I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
A simple solution is simply to amend it so it does not require a 2/3 majority to dissolve Parliament, just a simple majority.
That way a PM leading a majority government can call an election when they like in practice.
Yes, I think all roads lead to that as the simplest answer.
Edit - The date of next election in any revised Bill will be interesting. If they win, the Tories might become winter election fans and shift it to December 2024.
I think the whole point of repealing is so that there isn't a fixed date...
You have to have a maximum length of Parliament though don’t you? Technically where always had a last possible moment of five years time.
There again it would be fun to wind up Labour voters with the idea of a thousand year Tory reich.
Yeah, FTPA repealed the Septennial Act. So you are right that there would be a last possible date for an election, but not a fixed date for the election.
We could revisit the timings though. I mean, once we’ve had an election the people will have spoken. If they’ve given the right answer, do we really need to trouble them again this century?
You might have a point. The will of the people does endure for quite a long time.
Guardian reporting the Tories will get rid of FTPA.
Well, they've got my vote.
I understood that they cant simply repeal it, but need to replace it with something.
Well of course, otherwise there'd be no limit to the length of a parliament.
The issue is that, so far as I am aware, the Royal Prerogative, once removed, has never been restored. Liam Laurence Smyth (then Clerk of the Journals) observed in ‘Parliament and the Law’ (citing from a Government submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on Public Administration from 2003):
It is not altogether clear what happens when a prerogative power has been superseded by a statute and the statutory provision is later repealed but it is likely to be the case that the prerogative will not revive unless the repealing enactment makes specific provision to that effect.
If this is the case, it would mean that rather than simply repealing the 2011 Act, opponents of the legislation would have to introduce a new statute setting out the circumstances in which the Prime Minister would be entitled to request the monarch dissolve Parliament or to put in place other provisions that set out how Parliament could be dissolved. You could, I guess, make provision in the repealing act that the status quo anti the commencement of the FTPA in 2011 is restored, but does that make the discretion to dissolve Parliament a Prerogative power or an authority delegated by Parliament. You would also need to expressly revive the Septennial Act 1716 or make provision for something similar.
As I say, this sort of thing has never been done before.
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
Guardian reporting the Tories will get rid of FTPA.
Well, they've got my vote.
I understood that they cant simply repeal it, but need to replace it with something.
Well of course, otherwise there'd be no limit to the length of a parliament.
The issue is that, so far as I am aware, the Royal Prerogative, once removed, has never been restored. Liam Laurence Smyth (then Clerk of the Journals) observed in ‘Parliament and the Law’ (citing from a Government submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on Public Administration from 2003):
It is not altogether clear what happens when a prerogative power has been superseded by a statute and the statutory provision is later repealed but it is likely to be the case that the prerogative will not revive unless the repealing enactment makes specific provision to that effect.
If this is the case, it would mean that rather than simply repealing the 2011 Act, opponents of the legislation would have to introduce a new statute setting out the circumstances in which the Prime Minister would be entitled to request the monarch dissolve Parliament or to put in place other provisions that set out how Parliament could be dissolved. You could, I guess, make provision in the repealing act that the status quo anti the commencement of the FTPA in 2011 is restored, but does that make the discretion to dissolve Parliament a Prerogative power or an authority delegated by Parliament. You would also need to expressly revive the Septennial Act 1716 or make provision for something similar.
As I say, this sort of thing has never been done before.
You mean, it has not been done for a very long time. Victoria, for example, exercised the long dormant royal prerogative to appoint a PM without seeking ministerial advice in 1894.
Just back from the gym. How many extra tens of billions of public spending have Labour announced in the last couple of hours
On topic, if the Tories do get a majority next month then how do we all think Johnson might approach Indyref2? Presumably Sturgeon's demand for a vote next year will be turned down flat, but what do we reckon the response will be to another pro-independence majority in the next Scottish Parliament election?
The Scottish Tories are obviously heavily invested in holding the Union together, but I'm just wondering how bothered the English ones (and Johnson himself) actually are. If Scotland votes to go then Labour's main potential coalition partner is removed and the Conservative majority at Westminster increases by about 50.
Personally I would be quite glad to see Scotland cut loose and think it will be good for both England and Scotland to part ways on good terms, but I know that's not the Conservative and Unionist Party view.
I think realistically the idea of a referendum next year will be comprehensively rejected out of hand. The 2021 Scottish Parliament election will be critical. If the SNP wins a majority then it will be hard to deny a new Section 30 order in practice but the SCONs no doubt will be hoping to block the SNP from getting a majority just as the SNP didn't get one in 2016.
Conservative Manifesto 2019 part 1 First impressions 64 pages, much shorter than other main parties. But very wordy.
Big photo of Boris on the cover, definitely either they have focus groups saying he is a draw, or he has a giant ego, or both. Second photo of him inside 7 pages – tone it down please.
Quick guarantee of key pledges, useful summary for those scanning it – NHS top, then police, immigration etc. Only 5 sections after the intro, which is handy, but again no hyperlinking in the document. Green Party comes out top on usability . The chapters being ‘we will x’ is corny.
I think the message is Get Brexit Done, but it is subtle.
Direct mentions of Corbyn throughout, which was not the case in 2017.
I’ve not heard the UK called the ‘awesome foursome’ before, but I like it.
Pictures of candidates in the manifesto – better had checked they never said something bad on twitter
Splitting figures into weekly amounts and per person/ school etc good presentation, but overall a bit cluttered
Get Brexit Done Simple message of being out by January. Obviously does not mention years of difficult talking afterwards, but it’s a powerful dream that this phase will end.
Unleash Britain’s Potential ‘Debt will be lower at the end of the parliament’ – I think Guido of all people called this untrue earlier All very vague at present.
Focus on Priorities 40 new hospitals claim of course, 29% increase between 2018-2023. 650m a week.
50m more gp appointments. NHS visa
Mental health same urgency as physical health – LDs had the most detail on this
Extend life expectancy by 5 years by 2035. That’s a bold promise, albeit one so far off its meaningless as a political pledge.
NHS not on the table in trade deals – surprised this is not right at the top of the NHS section
Like others promising a cross-party consensus on social care – everyone clearly agrees there needs to be cross party consensus, but refuses to work together.
Seeking cure for dementia!
NOT replacing Ofsted – finally it finds a friend
Pretty brief on education overall
National living wage increase
Tax guarantee – I just don’t see how this will work
Triple lock – yawn
Abolish tampon tax
Multiple references in the credit and pensions section to women specifically – worried about the WASPi women I think.
Expand PCC role – oh great, that useless role.
Picture of Sajid Javid and Priti Patel on the section about points style immigration system.
I didn’t know the National Citizen Service was still a thing
Memorial for the Windrush generation – the Greens offering a bank holiday
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
Strange thing for her to say. She must be aware of canvassing figures and not too confident
Not really. He's significantly ahead in the polls. Of course things can change, but at the moment the Tories are winning. Just being realistic.
If Labour is seen as being out of the race, it makes it easier for remainers in both main parties to switch
Very dangerous
No it isn’t why do the tories need 100 seat majority, 15 should do them and make them watchful about pissing off their own MPs and be aware of byelection losses due to that could be because of their own incompetence.
Conservative Manifesto Part 2 Unleash Britain’s potential Everyone always say they want to get away from the idea that ‘whitehall knows best’. Shame no one ever tells Whitehall that.
Focus on towns, like Labour – its where a lot of battles will be.
100bn additional infrastructure spending
New rail system by ending the franchising model – meaning what?
Waffling on HS2, transparently seeking votes of those who want it scrapped without promising that
Everyone is promising to open up old lines
Potholes is low down considering the fuss they have made.
Lengthy and waffly about Heathrow 3rd runway
Veto on council tax rises still in there – this is a stupid policy the government knows does not work, given they gave permission for a further rise above 2% and had the social care levy as well. But they are too afraid to give councils permission to raise more without referendums.
I don’t know enough about renting to know if these plans are better than Labours or the lDs
Losing track of how many photos of Boris there are.
Defending record on tax evasion – new law promised doubling prison terms, ‘beefed up’ anti tax evasion unit A lot of these anti tax evasion paras seem the same to me,
National Skills Fund – again, same sort of idea other parties have had.
20 institutes of technology
Again emphasizing measures for women relating to discrimination in workplace, entitlement for unpair carers.
Fund ‘more’ childcare – how much, and how much will it cost?
Please trust us farmers and fishermen
New office for environmental protection. New national parks – common themes in the manifestos
NI gets first assurances in the Union section.
Not clear what the UK government will do for Scotland, reviewing and supporting things
Upgrade A55 in Wales, support welsh language
Not pulling back on voting ID
Make it easier for expats to vote – I’d think they’d want to make it harder
Not proceeding with second stage of Leveson
Constitution, Democracy and Rights Commission in first year. This could be worrying – want to look at relationship of government, parliament and the courts, which is a green light to restrict the courts -obviously angry about supreme court
Strengthen Britain in the world Waffle waffle waffle.
New office for veterans affairs, end vexatious legal claims
Not getting rid of the 0.7% target – given how many conservatives hate this, that may disappoint.
Ban keeping primates as pets – I didn’t know this was legal!
Climate change is clearly an afterthought, not much of interest
You lot were convinced there was no way he could renegotiate the deal. He got it done in a couple of weeks.
There's no need to drag this out forever.
He got a new deal by dropping the red line May had on an Irish Sea Border. If he drops his red line on EEA membership he can do it. He cannot negotiate a FTA in three months, that has never happened in history.
Sounds like a sensible and prudent pledge. Sets out priorities and leaves £78bn to make decisions with over next 5 years. Why should every single decision be made today?
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Strange thing for her to say. She must be aware of canvassing figures and not too confident
Not really. He's significantly ahead in the polls. Of course things can change, but at the moment the Tories are winning. Just being realistic.
If Labour is seen as being out of the race, it makes it easier for remainers in both main parties to switch
Very dangerous
No it isn’t why do the tories need 100 seat majority, 15 should do them and make them watchful about pissing off their own MPs and be aware of byelection losses due to that could be because of their own incompetence.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
Look at your own voters
You have your answer
Stop whatabouting, I am talking about Boris Johnson.
Guardian reporting the Tories will get rid of FTPA.
Well, they've got my vote.
I understood that they cant simply repeal it, but need to replace it with something.
Well of course, otherwise there'd be no limit to the length of a parliament.
The issue is that, so far as I am aware, the Royal Prerogative, once removed, has never been restored. Liam Laurence Smyth (then Clerk of the Journals) observed in ‘Parliament and the Law’ (citing from a Government submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on Public Administration from 2003):
It is not altogether clear what happens when a prerogative power has been superseded by a statute and the statutory provision is later repealed but it is likely to be the case that the prerogative will not revive unless the repealing enactment makes specific provision to that effect.
If this is the case, it would mean that rather than simply repealing the 2011 Act, opponents of the legislation would have to introduce a new statute setting out the circumstances in which the Prime Minister would be entitled to request the monarch dissolve Parliament or to put in place other provisions that set out how Parliament could be dissolved. You could, I guess, make provision in the repealing act that the status quo anti the commencement of the FTPA in 2011 is restored, but does that make the discretion to dissolve Parliament a Prerogative power or an authority delegated by Parliament. You would also need to expressly revive the Septennial Act 1716 or make provision for something similar.
As I say, this sort of thing has never been done before.
You mean, it has not been done for a very long time. Victoria, for example, exercised the long dormant royal prerogative to appoint a PM without seeking ministerial advice in 1894.
That’s different. The FTPA (in my view anyway) abolished the prerogative. A dormant prerogative is not the same as one that has been abolished. If the FTPA just put it into abeyance (per de Keyser) then you have a point, but it section 3(2) expressly took a power out of the hands of the Monarch (“Parliament cannot otherwise be dissolved”) which is clearly an abolition.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
I don't see how the tax pledge boxes him in significantly? Surely the whole thing about NI/Income tax/VAT is that they generate new money as the economy grows. It's not like eg. Council tax where you actively have to take a decision to raise more money to cover inflation.
And of course you can much about with allowances etc. Isn't it even possible that VAT will be replaced out of the EU?
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
Look at your own voters
You have your answer
Stop whatabouting, I am talking about Boris Johnson.
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Swing to the Tories in Carshalton in 2017, and the majority is less than 1500. It's London, so I'd assume it was safe for the LDs, and they've managed to hold it for 20 years despite never getting more than 5300 as a majority, but it doesn't look super safe if the Tories are as high as they appear.
You lot were convinced there was no way he could renegotiate the deal. He got it done in a couple of weeks.
There's no need to drag this out forever.
I'm sorry, there is simply no parallel between the WA and the FTA. Nobody who has any expertise in this area believes this can be done in 11 months (and it's really less than half that time). I don't know if you genuinely believe this or are just propagandising, but read what people like Ivan Rogers have written about this. There is real concern about this in the markets, it's a massive risk for next year.
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Well you have had the heads up.I don't care whether you pay heed or not.
Guardian reporting the Tories will get rid of FTPA.
Well, they've got my vote.
I understood that they cant simply repeal it, but need to replace it with something.
Well of course, otherwise there'd be no limit to the length of a parliament.
The issue is that, so far as I am aware, the Royal Prerogative, once removed, has never been restored. Liam Laurence Smyth (then Clerk of the Journals) observed in ‘Parliament and the Law’ (citing from a Government submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on Public Administration from 2003):
It is not altogether clear what happens when a prerogative power has been superseded by a statute and the statutory provision is later repealed but it is likely to be the case that the prerogative will not revive unless the repealing enactment makes specific provision to that effect.
If this is the case, it would mean that rather than simply repealing the 2011 Act, opponents of the legislation would have to introduce a new statute setting out the circumstances in which the Prime Minister would be entitled to request the monarch dissolve Parliament or to put in place other provisions that set out how Parliament could be dissolved. You could, I guess, make provision in the repealing act that the status quo anti the commencement of the FTPA in 2011 is restored, but does that make the discretion to dissolve Parliament a Prerogative power or an authority delegated by Parliament. You would also need to expressly revive the Septennial Act 1716 or make provision for something similar.
As I say, this sort of thing has never been done before.
You mean, it has not been done for a very long time. Victoria, for example, exercised the long dormant royal prerogative to appoint a PM without seeking ministerial advice in 1894.
That’s different. The FTPA (in my view anyway) abolished the prerogative. A dormant prerogative is not the same as one that has been abolished. If the FTPA just put it into abeyance (per de Keyser) then you have a point, but it section 3(2) expressly took a power out of the hands of the Monarch (“Parliament cannot otherwise be dissolved”) which is clearly an abolition.
Other views are, of course, available...
What you could argue is that, regardless of details on when an election can be called, the queen still performs the act of dissolving parliament. if you repeal the FTPA then the queen would take advice from her PM (ie as before)
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
That's not what most people commentating said. I think it very petty that people do a HYUFD and pretend they were not utterly dismissive of the idea of the WA being opened even if the EU had weasel words about it. So many commentators and posters said it would never happen and it did, there's nothing to be embarrassed in saying we got it wrong and actually Boris was seeking a deal, not no deal (at least at this stage). It's partisanship of some of the most transparent kind.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
Look at your own voters
You have your answer
Stop whatabouting, I am talking about Boris Johnson.
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Well you have had the heads up.I don't care whether you pay heed or not.
Would you care to post a copy of your betting slips for Kingston and Carshalton & Wallington?
Labours promises are not credible , even the traditional labour voters don’t believe it , they take the people for fools. Byronic Sean put it perfectly yesterday “ Do they not realise that at a certain point this largesse begins to have a negative effect?”
It’s like a spurned husband making promises to get his wife back. When he promises to clean the kitchen, and cut down on the drinking, she gives him a listen. She’s interested.
When he then promises to get a job as a brain surgeon, buy her a Maserati, and take her on holiday to the Maldives for six months, she looks at him and she despises him as a liar. And worse: a liar who takes her for a fool.”
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
That's not what most people commentating said. I think it very petty that people do a HYUFD and pretend they were not utterly dismissive of the idea of the WA being opened even if the EU had weasel words about it. So many commentators and posters said it would never happen and it did, there's nothing to be embarrassed in saying we got it wrong and actually Boris was seeking a deal, not no deal (at least at this stage). It's partisanship of some of the most transparent and pathetic kind.
I didn't get it wrong, I never claimed the WA couldn't be reopened.
At the time I said Boris Johnson will drop his red line on an Irish Sea border and get a new deal. I have nothing to apologise for - stop buying his rubbish.
re:2020 extension - is it possible that even if a trade deal isn't done, the circumstances can be created allowing whatever the GATT provisions of WTO come into force?
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Well you have had the heads up.I don't care whether you pay heed or not.
I suggest you return to the easier tasks set by your masters. No one in this part of the world would be so stupid as to believe that nonsense. I suggest you focus on Wimbledon, which you may have a chance of holding if you can prevent enough Labour supporters voting tactically.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
There will be several categories of voters for whom this will not matter:
1. Those actually taken in by it 2. Those not taken in by it, but who assume there will be No Deal and approve of this 3. Those not taken in by it, but who assume that there will just be further negotiations and aren't that bothered by the process going on for a bit longer 4. Those not taken in by it, and who fear Johnson wants some kind of soft Brexit, but who will vote Tory regardless to guarantee that some sort of Brexit happens 5. Those not taken in by it and who are nervous about what all this means, but will vote Tory anyway because they are tribally loyal and/or despise Corbyn and friends 6. Those who haven't noticed this pledge at all 7. Those who don't care about Brexit one way or another
Take all that lot out of the equation (plus all the totally apathetic non-voters as well) and the major group that will be left to be upset are committed Remainers who also prefer Corbyn to Brexit, and none of them were going to be backing the Tories anyway. Thus, from a purely cynical perspective, this is good politics. It will lure some additional voters, lull some of the existing ones who are nervous about Brexit into a false sense of security, and as for the remainder of the Conservative vote they will mostly either be too afraid of Corbyn to rebel or won't care.
The thing is, there are huge problems in education, but most of them one way or another are the fault of Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings. OFSTED‘S implosion, admittedly, is not their fault, but Nicky Morgan is still a Tory. Therefore, it was not likely that there would be many changes announced!
Their claims about standards are typically vacuous. Not much use talking about higher pass rates unless you’re sure of your new marking criteria, which we’re not.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
There will be several categories of voters for whom this will not matter:
1. Those actually taken in by it 2. Those not taken in by it, but who assume there will be No Deal and approve of this 3. Those not taken in by it, but who assume that there will just be further negotiations and aren't that bothered by the process going on for a bit longer 4. Those not taken in by it, and who fear Johnson wants some kind of soft Brexit, but who will vote Tory regardless to guarantee that some sort of Brexit happens 5. Those not taken in by it and who are nervous about what all this means, but will vote Tory anyway because they are tribally loyal and/or despise Corbyn and friends 6. Those who haven't noticed this pledge at all 7. Those who don't care about Brexit one way or another
Take all that lot out of the equation (plus all the totally apathetic non-voters as well) and the major group that will be left to be upset are committed Remainers who also prefer Corbyn to Brexit, and none of them were going to be backing the Tories anyway. Thus, from a purely cynical perspective, this is good politics. It will lure some additional voters, lull some of the existing ones who are nervous about Brexit into a false sense of security, and as for the remainder of the Conservative vote they will mostly either be too afraid of Corbyn to rebel or won't care.
I don't doubt it's good politics - but it's also utter nonsense.
I am going to be a nervous wreck no matter what any polls say. I genuinely believe that if Corbyn get a majority through the vagaries of our voting system, last minute Black Swan event, voters playing Russian Roulette by voting Labour to reduce a Tory majority and overshooting or Trump intervening then it will be the biggest political crisis since the second World War and will dwarf Brexit. I fully get that many will think that I'm overreacting. I was active on the Marxist left for many years in my youth and Corbyn & McDonnell I recognise as genuine fanatics. The LP manifesto is a horrible amalgam of various strains of barmy ideas like the ghosts of resolutions at student unions and LP fringe events in the '70s with a seasoning of modern identity politics.
Relax. To get Venezuela AND Brexit you'd need a Labour Majority. Ain't happening.
A Labour minority Government would probably mean no Brexit and a mini-Venezuela*, reversible after a period of no more than five years.
We can cope. We're British.
*[I guess a mini-Venezuela could be called a Caracas, but I don't have my coat handy.]
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
That's not what most people commentating said. I think it very petty that people do a HYUFD and pretend they were not utterly dismissive of the idea of the WA being opened even if the EU had weasel words about it. So many commentators and posters said it would never happen and it did, there's nothing to be embarrassed in saying we got it wrong and actually Boris was seeking a deal, not no deal (at least at this stage). It's partisanship of some of the most transparent and pathetic kind.
I didn't get it wrong, I never claimed the WA couldn't be reopened.
At the time I said Boris Johnson will drop his red line on an Irish Sea border and get a new deal. I have nothing to apologise for - stop buying his rubbish.
Guardian reporting the Tories will get rid of FTPA.
Well, they've got my vote.
I understood that they cant simply repeal it, but need to replace it with something.
Well of course, otherwise there'd be no limit to the length of a parliament.
The issue is that, so far as I am aware, the Royal Prerogative, once removed, has never been restored. Liam Laurence Smyth (then Clerk of the Journals) observed in ‘Parliament and the Law’ (citing from a Government submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on Public Administration from 2003):
It is not altogether clear what happens when a prerogative power has been superseded by a statute and the statutory provision is later repealed but it is likely to be the case that the prerogative will not revive unless the repealing enactment makes specific provision to that effect.
If this is the case, it would mean that rather than simply repealing the 2011 Act, opponents of the legislation would have to introduce a new statute setting out the circumstances in which the Prime Minister would be entitled to request the monarch dissolve Parliament or to put in place other provisions that set out how Parliament could be dissolved. You could, I guess, make provision in the repealing act that the status quo anti the commencement of the FTPA in 2011 is restored, but does that make the discretion to dissolve Parliament a Prerogative power or an authority delegated by Parliament. You would also need to expressly revive the Septennial Act 1716 or make provision for something similar.
As I say, this sort of thing has never been done before.
You mean, it has not been done for a very long time. Victoria, for example, exercised the long dormant royal prerogative to appoint a PM without seeking ministerial advice in 1894.
That’s different. The FTPA (in my view anyway) abolished the prerogative. A dormant prerogative is not the same as one that has been abolished. If the FTPA just put it into abeyance (per de Keyser) then you have a point, but it section 3(2) expressly took a power out of the hands of the Monarch (“Parliament cannot otherwise be dissolved”) which is clearly an abolition.
Other views are, of course, available...
Legislation of any sort only puts prerogative powers into abeyance. It’s one reason no Parliament can bind its successor.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
That's not what most people commentating said. I think it very petty that people do a HYUFD and pretend they were not utterly dismissive of the idea of the WA being opened even if the EU had weasel words about it. So many commentators and posters said it would never happen and it did, there's nothing to be embarrassed in saying we got it wrong and actually Boris was seeking a deal, not no deal (at least at this stage). It's partisanship of some of the most transparent and pathetic kind.
I didn't get it wrong, I never claimed the WA couldn't be reopened.
At the time I said Boris Johnson will drop his red line on an Irish Sea border and get a new deal. I have nothing to apologise for - stop buying his rubbish.
I said people, not you specifically. It's fine if you got it right, but most did not because they were not so careful in their language, that's why the true accusation he is selling a nonsense about a trade deal will not bite as hard as it should - because a lot of the people saying it were wrong before.
I'm not buying Boris's rubbish on this point even though I was wrong on the deal point - I'm saying a lot of people will buy it because they, or many commentators, were wrong before.
Let's not forget part of it was that many felt there would be no deal because he did not really want one. And he did. That might transfer no deal to the next stage, but it means the accusation of that will not hit home as hard.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
That's not what most people commentating said. I think it very petty that people do a HYUFD and pretend they were not utterly dismissive of the idea of the WA being opened even if the EU had weasel words about it. So many commentators and posters said it would never happen and it did, there's nothing to be embarrassed in saying we got it wrong and actually Boris was seeking a deal, not no deal (at least at this stage). It's partisanship of some of the most transparent and pathetic kind.
I didn't get it wrong, I never claimed the WA couldn't be reopened.
At the time I said Boris Johnson will drop his red line on an Irish Sea border and get a new deal. I have nothing to apologise for - stop buying his rubbish.
Said to others, perhaps, but not on here.
I wasn't posting on here then to be fair. But I did say that was would happen
You lot were convinced there was no way he could renegotiate the deal. He got it done in a couple of weeks.
There's no need to drag this out forever.
I'm sorry, there is simply no parallel between the WA and the FTA. Nobody who has any expertise in this area believes this can be done in 11 months (and it's really less than half that time). I don't know if you genuinely believe this or are just propagandising, but read what people like Ivan Rogers have written about this. There is real concern about this in the markets, it's a massive risk for next year.
"UK could crash out of EU with no-deal Brexit if Boris Johnson wins election, Michael Gove admits"
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
That's not what most people commentating said. I think it very petty that people do a HYUFD and pretend they were not utterly dismissive of the idea of the WA being opened even if the EU had weasel words about it. So many commentators and posters said it would never happen and it did, there's nothing to be embarrassed in saying we got it wrong and actually Boris was seeking a deal, not no deal (at least at this stage). It's partisanship of some of the most transparent and pathetic kind.
I didn't get it wrong, I never claimed the WA couldn't be reopened.
At the time I said Boris Johnson will drop his red line on an Irish Sea border and get a new deal. I have nothing to apologise for - stop buying his rubbish.
I said people, not you specifically. It's fine if you got it right, but most did not because they were not so careful in their language, that's why the true accusation he is selling a nonsense about a trade deal will not bite as hard as it should - because a lot of the people saying it were wrong before.
He played them hook line and sinker. And our media utterly hopeless.
Well of course, otherwise there'd be no limit to the length of a parliament.
The issue is that, so far as I am aware, the Royal Prerogative, once removed, has never been restored. Liam Laurence Smyth (then Clerk of the Journals) observed in ‘Parliament and the Law’ (citing from a Government submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on Public Administration from 2003):
It is not altogether clear what happens when a prerogative power has been superseded by a statute and the statutory provision is later repealed but it is likely to be the case that the prerogative will not revive unless the repealing enactment makes specific provision to that effect.
If this is the case, it would mean that rather than simply repealing the 2011 Act, opponents of the legislation would have to introduce a new statute setting out the circumstances in which the Prime Minister would be entitled to request the monarch dissolve Parliament or to put in place other provisions that set out how Parliament could be dissolved. You could, I guess, make provision in the repealing act that the status quo anti the commencement of the FTPA in 2011 is restored, but does that make the discretion to dissolve Parliament a Prerogative power or an authority delegated by Parliament. You would also need to expressly revive the Septennial Act 1716 or make provision for something similar.
As I say, this sort of thing has never been done before.
You mean, it has not been done for a very long time. Victoria, for example, exercised the long dormant royal prerogative to appoint a PM without seeking ministerial advice in 1894.
That’s different. The FTPA (in my view anyway) abolished the prerogative. A dormant prerogative is not the same as one that has been abolished. If the FTPA just put it into abeyance (per de Keyser) then you have a point, but it section 3(2) expressly took a power out of the hands of the Monarch (“Parliament cannot otherwise be dissolved”) which is clearly an abolition.
Other views are, of course, available...
What you could argue is that, regardless of details on when an election can be called, the queen still performs the act of dissolving parliament. if you repeal the FTPA then the queen would take advice from her PM (ie as before)
The basis of my argument is that the Queen currently has no power to dissolve Parliament. It went in 2011. That power would have to be expressly restored by the repealing Act, or one shortly after, or no one will be able to. And restoring a Royal Prerogative (please step in and correct me if I am wrong anyone) post abolition has never been done.
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Swing to the Tories in Carshalton in 2017, and the majority is less than 1500. It's London, so I'd assume it was safe for the LDs, and they've managed to hold it for 20 years despite never getting more than 5300 as a majority, but it doesn't look super safe if the Tories are as high as they appear.
Brake is a formidable campaigner, but the principal issue was Kingston. In Kingston the council moved from 28/18 to the Tories to 39/9 to the LDs in 2018 accompanied by a 10% swing to the LDs and Davey.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
That's not what most people commentating said. I think it very petty that people do a HYUFD and pretend they were not utterly dismissive of the idea of the WA being opened even if the EU had weasel words about it. So many commentators and posters said it would never happen and it did, there's nothing to be embarrassed in saying we got it wrong and actually Boris was seeking a deal, not no deal (at least at this stage). It's partisanship of some of the most transparent and pathetic kind.
I didn't get it wrong, I never claimed the WA couldn't be reopened.
At the time I said Boris Johnson will drop his red line on an Irish Sea border and get a new deal. I have nothing to apologise for - stop buying his rubbish.
Said to others, perhaps, but not on here.
I wasn't posting on here then to be fair. But I did say that was would happen
Very convenient Seems silly to make a claim like that which can't be backed up.
The transport infrastructure section is crap, it wouldn’t have been too difficult to say that in the post-Brexit environment we need to get Britain moving, and we commit fully to completing LHR3 and HS2 at the earliest opportunity.
The other lot need to find £650 billion for their National Transformation Fund and National Investment Bank. Relative to that, the entirety of the Tory manifesto represents a rounding error.
There is no way we're going to negotiate a trade deal in that time. I don't think we could even join the EEA in that time. How can anyone be taken in by these promises
I don't believe it either, but the fact he got a deal when many us, including me, said he could not, blunts those attacks. Some, including you, seek to change tack and focus on how they did not think he would junk red lines or throw the DUP under the bus, but that doesn't change that so many of us said the WA would not be changed, end of, and he did not have time to get something new anyway. We were wrong, end of. Yes perhaps we didn't see how he would drop various lines, but very few qualified their opinions carefully enough at the time.
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
The EU never said the WA couldn't be reopened. They consistently said if the red lines changed they would change the deal. This was made perfectly clear to anyone who actually listened. Boris Johnson has lied and scammed the public, again.
That's not what most people commentating said. I think it very petty that people do a HYUFD and pretend they were not utterly dismissive of the idea of the WA being opened even if the EU had weasel words about it. So many commentators and posters said it would never happen and it did, there's nothing to be embarrassed in saying we got it wrong and actually Boris was seeking a deal, not no deal (at least at this stage). It's partisanship of some of the most transparent and pathetic kind.
I didn't get it wrong, I never claimed the WA couldn't be reopened.
At the time I said Boris Johnson will drop his red line on an Irish Sea border and get a new deal. I have nothing to apologise for - stop buying his rubbish.
Said to others, perhaps, but not on here.
I wasn't posting on here then to be fair. But I did say that was would happen
Very convenient Seems silly to make a claim like that which can't be backed up.
I can post you my Reddit comment from the time if that would be easier? I have nothing to hide.
The other lot need to find £650 billion for their National Transformation Fund and National Investment Bank. Relative to that, the entirety of the Tory manifesto represents a rounding error.
I was simply making the point that the Tories aren't squeeky clean either.
As far as I am aware only HS2 is shovel ready in terms of major projects and that is only £4bn / year.
Northern Powerhouse Rail won't start until the very end of the next parliament at the very earliest given the plans, business case etc. have not been published yet let alone any legislation.
Hard to see what they could spend that much on in the next 5 years,
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Well you have had the heads up.I don't care whether you pay heed or not.
I suggest you return to the easier tasks set by your masters. No one in this part of the world would be so stupid as to believe that nonsense. I suggest you focus on Wimbledon, which you may have a chance of holding if you can prevent enough Labour supporters voting tactically.
I think you are over invested emotionally in this.I have never voted Tory in my life so just reacting to what I am hearing. Carshalton is very different from Wimbledon.These seats are not behaving the same.
Saying they won't extend the implementation period will I think, come back to bite them
Saying he'd not extend and doing so did not, but he could say it was not by choice. But honestly I think it only matters depending on the context - if things look like doing ok his ERGers will get mad and if they are still around BXP will moan, but he can push on through. If the government generally is doing bad, or there's recession, any roll back on promises will hit harder as well.
But frankly if they do win in a few weeks, then taking a hit in the polls in a year or so, even falling behind Labour, would not really be that awful for them, 10 years into government.
What you could argue is that, regardless of details on when an election can be called, the queen still performs the act of dissolving parliament. if you repeal the FTPA then the queen would take advice from her PM (ie as before)
The basis of my argument is that the Queen currently has no power to dissolve Parliament. It went in 2011. That power would have to be expressly restored by the repealing Act, or one shortly after, or no one will be able to. And restoring a Royal Prerogative (please step in and correct me if I am wrong anyone) post abolition has never been done.
I was under the impression that you cannot restore a prerogative power but I don't think that the FTPA completely abolished it. It didn't change the way that parliament is dissolved, just the details of when it can happen. so repealing the FTPA would not require the the reinstatement of the power.
If the FTPA said that following the passing of a motion in the house to hold a general election parliament would be dissolved automatically then it would have gotten rid of the power. That's not what is says. in order to dissolve parliament the PM still has to go to the queen and request a dissolution.
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Well you have had the heads up.I don't care whether you pay heed or not.
I suggest you return to the easier tasks set by your masters. No one in this part of the world would be so stupid as to believe that nonsense. I suggest you focus on Wimbledon, which you may have a chance of holding if you can prevent enough Labour supporters voting tactically.
I think you are over invested emotionally in this.I have never voted Tory in my life so just reacting to what I am hearing. Carshalton is very different from Wimbledon.These seats are not behaving the same.
You are wrong. I regularly voted Conservative when living in Chichester (as Andrew Tyrie was possibly the best MP in the last 50 years). However, if you are not acting as a troll I suggest you take what you hear with a pinch of salt. Conservative canvassers (like canvassers of all parties) are utterly unreliable.
It is true that Carshalton is different to Wimbledon, but it is also different to Kingston - where you claimed to have put a bet on the LDs losing. If you did that (and we still await sight of the betting slip) on the basis of party gossip in Carshalton I can only suggest you steer clear of betting in future.
For what it is worth I expect a LD landslide in Kingston, a hold in Carshalton and a Conservative majority of 2-3000 in Wimbledon.
The other lot need to find £650 billion for their National Transformation Fund and National Investment Bank. Relative to that, the entirety of the Tory manifesto represents a rounding error.
I was simply making the point that the Tories aren't squeeky clean either.
Absolutely, but these things are all relative. An axe murderer and a shoplifter are both criminals, but we all appreciate which offender is worse.
The transport infrastructure section is crap, it wouldn’t have been too difficult to say that in the post-Brexit environment we need to get Britain moving, and we commit fully to completing LHR3 and HS2 at the earliest opportunity.
And cause even more problems for them in seats west of London, not to mention Boris's own constituency?
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Swing to the Tories in Carshalton in 2017, and the majority is less than 1500. It's London, so I'd assume it was safe for the LDs, and they've managed to hold it for 20 years despite never getting more than 5300 as a majority, but it doesn't look super safe if the Tories are as high as they appear.
Brake is a formidable campaigner, but the principal issue was Kingston. In Kingston the council moved from 28/18 to the Tories to 39/9 to the LDs in 2018 accompanied by a 10% swing to the LDs and Davey.
I heard the 50,000 nurses pledge and I first thought, "that's an eye-catching pledge, why couldn't Labour have stuck to a small number of those rather than promising the universe?" and then I thought, "hang on, that's about 80 extra nurses per constituency, that sounds like rather a lot" and I googled and found out that there are an astonishing 320,000 nurses and midwives employed by the NHS- that's 500 per Westminster constituency.
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Swing to the Tories in Carshalton in 2017, and the majority is less than 1500. It's London, so I'd assume it was safe for the LDs, and they've managed to hold it for 20 years despite never getting more than 5300 as a majority, but it doesn't look super safe if the Tories are as high as they appear.
Brake is a formidable campaigner, but the principal issue was Kingston. In Kingston the council moved from 28/18 to the Tories to 39/9 to the LDs in 2018 accompanied by a 10% swing to the LDs and Davey.
BUT Theresa May was Prime Minister not Boris!
In London and Surrey Boris is a vote loser (even compared with May) in remain leaning seats.
The transport infrastructure section is crap, it wouldn’t have been too difficult to say that in the post-Brexit environment we need to get Britain moving, and we commit fully to completing LHR3 and HS2 at the earliest opportunity.
It would be a challenge for Bozo to drive the bulldozer while simultaneously lying down in front of it.
A small point I don't think anyone has mentioned. IF Boris secures a majority in just under 3 weeks time, then by convention the House of Lords will not seek to make major amendments to any legislation seeking to implement manifesto pledges. On the Brexit Bill and other key legislation, that will be crucial. In addition we will have Sir Lindsey Hoyle as Speaker and I sincerely doubt he will be Bercow Mark II and bend the rules to create difficulties for the government as Bercow did with permitting the Benn Act and Letwin Act time to be enacted.
I have just seen Ed Davey give Adam Boulton the best interview of the campaign on Sky news. He ripped Boris a new a**hole and this interview should be played again and again for voters of all persuasions. In a couple of minutes it exposes precisely why Boris is unfit for public office.
Delighted that, at last, someone is not holding back on calling him a liar and shyster.
Just had a bet on Davey losing his seat.
You must have money to burn. The bookies will be delighted. Davey is the safest hold in the LD book. I am not a 'all LD seats are safe' poster, but if Kingston falls so will every other LD seat - and I say that from Surrey and knowing that seat. In Richmond the latest YouGov analysis puts the LDs 20% ahead - and Kingston is safer.
Tory canvas returns are strong here and next door in Carshalton and Wallington. This is not going to be a good election for the Lib Dems.
I appreciate the troll machine is on full power but you do lose credibility by posting such utter rubbish.
Swing to the Tories in Carshalton in 2017, and the majority is less than 1500. It's London, so I'd assume it was safe for the LDs, and they've managed to hold it for 20 years despite never getting more than 5300 as a majority, but it doesn't look super safe if the Tories are as high as they appear.
At best the Tories are looking at a steady vote share. Knock off all the new Brexit fans they’ve apparently picked up in the north, and they are still going backwards in London.
Comments
There's absolutely no way.
It is not altogether clear what happens when a prerogative power has been superseded by a statute and the statutory provision is later repealed but it is likely to be the case that the prerogative will not revive unless the repealing enactment makes specific provision to that effect.
If this is the case, it would mean that rather than simply repealing the 2011 Act, opponents of the legislation would have to introduce a new statute setting out the circumstances in which the Prime Minister would be entitled to request the monarch dissolve Parliament or to put in place other provisions that set out how Parliament could be dissolved. You could, I guess, make provision in the repealing act that the status quo anti the commencement of the FTPA in 2011 is restored, but does that make the discretion to dissolve Parliament a Prerogative power or an authority delegated by Parliament. You would also need to expressly revive the Septennial Act 1716 or make provision for something similar.
As I say, this sort of thing has never been done before.
I think realistically the idea of a referendum next year will be comprehensively rejected out of hand. The 2021 Scottish Parliament election will be critical. If the SNP wins a majority then it will be hard to deny a new Section 30 order in practice but the SCONs no doubt will be hoping to block the SNP from getting a majority just as the SNP didn't get one in 2016.
You lot were convinced there was no way he could renegotiate the deal. He got it done in a couple of weeks.
There's no need to drag this out forever.
First impressions
64 pages, much shorter than other main parties. But very wordy.
Big photo of Boris on the cover, definitely either they have focus groups saying he is a draw, or he has a giant ego, or both. Second photo of him inside 7 pages – tone it down please.
Quick guarantee of key pledges, useful summary for those scanning it – NHS top, then police, immigration etc.
Only 5 sections after the intro, which is handy, but again no hyperlinking in the document. Green Party comes out top on usability . The chapters being ‘we will x’ is corny.
I think the message is Get Brexit Done, but it is subtle.
Direct mentions of Corbyn throughout, which was not the case in 2017.
I’ve not heard the UK called the ‘awesome foursome’ before, but I like it.
Pictures of candidates in the manifesto – better had checked they never said something bad on twitter
Splitting figures into weekly amounts and per person/ school etc good presentation, but overall a bit cluttered
Get Brexit Done
Simple message of being out by January. Obviously does not mention years of difficult talking afterwards, but it’s a powerful dream that this phase will end.
Unleash Britain’s Potential
‘Debt will be lower at the end of the parliament’ – I think Guido of all people called this untrue earlier
All very vague at present.
Focus on Priorities
40 new hospitals claim of course, 29% increase between 2018-2023. 650m a week.
50m more gp appointments. NHS visa
Mental health same urgency as physical health – LDs had the most detail on this
Extend life expectancy by 5 years by 2035. That’s a bold promise, albeit one so far off its meaningless as a political pledge.
NHS not on the table in trade deals – surprised this is not right at the top of the NHS section
Like others promising a cross-party consensus on social care – everyone clearly agrees there needs to be cross party consensus, but refuses to work together.
Seeking cure for dementia!
NOT replacing Ofsted – finally it finds a friend
Pretty brief on education overall
National living wage increase
Tax guarantee – I just don’t see how this will work
Triple lock – yawn
Abolish tampon tax
Multiple references in the credit and pensions section to women specifically – worried about the WASPi women I think.
Expand PCC role – oh great, that useless role.
Picture of Sajid Javid and Priti Patel on the section about points style immigration system.
I didn’t know the National Citizen Service was still a thing
Memorial for the Windrush generation – the Greens offering a bank holiday
Unleash Britain’s potential
Everyone always say they want to get away from the idea that ‘whitehall knows best’. Shame no one ever tells Whitehall that.
Focus on towns, like Labour – its where a lot of battles will be.
100bn additional infrastructure spending
New rail system by ending the franchising model – meaning what?
Waffling on HS2, transparently seeking votes of those who want it scrapped without promising that
Everyone is promising to open up old lines
Potholes is low down considering the fuss they have made.
Lengthy and waffly about Heathrow 3rd runway
Veto on council tax rises still in there – this is a stupid policy the government knows does not work, given they gave permission for a further rise above 2% and had the social care levy as well. But they are too afraid to give councils permission to raise more without referendums.
I don’t know enough about renting to know if these plans are better than Labours or the lDs
Losing track of how many photos of Boris there are.
Defending record on tax evasion – new law promised doubling prison terms, ‘beefed up’ anti tax evasion unit
A lot of these anti tax evasion paras seem the same to me,
National Skills Fund – again, same sort of idea other parties have had.
20 institutes of technology
Again emphasizing measures for women relating to discrimination in workplace, entitlement for unpair carers.
Fund ‘more’ childcare – how much, and how much will it cost?
Please trust us farmers and fishermen
New office for environmental protection. New national parks – common themes in the manifestos
NI gets first assurances in the Union section.
Not clear what the UK government will do for Scotland, reviewing and supporting things
Upgrade A55 in Wales, support welsh language
Not pulling back on voting ID
Make it easier for expats to vote – I’d think they’d want to make it harder
Not proceeding with second stage of Leveson
Constitution, Democracy and Rights Commission in first year. This could be worrying – want to look at relationship of government, parliament and the courts, which is a green light to restrict the courts -obviously angry about supreme court
Strengthen Britain in the world
Waffle waffle waffle.
New office for veterans affairs, end vexatious legal claims
Not getting rid of the 0.7% target – given how many conservatives hate this, that may disappoint.
Ban keeping primates as pets – I didn’t know this was legal!
Climate change is clearly an afterthought, not much of interest
Trade policy is what we’d expect
So, fair enough, if he capitulates to everything the EU wants we'll get this done quickly.
You have your answer
I would imagine the LD and Labour Manifestos assume no Brexit, and therefore more dosh available.
Other views are, of course, available...
I don't think we will be wrong about a trade deal in that time. But some will believe it.
And of course you can much about with allowances etc. Isn't it even possible that VAT will be replaced out of the EU?
Because your party is going to renegotiate a superb new deal which the public might vote to accept.
Plus keeping you lot out retains some level of economic sanity.
I point out the stupidity of it
I am not surprised
You'd never see PB accidentally breaking an embargo.
It’s like a spurned husband making promises to get his wife back. When he promises to clean the kitchen, and cut down on the drinking, she gives him a listen. She’s interested.
When he then promises to get a job as a brain surgeon, buy her a Maserati, and take her on holiday to the Maldives for six months, she looks at him and she despises him as a liar. And worse: a liar who takes her for a fool.”
At the time I said Boris Johnson will drop his red line on an Irish Sea border and get a new deal. I have nothing to apologise for - stop buying his rubbish.
1. Those actually taken in by it
2. Those not taken in by it, but who assume there will be No Deal and approve of this
3. Those not taken in by it, but who assume that there will just be further negotiations and aren't that bothered by the process going on for a bit longer
4. Those not taken in by it, and who fear Johnson wants some kind of soft Brexit, but who will vote Tory regardless to guarantee that some sort of Brexit happens
5. Those not taken in by it and who are nervous about what all this means, but will vote Tory anyway because they are tribally loyal and/or despise Corbyn and friends
6. Those who haven't noticed this pledge at all
7. Those who don't care about Brexit one way or another
Take all that lot out of the equation (plus all the totally apathetic non-voters as well) and the major group that will be left to be upset are committed Remainers who also prefer Corbyn to Brexit, and none of them were going to be backing the Tories anyway. Thus, from a purely cynical perspective, this is good politics. It will lure some additional voters, lull some of the existing ones who are nervous about Brexit into a false sense of security, and as for the remainder of the Conservative vote they will mostly either be too afraid of Corbyn to rebel or won't care.
Their claims about standards are typically vacuous. Not much use talking about higher pass rates unless you’re sure of your new marking criteria, which we’re not.
A Labour minority Government would probably mean no Brexit and a mini-Venezuela*, reversible after a period of no more than five years.
We can cope. We're British.
*[I guess a mini-Venezuela could be called a Caracas, but I don't have my coat handy.]
I'm not buying Boris's rubbish on this point even though I was wrong on the deal point - I'm saying a lot of people will buy it because they, or many commentators, were wrong before.
Let's not forget part of it was that many felt there would be no deal because he did not really want one. And he did. That might transfer no deal to the next stage, but it means the accusation of that will not hit home as hard.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-brexit-no-deal-boris-johnson-michael-gove-a9185381.html
As far as I am aware only HS2 is shovel ready in terms of major projects and that is only £4bn / year.
Northern Powerhouse Rail won't start until the very end of the next parliament at the very earliest given the plans, business case etc. have not been published yet let alone any legislation.
Hard to see what they could spend that much on in the next 5 years,
Also I note promising a station on the main line at Swansea.
Ouch
But frankly if they do win in a few weeks, then taking a hit in the polls in a year or so, even falling behind Labour, would not really be that awful for them, 10 years into government.
If the FTPA said that following the passing of a motion in the house to hold a general election parliament would be dissolved automatically then it would have gotten rid of the power. That's not what is says. in order to dissolve parliament the PM still has to go to the queen and request a dissolution.
It is true that Carshalton is different to Wimbledon, but it is also different to Kingston - where you claimed to have put a bet on the LDs losing. If you did that (and we still await sight of the betting slip) on the basis of party gossip in Carshalton I can only suggest you steer clear of betting in future.
For what it is worth I expect a LD landslide in Kingston, a hold in Carshalton and a Conservative majority of 2-3000 in Wimbledon.
99% of all embargoed polls say something like
'EMBARGOED UNTIL 21:00 GMT ON THE 24TH OF NOVEMBER 2019 - MUST CREDIT POLLSTER/CLIENT' in the subject header or as the first line of the email.
One or two pollsters put that notice right at the bottom of the email with all the other bumpf you get with corporate emails.
Or is that just another Bozo lie?