Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s leadership machinations could be a pointer that an ea

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s leadership machinations could be a pointer that an early change is being planned

So far I have not been tempted to take the Betfair 26% that Corbyn will step down as LAB leader during 2019.  But an early exit for Mr Corbyn is how some of the machinations ahead of the party conference both last night and this morning I’ve being interpreted.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited September 2019
    Recent machinations are certainly consistent with Jeremy Corbyn standing down in the not too distant future. @Charles mentioned doubts about Corbyn's health and it has long been rumoured that he is not enjoying leading the party. His past service reinforces the view that Corbyn is not personally ambitious.

    Or it could just be a clumsy overreach by Lansman.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Perhaps Corbyn's health is a factor here - as alluded to by Charles in early May.
  • We should also bear in mind his age. Jeremy Corbyn is 70 years old so might in any case be expected to resign during the next parliament.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    I see there is talk of a giveaway pre-election Budget next month - though that will only arise if Johnson gets beyond the Queen's Speech.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    Recent machinations are certainly consistent with Jeremy Corbyn standing down in the not too distant future. @Charles mentioned doubts about Corbyn's health and it has long been rumoured that he is not enjoying leading the party. His past service reinforces the view that Corbyn is not personally ambitious.

    Or it could just be a clumsy overreach by Lansman.

    But three TU reps voted with Lansman. TUs don't vote accidentally. Plus all Corbyn acolytes. Maybe Corbyn left the room because he realized 2/3rd majority was not possible. It was NOT a ruthless Leftist coup. The Hard Left would have been ashamed. They reckon Momentum are a bunch of amateurs.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    Polls ?
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    Farage is telling people "a wall of global money" will flow into the UK if there's No Deal.

    https://twitter.com/brexitparty_uk/status/1175413718118805504

    Russian oligarchs are having to pay the Swiss banks to keep their money there.
  • Everytime I see Corbyn on TV I think how old, ill and irritated he looks. He clearly doesn't enjoy being party leader and if he doesn't like being a party leader then the premiership will crush him. He's a campaigner who's campaign has ended. The Labour Party is transformed into something it has never been in its history. If the General Election is pushed back into the new year I think for the first time he might just jump.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Everytime I see Corbyn on TV I think how old, ill and irritated he looks. He clearly doesn't enjoy being party leader and if he doesn't like being a party leader then the premiership will crush him. He's a campaigner who's campaign has ended. The Labour Party is transformed into something it has never been in its history. If the General Election is pushed back into the new year I think for the first time he might just jump.

    I think he looks a bit younger than 70. I agree about the other features of his character.
  • It does look like forward planning.
  • Incidently if you want to see how hilarious a Corbyn premiership would be look at some of these hysterical on the record demands for a taxpayer bailout for Thomas Cook. God help us all.
  • O/T FPT non-politics betting question on betting Liverpool to keep a 100% win record in league until Christmas.

    Andrew said:

    Also not sure if you do walk into a bookies and say something like that would they give reasonable odds or would they think "mug" and give crap odds?

    You'd get very crap odds, because …

    a) they assume you won't be able to calculate a fair price on such an exotic/custom bet, so can offer whatever they like
    b) in sports-betting the longer the odds, typically the more profit margin the bookie loads on it. by 1000/1 you might get 33% of true odds.
    Just put on a manual bet as an accumulator before each game. As the winning streak goes on, there will be an element of "well, it has to end sometime..." factored in to the price. You can shop around for the best odds. And I can't imagine there is much of a limit to the wager you can make on individual games in the Premier League?
    How do you place a manual accumulator like that or do you just mean make a bet, then reinvest winnings into next bet etc etc until lost or Christmas?

    The thing that made me think this was possible and looking at the fixtures there isn't any that looks insurmountable.

    Of the big clubs Arsenal has already been defeated.

    Chelsea and Man are away so tricky but they're very vulnerable at the minute.
    Man City are obviously tricky but are at Anfield and without Laporte.
    Spurs, Merseyside Derby and Leicester all at Anfield too.

    If we can keep winning at Anfield and defeat Man Utd and Chelsea on the road then there's not many fixtures left.

    What would you think fair odds would be?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,551
    Jezza's going no where before the general. ;)
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    O/T FPT non-politics betting question on betting Liverpool to keep a 100% win record in league until Christmas.

    Andrew said:

    Also not sure if you do walk into a bookies and say something like that would they give reasonable odds or would they think "mug" and give crap odds?

    You'd get very crap odds, because …

    a) they assume you won't be able to calculate a fair price on such an exotic/custom bet, so can offer whatever they like
    b) in sports-betting the longer the odds, typically the more profit margin the bookie loads on it. by 1000/1 you might get 33% of true odds.
    Just put on a manual bet as an accumulator before each game. As the winning streak goes on, there will be an element of "well, it has to end sometime..." factored in to the price. You can shop around for the best odds. And I can't imagine there is much of a limit to the wager you can make on individual games in the Premier League?
    How do you place a manual accumulator like that or do you just mean make a bet, then reinvest winnings into next bet etc etc until lost or Christmas?

    The thing that made me think this was possible and looking at the fixtures there isn't any that looks insurmountable.

    Of the big clubs Arsenal has already been defeated.

    Chelsea and Man are away so tricky but they're very vulnerable at the minute.
    Man City are obviously tricky but are at Anfield and without Laporte.
    Spurs, Merseyside Derby and Leicester all at Anfield too.

    If we can keep winning at Anfield and defeat Man Utd and Chelsea on the road then there's not many fixtures left.

    What would you think fair odds would be?
    Fair odds about 1700/1
    Save your money.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Noo said:


    Fair odds about 1700/1
    Save your money.

    I came to this estimate by guessing the odds for each game. I had the away game to Chelsea as evens. Just checked willhill and it's 19/20... so probably I'm not hugely off. But really anything between 1000/1 and 2000/1 is realistic.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,304
    Quite right. Sensible stuff from Corbo.

    Frothers from both extremes disappointed.

    Move on people.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,618
    Noo said:

    Noo said:


    Fair odds about 1700/1
    Save your money.

    I came to this estimate by guessing the odds for each game. I had the away game to Chelsea as evens. Just checked willhill and it's 19/20... so probably I'm not hugely off. But really anything between 1000/1 and 2000/1 is realistic.
    I am sure @Tissue_Price would be willing to answer for Bet365. SkyBet seem open to Request-a-bet specials too.

    Rather than do a game by game accumulator, getting an advance quote may be better, as if the streak goes on, the odds will shorten. Wins are not independent variables, winning teams carry on winning.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,463
    Certainly possible, but the idea he really was not involved at all, was completely unaware (or that his people were unaware at least) seems a little improbable. Thus the argument that his outriders floated it, and he pulled back when it became clear how angry people would be, seems more plausible.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    FPT presumably Farage’s “wall of money” is foreign predators snapping up UK assets at dirt cheap prices following the total collapse of the pound?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    edited September 2019
    A new Canadian poll out today and taken yesterday from Nanos shows the Liberal vote down a bit since the Trudeau 'blackface' affair but the Conservative vote also down slightly, albeit by less than the Liberal vote, with the main gainers the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois.

    The figures are Liberals 32%, Conservatives 36.8%, NDP 13.7%, Bloc Quebecois 5.4%, Greens 9%.

    The previous Nanos poll had it Liberals 34.2%, Conservatives 37.4%, NDP 12.8%, Bloc Quebecois 3.5%, Greens 9.3%.

    Justin Trudeau still leads as preferred PM on 32% to 29% for Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer and 10% for NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh.

    https://secureservercdn.net/198.71.233.47/823.910.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/2019-1445-CTV-Globe-ELXN-Ending-September-20-2019.pdf
  • kle4 said:

    Certainly possible, but the idea he really was not involved at all, was completely unaware (or that his people were unaware at least) seems a little improbable. Thus the argument that his outriders floated it, and he pulled back when it became clear how angry people would be, seems more plausible.
    It is certainly an attempt to silence Watson. The language of the new motion effectively calls him a traitor to the cause and the review is hardly going to be a broad based panel who will look at things dispassionately.

    Yes, it means Watson isn't going to be removed this week - but the message is clear that dissent will not be tolerated. And that should worry everyone.

    If it is wrong to remove the whip from those Tory MPs who voted against the party a few weeks ago, it is equally wrong to try to silence those on the Labour benches who dare to espouse alternative perspectives.

    Corbyn's career was built on being a serial rebel against the party line. And now he and his fellow travellers threaten those who dare to even think about doing the same.

    Everyone should be worried - even if the immediate danger has gone. The threat is still there.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,463
    I know we joke about the uselessness of the MPs, and am considering the source, but if this is what some of them genuinely believe, and given those who seek to 'destroy' them are Corbyn supporters by and large, how can they even sit across the table with these fifth columnists and work together to elect the same man?
    https://twitter.com/OwenSmith_MP/status/1175383719428927488
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    It seems both Labour and Libdem policy is to have an election, but not to actually vote for one.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Recent machinations are certainly consistent with Jeremy Corbyn standing down in the not too distant future. @Charles mentioned doubts about Corbyn's health and it has long been rumoured that he is not enjoying leading the party. His past service reinforces the view that Corbyn is not personally ambitious.

    Or it could just be a clumsy overreach by Lansman.

    Occam’s razor suggests Marxism...
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited September 2019
    alex. said:

    It seems both Labour and Libdem policy is to have an election, but not to actually vote for one.

    And government policy is to leave the EU but have a snap election first before voters can see the damage done by a no-deal Brexit.

    Paradoxes abound.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    edited September 2019
    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
  • kle4 said:

    Certainly possible, but the idea he really was not involved at all, was completely unaware (or that his people were unaware at least) seems a little improbable. Thus the argument that his outriders floated it, and he pulled back when it became clear how angry people would be, seems more plausible.
    It is certainly an attempt to silence Watson. The language of the new motion effectively calls him a traitor to the cause and the review is hardly going to be a broad based panel who will look at things dispassionately.

    Yes, it means Watson isn't going to be removed this week - but the message is clear that dissent will not be tolerated. And that should worry everyone.

    If it is wrong to remove the whip from those Tory MPs who voted against the party a few weeks ago, it is equally wrong to try to silence those on the Labour benches who dare to espouse alternative perspectives.

    Corbyn's career was built on being a serial rebel against the party line. And now he and his fellow travellers threaten those who dare to even think about doing the same.

    Everyone should be worried - even if the immediate danger has gone. The threat is still there.
    It reminds me of the opinion poll showing 94% of the Chinese believe their country is on the right track - anyone who disagrees is too afraid to say so.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,042
    TGOHF said:
    SOME MEP's..... I doubt the Brexit Party MEPs joined in.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    He has more mandate than Juncker.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,784
    alex. said:

    It seems both Labour and Libdem policy is to have an election, but not to actually vote for one.

    Until Boris has been poleaxed by Bercow.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    Which is why I don’t support the policy . It opens up a Pandora’s box of new problems . It might yet prove successful for the Lib Dems but at what cost .
  • Gabs2 said:

    He has more mandate than Juncker.
    One of them has been ratified by the relevant Parliament. Guess which?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,734
    edited September 2019
    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
  • Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    The Tories are fundamentally a pro-European party. They don’t have it in them to leave with no deal.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
    They may not introduce PR if they get a majority under FPTP, the Trudeau experience suggests Liberals are all for PR in opposition but as soon as they win a majority under FPTP they dump it rather than risk having to share power with parties to their left or right.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
    We have seen periods of UKIP + Tories having more than 50% of the vote. I am sure the equivalent with BXP will happen at some point. The country is equally divided between Leave and Remain. There will be times when the Remainers have all the power and times the Leavers do. The difference is that membership of an international organization is far more dependent on settled policy than non-membership. Ricocheting back and forth will end up with others being sick of us and us staying out.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    Gabs2 said:

    He has more mandate than Juncker.
    One of them has been ratified by the relevant Parliament. Guess which?
    Both have effectively given the UK parliament hasn't no confidenced Boris.

    And far more people voted for Boris than for Juncker, in both absolute terms and percentage of the relevant geography's population.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    The Tories are fundamentally a pro-European party. They don’t have it in them to leave with no deal.
    Maybe that was true five years ago but not any more.
  • O/T FPT non-politics betting question on betting Liverpool to keep a 100% win record in league until Christmas.

    Andrew said:

    Also not sure if you do walk into a bookies and say something like that would they give reasonable odds or would they think "mug" and give crap odds?

    You'd get very crap odds, because …

    a) they assume you won't be able to calculate a fair price on such an exotic/custom bet, so can offer whatever they like
    b) in sports-betting the longer the odds, typically the more profit margin the bookie loads on it. by 1000/1 you might get 33% of true odds.
    Just put on a manual bet as an accumulator before each game. As the winning streak goes on, there will be an element of "well, it has to end sometime..." factored in to the price. You can shop around for the best odds. And I can't imagine there is much of a limit to the wager you can make on individual games in the Premier League?
    How do you place a manual accumulator like that or do you just mean make a bet, then reinvest winnings into next bet etc etc until lost or Christmas?

    The thing that made me think this was possible and looking at the fixtures there isn't any that looks insurmountable.

    Of the big clubs Arsenal has already been defeated.

    Chelsea and Man are away so tricky but they're very vulnerable at the minute.
    Man City are obviously tricky but are at Anfield and without Laporte.
    Spurs, Merseyside Derby and Leicester all at Anfield too.

    If we can keep winning at Anfield and defeat Man Utd and Chelsea on the road then there's not many fixtures left.

    What would you think fair odds would be?
    "...do you just mean make a bet, then reinvest winnings into next bet etc etc until lost or Christmas?"

    Yes, that's the way I would do it. I'm sure that's the way to get the best odds because you could cherry pick between the firms before each game. If the winning streak continues they may refuse part of your stake as being too big but you just spread the bets around the bookies.

    The problem is the psychological one. If you get to mid-December and have just a few more games to go you will be tempted to trouser the winnings and not risk any further. That would probably be wise, but if you want to continue the fun without risking the whole pool, just keep half the winnings and carry on with rest.

    Good luck!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,734
    edited September 2019
    Gabs2 said:

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
    We have seen periods of UKIP + Tories having more than 50% of the vote. I am sure the equivalent with BXP will happen at some point. The country is equally divided between Leave and Remain. There will be times when the Remainers have all the power and times the Leavers do. The difference is that membership of an international organization is far more dependent on settled policy than non-membership. Ricocheting back and forth will end up with others being sick of us and us staying out.
    Yebbut...

    ...Revoking A50 preserves the status quo. Any future government deciding to leave will still be faced with the intractable problem of how to leave and continue to trade with the EU.

    That, of course "should be one of the easiest deals in history". :wink:
  • kle4 said:

    Certainly possible, but the idea he really was not involved at all, was completely unaware (or that his people were unaware at least) seems a little improbable. Thus the argument that his outriders floated it, and he pulled back when it became clear how angry people would be, seems more plausible.
    It is certainly an attempt to silence Watson. The language of the new motion effectively calls him a traitor to the cause and the review is hardly going to be a broad based panel who will look at things dispassionately.

    Yes, it means Watson isn't going to be removed this week - but the message is clear that dissent will not be tolerated. And that should worry everyone.

    If it is wrong to remove the whip from those Tory MPs who voted against the party a few weeks ago, it is equally wrong to try to silence those on the Labour benches who dare to espouse alternative perspectives.

    Corbyn's career was built on being a serial rebel against the party line. And now he and his fellow travellers threaten those who dare to even think about doing the same.

    Everyone should be worried - even if the immediate danger has gone. The threat is still there.
    It reminds me of the opinion poll showing 94% of the Chinese believe their country is on the right track - anyone who disagrees is too afraid to say so.
    If you look at how far and how fast China has come in the past couple of decades, 94 per cent could be right. Remember too there is no folk memory of liberal democracy in China. Grandad was an illiterate peasant on a collective farm; mum was not allowed to go to college; now China has surpassed Russia in terms of cars, jobs and electronic gizmos and rivals America.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,734
    HYUFD said:

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
    They may not introduce PR if they get a majority under FPTP, the Trudeau experience suggests Liberals are all for PR in opposition but as soon as they win a majority under FPTP they dump it rather than risk having to share power with parties to their left or right.
    Well, fair point, but we're now dealing with a very slim possibility followed by another very slim possibility. I make that a very, very, slim possibility :wink:
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    TGOHF said:
    SOME MEP's..... I doubt the Brexit Party MEPs joined in.
    No they were too busy embarrassing the UK by heckling and behaving like children to do anything constructive and I bet only half of them bothered to turn up justify what they are being paid.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T

    "English is just a Mandarin dialect, Chinese scholars claim

    World Civilisation Research Association argue Shakespeare was an 'illiterate actor' and his works were in fact written by Samuel Johnson, author of the Johnson English Dictionary"

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/mandarin-chinese-english-shakespeare-world-civilization-research-association-a9097926.html
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,471
    An exciting time to be a LD supporter.
    They generally get a boost during the Labour conference, but this year I sense something special.




  • TGOHF said:
    SOME MEP's..... I doubt the Brexit Party MEPs joined in.
    They want no deal and have made similar interventions to try to sabotage any other outcome.
  • kle4 said:

    I know we joke about the uselessness of the MPs, and am considering the source, but if this is what some of them genuinely believe, and given those who seek to 'destroy' them are Corbyn supporters by and large, how can they even sit across the table with these fifth columnists and work together to elect the same man?
    https://twitter.com/OwenSmith_MP/status/1175383719428927488

    The more sane MPs stick it out in Labour the better the chance that they can elect a sane successor to Corbyn.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 774
    On topic. I think there's an element of truth to this but people are getting a little bit over excited. Really, we can see the intentions by the motion that is likely to pass - restricting Watson's ability to become leader in the event of Corbyn resigning - and his powers anyway if he did. If he were, he could in effect take control of the NEC by using Shadow Cabinet and PLP posts to tip the balance.

    It seems to me that it's the Corbynistas getting all their ducks in a row because they think there will be a general election before the next Lab Conf, and the range of likely outcomes could well precipitate Corbyn's departure.

    In the event Labour is marmalised, he probably has to go immediately and a pro-Europen loyalist moderate would have a real chance of winning - see Thornberry's manoeuvres and Starmer's silence. Watson being acting leader and in control of the NEC would allow him power to shape the contest in their favour.

    The likeliest current outcome - Labour lose a few seats and vote share but put in an 'acceptable' performance would probably buy Corbyn some time and allow them to likely ensure a succession - but still with some threat of moderate insurrection.

    The top end likely outcome - another hung parliament - would keep Corbyn in situ, but probably set off manoeuvres among the Corbynista dauphins - who would begin to get irritated by the prospect of squandering their ambitions on a two-time loser. Also worth remembering that in the event of coalition/confidence talks, the Lib Dems' big non-Brexit demand is ditch Corbyn. They'd never do it if it made Watson acting leader pending an election - install a far left candidate without the baggage that makes Corbyn a non-starter, however, and it might be possible.

    In all those cases, the Labour far left's cause is helped by being able to select the acting leader should Corbyn leave, by putting in place a figure who would promote their interests. In the former, it would allow them to stymie a credible moderate challenge. In the second, they could pose as unifiers. In the third, they'd ensure they have total control over every lever of power inside Labour. In coalition it puts the ball back in the Lib Dem court over refusing to deal with Corbyn.

    Win, and of course none of that matters. But I think that whatever they say in public, the smarter Corbyn acolytes know it ain't gonna happen.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    nichomar said:

    TGOHF said:
    SOME MEP's..... I doubt the Brexit Party MEPs joined in.
    No they were too busy embarrassing the UK by heckling and behaving like children to do anything constructive and I bet only half of them bothered to turn up justify what they are being paid.
    is a Lib Dem MEP shouting B 2 Brexit in the EU Parliament acting like a child?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    edited September 2019
    Gabs2 said:

    Gabs2 said:

    He has more mandate than Juncker.
    One of them has been ratified by the relevant Parliament. Guess which?
    Both have effectively given the UK parliament hasn't no confidenced Boris.

    And far more people voted for Boris than for Juncker, in both absolute terms and percentage of the relevant geography's population.
    What rot. Boris Johnson has lost every single vote in Parliament so far. And “relevant geography’s population” needs an absurd view of relevant before you can begin to make that claim.

    Keep talking nonsense like that and people might have vague ideas that your claim to be an ardent remainder might be wholly spurious. Or have you abandoned that persona yet?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    nichomar said:

    TGOHF said:
    SOME MEP's..... I doubt the Brexit Party MEPs joined in.
    No they were too busy embarrassing the UK by heckling and behaving like children to do anything constructive and I bet only half of them bothered to turn up justify what they are being paid.
    is a Lib Dem MEP shouting B 2 Brexit in the EU Parliament acting like a child?
    Not at the time it is sane coherent policy unlike garages tax dodgers policy
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,985

    kle4 said:

    Certainly possible, but the idea he really was not involved at all, was completely unaware (or that his people were unaware at least) seems a little improbable. Thus the argument that his outriders floated it, and he pulled back when it became clear how angry people would be, seems more plausible.
    It is certainly an attempt to silence Watson. The language of the new motion effectively calls him a traitor to the cause and the review is hardly going to be a broad based panel who will look at things dispassionately.

    Yes, it means Watson isn't going to be removed this week - but the message is clear that dissent will not be tolerated. And that should worry everyone.

    If it is wrong to remove the whip from those Tory MPs who voted against the party a few weeks ago, it is equally wrong to try to silence those on the Labour benches who dare to espouse alternative perspectives.

    Corbyn's career was built on being a serial rebel against the party line. And now he and his fellow travellers threaten those who dare to even think about doing the same.

    Everyone should be worried - even if the immediate danger has gone. The threat is still there.
    It reminds me of the opinion poll showing 94% of the Chinese believe their country is on the right track - anyone who disagrees is too afraid to say so.
    If you look at how far and how fast China has come in the past couple of decades, 94 per cent could be right. Remember too there is no folk memory of liberal democracy in China. Grandad was an illiterate peasant on a collective farm; mum was not allowed to go to college; now China has surpassed Russia in terms of cars, jobs and electronic gizmos and rivals America.
    Probably why where’s no big push for democracy there, why change the system if the current one is working well?
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    Omnium said:

    An exciting time to be a LD supporter.
    They generally get a boost during the Labour conference, but this year I sense something special.




    Do the LD normally get a boost during Lab party conference? if so i had not noticed, normally I thought that each party gets a small boost, that fades the next week when the other party conference is on. and by the end we are normally back to where we started, pretty much.

    This year, I think you may be right, buy talking so much about internal party rules, antisemitism, and so on I could see more bad press then good.

    Brexit part and Con may also get a small boost, but the LD boost may be more retentive if a handful of poles show then in second place, it could start to become perminat.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    alex. said:

    It seems both Labour and Libdem policy is to have an election, but not to actually vote for one.

    Like the ERG, who want Brexit and voted against it 3 times...
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,471
    BigRich said:

    Omnium said:

    An exciting time to be a LD supporter.
    They generally get a boost during the Labour conference, but this year I sense something special.




    Do the LD normally get a boost during Lab party conference? if so i had not noticed, normally I thought that each party gets a small boost, that fades the next week when the other party conference is on. and by the end we are normally back to where we started, pretty much.

    This year, I think you may be right, buy talking so much about internal party rules, antisemitism, and so on I could see more bad press then good.

    Brexit part and Con may also get a small boost, but the LD boost may be more retentive if a handful of poles show then in second place, it could start to become perminat.
    I was joking. I suspect this years Labour conference will do more for the LDs than their own did though.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,784
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    Certainly possible, but the idea he really was not involved at all, was completely unaware (or that his people were unaware at least) seems a little improbable. Thus the argument that his outriders floated it, and he pulled back when it became clear how angry people would be, seems more plausible.
    It is certainly an attempt to silence Watson. The language of the new motion effectively calls him a traitor to the cause and the review is hardly going to be a broad based panel who will look at things dispassionately.

    Yes, it means Watson isn't going to be removed this week - but the message is clear that dissent will not be tolerated. And that should worry everyone.

    If it is wrong to remove the whip from those Tory MPs who voted against the party a few weeks ago, it is equally wrong to try to silence those on the Labour benches who dare to espouse alternative perspectives.

    Corbyn's career was built on being a serial rebel against the party line. And now he and his fellow travellers threaten those who dare to even think about doing the same.

    Everyone should be worried - even if the immediate danger has gone. The threat is still there.
    It reminds me of the opinion poll showing 94% of the Chinese believe their country is on the right track - anyone who disagrees is too afraid to say so.
    If you look at how far and how fast China has come in the past couple of decades, 94 per cent could be right. Remember too there is no folk memory of liberal democracy in China. Grandad was an illiterate peasant on a collective farm; mum was not allowed to go to college; now China has surpassed Russia in terms of cars, jobs and electronic gizmos and rivals America.
    Probably why where’s no big push for democracy there, why change the system if the current one is working well?
    Spoken like a true conservative.
    :)
  • I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    Everyone wants to go on a State holiday.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 8,882
    I can't help thinking that all this talk of a Lib Dem revival is just another unicorn. Or maybe something worse than a unicorn.

    In reality I can think of few things more conducive to Johnson getting an electoral mandate for No Deal (if that's what he wants) than a Lib Dem revival that would split the opposition vote.

    I'm afraid that most politicians are quite privileged people who will be protected against the consequences of No Deal, and that - despite the self-serving rhetoric - there are only a relatively small number who really see avoiding it as their top priority.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,784

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    Nostaglia. It was nationalised in 1948 along with the railways.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    Chris said:

    I can't help thinking that all this talk of a Lib Dem revival is just another unicorn. Or maybe something worse than a unicorn.

    In reality I can think of few things more conducive to Johnson getting an electoral mandate for No Deal (if that's what he wants) than a Lib Dem revival that would split the opposition vote.

    I'm afraid that most politicians are quite privileged people who will be protected against the consequences of No Deal, and that - despite the self-serving rhetoric - there are only a relatively small number who really see avoiding it as their top priority.

    Some Lib Dem talk is very worrying for Remainers. The idea that they think they could win Chipping Barnet is for extinct birds !
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    geoffw said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    Nostaglia. It was nationalised in 1948 along with the railways.
    I still remember Thomas Cook "Travellers Cheques".
  • I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
  • Chris said:

    I can't help thinking that all this talk of a Lib Dem revival is just another unicorn. Or maybe something worse than a unicorn.

    In reality I can think of few things more conducive to Johnson getting an electoral mandate for No Deal (if that's what he wants) than a Lib Dem revival that would split the opposition vote.

    I'm afraid that most politicians are quite privileged people who will be protected against the consequences of No Deal, and that - despite the self-serving rhetoric - there are only a relatively small number who really see avoiding it as their top priority.

    If "most politicians are quite privileged people who will be protected against the consequences of No Deal" and by implication don't care then why are so many putting their careers at risk to stop it?
    You're also impying that Boris is somehow encouraging the LibDem revival - which, as a unicorn, wouldn't exist. Have you seen the results of the recent elections?
    Did you even read that post through before clicking 'Post Comment'?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,985

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    Only so they can fly Conservative, LibDem MP's and fellow travellers to overseas re-education camps.
  • @Omnium

    "If a handful of poles show then in second place...."

    LDs take Warsaw!
  • ChrisChris Posts: 8,882

    Chris said:

    I can't help thinking that all this talk of a Lib Dem revival is just another unicorn. Or maybe something worse than a unicorn.

    In reality I can think of few things more conducive to Johnson getting an electoral mandate for No Deal (if that's what he wants) than a Lib Dem revival that would split the opposition vote.

    I'm afraid that most politicians are quite privileged people who will be protected against the consequences of No Deal, and that - despite the self-serving rhetoric - there are only a relatively small number who really see avoiding it as their top priority.

    If "most politicians are quite privileged people who will be protected against the consequences of No Deal" and by implication don't care then why are so many putting their careers at risk to stop it?
    You're also impying that Boris is somehow encouraging the LibDem revival - which, as a unicorn, wouldn't exist. Have you seen the results of the recent elections?
    Did you even read that post through before clicking 'Post Comment'?
    Another reminder of why it's a waste of time commenting here.

    But thanks anyway - obviously I still need reminding!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,767
    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    Has Diane Abbott been doing the maths again?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    @Omnium

    "If a handful of poles show then in second place...."

    LDs take Warsaw!

    Then we take Berlin ?
  • RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    Those are the numbers being thrown around. For instance, and expressing scepticism:
    the government did not see its options as being between spending £200m to help Thomas Cook with its cash shortfall or £600m to repatriate its British customers abroad.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49783911
  • MJWMJW Posts: 774
    Chris said:

    I can't help thinking that all this talk of a Lib Dem revival is just another unicorn. Or maybe something worse than a unicorn.

    In reality I can think of few things more conducive to Johnson getting an electoral mandate for No Deal (if that's what he wants) than a Lib Dem revival that would split the opposition vote.

    I'm afraid that most politicians are quite privileged people who will be protected against the consequences of No Deal, and that - despite the self-serving rhetoric - there are only a relatively small number who really see avoiding it as their top priority.

    None more so than the sons of privilege at the top of Labour who have made Labour a morally unacceptable option for many with their promotion of institutional racism, factional shenanigans, delusions of revolutionary grandeur, and ill-disguised fondness for 'Lexit'.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,618
    I was in town this afternoon, Thomas Cook shop was looking rather quiet for a Saturday.

    No customers, two saleswoman and manager seemed cheerful though. Interestingly no signs up.
  • BigRich said:


    Brexit part and Con may also get a small boost, but the LD boost may be more retentive if a handful of poles show then in second place, it could start to become perminat.

    Did you hear about the psephologist from Warsaw who moved to Haiti?

    He became a Voodoo Pole! :lol:
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,767
    edited September 2019

    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    Those are the numbers being thrown around. For instance, and expressing scepticism:
    the government did not see its options as being between spending £200m to help Thomas Cook with its cash shortfall or £600m to repatriate its British customers abroad.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49783911
    The figure on Sky News just now was 150,000 people. So if £200m is the benchmark, then that implies around £1,333 per person. That seems steep to me.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    edited September 2019
    MJW said:

    Chris said:

    I can't help thinking that all this talk of a Lib Dem revival is just another unicorn. Or maybe something worse than a unicorn.

    In reality I can think of few things more conducive to Johnson getting an electoral mandate for No Deal (if that's what he wants) than a Lib Dem revival that would split the opposition vote.

    I'm afraid that most politicians are quite privileged people who will be protected against the consequences of No Deal, and that - despite the self-serving rhetoric - there are only a relatively small number who really see avoiding it as their top priority.

    None more so than the sons of privilege at the top of Labour who have made Labour a morally unacceptable option for many with their promotion of institutional racism, factional shenanigans, delusions of revolutionary grandeur, and ill-disguised fondness for 'Lexit'.
    Re-'Lexit' - would you level the same charge at Michael Foot, Tony Benn, Barbara Castle, Peter Shore & John Silkin who in 1975 campaigned to leave the EEC?
  • tysontyson Posts: 5,989
    https://the-lentil.com/2019/04/glebe-road-babys-first-ever-words-are-revoke-article-fifty/

    This site is an absolute hoot- a must read pisstake of the liberal elite....

    People here probably will not be too surprised that I live on said "Glebe Road" in the "Golden Triangle."
  • RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    Those are the numbers being thrown around. For instance, and expressing scepticism:
    the government did not see its options as being between spending £200m to help Thomas Cook with its cash shortfall or £600m to repatriate its British customers abroad.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49783911
    It's not really a choice between £200m or £600m. It could well be £200m now, another £200m in the spring and then still £600m next autumn when patience finally runs out.
  • tlg86 said:

    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    Those are the numbers being thrown around. For instance, and expressing scepticism:
    the government did not see its options as being between spending £200m to help Thomas Cook with its cash shortfall or £600m to repatriate its British customers abroad.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49783911
    The figure on Sky News just now was 150,000 people. So if £200m is the benchmark, then that implies around £1,333 per person. That seems steep to me.
    I've no idea how the numbers are calculated and was not really following last night's discussion but one obvious problem is that repatriation will mean hiring lots of aeroplanes at the same time, or paying hotel bills so that flights can be staggered. It only sounds expensive if you imagine the cost of repatriating one single passenger on a scheduled £100 Ryanair flight. Trouble is, you can't scale that up.
  • ab195ab195 Posts: 477
    edited September 2019
    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    The BBC says 150,000 Brits are on holiday with it, and also quotes the £600m figure. Does nobody question these things? £4000 per person to get them home from, by definition, easily reachable holiday destinations? We also know a large company that was leasing a lot of a/c is about to go out of business, leaving those serviceable a/c available and the leasing company desperate for cash.

    Edit - also haven’t read the details, but under either administration or liquidation a Gvt sponsored repatriation deal should be doable.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    tlg86 said:

    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    Those are the numbers being thrown around. For instance, and expressing scepticism:
    the government did not see its options as being between spending £200m to help Thomas Cook with its cash shortfall or £600m to repatriate its British customers abroad.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49783911
    The figure on Sky News just now was 150,000 people. So if £200m is the benchmark, then that implies around £1,333 per person. That seems steep to me.
    When I see travel company's adversities they seem to advertise as 'Atal protected' (please forgive spelling I am dyslexic) which I thought was a insoranse deposit thing, Am I wrong? and if not why does Atal pay?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    ab195 said:

    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    The BBC says 150,000 Brits are on holiday with it, and also quotes the £600m figure. Does nobody question these things? £4000 per person to get them home from, by definition, easily reachable holiday destinations? We also know a large company that was leasing a lot of a/c is about to go out of business, leaving those serviceable a/c available and the leasing company desperate for cash.

    Edit - also haven’t read the details, but under either administration or liquidation a Gvt sponsored repatriation deal should be doable.
    Try looking at these:

    https://www.caa.co.uk/ATOL-protection/Consumers/About-ATOL/

    https://www.abta.com/tips-and-advice/is-my-holiday-protected
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    edited September 2019
    tyson said:

    https://the-lentil.com/2019/04/glebe-road-babys-first-ever-words-are-revoke-article-fifty/

    This site is an absolute hoot- a must read pisstake of the liberal elite....

    People here probably will not be too surprised that I live on said "Glebe Road" in the "Golden Triangle."

    Who are these liberal Elite? Banks farage Tice jonson Rees Mogg and others that we don’t know? The only elite are the Uber rich backers of brexit that are trying to pervert uk democracy and taking the piss out of people who will gain nothing from falling for their lies.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    ab195 said:

    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    The BBC says 150,000 Brits are on holiday with it, and also quotes the £600m figure. Does nobody question these things? £4000 per person to get them home from, by definition, easily reachable holiday destinations? We also know a large company that was leasing a lot of a/c is about to go out of business, leaving those serviceable a/c available and the leasing company desperate for cash.

    Edit - also haven’t read the details, but under either administration or liquidation a Gvt sponsored repatriation deal should be doable.
    £4,000 for a one way flight home! That will be government run travel for you.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,618
    Interesting greeting for Tom Watson at Conference...

    https://twitter.com/ElunedAnderson/status/1175467163655843845?s=19
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,912
    edited September 2019
    ab195 said:

    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    The BBC says 150,000 Brits are on holiday with it, and also quotes the £600m figure. Does nobody question these things? £4000 per person to get them home from, by definition, easily reachable holiday destinations? We also know a large company that was leasing a lot of a/c is about to go out of business, leaving those serviceable a/c available and the leasing company desperate for cash.
    The £600m figure includes the cost of refunding the entire forward book of TC customers, which is mostly already insured via ATOL.

    The £200m figure is the cash they need to get them past the end of this month, to pay bills due and renew their ATOL bond (of £100m) - with no guarantee they wouldn’t implode shortly afterwards without another £1bn cash injection.

    The cost of repatriating c150k passengers is likely to be £80-£100m, most of which will be covered by ATOL and passengers’ own insurance policies. The airlift itself will be organised by the CAA and underwritten by government, who are likely to be on the hook for £10m or so that they can’t reclaim from elsewhere. It will work in the same way as the Monarch airlift that happened exactly two years ago on 2nd October 2017 - the dates are no coincidence.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    HYUFD said:

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
    They may not introduce PR if they get a majority under FPTP, the Trudeau experience suggests Liberals are all for PR in opposition but as soon as they win a majority under FPTP they dump it rather than risk having to share power with parties to their left or right.
    You are unusually cynical this afternoon, Mr HY. It is the Conservatives who make promises when they are campaigning for votes, and then go back on those promises.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    BigRich said:

    ab195 said:

    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    The BBC says 150,000 Brits are on holiday with it, and also quotes the £600m figure. Does nobody question these things? £4000 per person to get them home from, by definition, easily reachable holiday destinations? We also know a large company that was leasing a lot of a/c is about to go out of business, leaving those serviceable a/c available and the leasing company desperate for cash.

    Edit - also haven’t read the details, but under either administration or liquidation a Gvt sponsored repatriation deal should be doable.
    £4,000 for a one way flight home! That will be government run travel for you.
    This isn't the best time to be banging the drum for the virtues of the private sector, being as how all these people are stranded because of it.
  • ab195ab195 Posts: 477
    Sandpit said:

    ab195 said:

    RobD said:

    I see the Labour Front Bench has called for HMG to take an equity stake in Thomas Cook. Interesting times.

    On yesterday's thread it was suggested that bailing out Thomas Cook was the cheap option at £200 million as it would cost two or three times that to bring everyone home. In Europe it is common for the state to part-own private companies. Put those two things together and it does not seem too outrageous.

    Perhaps we should wait for Dominic Cummings to wargame stranded holidaymakers voting for the wrong party.
    It’d cost half a billion to bring everyone home?
    The BBC says 150,000 Brits are on holiday with it, and also quotes the £600m figure. Does nobody question these things? £4000 per person to get them home from, by definition, easily reachable holiday destinations? We also know a large company that was leasing a lot of a/c is about to go out of business, leaving those serviceable a/c available and the leasing company desperate for cash.
    The £600m figure includes the cost of refunding the entire forward book of TC customers, which is mostly already insured via ATOL.

    The £200m figure is the cash they need to get them past the end of this month, to pay bills due and renew their ATOL bond (of £100m) - with no guarantee they wouldn’t implode shortly afterwards without another £1bn cash injection.

    The cost of repatriating c150k passengers is likely to be £80-£100m, most of which will be covered by ATOL and passengers’ own insurance policies. The airlift itself will be organised by the CAA and underwritten by government, who are likely to be on the hook for £10m or so that they can’t reclaim from elsewhere. It will work in the same way as the Monarch airlift that happened exactly two years ago on 2nd October 2017 - the dates are no coincidence.
    Thanks, that makes substantially more sense. Also does rather highlight the danger of drawing too many conclusions from figures out of context.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
    They may not introduce PR if they get a majority under FPTP, the Trudeau experience suggests Liberals are all for PR in opposition but as soon as they win a majority under FPTP they dump it rather than risk having to share power with parties to their left or right.
    You are unusually cynical this afternoon, Mr HY. It is the Conservatives who make promises when they are campaigning for votes, and then go back on those promises.
    Two words, tuition fees shows how LDs can dispense with promises when needed
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    edited September 2019
    Congressman Joe Kennedy III, Bobby Kennedy's grandson, announces his candidacy for the Massachussetts Senate seat currently held by Ed Muskey. Becoming a Massachussetts Senator in 1953 was the route which led his great uncle JFK to the presidency in 1960

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7489539/amp/Camelot-comeback-Joe-Kennedy-III-38-announces-bid-Senate.html
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,591
    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
    They may not introduce PR if they get a majority under FPTP, the Trudeau experience suggests Liberals are all for PR in opposition but as soon as they win a majority under FPTP they dump it rather than risk having to share power with parties to their left or right.
    You are unusually cynical this afternoon, Mr HY. It is the Conservatives who make promises when they are campaigning for votes, and then go back on those promises.
    Two words, tuition fees shows how LDs can dispense with promises when needed
    I think they’ve learnt from that mistake.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    HYUFD said:

    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    Gabs2 said:

    nico67 said:

    TGOHF said:
    Big deal . The Lib Dems want to stop Brexit. So why would anyone be shocked that they’ve put that case .

    Is it any different to Tory MPs and Farage asking a country to veto an extension.

    I personally don’t support the revoke policy but I hope Leavers will spare Remainers the faux outrage when their poster boy Bozo is both a pathological liar and not negotiating in good faith .
    It is exactly the same as the Faragists' tactics, which is to say, reprehensible. Lobbying foreign leaders over the heads of Her Majesty's government to help out your own political faction should be off limits. All this does is further delegitimize a successful revoke push. Even if they get it, the Tories will take us out of the EU with no further referendum the next time they get a majority.
    You seem to be forgetting that in the unlikely event of a LibDem majority under FPTP they will:

    1. Revoke A50
    2. Introduce PR to make it extrememly unlikely that the Tories or any other party will win a majority in future.

    Think of it as their way of getting their own back on FPTP :smile:
    They may not introduce PR if they get a majority under FPTP, the Trudeau experience suggests Liberals are all for PR in opposition but as soon as they win a majority under FPTP they dump it rather than risk having to share power with parties to their left or right.
    You are unusually cynical this afternoon, Mr HY. It is the Conservatives who make promises when they are campaigning for votes, and then go back on those promises.
    Two words, tuition fees shows how LDs can dispense with promises when needed
    I think they’ve learnt from that mistake.
    I think national interest at the time were the more important words bot tories know nothing about that.
This discussion has been closed.