Never fight a battle on your opponent’s preferred terrain if you can avoid it.
In a war of attrition, a man who is going to do or die by 31 October is in trouble if he hasn’t done by that date.
Precisely. This is the absolute key point when considering what is likely to happen over the next few weeks. I don't think I'm exactly putting my neck on the line if I say that it seems to me that opposition parties might have noticed this point, and that they will not be falling over themselves to give Boris a massive electoral boost by helping meet his stupid self-imposed and artificial target.
Yes it reminds me of a siege. The commander of the fort is shouting "why won't you come and fight me you cowards!" while he knows that the longer they don't the weaker and weaker he becomes.
I'm at the climate strike protest in Edinburgh and obviously there are lots of very young people here, but the crowd noticeably skews more female than protests normally.
How white is it skewing ?
Hard to tell. Edinburgh always seems very white to me because I grew up in South London. Young people are also less white than the population at large.
I think among the young people it's reasonably representative of the city. Probably less so for the adults.
Apartheid by house price.
Hence why Cambridge is whiter than Glastonbury.
Utter tosh. I was in Cambridge yesterday. It is one of the most metropolitan and diverse cities in Europe (yep we are part of Europe!).
I can’t see the EU giving Bozo the stick of deal or no extension .
They’re quite aware of the hardcore no dealers in the Conservative party and are also aware that if they give an extension and an election happens , the deal could still get through with a decent Tory majority or another government either delivers a softer Brexit or another EU referendum .
I think that they (the EU) are very tired of our stupid antics. they just want rid now, and who can blame them.
I can’t see the EU giving Bozo the stick of deal or no extension .
They’re quite aware of the hardcore no dealers in the Conservative party and are also aware that if they give an extension and an election happens , the deal could still get through with a decent Tory majority or another government either delivers a softer Brexit or another EU referendum .
I think that they (the EU) are very tired of our stupid antics. they just want rid now, and who can blame them.
They can be very tired of us AND offer us endless extensions, because No Deal is potentially so grim. Indeed I am pretty sure that is the case.
I'm at the climate strike protest in Edinburgh and obviously there are lots of very young people here, but the crowd noticeably skews more female than protests normally.
How white is it skewing ?
Hard to tell. Edinburgh always seems very white to me because I grew up in South London. Young people are also less white than the population at large.
I think among the young people it's reasonably representative of the city. Probably less so for the adults.
Apartheid by house price.
Hence why Cambridge is whiter than Glastonbury.
Utter tosh. I was in Cambridge yesterday. It is one of the most metropolitan and diverse cities in Europe (yep we are part of Europe!).
Spoiler - those Chinese tourists with selfie sticks don’t live here.
My brother is senior management at Whipps Cross hospital. When Johnson was there on Wednesday my bro had coffee and biscuits with him and a 20 minute one on one chinwag. Said that the guy has an obvious charisma BUT he is strangely very unintimidating (unlike Brown, who he has also met) and is extremely easy to talk to. He really did feel like he could 'have a pint with him' no problem at all.
He (my brother) is a lifelong member of the Labour party and something of an activist. He hates the Tories.
(emoticon for "go figure")
This is a variation on an oft-told story, that when people actually meet politicians, they are surprised how nice they seem. Notwithstanding the tales of when they're rude, of course, such as the one about Cameron putting his hand in a stewardess's face. I've met a few politicians too, from councillors through MPs to a First Minister, and they all seemed ok. It's just their /beliefs/ that are the problem. Because no matter how nice you are, any policy you implement is going to spoil someone else's day, or even life. It's frankly unavoidable. The only thing you can do is look like you give a shit and try to do as little damage as possible. And on that front, I'd go for a pint with Boris too. If only to keep him away from wrecking this fucking country for an hour or two.
That comment made me laugh. I know someone who was a very senior civil servant and worked with a lot of them over the years- he felt Maggie was very personable, Major was excellent but undermined by a lack of self confidence that made decision making torturous, Blair a shit, Cameron vapid - he said the only conviction he possessed was that he was convinced he should be prime minister. May was wrecked by her inability to deal with anything other than a small group of close knit advisers- so almost totally unsuited to no 10, Brown a Jekyll and Hyde character. He said Osborne was personally a bit odd- on the spectrum- but one of the most effective strategists he ever saw. He has a very low opinion of all Politicians generally.
My brother is senior management at Whipps Cross hospital. When Johnson was there on Wednesday my bro had coffee and biscuits with him and a 20 minute one on one chinwag. Said that the guy has an obvious charisma BUT he is strangely very unintimidating (unlike Brown, who he has also met) and is extremely easy to talk to. He really did feel like he could 'have a pint with him' no problem at all.
He (my brother) is a lifelong member of the Labour party and something of an activist. He hates the Tories.
(emoticon for "go figure")
This is a variation on an oft-told story, that when people actually meet politicians, they are surprised how nice they seem. Notwithstanding the tales of when they're rude, of course, such as the one about Cameron putting his hand in a stewardess's face. I've met a few politicians too, from councillors through MPs to a First Minister, and they all seemed ok. It's just their /beliefs/ that are the problem. Because no matter how nice you are, any policy you implement is going to spoil someone else's day, or even life. It's frankly unavoidable. The only thing you can do is look like you give a shit and try to do as little damage as possible. And on that front, I'd go for a pint with Boris too. If only to keep him away from wrecking this fucking country for an hour or two.
That comment made me laugh. I know someone who was a very senior civil servant and worked with a lot of them over the years- he felt Maggie was very personable, Major was excellent but undermined by a lack of self confidence that made decision making torturous, Blair a shit, Cameron vapid - he said the only conviction he possessed was that he was convinced he should be prime minister. May was wrecked by her inability to deal with anything other than a small group of close knit advisers- so almost totally unsuited to no 10, Brown a Jekyll and Hyde character. He said Osborne was personally a bit odd- on the spectrum- but one of the most effective strategists he ever saw. He has a very low opinion of all Politicians generally.
That tallies with pretty much everything I've heard.
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
Worse than that - RBS is the banking causing problems - it would be cheaper for the Government to sub that incompetent banking quango the £200m and let it shut things down in a more structured format.
I'm at the climate strike protest in Edinburgh and obviously there are lots of very young people here, but the crowd noticeably skews more female than protests normally.
How white is it skewing ?
Hard to tell. Edinburgh always seems very white to me because I grew up in South London. Young people are also less white than the population at large.
I think among the young people it's reasonably representative of the city. Probably less so for the adults.
Apartheid by house price.
Hence why Cambridge is whiter than Glastonbury.
Utter tosh. I was in Cambridge yesterday. It is one of the most metropolitan and diverse cities in Europe (yep we are part of Europe!).
Spoiler - those Chinese tourists with selfie sticks don’t live here.
I lived there for quite a while and have plenty of friends who still do. It's diversity is one of the reasons it did not vote for the stupidity called Brexit
Good morning all. It strikes me that the increasingly vocal cries of parliament is sovereign! from MPs are at some point going to be drowned out by 'run along now, the electorate is here to sort this out'. There is as much frustration with MPs as there is with government and change is coming. If it's really the case that Chuka can win westminister then cooper can lose castleford, thornberry can lose islington and the Tories can evaporate in the south whilst storming the north. Outside of metropolitan liverpool and Manchester and the SNP stranglehold on much of Scotland I expect safe seats to be rare to tartar. The biggest FU ever delivered
Well all those things are possible, but you perhaps need to remove your partisan blinkers and realise that there are a lot of other possibilities too. One big possibility is that a lot of people look at the dishonest and incompetent Johnson and think he doesn't offer them anything better than Mr Thicky Corbyn. Another hung parliament is perhaps the most likely outcome ( I guess!).
A very possible outcome indeed. Massive churn is my prediction, lot of safe MPs finding out they arent safe at all
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
I can’t see the EU giving Bozo the stick of deal or no extension .
They’re quite aware of the hardcore no dealers in the Conservative party and are also aware that if they give an extension and an election happens , the deal could still get through with a decent Tory majority or another government either delivers a softer Brexit or another EU referendum .
It only needs one country to object to any more extensions. And then that is the EU position. Yes, they have been in lock-step so far. But if it is true that only four countries want to grant further extensions....
I'm at the climate strike protest in Edinburgh and obviously there are lots of very young people here, but the crowd noticeably skews more female than protests normally.
How white is it skewing ?
Hard to tell. Edinburgh always seems very white to me because I grew up in South London. Young people are also less white than the population at large.
I think among the young people it's reasonably representative of the city. Probably less so for the adults.
Apartheid by house price.
Hence why Cambridge is whiter than Glastonbury.
Utter tosh. I was in Cambridge yesterday. It is one of the most metropolitan and diverse cities in Europe (yep we are part of Europe!).
Good morning all. It strikes me that the increasingly vocal cries of parliament is sovereign! from MPs are at some point going to be drowned out by 'run along now, the electorate is here to sort this out'. There is as much frustration with MPs as there is with government and change is coming. If it's really the case that Chuka can win westminister then cooper can lose castleford, thornberry can lose islington and the Tories can evaporate in the south whilst storming the north. Outside of metropolitan liverpool and Manchester and the SNP stranglehold on much of Scotland I expect safe seats to be rare to tartar. The biggest FU ever delivered
Well all those things are possible, but you perhaps need to remove your partisan blinkers and realise that there are a lot of other possibilities too. One big possibility is that a lot of people look at the dishonest and incompetent Johnson and think he doesn't offer them anything better than Mr Thicky Corbyn. Another hung parliament is perhaps the most likely outcome ( I guess!).
There is a real issue with the 'people looking at the dishonest and incompetent Johnson' aspect of your post. As yet that appears more in your head and hope than in Tory opinion polls or Johnsons personal ratings.
So far the anti Johnson tsunami appears not to have swept the public mood in a joyous and determined anti Johnson wave. He has lost a few votes in Parliament without any major public anger. He has endured a few insults on his travels without a noticeable reduction in his ratings, he tries to give the impression of 'getting Brexit done' which has only alienated the potential supporters on the other side of the argument. Even the loss of 20 MPs appears not to have had a material effect.
You may be right and he will collect his just reward for the failings you highlight, but right now the numbers appear to say it is your wishful thinking and hope rather than fact.
Never fight a battle on your opponent’s preferred terrain if you can avoid it.
In a war of attrition, a man who is going to do or die by 31 October is in trouble if he hasn’t done by that date.
Precisely. This is the absolute key point when considering what is likely to happen over the next few weeks. I don't think I'm exactly putting my neck on the line if I say that it seems to me that opposition parties might have noticed this point, and that they will not be falling over themselves to give Boris a massive electoral boost by helping meet his stupid self-imposed and artificial target.
I suppose there will be a number of Labour MPs who could vote for the deal as a strategy of ridding themselves of Corbyn.
If Boris strikes a deal and then convincingly wins a GE, perhaps it's the quickest way of replacing Corbyn with someone electable.
Just like we used to have years ago. I used to volunteer at one such in North Kensington, doing housing and criminal work.
Why did they fall out of favour?
They were funded by councils and got squeezed when there were budget cuts. Also as legal aid got cut it became ever harder to get payment for defence work or other work.
Unless you have money you don't realistically have any sort of access to justice these days. It is a disgrace in a country which used to boast about the rule of law.
What do you think local councils should have cut instead considering that there was no money left?
I've got a few suggestions but curious what you think.
They cut my marginal tax rate by 5%, slashed corporation tax and increased the inheritance tax threshold to £1mn so there was definitely some money left.
Says someone who has never heard of the Laffer Curve. What matters is revenues not percentages.
Revenues have grown year on year not fallen. Indeed you claim corporation tax has been slashed but corporation tax is bringing in record revenues despite a supposed decade of lost growth. Go figure!
We've all heard of the laffer curve. What we haven't heard is why we should believe the peak is where you think it is
Because cutting corporation tax rates increased corporation tax revenues over the past decade?
Because this government is bringing in record revenues?
In 2017 the corporation tax take was lower in real terms than 2006, and lower as a percentage of GDP than 2000. It's almost as if cherry-picking two points in time and a specific tax rate to compare and totally ignoring any factor other than the rate is utterly inadequate as an analysis of the Laffer curve.
Percentage of GDP is an incredibly absurd figure to use because the whole frigging point is that getting a smaller slice of a bigger pie is more revenue. The purpose is not to take a bigger percentage its to take more revenue. Interestingly the last Labour government knew this which is why they too cut the tax after 2000 as well.
In 2017 corporation tax take in real terms is higher than almost every single year under Labour, despite being a smaller percentage.
As for this specific tax, it was @OnlyLivingBoy not me who chose to bring this into discussion.
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
I see your point of course.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
His is task has become somewhat easier since the EU has given up on trying to keep us inside The Project...
I'm at the climate strike protest in Edinburgh and obviously there are lots of very young people here, but the crowd noticeably skews more female than protests normally.
How white is it skewing ?
Hard to tell. Edinburgh always seems very white to me because I grew up in South London. Young people are also less white than the population at large.
I think among the young people it's reasonably representative of the city. Probably less so for the adults.
Apartheid by house price.
Hence why Cambridge is whiter than Glastonbury.
Utter tosh. I was in Cambridge yesterday. It is one of the most metropolitan and diverse cities in Europe (yep we are part of Europe!).
Theyre tourists or students!
Wow, ffs this is so uninformed it is bordering on racist. Cambridge has a very large ethnic diversity, not just tourists and students. I lived in the city for a number of years and visit regularly. Thanks to freedom of movement it has attracted brains from all over Europe and also further afield. These people live in the city and pay their taxes. Many may leave thanks to Brexit, and the country will be the poorer for it.
I disagree with this. If the house doesn't have confidence in a government, then we have a GE.
It's not up to the house to decide or have a factor in who the Tory leader is.
Why should the Commons not agreeing with the PM result in a general election when it's not what the Commons wants
Under the FTPA the Commons has two ways to remove Boris. They can vote for a General Election (which Boris tabled, twice) or they can VONC which the Opposition declined to table.
As such the Commons has voted, twice, to keep Boris in place.
The FTPA is not a complete code governing the dismissal and formation of governments. It doesn't, for example, stop governments resigning or being dismissed by the monarch and it doesn't regulate the process of becoming PM. So, for example, it leaves open possibilities for the House such as a humble address asking for the PM to be dismissed or asking for the PM to be replaced by a named person. Perhaps we should have such a code, and it is a legitimate criticism of the FTPA that it isn't one, but we don't.
Indeed it doesn't rule out those options but the Commons chose to forego all its options.
Not so. It took the option of voting against him in a vote he himself declared to be a vote of confidence. The process that defeat set off should have ended with his resignation on 9 September and so there was no need to do anything in the meantime. The time to take further action would have been after 9 September, but the PM immediately prorogued, so preventing that further action.
Why after 9 September? The confidence vote was a week before then and the 14 day window only applies if the opposition brings in a confidence vote under the FTPA which it doesn't - and the end of that 14 day window results in a General Election not a resignation.
The alternative to a resignation has always been an election for the last few centuries and he voted for that. Not his fault the Commons chose to vote to forego the election and forego a formal VONC.
Kids telling adults how things should be is quite reminiscent of 1984. And, of course, a certain period in the Cultural Revolution.
A bit harsh. Sometimes kids have good ideas.
But there does seem to be a bit of fetishising the voices of young people as though that automatically makes the view worthier. I didn't think that when I was a teenager or younger and I dont think that one, 'someone think of the children' can still be a lazy cry even when done by a child.
Of course theres plenty of issues with ovetemphasing the view of old people on the false assumption that everyone gets wiser with age rather than just some, and indeed if only focusing on the views of the working aged.
But there has to be a balance better than what we often do now.
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
I thought ABTA-protected meant that there was a sector-wide insurance scheme?
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
I think he has done well under both May and Johnson. Our greatest ever Brexit secretary!
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
The trouble with that is that experience (especially from the bad old pre-Thatcher days) is that you get faced with another demand for a further chunk of cash a few months later, and another, and another, always using the same argument. Eventually, as we saw in the 70s, companies give up even trying to be competitive, and switch to relying on the much less troublesome strategy of extortion from the taxpayer.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
The trouble with that is that experience (especially from the bad old pre-Thatcher days) is that you get faced with another demand for a further chunk of cash a few months later, and another, and another, always using the same argument. Eventually, as we saw in the 70s, companies give up even trying to be competitive, and switch to relying on the much less troublesome strategy of extortion from the taxpayer.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
The trouble with that is that experience (especially from the bad old pre-Thatcher days) is that you get faced with another demand for a further chunk of cash a few months later, and another, and another, always using the same argument. Eventually, as we saw in the 70s, companies give up even trying to be competitive, and switch to relying on the much less troublesome strategy of extortion from the taxpayer.
Plus when there is oversupply in the market keeping alive zombie companies like this with money from taxpayers gives them an unfair advantage over their struggling [but better] competitors. Whereas when a weak competitor goes bust it reduces supply in the market and means that their competitors get more consumers going to them and strengthens them.
I'm at the climate strike protest in Edinburgh and obviously there are lots of very young people here, but the crowd noticeably skews more female than protests normally.
How white is it skewing ?
Hard to tell. Edinburgh always seems very white to me because I grew up in South London. Young people are also less white than the population at large.
I think among the young people it's reasonably representative of the city. Probably less so for the adults.
Apartheid by house price.
Hence why Cambridge is whiter than Glastonbury.
Utter tosh. I was in Cambridge yesterday. It is one of the most metropolitan and diverse cities in Europe (yep we are part of Europe!).
Theyre tourists or students!
Wow, ffs this is so uninformed it is bordering on racist. Cambridge has a very large ethnic diversity, not just tourists and students. I lived in the city for a number of years and visit regularly. Thanks to freedom of movement it has attracted brains from all over Europe and also further afield. These people live in the city and pay their taxes. Many may leave thanks to Brexit, and the country will be the poorer for it.
basicbridge's comment seems to be that of someone who has never been outside a few hundred metres of King's Chapel. Yes, that area is very touristy, but the area is fairly diverse - e.g. just look at Mill Road.
Cambridge is only 82.5% white - and whilst that's nowhere near as low as (say) Newham, it's only a smidgen above Bolton or Rochdale.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
The trouble with that is that experience (especially from the bad old pre-Thatcher days) is that you get faced with another demand for a further chunk of cash a few months later, and another, and another, always using the same argument. Eventually, as we saw in the 70s, companies give up even trying to be competitive, and switch to relying on the much less troublesome strategy of extortion from the taxpayer.
And is it compatible with EU law and regulations?
Probably not. The EU's adoption of sensible and tough Thatcherite rules on state aid is one of the triumphs of the UK's influence in the organisation.
Good morning all. It strikes me that the increasingly vocal cries of parliament is sovereign! from MPs are at some point going to be drowned out by 'run along now, the electorate is here to sort this out'. There is as much frustration with MPs as there is with government and change is coming. If it's really the case that Chuka can win westminister then cooper can lose castleford, thornberry can lose islington and the Tories can evaporate in the south whilst storming the north. Outside of metropolitan liverpool and Manchester and the SNP stranglehold on much of Scotland I expect safe seats to be rare to tartar. The biggest FU ever delivered
Well all those things are possible, but you perhaps need to remove your partisan blinkers and realise that there are a lot of other possibilities too. One big possibility is that a lot of people look at the dishonest and incompetent Johnson and think he doesn't offer them anything better than Mr Thicky Corbyn. Another hung parliament is perhaps the most likely outcome ( I guess!).
There is a real issue with the 'people looking at the dishonest and incompetent Johnson' aspect of your post. As yet that appears more in your head and hope than in Tory opinion polls or Johnsons personal ratings.
So far the anti Johnson tsunami appears not to have swept the public mood in a joyous and determined anti Johnson wave. He has lost a few votes in Parliament without any major public anger. He has endured a few insults on his travels without a noticeable reduction in his ratings, he tries to give the impression of 'getting Brexit done' which has only alienated the potential supporters on the other side of the argument. Even the loss of 20 MPs appears not to have had a material effect.
You may be right and he will collect his just reward for the failings you highlight, but right now the numbers appear to say it is your wishful thinking and hope rather than fact.
I think you completely missed my point. I was referring to the other poster's certainty. I was saying that they *might* notice these things, and they *might* decide he is no better than Corbyn. I do not have great faith in the analytical rational capability of the British Electorate. After all in 2016 they narrowly voted in favour of one of the most irrational policies that we have ever proposed in peacetime. So, who knows there is even a chance he might win a majority if the electorate see it as a choice between him and Corbyn. Anyone's guess
I disagree with this. If the house doesn't have confidence in a government, then we have a GE.
It's not up to the house to decide or have a factor in who the Tory leader is.
Why should the Commons not agreeing with the PM result in a general election when it's not what the Commons wants
Under the FTPA the Commons has two ways to remove Boris. They can vote for a General Election (which Boris tabled, twice) or they can VONC which the Opposition declined to table.
As such the Commons has voted, twice, to keep Boris in place.
The FTPA is not a complete code governing the dismissal and formation of governments. It doesn't, for example, stop governments resigning or being dismissed by the monarch and it doesn't regulate the process of becoming PM. So, for example, it leaves open possibilities for the House such as a humble address asking for the PM to be dismissed or asking for the PM to be replaced by a named person. Perhaps we should have such a code, and it is a legitimate criticism of the FTPA that it isn't one, but we don't.
Indeed it doesn't rule out those options but the Commons chose to forego all its options.
Not so. It took the option of voting against him in a vote he himself declared to be a vote of confidence. The process that defeat set off should have ended with his resignation on 9 September and so there was no need to do anything in the meantime. The time to take further action would have been after 9 September, but the PM immediately prorogued, so preventing that further action.
Why after 9 September? The confidence vote was a week before then and the 14 day window only applies if the opposition brings in a confidence vote under the FTPA which it doesn't - and the end of that 14 day window results in a General Election not a resignation.
The alternative to a resignation has always been an election for the last few centuries and he voted for that. Not his fault the Commons chose to vote to forego the election and forego a formal VONC.
No. The 14 days only applies to FTPA votes of no confidence, not to other votes of confidence. 9 September was the day of the second attempt at dissolution, which was just about legitimate given Corbyn's ambiguity about his stance following the first vote.
You are wrong about the previous situation. It was clearly explained in the Lascelles letter. The PM was not automatically entitled to a dissolution. The monarch could refuse, and the letter explained the circumstances under which the monarch would refuse.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
The trouble with that is that experience (especially from the bad old pre-Thatcher days) is that you get faced with another demand for a further chunk of cash a few months later, and another, and another, always using the same argument. Eventually, as we saw in the 70s, companies give up even trying to be competitive, and switch to relying on the much less troublesome strategy of extortion from the taxpayer.
Yes, maybe, you're probably right. Perhaps I am being sentimental. Thomas Cook is such a grand old British brand: it's a terrible shame it has come to this.
I can’t see the EU giving Bozo the stick of deal or no extension .
They’re quite aware of the hardcore no dealers in the Conservative party and are also aware that if they give an extension and an election happens , the deal could still get through with a decent Tory majority or another government either delivers a softer Brexit or another EU referendum .
It only needs one country to object to any more extensions. And then that is the EU position. Yes, they have been in lock-step so far. But if it is true that only four countries want to grant further extensions....
If you believe the rumours it’s only 4 countries wanting the UK to stay in.
As for extensions if there’s a general election in the offing they’ll likely grant it .
That comment made me laugh. I know someone who was a very senior civil servant and worked with a lot of them over the years- he felt Maggie was very personable, Major was excellent but undermined by a lack of self confidence that made decision making torturous, Blair a shit, Cameron vapid - he said the only conviction he possessed was that he was convinced he should be prime minister. May was wrecked by her inability to deal with anything other than a small group of close knit advisers- so almost totally unsuited to no 10, Brown a Jekyll and Hyde character. He said Osborne was personally a bit odd- on the spectrum- but one of the most effective strategists he ever saw. He has a very low opinion of all Politicians generally.
That tallies with pretty much everything I've heard.
The civil servant quoted probably had the common but flawed idea that politicians should be good at government, rather than politics, which demands very different skills and personalities.
From my own experience in government, I endorse his opinions of Blair and Brown though.
PM is an untrustworthy liar who cannot be allowed a GE till No Deal is off the table.
Everything else is Johnson bluster.
The problem is that if he gets a deal and an election is then called Labour will be decimated. Their best cance has to be Johnson not getting a deal.
Depends on the deal, and how Farage and the Brexit Party portray it.
It'll be May's deal with a more flamboyant salesman. It really won't matter what Farage does or says. Leavers will be happy it's over and strong remainers will go Lib Dem. Labour will be in no mans land
So once a deal is done, there is no remain , just re-join. So you are expecting that to be instantly popular ?
No but that's only stage one. Remainers will trust the insticts of the Lib Dems most I suspect as the deal unfolds. But there's no doubt that Mays deal or something similar will be good for the Tories. Their only downside is the large number of voters who can't stand Johnson. I just struggle to see how that can help Corbyn who most people see as less trustworthy than Johnson
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
I see your point of course.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
It's be a massive shame if Thomas Cook was to disappear, because the company changed the way we holiday.
In 1841, Thomas Cook organised a trip for 500 people from Leicester to Loughborough by train for a temperance meeting. The 11 mile journey was (AIUI) a first of its type, and a sign that the new form of transport allowed travel opportunities not just for the rich and middle classes, but for the working classes as well.
Other journeys followed, including Leicester to Liverpool. In so doing, he created the package holiday and mass tourism.
This is not a reason to save the company (which has had so many takeovers its name is possibly all that exists), but it is a reason to lament its passing.
I can’t see the EU giving Bozo the stick of deal or no extension .
They’re quite aware of the hardcore no dealers in the Conservative party and are also aware that if they give an extension and an election happens , the deal could still get through with a decent Tory majority or another government either delivers a softer Brexit or another EU referendum .
It only needs one country to object to any more extensions. And then that is the EU position. Yes, they have been in lock-step so far. But if it is true that only four countries want to grant further extensions....
If you believe the rumours it’s only 4 countries wanting the UK to stay in.
As for extensions if there’s a general election in the offing they’ll likely grant it .
I do not believe there are only four countries that want us to stay in.
Off the top of my head I'd say: Denmark, Ireland, Holland, Sweden, Poland, Czech Republic, Romania, and probably Germany would all much prefer us to stay. Possibly Malta, Hungary, Slovakia, Spain, Italy, and the Baltic states can be added.
It's more interesting to speculate what countries actively want us gone, and are even prepared to tolerate No Deal.
France. Luxembourg. Belgium? Maybe Finland.
Then there's the countries that don't really give a toss. Cyprus. Portugal. Greece. Croatia. Bulgaria...
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
I thought ABTA-protected meant that there was a sector-wide insurance scheme?
Yes I had the same idea, which is why I'm not sure why the CAA (aka taxpayer) would have to pick up the tab? I'm sure a sector expert can tell us why it's not that simple.
Wow, ffs this is so uninformed it is bordering on racist. Cambridge has a very large ethnic diversity, not just tourists and students. I lived in the city for a number of years and visit regularly. Thanks to freedom of movement it has attracted brains from all over Europe and also further afield. These people live in the city and pay their taxes. Many may leave thanks to Brexit, and the country will be the poorer for it.
I'm confused. Is it diverse because freedom of movement has allowed lots of (mostly white) Europeans to turn up, or is freedom of movement irrelevant because it also has lots of (mostly non white) people from further afield?
Percentage of GDP is an incredibly absurd figure to use because the whole frigging point is that getting a smaller slice of a bigger pie is more revenue. The purpose is not to take a bigger percentage its to take more revenue. Interestingly the last Labour government knew this which is why they too cut the tax after 2000 as well.
In 2017 corporation tax take in real terms is higher than almost every single year under Labour, despite being a smaller percentage.
As for this specific tax, it was @OnlyLivingBoy not me who chose to bring this into discussion.
I am afraid it is wrong to solely look at the CT rate reductions. There have been significant changes to the CT regime over recent years which have reduced tax deductions and thus increased taxable profits.
For example there are significant restrictions on the amount of tax deductable interest and also the use of brought forward losses are capped.
These measures have increased CT paid even though the rate of CT has gone down.
Similarly banks are now paying a higher rate of CT than other companies.
The OBR has a helpful table of the impact of various tax changes since 1970.
For the benefit of @Byronic, I've spent the last few minutes eating figs straight from my fig tree, with cheese. Divine.
I expect to be very regular for the foreseeable future.
I have just been to Greece.. Funnily enough the water melon was a bit pithy and melon served generally not ripe enough.. BUT the blood grapefruit (not supposed to be having it on low dose BP tabs.. ) was delicious, and there are no words to describe the taste of the oranges.. Food of the gods, I'd say..
I'm at the climate strike protest in Edinburgh and obviously there are lots of very young people here, but the crowd noticeably skews more female than protests normally.
How white is it skewing ?
Hard to tell. Edinburgh always seems very white to me because I grew up in South London. Young people are also less white than the population at large.
I think among the young people it's reasonably representative of the city. Probably less so for the adults.
Apartheid by house price.
Hence why Cambridge is whiter than Glastonbury.
Utter tosh. I was in Cambridge yesterday. It is one of the most metropolitan and diverse cities in Europe (yep we are part of Europe!).
Theyre tourists or students!
Wow, ffs this is so uninformed it is bordering on racist. Cambridge has a very large ethnic diversity, not just tourists and students. I lived in the city for a number of years and visit regularly. Thanks to freedom of movement it has attracted brains from all over Europe and also further afield. These people live in the city and pay their taxes. Many may leave thanks to Brexit, and the country will be the poorer for it.
basicbridge's comment seems to be that of someone who has never been outside a few hundred metres of King's Chapel. Yes, that area is very touristy, but the area is fairly diverse - e.g. just look at Mill Road.
Cambridge is only 82.5% white - and whilst that's nowhere near as low as (say) Newham, it's only a smidgen above Bolton or Rochdale.
Thanks for the clarification. The inference form the other two posters seems to be that because Cambridge is pretty, has a top university and expensive housing, it is therefore a given that no non-white people live there! Staggering!
Though he has a 3% higher satisfaction rating than Foot and the same satisfaction rating as IDS but both Foot and IDS had lower dissatisfied scores than Corbyn
I'm at the climate strike protest in Edinburgh and obviously there are lots of very young people here, but the crowd noticeably skews more female than protests normally.
How white is it skewing ?
Hard to tell. Edinburgh always seems very white to me because I grew up in South London. Young people are also less white than the population at large.
I think among the young people it's reasonably representative of the city. Probably less so for the adults.
Apartheid by house price.
Hence why Cambridge is whiter than Glastonbury.
Utter tosh. I was in Cambridge yesterday. It is one of the most metropolitan and diverse cities in Europe (yep we are part of Europe!).
Theyre tourists or students!
Wow, ffs this is so uninformed it is bordering on racist. Cambridge has a very large ethnic diversity, not just tourists and students. I lived in the city for a number of years and visit regularly. Thanks to freedom of movement it has attracted brains from all over Europe and also further afield. These people live in the city and pay their taxes. Many may leave thanks to Brexit, and the country will be the poorer for it.
Not due to freedom of movement
A sensible immigration policy could achieve the same outcome
Once they start to laugh at you things really do get tough at the top. Couldn't have happened to anyone more cloyingly woke - except perhaps PrinceHal.
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
I thought ABTA-protected meant that there was a sector-wide insurance scheme?
Yes I had the same idea, which is why I'm not sure why the CAA (aka taxpayer) would have to pick up the tab? I'm sure a sector expert can tell us why it's not that simple.
Not a sector expert, but flights by British carriers are usually protected by the CAA’s ATOL (Air Travel Operator’s Licence) scheme. I think it’s funded by the carriers’ licence fees, so it’s not exactly the taxpayer paying for it, rather the airline industry collectively.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
The trouble with that is that experience (especially from the bad old pre-Thatcher days) is that you get faced with another demand for a further chunk of cash a few months later, and another, and another, always using the same argument. Eventually, as we saw in the 70s, companies give up even trying to be competitive, and switch to relying on the much less troublesome strategy of extortion from the taxpayer.
Yes, maybe, you're probably right. Perhaps I am being sentimental. Thomas Cook is such a grand old British brand: it's a terrible shame it has come to this.
Regarding Johnson and confidence, a few things feel true from my perspective: 1. Its patently absurd to suggest that a PM who has lost every vote he has called has the confidence of the house. 2. However, unless he resigns the government or a formal no confidence motion is lost, he is required to remain as PM. Its a peculiar circumstance where a minority government not holding the confidence of the House remains in office but here we are... 3. Johnson prorogued parliament with a programme to start a new session ("we need new bills" etc) in mid October and see through Brexit at the end of October. The faux outrage that he can't get an election is also absurd - an election was not his plan. 4. A basic principle of our system is that a government only exists at the pleasure of the Crown in Parliament. The House votes in and out a government. Thanks to the FTPA its not even in the whim of the PM to call an election, the House has the absolute authority now, and seems happy to leave the rump Johnson "government" marooned in office unable to govern.
In ordinary times the PM would be a person with integrity who would have recognised the futility of being marooned in office unable to govern and would have resigned. That he hasn't just demonstrates the character (and lack thereof) of the man.
Isn't the truth that the current impasse suits all sides? Tories - building a people vs parliament narrative Labour - hiding from the kicking to come LibDems - getting stronger by the day Nats - increased outrage at Scots courts being abused by Westminister Various Indies - time to work out WTF their plan is
All agree that an election would be chaos. So why bother?
I can’t see the EU giving Bozo the stick of deal or no extension .
They’re quite aware of the hardcore no dealers in the Conservative party and are also aware that if they give an extension and an election happens , the deal could still get through with a decent Tory majority or another government either delivers a softer Brexit or another EU referendum .
It only needs one country to object to any more extensions. And then that is the EU position. Yes, they have been in lock-step so far. But if it is true that only four countries want to grant further extensions....
If you believe the rumours it’s only 4 countries wanting the UK to stay in.
As for extensions if there’s a general election in the offing they’ll likely grant it .
Is there a general election in the offing? With those numbers for Corbyn? Excellent....
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
So the Gvt should take a £200m stake in any failing company, just because there will be a big one-off hit if they don't? It's quite a business model to make *not* bailing you out that painful. Why don't they have some sector-wide insurance scheme for this purpose.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
I see your point of course.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
I think that would require some kind of system for removing money from efficient companies and redistributing it to inefficient companies for political reasons. Since there would be no volunteers, such a system would have to be coercive and require a bureaucracy to take this revenue from those inland resources. If only I could think of a name for such a system. It's quite difficult. Taxing, in fact...
Re the New Speaker.... I do hope Harperson will be thwarted. I hope the Tories en mass will go for Lindsay Hoyle who strikes me as a pretty decent bloke.
I never like Major's policies, but he seems like a gentleman. My guess for the PMs of my lifetime for how nice they would be / have been to meet: Major Blair May Cameron Johnson Brown Thatcher
Pop Corbyn in at about the same level as Johnson if he becomes PM. Swinson can go in just above May. Clarke just below Blair. What other candidates am I missing?
There are three different criteria, really: who you'd like to have a beer with, who you'd like to work for (which is rare among senior ambitious types), and who's interesting. Nearly everyone in politics is pleasant enough to chat with - if you hate people, it's clearly a crap job for you. I've not met Thatcher or Swinson, but I found all the others nice enough.
But only Blair, Clarke and Corbyn have been people I remember being interesting to talk to beyond social pleasantries - Blair in particular has a fast mind and can come back with an intelligent response that engages with anything you say. Clarke is unafraid to say anything, so it's always rewarding to hear his unvarnished view. Corbyn is a type unusual in British politics though common on the Continent - very interested in things outside the classic mainstream like developing countries and climate change. Brown is slow on the draw - capable of really thorough analyses, but not of responding in casual discussion.
I never like Major's policies, but he seems like a gentleman. My guess for the PMs of my lifetime for how nice they would be / have been to meet: Major Blair May Cameron Johnson Brown Thatcher
Pop Corbyn in at about the same level as Johnson if he becomes PM. Swinson can go in just above May. Clarke just below Blair. What other candidates am I missing?
There are three different criteria, really: who you'd like to have a beer with, who you'd like to work for (which is rare among senior ambitious types), and who's interesting. Nearly everyone in politics is pleasant enough to chat with - if you hate people, it's clearly a crap job for you. I've not met Thatcher or Swinson, but I found all the others nice enough.
But only Blair, Clarke and Corbyn have been people I remember being interesting to talk to beyond social pleasantries - Blair in particular has a fast mind and can come back with an intelligent response that engages with anything you say. Clarke is unafraid to say anything, so it's always rewarding to hear his unvarnished view. Corbyn is a type unusual in British politics though common on the Continent - very interested in things outside the classic mainstream like developing countries and climate change. Brown is slow on the draw - capable of really thorough analyses, but not of responding in casual discussion.
Clarke is the only one I could imagine having anything interesting to say outside of politics.
You have to admire the sheer creativeness and cunning of the government's Brexit negotiation strategy. The latest brilliant wheeze is that the people we're negotiating with aren't allowed to see our proposals. That's genius: how can they reject them if they don't know what they are?
Celebrating violence and encouragement of violence should surely be a universal red line. There is a disease on the British Left. What is really upsetting is that it is now spreading beyond the Labour Party to once respected outlets like the Guardian.
Comments
Voting for the deal means Labour will get pulverized in the GE .
If they do go bust, all their customers on holiday will be stranded, and the one-off cost to the government, of flying them home, will be £600m.
I'm surely not alone in finding this rather stupid. Yes yes, free market, but still.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49761464
In related news, my wife flies to Rhodes on Thomas Cook on Sunday. Eeek.
Travel agents with planes and high street offices are over - killed by the internet.
Vaguely off-topic, am I the only person developing a grudging respect for Steven Barclay? Maybe not hard to shine after David Davis and Dominic Raab but he's showing a dogged persistence in pursuing his master's impossible demands, and seems to be causing far less trouble than the PM or his predecessors.
So far the anti Johnson tsunami appears not to have swept the public mood in a joyous and determined anti Johnson wave. He has lost a few votes in Parliament without any major public anger. He has endured a few insults on his travels without a noticeable reduction in his ratings, he tries to give the impression of 'getting Brexit done' which has only alienated the potential supporters on the other side of the argument. Even the loss of 20 MPs appears not to have had a material effect.
You may be right and he will collect his just reward for the failings you highlight, but right now the numbers appear to say it is your wishful thinking and hope rather than fact.
If Boris strikes a deal and then convincingly wins a GE, perhaps it's the quickest way of replacing Corbyn with someone electable.
In 2017 corporation tax take in real terms is higher than almost every single year under Labour, despite being a smaller percentage.
As for this specific tax, it was @OnlyLivingBoy not me who chose to bring this into discussion.
They'll beat Russia by 40 points today.
But... there must be a better way than letting them go under, for the want of £200m, when the immediate hit will cost us all £600m, and the bankruptcy will cost 10,000 UK jobs, as well. A whole ton of human misery.
The alternative to a resignation has always been an election for the last few centuries and he voted for that. Not his fault the Commons chose to vote to forego the election and forego a formal VONC.
But there does seem to be a bit of fetishising the voices of young people as though that automatically makes the view worthier. I didn't think that when I was a teenager or younger and I dont think that one, 'someone think of the children' can still be a lazy cry even when done by a child.
Of course theres plenty of issues with ovetemphasing the view of old people on the false assumption that everyone gets wiser with age rather than just some, and indeed if only focusing on the views of the working aged.
But there has to be a balance better than what we often do now.
Spoiler 2: the folk that unleashed those pesky kids of the Cultural Revolution were adults, with 70+ year old Mao at the head of them.
Cambridge is only 82.5% white - and whilst that's nowhere near as low as (say) Newham, it's only a smidgen above Bolton or Rochdale.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_districts_and_their_ethnic_composition
I expect to be very regular for the foreseeable future.
You are wrong about the previous situation. It was clearly explained in the Lascelles letter. The PM was not automatically entitled to a dissolution. The monarch could refuse, and the letter explained the circumstances under which the monarch would refuse.
As for extensions if there’s a general election in the offing they’ll likely grant it .
From my own experience in government, I endorse his opinions of Blair and Brown though.
That said it has been blazing in London all week. Eerily perfect weather. The kind of weather you get just before a war...
In 1841, Thomas Cook organised a trip for 500 people from Leicester to Loughborough by train for a temperance meeting. The 11 mile journey was (AIUI) a first of its type, and a sign that the new form of transport allowed travel opportunities not just for the rich and middle classes, but for the working classes as well.
Other journeys followed, including Leicester to Liverpool. In so doing, he created the package holiday and mass tourism.
This is not a reason to save the company (which has had so many takeovers its name is possibly all that exists), but it is a reason to lament its passing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cook
Off the top of my head I'd say: Denmark, Ireland, Holland, Sweden, Poland, Czech Republic, Romania, and probably Germany would all much prefer us to stay. Possibly Malta, Hungary, Slovakia, Spain, Italy, and the Baltic states can be added.
It's more interesting to speculate what countries actively want us gone, and are even prepared to tolerate No Deal.
France. Luxembourg. Belgium? Maybe Finland.
Then there's the countries that don't really give a toss. Cyprus. Portugal. Greece. Croatia. Bulgaria...
For example there are significant restrictions on the amount of tax deductable interest and also the use of brought forward losses are capped.
These measures have increased CT paid even though the rate of CT has gone down.
Similarly banks are now paying a higher rate of CT than other companies.
The OBR has a helpful table of the impact of various tax changes since 1970.
Https://obr.uk/download/policy-measures-database
A sensible immigration policy could achieve the same outcome
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1174966536777293824?s=20
You're clearly wasted as a male model.
1. Its patently absurd to suggest that a PM who has lost every vote he has called has the confidence of the house.
2. However, unless he resigns the government or a formal no confidence motion is lost, he is required to remain as PM. Its a peculiar circumstance where a minority government not holding the confidence of the House remains in office but here we are...
3. Johnson prorogued parliament with a programme to start a new session ("we need new bills" etc) in mid October and see through Brexit at the end of October. The faux outrage that he can't get an election is also absurd - an election was not his plan.
4. A basic principle of our system is that a government only exists at the pleasure of the Crown in Parliament. The House votes in and out a government. Thanks to the FTPA its not even in the whim of the PM to call an election, the House has the absolute authority now, and seems happy to leave the rump Johnson "government" marooned in office unable to govern.
In ordinary times the PM would be a person with integrity who would have recognised the futility of being marooned in office unable to govern and would have resigned. That he hasn't just demonstrates the character (and lack thereof) of the man.
Isn't the truth that the current impasse suits all sides?
Tories - building a people vs parliament narrative
Labour - hiding from the kicking to come
LibDems - getting stronger by the day
Nats - increased outrage at Scots courts being abused by Westminister
Various Indies - time to work out WTF their plan is
All agree that an election would be chaos. So why bother?
https://twitter.com/caarlaajenkins/status/1175014464866914306?s=20
But only Blair, Clarke and Corbyn have been people I remember being interesting to talk to beyond social pleasantries - Blair in particular has a fast mind and can come back with an intelligent response that engages with anything you say. Clarke is unafraid to say anything, so it's always rewarding to hear his unvarnished view. Corbyn is a type unusual in British politics though common on the Continent - very interested in things outside the classic mainstream like developing countries and climate change. Brown is slow on the draw - capable of really thorough analyses, but not of responding in casual discussion.
He was on the BBC ‘Sound of 2019’ list.
Edit: who the **** is Jonathan Ashworth? I notice I am large (decent four figures) green on him???
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/20/fresh-brexit-talks-row-uk-eu-proposals-secret