If Greening, Bebb and Lee do jump ship to the LibDems, surely that really is 'it' for the Johnson regime?
Might we not see a double-fronted attack?
First Parliament stops No Deal Brexit & extends.
Second, once they're sure of that, we have a VONC or call for election. It's easy to forget in the Brexit farrago that Johnson is virtually without majority for all the other Gov't business. That's why, on balance, I DO think we're heading for a 2019 General Election.
It's possible we could see an extension of Article 50 AND a General Election before Oct 31st.
The EU might very well make a general election the price of extension. It's difficult to see how an extension by itself is going to solve anything.
Could the EU extend A50 unilaterally? It seems illogical to me but I recall someone on here saying it could.
If they can, it would make sense from their perspective, because of the prospect of a Leader emerging who would be prepared to negotiate rather than lay down further red lines.
They certainly can't extend unilaterally within the terms of the treaty. I'm sure if it turns out catastrophically an emergency deal can be agreed in practice. Assuming our political leadership hasn't got to the stage of being literally stark raving mad.
The interesting part will be them agreeing to extend on Parliament's mandate (legislation) if Johnson is still PM. The noises from the EU are that they would since this would be the will of UK Parliament.
I suspect though that Parliament might enact the necessary legislation first, and then consider the VONC issue second. Disentangling the two makes a lot of sense and is more likely to win the support of Remainer Tories.
p.s. it would be quite a clever move to VONC Johnson only if he refuses to enact the will of Parliament. Still plenty of time for this process.
20 Tory MPs, including May Cabinet Ministers David Lidington, Rory Stewart, David Gauke and Greg Clark sign a letter written by the former Chancellor Philip Hammond demanding that PM Boris only leaves the EU with a Deal and say that his price of renegotiating the backstop is too high for the EU to agree.
20 Tory MPs, including May Cabinet Ministers David Lidington, Rory Stewart, David Gauke and Greg Clark sign a letter written by the former Chancellor Philip Hammond demanding that PM Boris only leaves the EU with a Deal and say that his price of renegotiating the backstop is too high for the EU to agree.
The volatility and divergence in the weaponised polls tells us only what we want to hear so the Conservatives run to YouGov and tout it wherever they go. Labour supporters talk ComRes and Opinium so let's forget polls, they are now as part of the propaganda war as Facebook ads.
As others have argued, so much will depend on Boris the campaigner and especially if and when his past inconsistencies (as distinct from his indiscretions) are brought back into the light. Many will not care, shrug and say "that's Boris" but he's not Mayor of London any more so it might matter.
We have also, as we've seen this morning, the Conservative dissidents, once the ERG but now those adamantly opposed to No Deal. A lot will depend on how this group chooses to act in the next few weeks.
If Greening, Bebb and Lee do jump ship to the LibDems, surely that really is 'it' for the Johnson regime?
Might we not see a double-fronted attack?
First Parliament stops No Deal Brexit & extends.
Second, once they're sure of that, we have a VONC or call for election. It's easy to forget in the Brexit farrago that Johnson is virtually without majority for all the other Gov't business. That's why, on balance, I DO think we're heading for a 2019 General Election.
It's possible we could see an extension of Article 50 AND a General Election before Oct 31st.
The EU might very well make a general election the price of extension. It's difficult to see how an extension by itself is going to solve anything.
Could the EU extend A50 unilaterally? It seems illogical to me but I recall someone on here saying it could.
If they can, it would make sense from their perspective, because of the prospect of a Leader emerging who would be prepared to negotiate rather than lay down further red lines.
They certainly can't extend unilaterally within the terms of the treaty. I'm sure if it turns out catastrophically an emergency deal can be agreed in practice. Assuming our political leadership hasn't got to the stage of being literally stark raving mad.
The interesting part will be them agreeing to extend on Parliament's mandate (legislation) if Johnson is still PM. The noises from the EU are that they would since this would be the will of UK Parliament.
I suspect though that Parliament might enact the necessary legislation first, and then consider the VONC issue second. Disentangling the two makes a lot of sense and is more likely to win the support of Remainer Tories.
If they can pass legislation I wouldn't have thought there would be any doubt about it. Parliament is sovereign.
The murkier suggestions are about the Commons making its will clear but not being able to legislate. I'd have thought that was clearly not something the EU could act on, though.
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
From the evidence so far of Brecon and local by-elections Boris is a loser Not a Winner.
The Tory voteshare was up in Worcester last week and the Tories got 12% more in Brecon on election night with Boris as PM than the only by election poll of the campaign had them on when May was PM
FFS, HYUFD, how many farmers and farming families have time to answer polls at the height of the haymaking season? In an area with poor phone and Internet coverage, at that? That poll was totally unreliable and as it has been explained to you many times in words of one syllable you must know that.
There was no evidence of a Boris bounce, if anything the reverse. Despite everything, that is a seat the Tories should have held. They lost by a far bigger margin than those of us who knew he seat were predicting, due to the collapse of a very tribal Labour vote in a deprived ex-industrial area to the Liberal Democrats. As I have repeatedly said that should worry Labour, but it should also worry you.
Even on the latest Yougov giving a small Tory majority they would have lost Brecon, that it was much closer than expected was somewhat encouraging
Say the LDs take 20 Remainian seats off Con and various parties get 10 off them in Scotland. That lowers the bar to something like 285. Lab need to hold what they've got, then gain another 10 or so. That's a very modest goal.
Can they hit it? Well, Corbyn is still shit and Boris is probably better at campaigning than TMay but the BXP situation is very unclear, and LDs and ex-Cons could well get behind Corbyn in Lab-Con marginals. I think the number should be bigger than 22%.
That looks very optimistic.
No Labour policy seems to be thought through. For example, Angela Rayner says on radio "Labour wants universities to offer places after exam results" She was then asked how is that to be implemented.
She said "Errr.. we'll have to think"
Actually, it can only be implemented in two ways.
1. A level exams are earlier, say in April. This means that stuff has to be taken out of A Level syllabus, so students are under-prepared when they start University in October.
2. A levels stay the same. But University term starts later, say in January. This leaves students with June-January with nothing much to do. And will be hugely unpopular with Universities.
1 is the worst option, so Labour will probably go with that.
On grounds of remedying "unfairness" (which actually remains to be shown), a dumb policy is advocated without any thought as to how it is to be implemented.
And Labour propose this while holding most of the University seats ....
Though the answer is fairly obvious, a year off post A levels for applications and work experience. It gets the kids to grow up a bit and decide if they really want to go. This may well reduce interest in more marginal courses of little added value.
My Medical School has this policy, and Angela Rayner is correct, it does help the disadvantaged groups to get access.
What is the work experience that all these A Level students will do ? I can certainly see your idea being advantageous to Deliveroo and Just Eat.
I think a year off can be advantageous for some students, but it is probably the wealthier ones (whose parents can afford to subsidise them in some travel) that benefit the most. But, for some students, it is just a wasted year doing little or nothing.
I don't think a plan to make a year off compulsory would be popular.
School leavers could spend a year manning the border posts in Northern Ireland.
There are ~ 500,000 going to University each year. The Irish border is ~ 500 km.
That is an A level student every metre from Derry to Warrenpoint.
We have also, as we've seen this morning, the Conservative dissidents, once the ERG but now those adamantly opposed to No Deal. A lot will depend on how this group chooses to act in the next few weeks.
Indeed. But with John Bercow determined to see the will of Parliament heard and enacted I am feeling much more confident that we will not Brexit on October 31st.
"There is also the possibility of a deal with Plaid and the Greens on the Brecon model to allow a single “Unite to Remain” candidate in key seats."
There may be seats in England - say, Cheltenham - where it would be different.
I think the Plaid Cymru vote is 1/3 Leave, 2/3 Remain. So, this alliance will lose some Plaid Cymru voters.
The LibDem vote is 100 per cent Remain, so the problem does not occur for them.
That's one problem. The other problem is that people are assuming that just because the party leadership has endorsed another candidate, that means their voters will slavishly follow. This is a very bold assumption. In the case of Wales for a number of reasons it is a totally ludicrous assumption. If you were a Liberal Democrat and willing to vote for a Plaid candidate to take a seat off say Labour - and Ynys Môn is the only seat where this might apply - you will already be doing it. If not, no amount of havering from Jane Dodds will change your mind.
Marginal Arfon is possibly another example.
I suspect LibDems in Arfon or Ynys Môn are probably more likely either to not vote or to vote Labour than Plaid Cymru -- if the LibDems are not standing.
I have still to hear what Plaid Cymru got in return for not standing in Brecon & Radnorshire.
What did PC get out of B&R?
a) they avoid being humiliatingly squeezed down to the loony vote and losing their deposit b) they got some good publicity out of the result, praised as being shrewd and progressive with a sliver of credit for the victory c) their supporters saw a Welsh speaker and strong remainer elected for this constituency d) LibDems returning the favour in the GE wont do them any harm.
20 Tory MPs, including May Cabinet Ministers David Lidington, Rory Stewart, David Gauke and Greg Clark sign a letter written by the former Chancellor Philip Hammond demanding that PM Boris only leaves the EU with a Deal and say that his price of renegotiating the backstop is too high for the EU to agree.
The second most significant thing about that letter is the missing signatures. Where are Guto Bebb, Phillip Lee and Justine Greening?
Are they about to jump ship to the LibDems?
You're probably being too Kremlinological. It's August, lots of people are away, contacting each other is harder than usual.
Only the current generation of politicians could even remotely think they should have August away from Parliament when we face the biggest crisis since the War.
Say the LDs take 20 Remainian seats off Con and various parties get 10 off them in Scotland. That lowers the bar to something like 285. Lab need to hold what they've got, then gain another 10 or so. That's a very modest goal.
Can they hit it? Well, Corbyn is still shit and Boris is probably better at campaigning than TMay but the BXP situation is very unclear, and LDs and ex-Cons could well get behind Corbyn in Lab-Con marginals. I think the number should be bigger than 22%.
That looks very optimistic.
No Las that to be implemented.
She said "Errr.. we'll have to think"
Actually, it can only be implemented in two ways.
1. A level exams are earlier, say in April. This means that stuff has to be taken out of A Level syllabus, so students are under-prepared when they start University in October.
2. A levels stay the same. But University term starts later, say in January. This leaves students with June-January with nothing much to do. And will be hugely unpopular with Universities.
1 is the worst option, so Labour will probably go with that.
On grounds of remedying "unfairness" (which actually remains to be shown), a dumb policy is advocated without any thought as to how it is to be implemented.
And Labour propose this while holding most of the University seats ....
Though the answer is fairly obvious, a year off post A levels for applications and work experience. It gets the kids to grow up a bit and decide if they really want to go. This may well reduce interest in more marginal courses of little added value.
My Medical School has this policy, and Angela Rayner is correct, it does help the disadvantaged groups to get access.
What is the work experience that all these A Level students will do ? I can certainly see your idea being advantageous to Deliveroo and Just Eat.
I think a year off can be advantageous for some students, but it is probably the wealthier ones (whose parents can afford to subsidise them in some travel) that benefit the most. But, for some students, it is just a wasted year doing little or nothing.
I don't think a plan to make a year off compulsory would be popular.
School leavers could spend a year manning the border posts in Northern Ireland.
There are ~ 500,000 going to University each year. The Irish border is ~ 500 km.
That is an A level student every metre from Derry to Warrenpoint.
I like the idea.
Any left over could be asked to go pick fruit and veg.
The volatility and divergence in the weaponised polls tells us only what we want to hear so the Conservatives run to YouGov and tout it wherever they go. Labour supporters talk ComRes and Opinium so let's forget polls, they are now as part of the propaganda war as Facebook ads.
As others have argued, so much will depend on Boris the campaigner and especially if and when his past inconsistencies (as distinct from his indiscretions) are brought back into the light. Many will not care, shrug and say "that's Boris" but he's not Mayor of London any more so it might matter.
We have also, as we've seen this morning, the Conservative dissidents, once the ERG but now those adamantly opposed to No Deal. A lot will depend on how this group chooses to act in the next few weeks.
The Tories still now lead even with the latest Comres and Opinium polls albeit not with a majority unlike Yougov
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
From the evidence so far of Brecon and local by-elections Boris is a loser Not a Winner.
The Tory voteshare was up in Worcester last week and the Tories got 12% more in Brecon on election night with Boris as PM than the only by election poll of the campaign had them on when May was PM
FFS, HYUFD, how many farmers and farming families have time to answer polls at the height of the haymaking season? In an area with poor phone and Internet coverage, at that? That poll was totally unreliable and as it has been explained to you many times in words of one syllable you must know that.
There was no evidence of a Boris bounce, if anything the reverse. Despite everything, that is a seat the Tories should have held. They lost by a far bigger margin than those of us who knew he seat were predicting, due to the collapse of a very tribal Labour vote in a deprived ex-industrial area to the Liberal Democrats. As I have repeatedly said that should worry Labour, but it should also worry you.
Even on the latest Yougov giving a small Tory majority they would have lost Brecon, that it was much closer than expected was somewhat encouraging
It was not a smaller swing than people who actually know the fecking seat expected, it was a larger one.
But why bother? You only accept facts when they fit your views.
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
Corbyn would slaughter Boris in a head-to-head, but it will matter little by comparison to how Brexit shakes out and whether we are talking about a pre or post Brexit GE.
That's the problem at the moment with making any predictions. Even assuming that B Day is October 31, there's a huge range of possible outcomes.
It could be joyful and triumphant. It could be like diving into a cold pool of water- an initial shock, but quickly invigorating. It could be a tar pit, where nothing happens at first, we just get... stuck. It could be a fiasco that unravels in a week.
You can make a not-totally-stupid case for each of these. (FWIW, my hunch is that something small and unexpected will turn out to make the whole thing fall apart- a black mosquito rather than a black swan, if you like.)
But the reputation of the government come election day could be anything.
The danger is in the little things.
To do A you need to tick box X.
And if you cannot tick box X then things begin to grind to a halt.
Its no good some posturing politician saying that box X should be ignored.
Because in the real world people who ignore box X get inspected, fined, prosecuted and sacked.
So the person who's job it is to tick box X will still insist on doing so.
And there's an endless multitude of box Xs in this country.
We have also, as we've seen this morning, the Conservative dissidents, once the ERG but now those adamantly opposed to No Deal. A lot will depend on how this group chooses to act in the next few weeks.
Indeed. But with John Bercow determined to see the will of Parliament heard and enacted I am feeling much more confident that we will not Brexit on October 31st.
Parliament will somehow have to Revoke or Extend Article 50. I don't see how they will do this as there is not a majority in Parliament for anything
I don't think is going to happen after Labour's confusion over Brexit.
It does suggest though if Swinson holds the balance of power after the next general election she will demand Corbyn's head and only back Labour on confidence and supply if Watson for example is Labour leader
The volatility and divergence in the weaponised polls tells us only what we want to hear so the Conservatives run to YouGov and tout it wherever they go. Labour supporters talk ComRes and Opinium so let's forget polls, they are now as part of the propaganda war as Facebook ads.
As others have argued, so much will depend on Boris the campaigner and especially if and when his past inconsistencies (as distinct from his indiscretions) are brought back into the light. Many will not care, shrug and say "that's Boris" but he's not Mayor of London any more so it might matter.
We have also, as we've seen this morning, the Conservative dissidents, once the ERG but now those adamantly opposed to No Deal. A lot will depend on how this group chooses to act in the next few weeks.
The Tories still now lead even with the latest Comres and Opinium polls albeit not with a majority unlike Yougov
Don't worry anyway. There are enough pollsters for you to keep hopping about to the most favourable one.
a) they avoid being humiliatingly squeezed down to the loony vote and losing their deposit b) they got some good publicity out of the result, praised as being shrewd and progressive with a sliver of credit for the victory c) their supporters saw a Welsh speaker and strong remainer elected for this constituency d) LibDems returning the favour in the GE wont do them any harm.
We have a real national crisis for which I can only imagine there have already been secret COBRA meetings.
There is a shortage of cauliflowers.
@HYUFD will be on here to tell us the latest YouGov poll shows 71% of Conservative supporting LEAVE voters eat cauliflower at least once a week so that's a real crisis for the new Prime Minister.
Perhaps the Government can spend £10 billion on a public information campaign advising as to alternatives to cauliflowers.
Personally, I blame the Tories - it's raining, that's also down to bloody Boris Johnson, the summers were always nice when Theresa May was PM and it's Wednesday, that's also down to the Tories.
I don't think is going to happen after Labour's confusion over Brexit.
It does suggest though if Swinson holds the balance of power after the next general election she will demand Corbyn's head and only back Labour on confidence and supply if Watson for example is Labour leader
To be honest I haven't a clue what would happen. However that does seem more likely.
I agree. Bizarrely I was accused of suggesting LDs would vote tactically for Lab a few days ago, when in fact I believe the opposite (I don't know where that came from).
I think Lab has done so much damage to its reputation for Remainers that it is not going to get that tactical vote. Of course that could mean LDs are getting votes where they don't need them.
Hope (and think) you're wrong about this.
We need both sides. (1) Lab supporters to vote LD in seats where the LD has the best chance, and (2) LD supporters to vote Lab where Lab has the best chance.
If this happens, it's a change of PM - bye bye Boz, hello Jez - and it's Ref2 and Remain.
If we get lots of (1) happening but very little (2) - because of squeamishness about JC - that will not be enough. That spells a Tory government under BJ and Brexit.
So LDs need to ask themselves the following question -
What is our priority? Is it stopping Brexit? Or is it replacing Lab as the main opposition party.
And if the answer is the latter, it would be nice if they did not lie about it.
SLab councillor defects to SLD. This would have been unthinkable a few years ago
This defection does not affect council control as South Lanarkshire is an SNP minority administration. But cheering for Swinson and Rennie as Lanarkshire is traditionally an SLD desert.
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
Corbyn would slaughter Boris in a head-to-head, but it will matter little by comparison to how Brexit shakes out and whether we are talking about a pre or post Brexit GE.
That's the problem at the moment with making any predictions. Even assuming that B Day is October 31, there's a huge range of possible outcomes.
It could be joyful and triumphant. It could be like diving into a cold pool of water- an initial shock, but quickly invigorating. It could be a tar pit, where nothing happens at first, we just get... stuck. It could be a fiasco that unravels in a week.
You can make a not-totally-stupid case for each of these. (FWIW, my hunch is that something small and unexpected will turn out to make the whole thing fall apart- a black mosquito rather than a black swan, if you like.)
But the reputation of the government come election day could be anything.
The danger is in the little things.
To do A you need to tick box X.
And if you cannot tick box X then things begin to grind to a halt.
Its no good some posturing politician saying that box X should be ignored.
Because in the real world people who ignore box X get inspected, fined, prosecuted and sacked.
So the person who's job it is to tick box X will still insist on doing so.
And there's an endless multitude of box Xs in this country.
A very good way of describing it.
And it's not only in this country - there is also an ample supply of box Xs in the EU which will cause all sorts of unexpected consequences at ports and other parts of the supply chain.
a) they avoid being humiliatingly squeezed down to the loony vote and losing their deposit b) they got some good publicity out of the result, praised as being shrewd and progressive with a sliver of credit for the victory c) their supporters saw a Welsh speaker and strong remainer elected for this constituency d) LibDems returning the favour in the GE wont do them any harm.
So, nothing. Thanks for clarifying.
What a puerile response.
You asked what PC got out of B&R; @IanB2 suggested 4 things and all you can do is you dismiss with a pantomime response.
Either tell us why he's wrong or just accept there might have been some benefits for PC.
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
Corbyn would slaughter Boris in a head-to-head, but it will matter little by comparison to how Brexit shakes out and whether we are talking about a pre or post Brexit GE.
Did you see Boris v Corbyn in the final day of Parliament. I didn't feel that Boris got slaughtered. Even Big G was full of praise for Boris.
The faces on the Labour benches were a picture. They knew their guy got stuffed.
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
From the evidence so far of Brecon and local by-elections Boris is a loser Not a Winner.
The Tory voteshare was up in Worcester last week and the Tories got 12% more in Brecon on election night with Boris as PM than the only by election poll of the campaign had them on when May was PM
FFS, HYUFD, how many farmers and farming families have time to answer polls at the height of the haymaking season? In an area with poor phone and Internet coverage, at that? That poll was totally unreliable and as it has been explained to you many times in words of one syllable you must know that.
There was no evidence of a Boris bounce, if anything the reverse. Despite everything, that is a seat the Tories should have held. They lost by a far bigger margin than those of us who knew he seat were predicting, due to the collapse of a very tribal Labour vote in a deprived ex-industrial area to the Liberal Democrats. As I have repeatedly said that should worry Labour, but it should also worry you.
I don't understand why OGH and others thing that the Brecon & Radnorshire by-election was a bad result for Boris. The Tories only very narrowly lost it with a "re-called" candidate. In fact CCO will have been very encouraged at the resilience of the Tory vote. In 2016 the LibDems won the same seat in the Welsh Assembly elections by a country mile. The seat was tailor-made for a gain by them - just like Sheffield Hallam.
Welsh Assembly Election 2016: Brecon and Radnorshire
Liberal Democrats - Kirsty Williams 15,898 (52.4%) +9.3
Conservative - Gary Price 7,728 (25.4%) −7.9
Labour - Alex Thomas 2,703 (8.9%) −8.0
UKIP - Thomas Turton 2,161 (7.1%) +7.1
Plaid Cymru - Freddy Greaves 1,180 (3.9%) −2.8
Green - Grenville Ham 697 (2.3%) +2.3 Majority 8,170 (27%) +17.3
The Lib Dems are going to be the most interesting party to watch on election night.
Anti-Conservative tactical voting could come roaring back, as Labour types are quite happy to 'reluctantly' abandon Corbyn and support the Lib Dems.
But will the reverse happen where it's needed? I'm not so sure.
Depends what Labour are saying on Brexit, assuming it isn't already done and dusted. I would vote Lib Dem and can't stand Corbyn but if they were categorically offering a second referendum I might hold my nose and vote Labour (We live in a tight Lab/Con marginal)
We have also, as we've seen this morning, the Conservative dissidents, once the ERG but now those adamantly opposed to No Deal. A lot will depend on how this group chooses to act in the next few weeks.
Indeed. But with John Bercow determined to see the will of Parliament heard and enacted I am feeling much more confident that we will not Brexit on October 31st.
Parliament will somehow have to Revoke or Extend Article 50. I don't see how they will do this as there is not a majority in Parliament for anything
Parliament has already voted to extend twice and would do so again if asked.
I agree that there is no majority to revoke and the chances of that happening in the near future are remote, though not completely inconceivable.
SLab councillor defects to SLD. This would have been unthinkable a few years ago
This defection does not affect council control as South Lanarkshire is an SNP minority administration. But cheering for Swinson and Rennie as Lanarkshire is traditionally an SLD desert.
In the last couple of months or so, councillor defections to the LibDems have included:
Fenland - Tory to LibDem Harborough - Tory to LibDem Poole - Ind (former Tory) to LibDem Portsmouth - Tory to Ind to LibDem Essex CC - Tory to LibDem Winchester - Ind to LibDem North Dorset - Tory to LibDem W Somerset - Tory to LibDem Woking - Tory to LibDem Chichester - Tory to LibDem Bolton - Ind (former Lab) to LibDem S Lanarkshire - Con to LibDem
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
Corbyn would slaughter Boris in a head-to-head, but it will matter little by comparison to how Brexit shakes out and whether we are talking about a pre or post Brexit GE.
That's the problem at the moment with making any predictions. Even assuming that B Day is October 31, there's a huge range of possible outcomes.
It could be joyful and triumphant. It could be like diving into a cold pool of water- an initial shock, but quickly invigorating. It could be a tar pit, where nothing happens at first, we just get... stuck. It could be a fiasco that unravels in a week.
You can make a not-totally-stupid case for each of these. (FWIW, my hunch is that something small and unexpected will turn out to make the whole thing fall apart- a black mosquito rather than a black swan, if you like.)
But the reputation of the government come election day could be anything.
The danger is in the little things.
To do A you need to tick box X.
And if you cannot tick box X then things begin to grind to a halt.
Its no good some posturing politician saying that box X should be ignored.
Because in the real world people who ignore box X get inspected, fined, prosecuted and sacked.
So the person who's job it is to tick box X will still insist on doing so.
And there's an endless multitude of box Xs in this country.
Not just that. Box X was introduced in 1978, because of the scandal where... you remember... Oh. Of course. Nobody remembers why box X was introduced, because it was over 40 years ago. And nobody has died in the same way since.
If I've understood the government briefings correctly, the plan is that Spads find out all the Box X issues in their department, tell Cummings and Gove, and they will decide what to do. Throw money at the problem, or cut corners, or something else.
That will probably work, most of the time. Hell, it might work all of the time. But if your reputation was on the line, and your reputation was all you had, would you want to rely on that sort of process?
The surprise is that someone who claims to understand the strategy and tactics of getting things done in complex situations, the sort where there are 10^4 poorly-documented interlocking pieces, could be dumb enough to rewrite the national rulebook in a summer.
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
Corbyn would slaughter Boris in a head-to-head, but it will matter little by comparison to how Brexit shakes out and whether we are talking about a pre or post Brexit GE.
That's the problem at the moment with making any predictions. Even assuming that B Day is October 31, there's a huge range of possible outcomes.
It could be joyful and triumphant. It could be like diving into a cold pool of water- an initial shock, but quickly invigorating. It could be a tar pit, where nothing happens at first, we just get... stuck. It could be a fiasco that unravels in a week.
You can make a not-totally-stupid case for each of these. (FWIW, my hunch is that something small and unexpected will turn out to make the whole thing fall apart- a black mosquito rather than a black swan, if you like.)
But the reputation of the government come election day could be anything.
Great post - very well put.
I'm a devout Remainer but I agree any of these four outcomes is possible. Odds on each? 10%, 30%, 30%, 30% imho.
"There is also the possibility of a deal with Plaid and the Greens on the Brecon model to allow a single “Unite to Remain” candidate in key seats."
I cannot see that benefitting Plaid Cymru.
I am sure the LibDems are super-keen, though.
I would say there is zero prospect of the SNP standing down anywhere in favour of the Lib Dems.
Less than zero I think.
Mathematically that seems improbable. You remind me of the Tory Sec of State for Health who when he was challenged over his failure to achieve zero people waiting more than an hour in A+E replied, 'when you're dealing with very big numbers, 'zero' must mean plus or minus a few.'
ydoethur , if I measure on the kelvin scale I can get much less than zero
"There is also the possibility of a deal with Plaid and the Greens on the Brecon model to allow a single “Unite to Remain” candidate in key seats."
I cannot see that benefitting Plaid Cymru.
I am sure the LibDems are super-keen, though.
I would say there is zero prospect of the SNP standing down anywhere in favour of the Lib Dems.
Less than zero I think.
Mathematically that seems improbable. You remind me of the Tory Sec of State for Health who when he was challenged over his failure to achieve zero people waiting more than an hour in A+E replied, 'when you're dealing with very big numbers, 'zero' must mean plus or minus a few.'
ydoethur , if I measure on the kelvin scale I can get much less than zero
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
Corbyn would slaughter Boris in a head-to-head, but it will matter little by comparison to how Brexit shakes out and whether we are talking about a pre or post Brexit GE.
That's the problem at the moment with making any predictions. Even assuming that B Day is October 31, there's a huge range of possible outcomes.
It could be joyful and triumphant. It could be like diving into a cold pool of water- an initial shock, but quickly invigorating. It could be a tar pit, where nothing happens at first, we just get... stuck. It could be a fiasco that unravels in a week.
You can make a not-totally-stupid case for each of these. (FWIW, my hunch is that something small and unexpected will turn out to make the whole thing fall apart- a black mosquito rather than a black swan, if you like.)
But the reputation of the government come election day could be anything.
The danger is in the little things.
To do A you need to tick box X.
And if you cannot tick box X then things begin to grind to a halt.
Its no good some posturing politician saying that box X should be ignored.
Because in the real world people who ignore box X get inspected, fined, prosecuted and sacked.
So the person who's job it is to tick box X will still insist on doing so.
And there's an endless multitude of box Xs in this country.
A very good way of describing it.
And it's not only in this country - there is also an ample supply of box Xs in the EU which will cause all sorts of unexpected consequences at ports and other parts of the supply chain.
I know it is not quite what you mean here, but the nclusion of the backstop in the deal, of course, was/is exactly such a box X type scenario. EU needed to ensure that in any deal its import inspection regimes were fully WTO compliant, even though the WTO itself were not going to pull them up on it on day 1. No border in Ireland required certain things to be true to maintain that compliance and the backstop fulfilled that.
How that has been dealt with does not exactly encourage that, when a business has a box X to tick, they will not simply be told by HMG to whistle a happy tune.
I agree. Bizarrely I was accused of suggesting LDs would vote tactically for Lab a few days ago, when in fact I believe the opposite (I don't know where that came from).
I think Lab has done so much damage to its reputation for Remainers that it is not going to get that tactical vote. Of course that could mean LDs are getting votes where they don't need them.
Hope (and think) you're wrong about this.
We need both sides. (1) Lab supporters to vote LD in seats where the LD has the best chance, and (2) LD supporters to vote Lab where Lab has the best chance.
If this happens, it's a change of PM - bye bye Boz, hello Jez - and it's Ref2 and Remain.
If we get lots of (1) happening but very little (2) - because of squeamishness about JC - that will not be enough. That spells a Tory government under BJ and Brexit.
So LDs need to ask themselves the following question -
What is our priority? Is it stopping Brexit? Or is it replacing Lab as the main opposition party.
And if the answer is the latter, it would be nice if they did not lie about it.
McDonnell has been quoted in the Guardian twice in the past week saying that a caretaker Corbyn government would legislate for a second referendum. Surely the Lib Dems could not spurn such an offer were it to become official Labour policy?
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
From the evidence so far of Brecon and local by-elections Boris is a loser Not a Winner.
The Tory voteshare was up in Worcester last week and the Tories got 12% more in Brecon on election night with Boris as PM than the only by election poll of the campaign had them on when May was PM
FFS, HYUFD, how many farmers and farming families have time to answer polls at the height of the haymaking season? In an area with poor phone and Internet coverage, at that? That poll was totally unreliable and as it has been explained to you many times in words of one syllable you must know that.
There was no evidence of a Boris bounce, if anything the reverse. Despite everything, that is a seat the Tories should have held. They lost by a far bigger margin than those of us who knew he seat were predicting, due to the collapse of a very tribal Labour vote in a deprived ex-industrial area to the Liberal Democrats. As I have repeatedly said that should worry Labour, but it should also worry you.
I don't understand why OGH and others thing that the Brecon & Radnorshire by-election was a bad result for Boris. The Tories only very narrowly lost it with a "re-called" candidate. In fact CCO will have been very encouraged at the resilience of the Tory vote. In 2016 the LibDems won the same seat in the Welsh Assembly elections by a country mile. The seat was tailor-made for a gain by them - just like Sheffield Hallam.
Welsh Assembly Election 2016: Brecon and Radnorshire
Liberal Democrats - Kirsty Williams 15,898 (52.4%) +9.3
Conservative - Gary Price 7,728 (25.4%) −7.9
Labour - Alex Thomas 2,703 (8.9%) −8.0
UKIP - Thomas Turton 2,161 (7.1%) +7.1
Plaid Cymru - Freddy Greaves 1,180 (3.9%) −2.8
Green - Grenville Ham 697 (2.3%) +2.3 Majority 8,170 (27%) +17.3
Yes, but having campaigned there, it is clearly a seat where the candidate matters a lot. People made positive comments about Kirsty - and about the former Tory MP, despite his transgression. A new Tory candidate without Davies's connections and reputation among the farming community could easily have done worse.
It was also a 12% swing from Tory to LibDem, which is big in anyone's book.
Alex Salmond's £500k legal bill to be paid by Scottish taxpayers after botched probe.
Fixed it for you!
Why were Salmond's cost four times as much as the SNP government's?
Don't you want to know?
You're picking up the tab.....
they lied to start with and would not have included their real costs. I want justice and they have been found guilty. I am happy that some of my money is going to good use. Just a pity Davidl was not on Alex's team I did suggest he should be.
Alex Salmond's £500k legal bill to be paid by taxpayer after botched probe
Court rules the ex-First Minister's expenses from a successful judicial review into how complaints from civl servants were handled should be paid. The former First Minister has been paid £512,250 to cover his expenses from a successful judicial review into how complaints from civil servants were handled.
The Record told last year how two women had made complaints of sexual misconduct against Salmond dating back to his time as First Minister.
But the findings of the Scottish Government investigation into the allegations were struck down in court after they admitted their own guidelines had been breached by the appointment of an investigating officer with “prior involvement” in the case. At a hearing in Edinburgh, Lord Pentland said the Scottish Government’s actions were “unlawful in the respect that they were procedurally unfair and that they were tainted with apparent bias”.
Hilarious. SNP Government pays £0.5m of taxpayers' money to former SNP First Minister because they (SNP Government) botched the investigation into said former SNP First Minister- leaving the complainants high and dry. Not a good look.
a) they avoid being humiliatingly squeezed down to the loony vote and losing their deposit b) they got some good publicity out of the result, praised as being shrewd and progressive with a sliver of credit for the victory c) their supporters saw a Welsh speaker and strong remainer elected for this constituency d) LibDems returning the favour in the GE wont do them any harm.
So, nothing. Thanks for clarifying.
What a puerile response.
You asked what PC got out of B&R; @IanB2 suggested 4 things and all you can do is you dismiss with a pantomime response.
Either tell us why he's wrong or just accept there might have been some benefits for PC.
I think I might draw your attention to an earlier posting by a LibDem poster called Torby Fennel, a few weeks back.
He said he voted LibDem because he believed in their policies, and if the LibDems weren't standing, he would not vote for another party.
I admire people like Torby. He believes in something.
There are Plaid Cymru voters who feel like Torby, they believe in something, and it is part of being honest with themselves that they vote Plaid Cymru.
And let's look at the behaviour of the Welsh LibDems in the Euro elections (where they won no seats). Did they stand aside and say vote Plaid Cymru. They could have, but they did not.
Are the LibDems going to stand aside in SNP/Tory marginals & say vote SMP? They will not. Why not?
Both PC and SNP want to break the Union, but the LibDems will work with one, but not the other. Hypocrisy upon hypocrisy.
Alex Salmond's £500k legal bill to be paid by Scottish taxpayers after botched probe.
Fixed it for you!
Why were Salmond's cost four times as much as the SNP government's?
Don't you want to know?
You're picking up the tab.....
they lied to start with and would not have included their real costs. I want justice and they have been found guilty. I am happy that some of my money is going to good use. Just a pity Davidl was not on Alex's team I did suggest he should be.
What is more shocking is that the miscreant public servants involved are still in place and not collecting job seekers allowance or peeling spuds in Saughton HMP.
I don't understand why OGH and others thing that the Brecon & Radnorshire by-election was a bad result for Boris. The Tories only very narrowly lost it with a "re-called" candidate. In fact CCO will have been very encouraged at the resilience of the Tory vote. In 2016 the LibDems won the same seat in the Welsh Assembly elections by a country mile. The seat was tailor-made for a gain by them - just like Sheffield Hallam.
My original view was the LDs would win by 5000 but that was based on May still being in Downing Street. The coming of Boris did one vital thing - it brought votes back from the BP to the Conservatives. I reckon BP lost about half their vote in B&R with the coming of Boris. The Numbercruncher poll from early in July was remarkably accurate save for that late 10% movement so 43-28-21 (LD-Con-BP) became (roughly) 43-38-11.
Nationally, I'm surprised how resilient the BP vote has remained. Assuming there's roughly a 45-47% Con-BP vote share (and the Lab-LD-Green share is about the same and that's sliced very differently from poll to poll) we were seeing projections of 36-10 in the Conservative's favour but the polls seem to have steadied at around 31-15.
The other fundamental is for all the sound and fury the voting blocs are about the same - there are two roughly equally sized groups - the Con/BP bloc is matched by the Lab/LD/Green bloc and each polls at around 45-47%. If you had PR you'd have a Danish-style system of the two party blocs alternating within a narrow boundary of seats but FPTP doesn't work that way.
The other important change is the Con-Lab share has recovered from the 40s to around 60% (lower with YouGov). How will this stand up to a GE campaign when the LDs and BP will get much more coverage than coverage than currently?
a) they avoid being humiliatingly squeezed down to the loony vote and losing their deposit b) they got some good publicity out of the result, praised as being shrewd and progressive with a sliver of credit for the victory c) their supporters saw a Welsh speaker and strong remainer elected for this constituency d) LibDems returning the favour in the GE wont do them any harm.
Alex Salmond's £500k legal bill to be paid by taxpayer after botched probe
Court rules the ex-First Minister's expenses from a successful judicial review into how complaints from civl servants were handled should be paid. The former First Minister has been paid £512,250 to cover his expenses from a successful judicial review into how complaints from civil servants were handled.
The Record told last year how two women had made complaints of sexual misconduct against Salmond dating back to his time as First Minister.
But the findings of the Scottish Government investigation into the allegations were struck down in court after they admitted their own guidelines had been breached by the appointment of an investigating officer with “prior involvement” in the case. At a hearing in Edinburgh, Lord Pentland said the Scottish Government’s actions were “unlawful in the respect that they were procedurally unfair and that they were tainted with apparent bias”.
Hilarious. SNP Government pays £0.5m of taxpayers' money to former SNP First Minister because they (SNP Government) botched the investigation into said former SNP First Minister- leaving the complainants high and dry. Not a good look.
Shocking and why they have been allowed to stay in post is even more shocking, what a stitch up by those scheming chancers. They were not quite as smart as they thought they were, keep notes on the coaching before the complaints were made was not very bright.
The Lib Dems are going to be the most interesting party to watch on election night.
Anti-Conservative tactical voting could come roaring back, as Labour types are quite happy to 'reluctantly' abandon Corbyn and support the Lib Dems.
I'm quite optimistic. Though corralling the anti Johnson forces is like herding cats he needs an absolute majority and they don't. As a common enemy he's perfect
The Lib Dems are going to be the most interesting party to watch on election night.
Anti-Conservative tactical voting could come roaring back, as Labour types are quite happy to 'reluctantly' abandon Corbyn and support the Lib Dems.
Will be interesting to see. Generally the Libs always underperform expectations at general elections.
1983 and 1987 - Return To Your Constituencies And Prepare For... Irrelevance
1992 - Paddy thought he'd end up calling the shots in a hung parliament - Con won a majority.
1997 and 2001 - Blair landslides left the Lib-Dems on the fringes.
2005 - High watermark in terms of seats but as the only major party to oppose Iraq probably underperformed expectations. Disappointment.
2010 - Despite the Cleggasm Lib-Dems actually lost seats!!!
2015 - Meltdown!!!
2017 - Barely improved on 2015 disaster.
I suppose the Autumn 2019 general election might prove to be a real break through because of Brexit but we've been here so many times with the Lib's that its hard to have confidence that they won't screw it up again...
Talk of parliament stopping no deal still seems predicated on a menu of constitutionally questionable options, none of which seem to carry any real degree of confidence even among their advocates.
How does parliament ACTUALLY stop no deal? I read about amendments 'requiring' or 'forcing' but with little in the way of background information on whether there is genuinely the element of compulsion on the executive.
My sense is there is an awful lot of frustration and bluster masquerading as action.
I agree. Bizarrely I was accused of suggesting LDs would vote tactically for Lab a few days ago, when in fact I believe the opposite (I don't know where that came from).
I think Lab has done so much damage to its reputation for Remainers that it is not going to get that tactical vote. Of course that could mean LDs are getting votes where they don't need them.
Hope (and think) you're wrong about this.
We need both sides. (1) Lab supporters to vote LD in seats where the LD has the best chance, and (2) LD supporters to vote Lab where Lab has the best chance.
If this happens, it's a change of PM - bye bye Boz, hello Jez - and it's Ref2 and Remain.
If we get lots of (1) happening but very little (2) - because of squeamishness about JC - that will not be enough. That spells a Tory government under BJ and Brexit.
So LDs need to ask themselves the following question -
What is our priority? Is it stopping Brexit? Or is it replacing Lab as the main opposition party.
And if the answer is the latter, it would be nice if they did not lie about it.
McDonnell has been quoted in the Guardian twice in the past week saying that a caretaker Corbyn government would legislate for a second referendum. Surely the Lib Dems could not spurn such an offer were it to become official Labour policy?
If there is money and ministerial cars in it for them it is a certainty, principles will be out the window yet again.
a) they avoid being humiliatingly squeezed down to the loony vote and losing their deposit b) they got some good publicity out of the result, praised as being shrewd and progressive with a sliver of credit for the victory c) their supporters saw a Welsh speaker and strong remainer elected for this constituency d) LibDems returning the favour in the GE wont do them any harm.
So, nothing. Thanks for clarifying.
They did get duped and taken a loan of.
Exactly. The SNP would not stand aside for a Unionist party. Why should PC?
It is a terrible policy for PC to adopt, though I can see why the LibDems are clucking with glee on this site.
I agree. Bizarrely I was accused of suggesting LDs would vote tactically for Lab a few days ago, when in fact I believe the opposite (I don't know where that came from).
I think Lab has done so much damage to its reputation for Remainers that it is not going to get that tactical vote. Of course that could mean LDs are getting votes where they don't need them.
Hope (and think) you're wrong about this.
We need both sides. (1) Lab supporters to vote LD in seats where the LD has the best chance, and (2) LD supporters to vote Lab where Lab has the best chance.
If this happens, it's a change of PM - bye bye Boz, hello Jez - and it's Ref2 and Remain.
If we get lots of (1) happening but very little (2) - because of squeamishness about JC - that will not be enough. That spells a Tory government under BJ and Brexit.
So LDs need to ask themselves the following question -
What is our priority? Is it stopping Brexit? Or is it replacing Lab as the main opposition party.
And if the answer is the latter, it would be nice if they did not lie about it.
McDonnell has been quoted in the Guardian twice in the past week saying that a caretaker Corbyn government would legislate for a second referendum. Surely the Lib Dems could not spurn such an offer were it to become official Labour policy?
If there is money and ministerial cars in it for them it is a certainty, principles will be out the window yet again.
Also there is always a temptation once in downing street to do alittle bit more.
sure, Brexit is important, but then so is climate change.so why no do X Y and Z important things...under the guise of being 'caketaker'.
SLab councillor defects to SLD. This would have been unthinkable a few years ago
This defection does not affect council control as South Lanarkshire is an SNP minority administration. But cheering for Swinson and Rennie as Lanarkshire is traditionally an SLD desert.
In the last couple of months or so, councillor defections to the LibDems have included:
Fenland - Tory to LibDem Harborough - Tory to LibDem Poole - Ind (former Tory) to LibDem Portsmouth - Tory to Ind to LibDem Essex CC - Tory to LibDem Winchester - Ind to LibDem North Dorset - Tory to LibDem W Somerset - Tory to LibDem Woking - Tory to LibDem Chichester - Tory to LibDem Bolton - Ind (former Lab) to LibDem S Lanarkshire - Con to LibDem
Thanks Ian. Notable that the only other Scottish one was also to SLD in S Lanarkshire.
a) they avoid being humiliatingly squeezed down to the loony vote and losing their deposit b) they got some good publicity out of the result, praised as being shrewd and progressive with a sliver of credit for the victory c) their supporters saw a Welsh speaker and strong remainer elected for this constituency d) LibDems returning the favour in the GE wont do them any harm.
So, nothing. Thanks for clarifying.
What a puerile response.
You asked what PC got out of B&R; @IanB2 suggested 4 things and all you can do is you dismiss with a pantomime response.
Either tell us why he's wrong or just accept there might have been some benefits for PC.
I think I might draw your attention to an earlier posting by a LibDem poster called Torby Fennel, a few weeks back.
He said he voted LibDem because he believed in their policies, and if the LibDems weren't standing, he would not vote for another party.
I admire people like Torby. He believes in something.
There are Plaid Cymru voters who feel like Torby, they believe in something, and it is part of being honest with themselves that they vote Plaid Cymru.
And let's look at the behaviour of the Welsh LibDems in the Euro elections (where they won no seats). Did they stand aside and say vote Plaid Cymru. They could have, but they did not.
Are the LibDems going to stand aside in SNP/Tory marginals & say vote SMP? They will not. Why not?
Both PC and SNP want to break the Union, but the LibDems will work with one, but not the other. Hypocrisy upon hypocrisy.
Well, thank-you for the sort of considered response we're more used to seeing from you.
It makes me reflect that some voters are strongly committed to one party, or even one policy of a given party; I believe many, like myself, are not.
I want to see left of centre, pro-Europe, pro-union, green, sustainable economy policies. No one party has a monopoly on those - I will flit from party to party voting tactically where I think it makes sense.
I have voted LD, Lab, Green in the past. I would probably vote Tory if they were the pro-EU party and all the rest were for Brexit.
Right now I feel minded to vote LD (and am even considering joining the LDs) but if there's a GE and someone convinces me that another party should get my vote to unseat the current Tory*, I might do that.
(*Given my MP has just signed Hammond's letter I could, at a long stretch, see me voting for him at the GE if he became part of a pro-EU Tory faction - unlikely, I know.)
PS 'Hypocrisy upon hypocrisy'? - every vote is a comprimise for me - I do not like everything in any one party's policies.
"There is an antagonistic strain in remainism that is just as important as this idealism. “Europeanism has always been more anti-Eurosceptic than pro-European,” says Robert Saunders, a historian at Queen Mary University of London. And what fuels remainists, three years into the Brexit process, is anger. They hate the people you’d expect them to hate: Johnson, Farage, Jacob Rees-Mogg, “Andrea Loathsome”, to use one of their schoolboyish nicknames. They hate them for their lies, and their “cakeism”, the Johnsonian insistence that we really can have our cake and eat it: that Britain could leave the single market, say, without losing any of the benefits of being part of it. (One remainist podcast is called Cake Watch.)"
A good article about quite a strong movement, and one that is going to be a fixture after Brexit still. I never expected hundreds of thousands of people to March in Britain proudly waving the EU flag as a result of Brexit, but they are.
Not so long ago these people would have been core Tory voters. I cannot see that happening again.
I think they're more the types of people in urban villa constituencies, who were still voting Conservative in 1979, but gradually became hostile towards Thatcherism.
Where they go, it seems TSE, Nabavi, David Herdson and Big G follow (and myself, who voted Tory in every election until 2017).
It's been a long time coming. Back in 1959, around 80% of AB voters supported the Conservatives, compared to 45% in 2017.
It would be interesting to break that change down further geographically.
I expect that fall is even more extreme in big urban areas.
Suburban south Liverpool elected conservatives
In 1885, Liverpool Scotland elected an Irish Nationalist, T. P. O'Connor. He was their MP until his death just after the 1929 election. He was unopposed between 1918 and 1929.
McDonnell has been quoted in the Guardian twice in the past week saying that a caretaker Corbyn government would legislate for a second referendum. Surely the Lib Dems could not spurn such an offer were it to become official Labour policy?
If their priority is stopping Brexit, no.
But is it?
I think it will be, if and when it comes down to it, but the anti-Corbyn sentiment amongst some Remainers does worry me a little.
"There is also the possibility of a deal with Plaid and the Greens on the Brecon model to allow a single “Unite to Remain” candidate in key seats."
I cannot see that benefitting Plaid Cymru.
I am sure the LibDems are super-keen, though.
I would say there is zero prospect of the SNP standing down anywhere in favour of the Lib Dems.
Why does that matter?
Are there really any Westminster seats in Scotland where having a LibDem and SNP candidate splits the Remain vote?
East Dunbartonshire? NE Fife? Edinburgh East?
But splitting the Remain vote would only be a problem if Leave and/or SCon were strong in these seats. They aren’t. (Jo Swinson’s seat of East Dunbartonshire being the closest to an exception.)
Say the LDs take 20 Remainian seats off Con and various parties get 10 off them in Scotland. That lowers the bar to something like 285. Lab need to hold what they've got, then gain another 10 or so. That's a very modest goal.
Can they hit it? Well, Corbyn is still shit and Boris is probably better at campaigning than TMay but the BXP situation is very unclear, and LDs and ex-Cons could well get behind Corbyn in Lab-Con marginals. I think the number should be bigger than 22%.
That looks very optimistic.
No Labour policy seems to be thought through. For example, Angela Rayner says on radio "Labour wants universities to offer places after exam results" She was then asked how is that to be implemented.
She said "Errr.. we'll have to think"
Actually, it can only be implemented in two ways.
1. A level exams are earlier, say in April. This means that stuff has to be taken out of A Level syllabus, so students are under-prepared when they start University in October.
2. A levels stay the same. But University term starts later, say in January. This leaves students with June-January with nothing much to do. And will be hugely unpopular with Universities.
1 is the worst option, so Labour will probably go with that.
On grounds of remedying "unfairness" (which actually remains to be shown), a dumb policy is advocated without any thought as to how it is to be implemented.
And Labour propose this while holding most of the University seats ....
Not so. The whole business of making and accepting offers need not take more than a month. Foxy knows he will be getting 200 new medical students in October; he will just have to wait a bit longer to find out their names.
OK - so somebody knows nothing about university application procedures...
Looks like the Irish manage to make the main body of offers after exam results are known, and yet have exam results and university term dates similar to ours. My Irish wife has always thought it was strange that the UK system has offers made before exam results. I don't see why we couldn't change to the Irish system if we wanted to.
It does seem really incompetent that Angela Rayner didn't know about this and wasn't able to refer to it on the radio, though.
On the contrary, in this morning''s radio interview Rayner did make a general point that many other countries experience was evidence that the similar policy she was advocating here was practicable.
The Lib Dems are going to be the most interesting party to watch on election night.
Anti-Conservative tactical voting could come roaring back, as Labour types are quite happy to 'reluctantly' abandon Corbyn and support the Lib Dems.
Will be interesting to see. Generally the Libs always underperform expectations at general elections.
1983 and 1987 - Return To Your Constituencies And Prepare For... Irrelevance
1992 - Paddy thought he'd end up calling the shots in a hung parliament - Con won a majority.
1997 and 2001 - Blair landslides left the Lib-Dems on the fringes.
2005 - High watermark in terms of seats but as the only major party to oppose Iraq probably underperformed expectations. Disappointment.
2010 - Despite the Cleggasm Lib-Dems actually lost seats!!!
2015 - Meltdown!!!
2017 - Barely improved on 2015 disaster.
I suppose the Autumn 2019 general election might prove to be a real break through because of Brexit but we've been here so many times with the Lib's that its hard to have confidence that they won't screw it up again...
True. And you missed out Oct 1974 "One more heave!" and 1983 "Breaking the mould"
The reason for more optimism this time is that there is a more focused demographic and geography to the rising LibDem support which offers better prospects under the voting system.
I don't think is going to happen after Labour's confusion over Brexit.
It does suggest though if Swinson holds the balance of power after the next general election she will demand Corbyn's head and only back Labour on confidence and supply if Watson for example is Labour leader
As a LibDem, I think it suits us just fine to keep Corbyn at the helm of Labour.
"There is an antagonistic strain in remainism that is just as important as this idealism. “Europeanism has always been more anti-Eurosceptic than pro-European,” says Robert Saunders, a historian at Queen Mary University of London. And what fuels remainists, three years into the Brexit process, is anger. They hate the people you’d expect them to hate: Johnson, Farage, Jacob Rees-Mogg, “Andrea Loathsome”, to use one of their schoolboyish nicknames. They hate them for their lies, and their “cakeism”, the Johnsonian insistence that we really can have our cake and eat it: that Britain could leave the single market, say, without losing any of the benefits of being part of it. (One remainist podcast is called Cake Watch.)"
A good article about quite a strong movement, and one that is going to be a fixture after Brexit still. I never expected hundreds of thousands of people to March in Britain proudly waving the EU flag as a result of Brexit, but they are.
Not so long ago these people would have been core Tory voters. I cannot see that happening again.
I think they're more the types of people in urban villa constituencies, who were still voting Conservative in 1979, but gradually became hostile towards Thatcherism.
Where they go, it seems TSE, Nabavi, David Herdson and Big G follow (and myself, who voted Tory in every election until 2017).
It's been a long time coming. Back in 1959, around 80% of AB voters supported the Conservatives, compared to 45% in 2017.
It would be interesting to break that change down further geographically.
I expect that fall is even more extreme in big urban areas.
Suburban south Liverpool elected conservatives
In 1885, Liverpool Scotland elected an Irish Nationalist, T. P. O'Connor. He was their MP until his death just after the 1929 election. He was unopposed between 1918 and 1929.
The SNP should stand south of the border - they'd do quite well in a few places :
I agree. Bizarrely I was accused of suggesting LDs would vote tactically for Lab a few days ago, when in fact I believe the opposite (I don't know where that came from).
I think Lab has done so much damage to its reputation for Remainers that it is not going to get that tactical vote. Of course that could mean LDs are getting votes where they don't need them.
Hope (and think) you're wrong about this.
We need both sides. (1) Lab supporters to vote LD in seats where the LD has the best chance, and (2) LD supporters to vote Lab where Lab has the best chance.
If this happens, it's a change of PM - bye bye Boz, hello Jez - and it's Ref2 and Remain.
If we get lots of (1) happening but very little (2) - because of squeamishness about JC - that will not be enough. That spells a Tory government under BJ and Brexit.
So LDs need to ask themselves the following question -
What is our priority? Is it stopping Brexit? Or is it replacing Lab as the main opposition party.
And if the answer is the latter, it would be nice if they did not lie about it.
Well of course the honest answer is I don't have a clue. But Brexit is so polarising it could impact LD voters normally willing to switch being very angry and not doing so. That of course is not good news for the LDs either as it will mean any poll figure is more evenly spread rather than focused where it is needed.
Please bear in mind I have just made all this up and it is not based upon facts or logic, just gut.
That's one problem. The other problem is that people are assuming that just because the party leadership has endorsed another candidate, that means their voters will slavishly follow. This is a very bold assumption. In the case of Wales for a number of reasons it is a totally ludicrous assumption. If you were a Liberal Democrat and willing to vote for a Plaid candidate to take a seat off say Labour - and Ynys Môn is the only seat where this might apply - you will already be doing it. If not, no amount of havering from Jane Dodds will change your mind.
I've been wondering about this and have come to the conclusion it's a much smarter move than it initially appears.
As you say, the number of direct switchers is fairly small, partly because tactical voting already happens and partly because not everyone will agree with the "anointed party" in their constituency. It could be worth a couple of marginals but it's not in itself a game-changer.
But I don't think that's what they're doing.
I think the aim here is to replace Labour as the progressive party. Let's say you're a left-leaning, vaguely Remain voter in a marginal which is currently 26k Conservative, 15k Labour, 14k LibDem. On the surface, Labour is best-placed to challenge the Conservatives. You have misgivings about Corbyn and his Brexit policy, but you really want to get shot of Johnson, Patel, Gove and their motley crew, so you'll vote for whoever's best placed to do that.
But if the Lib Dems are standing with the endorsement of the Greens and maybe Plaid, while Corbyn's travails continue to be well publicised, then the "alliance" candidate looks a lot more appealing. You're not voting for an also-ran, you're voting for a national alliance with the wind in its sails, and with a better policy on Brexit.
This, I think, is what's behind the four-point platform that Rafael Behr claims is being considered for alliance candidates: Remain, investment in public services, electoral reform, de-carbonisation. It's not just about Brexit any more. It's about replacing Labour, starting by squeezing the Labour vote in the many constituencies where the LD+Green(+PC)+Lab total is higher than the Conservative vote. And if Brecon and Radnorshire is anything to go by, the Ystradgynlais collapse suggests it might be working.
McDonnell has been quoted in the Guardian twice in the past week saying that a caretaker Corbyn government would legislate for a second referendum. Surely the Lib Dems could not spurn such an offer were it to become official Labour policy?
If their priority is stopping Brexit, no.
But is it?
I think it will be, if and when it comes down to it, but the anti-Corbyn sentiment amongst some Remainers does worry me a little.
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
Corbyn would slaughter Boris in a head-to-head, but it will matter little by comparison to how Brexit shakes out and whether we are talking about a pre or post Brexit GE.
Did you see Boris v Corbyn in the final day of Parliament. I didn't feel that Boris got slaughtered. Even Big G was full of praise for Boris.
The faces on the Labour benches were a picture. They knew their guy got stuffed.
I'll take your word for it on that one. But Johnson is typical of the kind of manager that has been the bane of my life. Men, they are always men, who have got where they are by bluff and bluster rather than any kind of application to the job in hand. They invariably mess things up and usually have to move on after having run out of other people to blame for their own shortcomings. If you want something actually done get a Hammond or a Corbyn.
Boris has usurped Corbyn's role as The New Thing in Westminster Politics. And unlike yesterday's Donny Downer of the Left, Boris projects a cheery, avuncular belief in Britain.
I suspect he will have a very good campaign.
Although not if he cowers away from the public a la Theresa May, as he did in Brecon and Radnor.
Corbyn would slaughter Boris in a head-to-head, but it will matter little by comparison to how Brexit shakes out and whether we are talking about a pre or post Brexit GE.
Did you see Boris v Corbyn in the final day of Parliament. I didn't feel that Boris got slaughtered. Even Big G was full of praise for Boris.
The faces on the Labour benches were a picture. They knew their guy got stuffed.
I'll take your word for it on that one. But Johnson is typical of the kind of manager that has been the bane of my life. Men, they are always men, who have got where they are by bluff and bluster rather than any kind of application to the job in hand. They invariably mess things up and usually have to move on after having run out of other people to blame for their own shortcomings. If you want something actually done get a Hammond or a Corbyn.
I'll take your word for it on that one. But Johnson is typical of the kind of manager that has been the bane of my life. Men, they are always men, who have got where they are by bluff and bluster rather than any kind of application to the job in hand. They invariably mess things up and usually have to move on after having run out of other people to blame for their own shortcomings. If you want something actually done get a Hammond or a Corbyn.
Perhaps the BBC article is badly written, but it seems to be saying the payments have been ruled by the courts to be non-taxable, but that if people didn't offer to pay tax on them, they would be taxed retrospectively.
"There is also the possibility of a deal with Plaid and the Greens on the Brecon model to allow a single “Unite to Remain” candidate in key seats."
I cannot see that benefitting Plaid Cymru.
I am sure the LibDems are super-keen, though.
I would say there is zero prospect of the SNP standing down anywhere in favour of the Lib Dems.
Less than zero I think.
Mathematically that seems improbable. You remind me of the Tory Sec of State for Health who when he was challenged over his failure to achieve zero people waiting more than an hour in A+E replied, 'when you're dealing with very big numbers, 'zero' must mean plus or minus a few.'
ydoethur , if I measure on the kelvin scale I can get much less than zero
McDonnell has been quoted in the Guardian twice in the past week saying that a caretaker Corbyn government would legislate for a second referendum. Surely the Lib Dems could not spurn such an offer were it to become official Labour policy?
If their priority is stopping Brexit, no.
But is it?
I think it will be, if and when it comes down to it, but the anti-Corbyn sentiment amongst some Remainers does worry me a little.
Yes the LDs would lose all the credibility they have recently gained, and more, if they were seen to block a clear path to a second vote. Much of their newly-won support amongst remainers would instantly transfer itself to Labour.
This is where the agency employing them diverts most of their pay to an offshore trust, then the trust gives them a loan which they typically don't have to pay back - and on which tax is only payable at around 1-2%.
Isn't that in Lethal Weapon 2?
Tens of thousands of freelancers and contractors now face a deadline of the end of August, to obtain HMRC's agreement to a "voluntary" payment for what it says is tax due going back to 1999.
I thought there was a time limit on how long they can go after you and vice versa (and they aren't the same, I think)?
Perhaps the BBC article is badly written, but it seems to be saying the payments have been ruled by the courts to be non-taxable, but that if people didn't offer to pay tax on them, they would be taxed retrospectively.
"This is where the agency employing them diverts most of their pay to an offshore trust, then the trust gives them a loan which they typically don't have to pay back - and on which tax is only payable at around 1-2%." Boils my piss as a PAYEr.
Perhaps the BBC article is badly written, but it seems to be saying the payments have been ruled by the courts to be non-taxable, but that if people didn't offer to pay tax on them, they would be taxed retrospectively.
The Scheme had two elements: - The payment by the agency to the offshore trust; and - A "loan" by the Trust to the individual
HMRC largely contended (IIRC) that the loan was income in the hands of the individual and taxable on that basis. The Court reached the same overall conclusion, but instead held that the payment by the agency to the Trust was taxable.
There are slightly different consequences to each finding.
The Lib Dems are going to be the most interesting party to watch on election night.
Anti-Conservative tactical voting could come roaring back, as Labour types are quite happy to 'reluctantly' abandon Corbyn and support the Lib Dems.
Will be interesting to see. Generally the Libs always underperform expectations at general elections.
1983 and 1987 - Return To Your Constituencies And Prepare For... Irrelevance
1992 - Paddy thought he'd end up calling the shots in a hung parliament - Con won a majority.
1997 and 2001 - Blair landslides left the Lib-Dems on the fringes.
2005 - High watermark in terms of seats but as the only major party to oppose Iraq probably underperformed expectations. Disappointment.
2010 - Despite the Cleggasm Lib-Dems actually lost seats!!!
2015 - Meltdown!!!
2017 - Barely improved on 2015 disaster.
I suppose the Autumn 2019 general election might prove to be a real break through because of Brexit but we've been here so many times with the Lib's that its hard to have confidence that they won't screw it up again...
True. And you missed out Oct 1974 "One more heave!" and 1983 "Breaking the mould"
The reason for more optimism this time is that there is a more focused demographic and geography to the rising LibDem support which offers better prospects under the voting system.
And the under-performance, ineptitude and toxicity of the Conservative and Labour leaders. Throw Brexit into the mix, on which the LibDems have been the only consistent national party, and this is genuinely new territory.
Talk of parliament stopping no deal still seems predicated on a menu of constitutionally questionable options, none of which seem to carry any real degree of confidence even among their advocates.
How does parliament ACTUALLY stop no deal? I read about amendments 'requiring' or 'forcing' but with little in the way of background information on whether there is genuinely the element of compulsion on the executive.
My sense is there is an awful lot of frustration and bluster masquerading as action.
Of course but through it all there might be a constitutionally sound, legal way of doing it.
But likewise proroguing parliament might be constitutional and legal.
Will be interesting to see. Generally the Libs always underperform expectations at general elections.
1983 and 1987 - Return To Your Constituencies And Prepare For... Irrelevance
1992 - Paddy thought he'd end up calling the shots in a hung parliament - Con won a majority.
1997 and 2001 - Blair landslides left the Lib-Dems on the fringes.
2005 - High watermark in terms of seats but as the only major party to oppose Iraq probably underperformed expectations. Disappointment.
2010 - Despite the Cleggasm Lib-Dems actually lost seats!!!
2015 - Meltdown!!!
2017 - Barely improved on 2015 disaster.
I suppose the Autumn 2019 general election might prove to be a real break through because of Brexit but we've been here so many times with the Lib's that its hard to have confidence that they won't screw it up again...
So parties aren't allowed to have expectations and to offer their supporters (both real and potential) some degree of hope and optimism !!
Okay, what would the Conservatives have said in 1997: - "don't bind my hands but we're going to get massacred". Even Major was saying publicly they could still win even when Labour were miles ahead in the polls.
Final thought - what were YOUR expectations for the LDs? Was it 200 seats in 2005? It wasn't mine.
@CarlottaVance you said in a previous thread that in a poll that showed the LDs ahead of Con by 1% was statistically the same. That isn't correct (Happy to be corrected as although my background is mathematics, it definitely isn't statistics)
At a confidence level of 95% there is a margin of error of 3%. If you reduce the confidence level you will reduce the margin of error. Regardless it is always better to be ahead, you are just not so confident.
Admittedly this is just 1% (I saw Plato once try and argue that 6% [3% each way] was really the same. I calculated the probability of the results swapping and let's just say it was a very small number).
Also of course OGH's article made sense even if the result was reversed. The point was to highlight these marginals.
I would worry more about the sample selection and questions asked. It is not as easy as testing light bulbs.
SLab councillor defects to SLD. This would have been unthinkable a few years ago
This defection does not affect council control as South Lanarkshire is an SNP minority administration. But cheering for Swinson and Rennie as Lanarkshire is traditionally an SLD desert.
In the last couple of months or so, councillor defections to the LibDems have included:
Fenland - Tory to LibDem Harborough - Tory to LibDem Poole - Ind (former Tory) to LibDem Portsmouth - Tory to Ind to LibDem Essex CC - Tory to LibDem Winchester - Ind to LibDem North Dorset - Tory to LibDem W Somerset - Tory to LibDem Woking - Tory to LibDem Chichester - Tory to LibDem Bolton - Ind (former Lab) to LibDem S Lanarkshire - Con to LibDem
Thanks Ian. Notable that the only other Scottish one was also to SLD in S Lanarkshire.
Tory/LD same thing. Pro Austerity pro bedroom tax pro tax cuts for the rich.
On the principle, no. But on the detail, it is obviously harsh to demand 20 years backpayments in a lump sum, especially given the earlier court rulings that the loans were not taxable.
This 2016 budget measure from George Osborne has the same root cause as the omnishambles budget: wealthy ministers out of touch with the real world of what Theresa May called the JAMs: just about managing. Most people, even self-employed tax-dodging contractors, do not have six-figure sums in loose change and cannot pick up the phone to their brokers to sell a quarter of a mill in shares. The result is that once again, a Conservative government victimises its own natural supporters.
Talk of parliament stopping no deal still seems predicated on a menu of constitutionally questionable options, none of which seem to carry any real degree of confidence even among their advocates.
How does parliament ACTUALLY stop no deal? I read about amendments 'requiring' or 'forcing' but with little in the way of background information on whether there is genuinely the element of compulsion on the executive.
My sense is there is an awful lot of frustration and bluster masquerading as action.
Of course but through it all there might be a constitutionally sound, legal way of doing it.
But likewise proroguing parliament might be constitutional and legal.
The Speaker.
He will stop the second of those and support the first. Were it not the case, then we'd be in a different ball game. But he is committed to the sovereignty of Parliament.
So if Parliament wishes to stop a No Deal Brexit, it will find a way to do so. Cummings isn't a lawyer. Nor is Johnson. There are some smart lawyers on the Remainer side of the divide.
Assuming an Oct GE and that Labour DO have Ref2 as a manifesto commitment.
And that you live in a Lab/Con marginal, LDs not a chance.
Do you vote Labour?
If you'd asked me a while back, I'd have said out of the question. If you'd asked me more recently, I'd have said yes. However in reality my seat is safe Con and the Greens have as much chance as Labour. I think I'll be in a Green - Unite to Remain seat and will then vote Green.
If I were in a true Con/Lab marginal and the Lab manifesto was PV and the Lab candidate was someone with clear and strong remain opinions, then this time I'd be willing to vote Labour. I'd probably try to do a TSE and "swap" my vote with someone online, to feel a bit better about it.
Say the LDs take 20 Remainian seats off Con and various parties get 10 off them in Scotland. That lowers the bar to something like 285. Lab need to hold what they've got, then gain another 10 or so. That's a very modest goal.
Can they hit it? Well, Corbyn is still shit and Boris is probably better at campaigning than TMay but the BXP situation is very unclear, and LDs and ex-Cons could well get behind Corbyn in Lab-Con marginals. I think the number should be bigger than 22%.
That looks very optimistic.
No Labour policy seems to be thought through. For example, Angela Rayner says on radio "Labour wants universities to offer places after exam results" She was then asked how is that to be implemented.
1 is the worst option, so Labour will probably go with that.
On grounds of remedying "unfairness" (which actually remains to be shown), a dumb policy is advocated without any thought as to how it is to be implemented.
And Labour propose this while holding most of the University seats ....
Though the answer is fairly obvious, a year off post A levels for applications and work experience. It gets the kids to grow up a bit and decide if they really want to go. This may well reduce interest in more marginal courses of little added value.
My Medical School has this policy, and Angela Rayner is correct, it does help the disadvantaged groups to get access.
What is the work experience that all these A Level students will do ? I can certainly see your idea being advantageous to Deliveroo and Just Eat.
I think a year off can be advantageous for some students, but it is probably the wealthier ones (whose parents can afford to subsidise them in some travel) that benefit the most. But, for some students, it is just a wasted year doing little or nothing.
I don't think a plan to make a year off compulsory would be popular.
On the contrary it is the state school pupils from modest backgrounds that benefit particularly. This is because private schools often over egg predictions and state schools often underestimate their brightest students.
The gap year is mostly spent doing something useful for the majority of the time, particularly working as an assistant in health and social care. This is valuable experience for budding doctors to see the coalface at the delivery end. We find they adapt better to the ward environment with a few preconceptions knocked off.
For other courses different work experience might be helpful. Being at the sharp end of retail, hospitality or logistics for example. It opens youngsters eyes.
Well of course the honest answer is I don't have a clue. But Brexit is so polarising it could impact LD voters normally willing to switch being very angry and not doing so. That of course is not good news for the LDs either as it will mean any poll figure is more evenly spread rather than focused where it is needed.
Please bear in mind I have just made all this up and it is not based upon facts or logic, just gut.
No facts or logic? Disgraceful!
I have a conflict between my brain and my gut regarding the outcome of a pre-Brexit GE. My analytical micro side says a Labour minority govt is almost nailed on. But going all macro and instinctive, I see Johnson winning a majority.
Assuming an Oct GE and that Labour DO have Ref2 as a manifesto commitment.
And that you live in a Lab/Con marginal, LDs not a chance.
Do you vote Labour?
If you'd asked me a while back, I'd have said out of the question. If you'd asked me more recently, I'd have said yes. However in reality my seat is safe Con and the Greens have as much chance as Labour. I think I'll be in a Green - Unite to Remain seat and will then vote Green.
If I were in a true Con/Lab marginal and the Lab manifesto was PV and the Lab candidate was someone with clear and strong remain opinions, then this time I'd be willing to vote Labour. I'd probably try to do a TSE and "swap" my vote with someone online, to feel a bit better about it.
Really tough one for me. I'm in a Labour Remainer seat. And he's one of the best.
But on principle this time I have to vote for my party. I feel so passionately about Remaining in the EU and that the LibDems have been consistent on this, and with Jo needing my support, that I would find it nigh-impossible to vote for anyone else but my party. And I wouldn't trust Corbyn one iota. He's been all over the place on Brexit.
The only thing which would tempt me otherwise would be a swap, as above. If I could be sure to trust it then I might well do so.
Talk of parliament stopping no deal still seems predicated on a menu of constitutionally questionable options, none of which seem to carry any real degree of confidence even among their advocates.
How does parliament ACTUALLY stop no deal? I read about amendments 'requiring' or 'forcing' but with little in the way of background information on whether there is genuinely the element of compulsion on the executive.
My sense is there is an awful lot of frustration and bluster masquerading as action.
Of course but through it all there might be a constitutionally sound, legal way of doing it.
But likewise proroguing parliament might be constitutional and legal.
The Speaker.
He will stop the second of those and support the first. Were it not the case, then we'd be in a different ball game. But he is committed to the sovereignty of Parliament.
So if Parliament wishes to stop a No Deal Brexit, it will find a way to do so. Cummings isn't a lawyer. Nor is Johnson. There are some smart lawyers on the Remainer side of the divide.
"If Parliament wishes..." takes rather a lot for granted.
I don't think Corbyn, for example, has any great desire to make some heroic stand on the issue. He's far more interested in becoming Prime Minister.
Bercow will no doubt provide the opportunity for votes, but I think it quite likely that there won't be a parliamentary majority for any particular action other than a VONC. Which in itself solves nothing.
Perhaps the BBC article is badly written, but it seems to be saying the payments have been ruled by the courts to be non-taxable, but that if people didn't offer to pay tax on them, they would be taxed retrospectively.
The Scheme had two elements: - The payment by the agency to the offshore trust; and - A "loan" by the Trust to the individual
HMRC largely contended (IIRC) that the loan was income in the hands of the individual and taxable on that basis. The Court reached the same overall conclusion, but instead held that the payment by the agency to the Trust was taxable.
There are slightly different consequences to each finding.
But this is being done under legislation enabling retrospective taxation over a period of 20 years?
Comments
I'm nicking it, please
The volatility and divergence in the weaponised polls tells us only what we want to hear so the Conservatives run to YouGov and tout it wherever they go. Labour supporters talk ComRes and Opinium so let's forget polls, they are now as part of the propaganda war as Facebook ads.
As others have argued, so much will depend on Boris the campaigner and especially if and when his past inconsistencies (as distinct from his indiscretions) are brought back into the light. Many will not care, shrug and say "that's Boris" but he's not Mayor of London any more so it might matter.
We have also, as we've seen this morning, the Conservative dissidents, once the ERG but now those adamantly opposed to No Deal. A lot will depend on how this group chooses to act in the next few weeks.
The murkier suggestions are about the Commons making its will clear but not being able to legislate. I'd have thought that was clearly not something the EU could act on, though.
That is an A level student every metre from Derry to Warrenpoint.
I like the idea.
a) they avoid being humiliatingly squeezed down to the loony vote and losing their deposit
b) they got some good publicity out of the result, praised as being shrewd and progressive with a sliver of credit for the victory
c) their supporters saw a Welsh speaker and strong remainer elected for this constituency
d) LibDems returning the favour in the GE wont do them any harm.
But why bother? You only accept facts when they fit your views.
To do A you need to tick box X.
And if you cannot tick box X then things begin to grind to a halt.
Its no good some posturing politician saying that box X should be ignored.
Because in the real world people who ignore box X get inspected, fined, prosecuted and sacked.
So the person who's job it is to tick box X will still insist on doing so.
And there's an endless multitude of box Xs in this country.
We have a real national crisis for which I can only imagine there have already been secret COBRA meetings.
There is a shortage of cauliflowers.
@HYUFD will be on here to tell us the latest YouGov poll shows 71% of Conservative supporting LEAVE voters eat cauliflower at least once a week so that's a real crisis for the new Prime Minister.
Perhaps the Government can spend £10 billion on a public information campaign advising as to alternatives to cauliflowers.
Personally, I blame the Tories - it's raining, that's also down to bloody Boris Johnson, the summers were always nice when Theresa May was PM and it's Wednesday, that's also down to the Tories.
We need both sides. (1) Lab supporters to vote LD in seats where the LD has the best chance, and (2) LD supporters to vote Lab where Lab has the best chance.
If this happens, it's a change of PM - bye bye Boz, hello Jez - and it's Ref2 and Remain.
If we get lots of (1) happening but very little (2) - because of squeamishness about JC - that will not be enough. That spells a Tory government under BJ and Brexit.
So LDs need to ask themselves the following question -
What is our priority? Is it stopping Brexit? Or is it replacing Lab as the main opposition party.
And if the answer is the latter, it would be nice if they did not lie about it.
Why were Salmond's cost four times as much as the SNP government's?
Don't you want to know?
You're picking up the tab.....
This defection does not affect council control as South Lanarkshire is an SNP minority administration. But cheering for Swinson and Rennie as Lanarkshire is traditionally an SLD desert.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-labour-councillor-quits-party-over-independence-stance-1-4982625/amp
https://www.cosla.gov.uk/councils/political-control
And it's not only in this country - there is also an ample supply of box Xs in the EU which will cause all sorts of unexpected consequences at ports and other parts of the supply chain.
You asked what PC got out of B&R; @IanB2 suggested 4 things and all you can do is you dismiss with a pantomime response.
Either tell us why he's wrong or just accept there might have been some benefits for PC.
Welsh Assembly Election 2016: Brecon and Radnorshire
Liberal Democrats - Kirsty Williams
15,898 (52.4%) +9.3
Conservative - Gary Price
7,728 (25.4%) −7.9
Labour - Alex Thomas
2,703 (8.9%) −8.0
UKIP - Thomas Turton
2,161 (7.1%) +7.1
Plaid Cymru - Freddy Greaves
1,180 (3.9%) −2.8
Green - Grenville Ham
697 (2.3%) +2.3
Majority
8,170 (27%) +17.3
Are there really any Westminster seats in Scotland where having a LibDem and SNP candidate splits the Remain vote?
I agree that there is no majority to revoke and the chances of that happening in the near future are remote, though not completely inconceivable.
Fenland - Tory to LibDem
Harborough - Tory to LibDem
Poole - Ind (former Tory) to LibDem
Portsmouth - Tory to Ind to LibDem
Essex CC - Tory to LibDem
Winchester - Ind to LibDem
North Dorset - Tory to LibDem
W Somerset - Tory to LibDem
Woking - Tory to LibDem
Chichester - Tory to LibDem
Bolton - Ind (former Lab) to LibDem
S Lanarkshire - Con to LibDem
If I've understood the government briefings correctly, the plan is that Spads find out all the Box X issues in their department, tell Cummings and Gove, and they will decide what to do. Throw money at the problem, or cut corners, or something else.
That will probably work, most of the time. Hell, it might work all of the time. But if your reputation was on the line, and your reputation was all you had, would you want to rely on that sort of process?
The surprise is that someone who claims to understand the strategy and tactics of getting things done in complex situations, the sort where there are 10^4 poorly-documented interlocking pieces, could be dumb enough to rewrite the national rulebook in a summer.
I'm a devout Remainer but I agree any of these four outcomes is possible. Odds on each? 10%, 30%, 30%, 30% imho.
Why take the risk?
How that has been dealt with does not exactly encourage that, when a business has a box X to tick, they will not simply be told by HMG to whistle a happy tune.
GCSE English is too hard so there has been a big drop in A-level students.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/08/13/english-a-level-suffers-collapse-student-numbers-teachers-blame/
It was also a 12% swing from Tory to LibDem, which is big in anyone's book.
He said he voted LibDem because he believed in their policies, and if the LibDems weren't standing, he would not vote for another party.
I admire people like Torby. He believes in something.
There are Plaid Cymru voters who feel like Torby, they believe in something, and it is part of being honest with themselves that they vote Plaid Cymru.
And let's look at the behaviour of the Welsh LibDems in the Euro elections (where they won no seats). Did they stand aside and say vote Plaid Cymru. They could have, but they did not.
Are the LibDems going to stand aside in SNP/Tory marginals & say vote SMP? They will not. Why not?
Both PC and SNP want to break the Union, but the LibDems will work with one, but not the other. Hypocrisy upon hypocrisy.
Nationally, I'm surprised how resilient the BP vote has remained. Assuming there's roughly a 45-47% Con-BP vote share (and the Lab-LD-Green share is about the same and that's sliced very differently from poll to poll) we were seeing projections of 36-10 in the Conservative's favour but the polls seem to have steadied at around 31-15.
The other fundamental is for all the sound and fury the voting blocs are about the same - there are two roughly equally sized groups - the Con/BP bloc is matched by the Lab/LD/Green bloc and each polls at around 45-47%. If you had PR you'd have a Danish-style system of the two party blocs alternating within a narrow boundary of seats but FPTP doesn't work that way.
The other important change is the Con-Lab share has recovered from the 40s to around 60% (lower with YouGov). How will this stand up to a GE campaign when the LDs and BP will get much more coverage than coverage than currently?
1983 and 1987 - Return To Your Constituencies And Prepare For... Irrelevance
1992 - Paddy thought he'd end up calling the shots in a hung parliament - Con won a majority.
1997 and 2001 - Blair landslides left the Lib-Dems on the fringes.
2005 - High watermark in terms of seats but as the only major party to oppose Iraq probably underperformed expectations. Disappointment.
2010 - Despite the Cleggasm Lib-Dems actually lost seats!!!
2015 - Meltdown!!!
2017 - Barely improved on 2015 disaster.
I suppose the Autumn 2019 general election might prove to be a real break through because of Brexit but we've been here so many times with the Lib's that its hard to have confidence that they won't screw it up again...
How does parliament ACTUALLY stop no deal? I read about amendments 'requiring' or 'forcing' but with little in the way of background information on whether there is genuinely the element of compulsion on the executive.
My sense is there is an awful lot of frustration and bluster masquerading as action.
Will that stuff work on a wet windy night at Stoke, a.k.a. TV debate with Fiona Bruce?
Not sure it will.
It is a terrible policy for PC to adopt, though I can see why the LibDems are clucking with glee on this site.
sure, Brexit is important, but then so is climate change.so why no do X Y and Z important things...under the guise of being 'caketaker'.
It makes me reflect that some voters are strongly committed to one party, or even one policy of a given party; I believe many, like myself, are not.
I want to see left of centre, pro-Europe, pro-union, green, sustainable economy policies. No one party has a monopoly on those - I will flit from party to party voting tactically where I think it makes sense.
I have voted LD, Lab, Green in the past. I would probably vote Tory if they were the pro-EU party and all the rest were for Brexit.
Right now I feel minded to vote LD (and am even considering joining the LDs) but if there's a GE and someone convinces me that another party should get my vote to unseat the current Tory*, I might do that.
(*Given my MP has just signed Hammond's letter I could, at a long stretch, see me voting for him at the GE if he became part of a pro-EU Tory faction - unlikely, I know.)
PS 'Hypocrisy upon hypocrisy'? - every vote is a comprimise for me - I do not like everything in any one party's policies.
But is it?
I think it will be, if and when it comes down to it, but the anti-Corbyn sentiment amongst some Remainers does worry me a little.
But splitting the Remain vote would only be a problem if Leave and/or SCon were strong in these seats. They aren’t. (Jo Swinson’s seat of East Dunbartonshire being the closest to an exception.)
The reason for more optimism this time is that there is a more focused demographic and geography to the rising LibDem support which offers better prospects under the voting system.
Please bear in mind I have just made all this up and it is not based upon facts or logic, just gut.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49284171
As you say, the number of direct switchers is fairly small, partly because tactical voting already happens and partly because not everyone will agree with the "anointed party" in their constituency. It could be worth a couple of marginals but it's not in itself a game-changer.
But I don't think that's what they're doing.
I think the aim here is to replace Labour as the progressive party. Let's say you're a left-leaning, vaguely Remain voter in a marginal which is currently 26k Conservative, 15k Labour, 14k LibDem. On the surface, Labour is best-placed to challenge the Conservatives. You have misgivings about Corbyn and his Brexit policy, but you really want to get shot of Johnson, Patel, Gove and their motley crew, so you'll vote for whoever's best placed to do that.
But if the Lib Dems are standing with the endorsement of the Greens and maybe Plaid, while Corbyn's travails continue to be well publicised, then the "alliance" candidate looks a lot more appealing. You're not voting for an also-ran, you're voting for a national alliance with the wind in its sails, and with a better policy on Brexit.
This, I think, is what's behind the four-point platform that Rafael Behr claims is being considered for alliance candidates: Remain, investment in public services, electoral reform, de-carbonisation. It's not just about Brexit any more. It's about replacing Labour, starting by squeezing the Labour vote in the many constituencies where the LD+Green(+PC)+Lab total is higher than the Conservative vote. And if Brecon and Radnorshire is anything to go by, the Ystradgynlais collapse suggests it might be working.
Took it rather badly when I resigned.
She later moved on.
Assuming an Oct GE and that Labour DO have Ref2 as a manifesto commitment.
And that you live in a Lab/Con marginal, LDs not a chance.
Do you vote Labour?
This is where the agency employing them diverts most of their pay to an offshore trust, then the trust gives them a loan which they typically don't have to pay back - and on which tax is only payable at around 1-2%.
Isn't that in Lethal Weapon 2?
Tens of thousands of freelancers and contractors now face a deadline of the end of August, to obtain HMRC's agreement to a "voluntary" payment for what it says is tax due going back to 1999.
I thought there was a time limit on how long they can go after you and vice versa (and they aren't the same, I think)?
- The payment by the agency to the offshore trust; and
- A "loan" by the Trust to the individual
HMRC largely contended (IIRC) that the loan was income in the hands of the individual and taxable on that basis. The Court reached the same overall conclusion, but instead held that the payment by the agency to the Trust was taxable.
There are slightly different consequences to each finding.
But likewise proroguing parliament might be constitutional and legal.
Okay, what would the Conservatives have said in 1997: - "don't bind my hands but we're going to get massacred". Even Major was saying publicly they could still win even when Labour were miles ahead in the polls.
Final thought - what were YOUR expectations for the LDs? Was it 200 seats in 2005? It wasn't mine.
At a confidence level of 95% there is a margin of error of 3%. If you reduce the confidence level you will reduce the margin of error. Regardless it is always better to be ahead, you are just not so confident.
Admittedly this is just 1% (I saw Plato once try and argue that 6% [3% each way] was really the same. I calculated the probability of the results swapping and let's just say it was a very small number).
Also of course OGH's article made sense even if the result was reversed. The point was to highlight these marginals.
I would worry more about the sample selection and questions asked. It is not as easy as testing light bulbs.
Pro continuation of Liberal elite domination.
Only one way to change society.
This 2016 budget measure from George Osborne has the same root cause as the omnishambles budget: wealthy ministers out of touch with the real world of what Theresa May called the JAMs: just about managing. Most people, even self-employed tax-dodging contractors, do not have six-figure sums in loose change and cannot pick up the phone to their brokers to sell a quarter of a mill in shares. The result is that once again, a Conservative government victimises its own natural supporters.
He will stop the second of those and support the first. Were it not the case, then we'd be in a different ball game. But he is committed to the sovereignty of Parliament.
So if Parliament wishes to stop a No Deal Brexit, it will find a way to do so. Cummings isn't a lawyer. Nor is Johnson. There are some smart lawyers on the Remainer side of the divide.
If I were in a true Con/Lab marginal and the Lab manifesto was PV and the Lab candidate was someone with clear and strong remain opinions, then this time I'd be willing to vote Labour. I'd probably try to do a TSE and "swap" my vote with someone online, to feel a bit better about it.
The gap year is mostly spent doing something useful for the majority of the time, particularly working as an assistant in health and social care. This is valuable experience for budding doctors to see the coalface at the delivery end. We find they adapt better to the ward environment with a few preconceptions knocked off.
For other courses different work experience might be helpful. Being at the sharp end of retail, hospitality or logistics for example. It opens youngsters eyes.
I have a conflict between my brain and my gut regarding the outcome of a pre-Brexit GE. My analytical micro side says a Labour minority govt is almost nailed on. But going all macro and instinctive, I see Johnson winning a majority.
But on principle this time I have to vote for my party. I feel so passionately about Remaining in the EU and that the LibDems have been consistent on this, and with Jo needing my support, that I would find it nigh-impossible to vote for anyone else but my party. And I wouldn't trust Corbyn one iota. He's been all over the place on Brexit.
The only thing which would tempt me otherwise would be a swap, as above. If I could be sure to trust it then I might well do so.
However now with WhatsApp and other online messaging services the communication difficulties have significantly reduced.
Indeed as politicians have more time on their hands it might be easier to plot than during a busy parliamentary schedule.
I don't think Corbyn, for example, has any great desire to make some heroic stand on the issue. He's far more interested in becoming Prime Minister.
Bercow will no doubt provide the opportunity for votes, but I think it quite likely that there won't be a parliamentary majority for any particular action other than a VONC. Which in itself solves nothing.