopters - and as for the time it takes? No idea but swap out Antigua and replace with the USA and swap out the USA and replace with the UK. Then ponder whether minds might be concentrated.
If we are in dispute with a Trump US govt the "punishment" will surely be via tariffs not the WTO.
He's started from a point of very low expectations after every man and his dog has spent the last six weeks laughing at him/or being horrified at the prospect of him.
The selection of his cabinet is going to be HUGE. I think Boris - if Brexit wasn't an issue - would select a much more liberal, Cameroon cabinet than he is now going to be able to.
Getting the balance of the cabinet correct against the backdrop of party splits over Brexit is going to be very difficult. If he can pull it off an keep both wings of his party relatively happy, that'd be a big plus for him.
If he doesn't, it will just fuel the narrative that he isn't up to the job/beholden to the Brexiteer crazies... and he'll be further in the shit.
I'd go Hunt as Chancellor, Gove as Brexit Sec, Cox as Foreign Secretary, Rudd to Health, Javid remain at Home Office, Truss to First Treasury Sec. I'd like to see him promote the likes of Tom Tugenhdat (Defence Sec?) and Jesse Norman.
God knows what he'll do though. He's not exactly predictable.
There's a media perception problem at work here. Most journalists rely on MP contacts for information about how party members are feeling. But many Labour MPs are Corbyn-sceptics, as we've seen with the VONCs etc. So journalist X goes to MP Y, who says "Oh, God, this is awful, he really has to go", and the journalist duly reports that there is deep Labour unhappiness with Corbyn. But actually it's the same unhappiness as before - absolutely genuine, but not new.
Down in Snoddington West CLP, things haven't changed much either. Around 60% voted for Corbyn, 40% for all other candidates put together. The 60% don't see any special reason to change their minds - sure, they see the usual suspects are having another go at him, but what else is new? They never hear any members spouting anti-semitic rants (at least I've never heard any in 48 years) so they assume it's a relatively minor problem, no doubt exaggerated by the media - needs to be sorted, but not a reason to change leader. Some were unhappy about the Brexit stance, but largely feel it's been fixed.
"There's just no satisfying the critics" is a common complaint, and I know people who were against mandatory reselection but are now starting to feel it's needed: does it make sense, they grumble, to perpetuate a situation where a chunk of the PLP take every opportunity to start a new squabble? What would it be like in government?
As with Tory members, Labour members are living in a bubble unaware of how normal people feel about it. There are many millions who would be delighted right now to have a Labour party alternative they could simply tolerate to vote for to get rid of the Tory ERG from power.
It should not be a difficult ask. Whether it is fair or not, or the media are to blame shouldnt matter. If there is an easy way to improve the lives of millions of people, such as electing a new Labour leader and govt, to prevent the ERG meltdown we are all about to suffer it is inexcusable to simply say it is not being fair on Jeremy. Surely Labour is supposed to be about the collective good not the individual?
There's a media perception problem at work here. Most journalists rely on MP contacts for information about how party members are feeling. But many Labour MPs are Corbyn-sceptics, as we've seen with the VONCs etc. So journalist X goes to MP Y, who says "Oh, God, this is awful, he really has to go", and the journalist duly reports that there is deep Labour unhappiness with Corbyn. But actually it's the same unhappiness as before - absolutely genuine, but not new.
Down in Snoddington West CLP, things haven't changed much either. Around 60% voted for Corbyn, 40% for all other candidates put together. The 60% don't see any special reason to change their minds - sure, they see the usual suspects are having another go at him, but what else is new? They never hear any members spouting anti-semitic rants (at least I've never heard any in 48 years) so they assume it's a relatively minor problem, no doubt exaggerated by the media - needs to be sorted, but not a reason to change leader. Some were unhappy about the Brexit stance, but largely feel it's been fixed.
"There's just no satisfying the critics" is a common complaint, and I know people who were against mandatory reselection but are now starting to feel it's needed: does it make sense, they grumble, to perpetuate a situation where a chunk of the PLP take every opportunity to start a new squabble? What would it be like in government?
As with Tory members, Labour members are living in a bubble unaware of how normal people feel about it. There are many millions who would be delighted right now to have a Labour party alternative they could simply tolerate to vote for to get rid of the Tory ERG from power.
It should not be a difficult ask. Whether it is fair or not, or the media are to blame shouldnt matter. If there is an easy way to improve the lives of millions of people, such as electing a new Labour leader and govt, to prevent the ERG meltdown we are all about to suffer it is inexcusable to simply say it is not being fair on Jeremy. Surely Labour is supposed to be about the collective good not the individual?
That collective being from the 1950s Soviet Union.
Forgive my ignorance on this but I have no idea what problem HS2 was supposed to fix. In my experience the London-west midlands-north west routes are quick and frequent. Bloody expensive but I don’t think that is the issue.
shave 15 mins off London to Birmingham, nothing else. Cheap at 100B
The primary reason for it is expanding rail freight capacity over currently full lines, nothing to do with journey times between London and Birmingham.
Same as the Heathrow runway, LHR is so far over capacity that any adverse weather costs billions in delays and cancellations, not to mention the environmental cost of having hundreds of thousands of planes that currently spend hours going around in circles at low level close to London so they can squeeze them so close together on approach.
Another one that could be solved easier, faster and cheaper by expanding other airports
Oh look, Politico with another Sanders hit piece. Given Warren is miles shorter in the betting odds than Sanders shouldn't we expect Warren to lead amongst this favoured group ?
& No I'm not talking my book here, I have green numbers next to both of them.
Oh look, Politico with another Sanders hit piece. Given Warren is miles shorter in the betting odds than Sanders shouldn't we expect Warren to lead amongst this favoured group ?
& No I'm not talking my book here, I have green numbers next to both of them.
"DFA, founded by Howard Dean following his run for president in 2004" LOL !
"Priti Patel is being considered for a shock cabinet return as home secretary, The Independent has learned, as Boris Johnson seeks to convince the public he is not a “British Donald Trump”."
Mr. eek, they aren't paid to mindlessly oppose everything.
Miss Cyclefree, that's a pretext as wafer-thin as Boris' charm.
Opposing a deal, with no prospect (at the moment) of revoking/remaining, is to take action that makes no deal the only viable outcome. Then bleating about leaving with no deal, when one's own actions have helped to bring it about, is rancid hypocrisy.
To be fair, it was made obvious during the indicative votes exercise that an alternative to the Deal - well, a tweak to the Deal - would garner cross-House support.
The Government could have thrown their weight behind the Customs Union amendment championed by Ken Clarke. Had it done so, then MPs who had supported it during the Indicative Votes would have had to support it again or been made to look like utter fools.
The Magic Circle failed to promote R A Butler. Apart from that, I think it worked until that bloody woman was installed, arguably a case of right-wing entryism. Heath wasn't ideal but I seem to remember the field was limited in 1965; maybe Butler was a bit old by then.
The field was limited in 1965 - only three candidates:
First ballot
Ted Heath 150 Reg Maudling 133 Enoch Powell 15
Powell was eliminated, and Maudling withdrew.
The Magic Circle would I think have chosen Whitelaw in 1975, perhaps Hurd in 1990, Clarke in 1997 and 2001. Perhaps Cameron in 2005, May in 2016 and Hunt in 2019. But by then the whole trajectory of history would have been utterly changed. The question is whether the establishment candidate is generally the best.
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..
If nothing else that comment by Boris shows that he does not have a clue about what implementing a telematics solution to customs would involve.
That's not the point I would guess. The point is make people, especially Brexiteers, believe that it must be possible to develop a technical solution and, then, when one is not developed, Johnson and the Brexiteers can blame someone else for the failure of another unicorn.
Which is why anyone clueful is saying now that it isn’t possible. Mind you I do like the ability to turn around later and say I told you so.
Now it may well be that the Government gives someone a few billion to create a solution but until I’m on the receiving end of that cheque I’ll repeat the statement that it’s more a human issue than a technology one (and even then the technology won’t be easy).
The technological solution working on GPS and the equivalent of aviation flight plans works just fine and actually could be implemented soon. That software already exists.
But we’re not dealing with a technological problem, we’re dealing with a political problem.
Given their record on IT projects, you can guarantee there is no solution , they would spend 10 years , a few gazillions and it would not work. If there was indeed any hope of a solution someone would have actually described it by now or at worst tried to sell it to the idiots.
When a case is brought by Uraguay about why its beef is treated differently to Ireland's (despite there being no WTO-sanctioned FTA between us and Ireland), and we lose that case, what then?
How long would that case take to be heard? What are the penalties we could suffer, especially if a FTA had been arranged by the time the court case was heard.
Antigua started a court case vs USA over gambling in 2003, eventually won the case, awarded $21m per year, still received nothing and still complaining.
No WTO black helicopters - and as for the time it takes? No idea but swap out Antigua and replace with the USA and swap out the USA and replace with the UK. Then ponder whether minds might be concentrated.
If we are in dispute with a Trump US govt the "punishment" will surely be via tariffs not the WTO.
That too.
The point I am trying to make, is that we know little about the WTO and as we did with the EU assume countries follow the rules that have been created. Whilst they generally may follow them, in practice many countries choose not to, the world doesnt end for them, if there is any punishment it could be a decade or two away, assuming the WTO still exists by then, which given Trumps view it may not.
Worrying about the WTO re the Irish border is probably unnecessary compared to other no deal problems.
Relying on the WTO to govern our trade and enforce our rights when we want to is a very bad idea for the same reasons, especially as we will tend to play by the rules more than our competitors.
"Priti Patel is being considered for a shock cabinet return as home secretary, The Independent has learned, as Boris Johnson seeks to convince the public he is not a “British Donald Trump”."
"Priti Patel is being considered for a shock cabinet return as home secretary, The Independent has learned, as Boris Johnson seeks to convince the public he is not a “British Donald Trump”."
"Priti Patel is being considered for a shock cabinet return as home secretary, The Independent has learned, as Boris Johnson seeks to convince the public he is not a “British Donald Trump”."
A halfway competent opposition would destroy this government. Imagine what a John Smith could have done.
Instead we have a party which rivals the Tories for malicious incompetence.
There is such a big opportunity for the Lib Dems here - if only they have the ruthless focus to grab it.
It is not just ruthlessness that they need, it is imagination and an acceptance of moving to a broad based centre party that could house Tom Watson and David Gauke, not just Chuka and Rory Stewart. The prize is a reasonable shot at being the main party of govt over the next twenty years. The cost is the end of the Lib Dems in their current form. I have seen and heard nothing to suggest the LD leaders or members are willing to pay the cost.
Lib Dems are a bunch of duffers, god help us if they ever cheat their way to any position of power ever again.
Forgive my ignorance on this but I have no idea what problem HS2 was supposed to fix. In my experience the London-west midlands-north west routes are quick and frequent. Bloody expensive but I don’t think that is the issue.
shave 15 mins off London to Birmingham, nothing else. Cheap at 100B
The primary reason for it is expanding rail freight capacity over currently full lines, nothing to do with journey times between London and Birmingham.
Same as the Heathrow runway, LHR is so far over capacity that any adverse weather costs billions in delays and cancellations, not to mention the environmental cost of having hundreds of thousands of planes that currently spend hours going around in circles at low level close to London so they can squeeze them so close together on approach.
Another one that could be solved easier, faster and cheaper by expanding other airports
Quite. Who wants to travel to Heathrow if they could get to Manchester in about half the time, despite living in 'the south'? Well, S W Midlands. However, when I do fly, which isn't often these days, there are few cheap or mid-price long-haul flights except from Stansted, H'row or maybe Gatwick or Luton. (Unlike most of PB I've never gone 1st or business class...)
And I believe B'ham's runway isn't long enough for some aircraft, although that's pretty close too.
Fairly busy today so only noticing UK political developments out of the corner of my eye this morning, but even still the optic for the Tories looks much worse than I expected ahead of BoJo's getting into Number 10.
Looks like he will have at least 30 anti-ERG MPs to try to deal with and a significant block of cabinet ministers will refuse to serve under him.
In any event B&R together with up to 6 defections are going to leave him with no majority.
Seems like he is walking into a complete shit storm... from his own side.
Mr. Cooke, I would've gone for a second referendum over that. Membership of the customs union is both demented in and of itself, and directly contrary to what both sides said during the campaign. Better to remain honestly then have a pathetic departure in name only.
There's also no guarantee the pro-EU MPs wouldn't've just shifted the goal posts again.
The fact remains, the vast majority of MPs who opposed the deal are now bleating about there being no deal.
Tory MP Elphicke charged with sexual assault. Breaking BBC news.
Dover would certainly be an interesting by election.
I guess it would be between Labour and the Brexit Party in current circumstances. It's not a good area for the LDs.
The Brexit Party should really be able to take Dover in a by-election. If they can't win there then it's tough to see where they do win.
Both UKIP and the Brexit Party have never done quite as well in Dover over the years as one might have assumed. It's good for them, but not spectacularly so.
Mr. eek, they aren't paid to mindlessly oppose everything.
Miss Cyclefree, that's a pretext as wafer-thin as Boris' charm.
Opposing a deal, with no prospect (at the moment) of revoking/remaining, is to take action that makes no deal the only viable outcome. Then bleating about leaving with no deal, when one's own actions have helped to bring it about, is rancid hypocrisy.
To be fair, it was made obvious during the indicative votes exercise that an alternative to the Deal - well, a tweak to the Deal - would garner cross-House support.
The Government could have thrown their weight behind the Customs Union amendment championed by Ken Clarke. Had it done so, then MPs who had supported it during the Indicative Votes would have had to support it again or been made to look like utter fools.
Forgive my ignorance on this but I have no idea what problem HS2 was supposed to fix. In my experience the London-west midlands-north west routes are quick and frequent. Bloody expensive but I don’t think that is the issue.
shave 15 mins off London to Birmingham, nothing else. Cheap at 100B
The primary reason for it is expanding rail freight capacity over currently full lines, nothing to do with journey times between London and Birmingham.
Same as the Heathrow runway, LHR is so far over capacity that any adverse weather costs billions in delays and cancellations, not to mention the environmental cost of having hundreds of thousands of planes that currently spend hours going around in circles at low level close to London so they can squeeze them so close together on approach.
Another one that could be solved easier, faster and cheaper by expanding other airports
Quite. Who wants to travel to Heathrow if they could get to Manchester in about half the time, despite living in 'the south'? Well, S W Midlands. However, when I do fly, which isn't often these days, there are few cheap or mid-price long-haul flights except from Stansted, H'row or maybe Gatwick or Luton. (Unlike most of PB I've never gone 1st or business class...)
And I believe B'ham's runway isn't long enough for some aircraft, although that's pretty close too.
BHX had their runway lengthened a few years ago now. Emirates flys a daily A380 into there.
The Magic Circle failed to promote R A Butler. Apart from that, I think it worked until that bloody woman was installed, arguably a case of right-wing entryism. Heath wasn't ideal but I seem to remember the field was limited in 1965; maybe Butler was a bit old by then.
The field was limited in 1965 - only three candidates:
First ballot
Ted Heath 150 Reg Maudling 133 Enoch Powell 15
Powell was eliminated, and Maudling withdrew.
The Magic Circle would I think have chosen Whitelaw in 1975, perhaps Hurd in 1990, Clarke in 1997 and 2001. Perhaps Cameron in 2005, May in 2016 and Hunt in 2019. But by then the whole trajectory of history would have been utterly changed. The question is whether the establishment candidate is generally the best.
Maudling had dodgy financial dealings. Otherwise, he'd have been the best.
I'd have preferred Heseltine to Hurd. Similar views on EU membership, believes in intervention to combat social injustice, speaks his mind and always has. However, he's not 'clubbable' and made many enemies.
Yes, 1975 onwards would have diverged radically, although Clarke would probably have become PM. Maybe Whitelaw would have tamed the unions peacefully, as Castle and Wilson had been trying to do before 1976.
Forgive my ignorance on this but I have no idea what problem HS2 was supposed to fix. In my experience the London-west midlands-north west routes are quick and frequent. Bloody expensive but I don’t think that is the issue.
shave 15 mins off London to Birmingham, nothing else. Cheap at 100B
The primary reason for it is expanding rail freight capacity over currently full lines, nothing to do with journey times between London and Birmingham.
Same as the Heathrow runway, LHR is so far over capacity that any adverse weather costs billions in delays and cancellations, not to mention the environmental cost of having hundreds of thousands of planes that currently spend hours going around in circles at low level close to London so they can squeeze them so close together on approach.
Another one that could be solved easier, faster and cheaper by expanding other airports
Quite. Who wants to travel to Heathrow if they could get to Manchester in about half the time, despite living in 'the south'? Well, S W Midlands. However, when I do fly, which isn't often these days, there are few cheap or mid-price long-haul flights except from Stansted, H'row or maybe Gatwick or Luton. (Unlike most of PB I've never gone 1st or business class...)
And I believe B'ham's runway isn't long enough for some aircraft, although that's pretty close too.
Agree, like everything else in UK it is all done to get everything London/south east centric and coining in the cash. We get all the hassle, inconvenience and cost.
"Priti Patel is being considered for a shock cabinet return as home secretary, The Independent has learned, as Boris Johnson seeks to convince the public he is not a “British Donald Trump”."
Comments
I wonder how many MPs voted for Boris because they were afraid of their members and felt they had to have him in the final two.
Here’s a 25 year old video of them failing to account for a crosswind: it’s got a lot worse since then.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uw5xOB5kQLw
I am pessimistic. I see very little hope for our politics these days.
Miss Cyclefree, that's a pretext as wafer-thin as Boris' charm.
Opposing a deal, with no prospect (at the moment) of revoking/remaining, is to take action that makes no deal the only viable outcome. Then bleating about leaving with no deal, when one's own actions have helped to bring it about, is rancid hypocrisy.
If a client can’t produce a flowchart of what their system would do if done manually, then they can’t expect the computer programme to be able to do the same.
The vast majority of IT system failures come from a lack of mutual understanding of business process between the developer and customer.
When a case is brought by Uraguay about why its beef is treated differently to Ireland's (despite there being no WTO-sanctioned FTA between us and Ireland), and we lose that case, what then?
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/604087/the-dark-secret-at-the-heart-of-ai/
Antigua started a court case vs USA over gambling in 2003, eventually won the case, awarded $21m per year, still received nothing and still complaining.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-trade-antigua/antigua-losing-all-hope-of-u-s-payout-in-gambling-dispute-idUSKBN1JI0VZ
1) will there be a crest?
2) will Theresa May be half an hour late?
In general, FPTP tends towards one big right party, one big left party and a few smaller niche parties.
In general, PR tends towards biggish centre right and centre left parties, smaller hard left and hard right parties, and perhaps a smallish party in the centre like Germany's FDP
If the LDs are ever to win an election then they need to replace Labour, which means staying firmly on the centre left.
Without PR, most of the time they're as significant as ticks on the hide of an elephant. Only in 1974, 2010 and since 2017 have they had much influence, when FPTP gave them a hung parliament. In 1974, 2010 and 2017, the major parties managed to defeat any pressure for PR. The minor party they were dealing with in 2017 didn't want it.
https://irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/wto-says-its-rules-would-not-force-eu-or-uk-to-erect-hard-irish-border-1.3710136
No WTO black helicopters - and as for the time it takes? No idea but swap out Antigua and replace with the USA and swap out the USA and replace with the UK. Then ponder whether minds might be concentrated.
First ballot
Ted Heath 150
Reg Maudling 133
Enoch Powell 15
Powell was eliminated, and Maudling withdrew.
And they're electrifying the route south of Harborough, and also I saw an extra track built along the Sharnbrook tunnel diversionary route (used rarely or late at night).
John McDonnell his only challenger failed to secure enough nominations to get onto the ballot.
Down in Snoddington West CLP, things haven't changed much either. Around 60% voted for Corbyn, 40% for all other candidates put together. The 60% don't see any special reason to change their minds - sure, they see the usual suspects are having another go at him, but what else is new? They never hear any members spouting anti-semitic rants (at least I've never heard any in 48 years) so they assume it's a relatively minor problem, no doubt exaggerated by the media - needs to be sorted, but not a reason to change leader. Some were unhappy about the Brexit stance, but largely feel it's been fixed.
"There's just no satisfying the critics" is a common complaint, and I know people who were against mandatory reselection but are now starting to feel it's needed: does it make sense, they grumble, to perpetuate a situation where a chunk of the PLP take every opportunity to start a new squabble? What would it be like in government?
Oh dear...another headache for Boris...
(and i know it's potentially muchmore serious than that)
The PM takes the lead on all the important stuff to a degree not seen with the Treasury or other Cabinet departments.
Why else would Rees-Mogg be favourite?
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1153253818269863936
Of course this assumes the DUP continue to support him.
I do wonder what they will ask for as the current Stormont extension bill gives Sinn Fein everything they would want so they have no incentive to return until November when that bill takes effect
The whip was restored to Elphicke and Griffiths on the day of the Tory leadership confidence vote.
Breaking BBC news.
https://news.sky.com/story/charlie-elphicke-tory-mp-charged-with-three-counts-of-sexual-assault-11768220
He's started from a point of very low expectations after every man and his dog has spent the last six weeks laughing at him/or being horrified at the prospect of him.
The selection of his cabinet is going to be HUGE. I think Boris - if Brexit wasn't an issue - would select a much more liberal, Cameroon cabinet than he is now going to be able to.
Getting the balance of the cabinet correct against the backdrop of party splits over Brexit is going to be very difficult. If he can pull it off an keep both wings of his party relatively happy, that'd be a big plus for him.
If he doesn't, it will just fuel the narrative that he isn't up to the job/beholden to the Brexiteer crazies... and he'll be further in the shit.
I'd go Hunt as Chancellor, Gove as Brexit Sec, Cox as Foreign Secretary, Rudd to Health, Javid remain at Home Office, Truss to First Treasury Sec. I'd like to see him promote the likes of Tom Tugenhdat (Defence Sec?) and Jesse Norman.
God knows what he'll do though. He's not exactly predictable.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/22/elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-progressive-straw-poll-1424143
Sanders led Warren by more than 30 percentage points in the group’s previous survey in April, but the independent senator from Vermont saw his edge over Warren fall to just more than 6 percentage points in the latest survey....
No chance.
It should not be a difficult ask. Whether it is fair or not, or the media are to blame shouldnt matter. If there is an easy way to improve the lives of millions of people, such as electing a new Labour leader and govt, to prevent the ERG meltdown we are all about to suffer it is inexcusable to simply say it is not being fair on Jeremy. Surely Labour is supposed to be about the collective good not the individual?
& No I'm not talking my book here, I have green numbers next to both of them.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/priti-patel-boris-johnson-brexit-trump-cabinet-home-secretary-pm-a9012916.html
The Government could have thrown their weight behind the Customs Union amendment championed by Ken Clarke. Had it done so, then MPs who had supported it during the Indicative Votes would have had to support it again or been made to look like utter fools.
Worrying about the WTO re the Irish border is probably unnecessary compared to other no deal problems.
Relying on the WTO to govern our trade and enforce our rights when we want to is a very bad idea for the same reasons, especially as we will tend to play by the rules more than our competitors.
And I believe B'ham's runway isn't long enough for some aircraft, although that's pretty close too.
Looks like he will have at least 30 anti-ERG MPs to try to deal with and a significant block of cabinet ministers will refuse to serve under him.
In any event B&R together with up to 6 defections are going to leave him with no majority.
Seems like he is walking into a complete shit storm... from his own side.
There's also no guarantee the pro-EU MPs wouldn't've just shifted the goal posts again.
The fact remains, the vast majority of MPs who opposed the deal are now bleating about there being no deal.
No shit, Sherlock.
Or can I switch off my mobile?
That would make it 311 Con, 10 DUP, 319 all other opposition, 2 vacant.
Those 2 vacant get converted into Lib Dem/Labour/Brexit and it would be 321 for the government and 321 all opposition.
Speaker having to cast his vote on every VoNC!
I'd have preferred Heseltine to Hurd. Similar views on EU membership, believes in intervention to combat social injustice, speaks his mind and always has. However, he's not 'clubbable' and made many enemies.
Yes, 1975 onwards would have diverged radically, although Clarke would probably have become PM. Maybe Whitelaw would have tamed the unions peacefully, as Castle and Wilson had been trying to do before 1976.