I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - the people arguing on our tv should be people contesting for our votes. Sending your father is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
Problem is that it's a specialist subject, so you have an advantage if you can replace the Leader, who is naturally enough a generalist. This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
So it wasn't a Climate Debate?
Other Parties don't get a say in who the Conservatives put forward for the debate. The second C4 asked other parties it was inappropriate. The Tories don't get a say in who Labour puts forward.
I checked in here about an hour ago and I thought Boris had blown the election, or he had sent in his Dad to do channel 4 climate debate, or that Michael Gove had been barred by channel 4, or the conservatives have filed a formal complaint about channel 4's behaviour
I get home and put on the news and find it is a debate over the IFS report followed by the 8.00 news of the Duckinfield not guilty verdict. Nothing about this crisis for the conservative party and no doubt the broadcaster may well be careful on getting involved in an ofcom complaint during purdah
On the face of it I think the conservative party have a very strong case against channel 4.
They offer their chief climate change spokesperson in Michael Gove but channel 4 has a history of anti conservative bias that is well documented. I expect this could not turn out well for channel 4
As far as the debate is concerned the parties taking part are all from the left and competing in the same pot. While climate change is a very important subject, labour need to address their leave areas which in the main are less into climate change
Who is Ben de Pear and will he have a job next week?
He's going on a Bender because it's now Pear shaped.
It is rather worrying that Labour have become reliant on one big donor. If the Tories were being supported by a bank that had a long history of appointing people on the basis of their personal contacts, stood accused of rigging elections for the board, insisted on a share in their electoral procedure and shamelessly manipulated it, and overruled the party on matters of policy to suit themselves, I can't help thinking the left would rightly be outraged. But the alarming stranglehold UNITE has over Labour - which will persist unless they are actually reduced to fourth party status - not a murmur.
In that case the only option for Channel4 was no debate.
Well, that was a risk they took when they offered and advertised something not in their gift to deliver, wasn't it? The only person with the power to summon the PM is the Queen, not some self-regarding lefty Tristram at a failing semi-commercial broadcaster.
Despite this debate being awful - did I hear Corbyn correctly? He's going to force homeowners to take on an interest free loan to make their homes more eco-friendly?
Click on the link, which I will admit I added in an edit.
Thanks just had a quick read.
What could possibly go wrong with doing enforced work on 27m households? How on earth are you going to measure the “savings” to pay the loan? More bonds for squillions being issued I guess from the back of Corbyn’s sofa to “invest@ ( not debt no siree). It’s a con man’s Christmas. Where’s the capacity to do it? Who judges what needs doing and has it been done to standard? What if ten million of us roundly tell them to piss off you’re not coming in? That’ll be a legal bunfight.
I could go on.
And how many will claim the money and not actually have any work done.
I checked in here about an hour ago and I thought Boris had blown the election, or he had sent in his Dad to do channel 4 climate debate, or that Michael Gove had been barred by channel 4, or the conservatives have filed a formal complaint about channel 4's behaviour
I get home and put on the news and find it is a debate over the IFS report followed by the 8.00 news of the Duckinfield not guilty verdict. Nothing about this crisis for the conservative party and no doubt the broadcaster may well be careful on getting involved in an ofcom complaint during purdah
On the face of it I think the conservative party have a very strong case against channel 4.
They offer their chief climate change spokesperson in Michael Gove but channel 4 has a history of anti conservative bias that is well documented. I expect this could not turn out well for channel 4
As far as the debate is concerned the parties taking part are all from the left and competing in the same pot. While climate change is a very important subject, labour need to address their leave areas which in the main are less into climate change
BigG
Sorry if I missed your repsonse but following up on my Q last night on the MRP poll, do you think it is plausible that the Conservatives are tied or ahead in all 7 of the Clywd constituencies as MRP suggests ?
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - the people arguing on our tv should be people contesting for our votes. Sending your father is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
Problem is that it's a specialist subject, so you have an advantage if you can replace the Leader, who is naturally enough a generalist. This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
They don't have the authority to demand leaders attend. Clue is in the Ofcom regulations. Them's, as you say, the rules. Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
On the day after my party has been predicted to get just 13 seats it's actually the PB Conservatives who are in another blind panic... As a Lib Dem I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry...
For you guys getting 13 is just another day in the office. For us who are genuinely terrified of a Corbyn government any less than 320 or more is a terrifying prospect.
I'd find a Corbyn government terrifying too. Conservatives don't have a monopoly on that.
Then don't vote Lib Dem! Unless you're in an existing Lib Dem/Labour marginal seat.
I'm an active Lib Dem member in a Lab/Con marginal (Lincoln). I've delivered over 1,100 Lib Dem leaflets so far this campaign. I am a Lib Dem because Lib Dem values most closely align with my values... Conservative values don't so I won't vote for them. If Labour win in Lincoln then so be it.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
They don't have the authority to demand leaders attend. Clue is in the Ofcom regulations. Theme's, as you say, the rules. Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
No, it's top Tory trolling. The next few hours will be spent discussing this story rather than any good ideas/policies that may have come up in the debate.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - the people arguing on our tv should be people contesting for our votes. Sending your father is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
Problem is that it's a specialist subject, so you have an advantage if you can replace the Leader, who is naturally enough a generalist. This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
They don't have the authority to demand leaders attend. Clue is in the Ofcom regulations. Theme's, as you say, the rules. Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
They won't mind being on the naughty step if it delivers on its purpose, to undermine Boris (or have him undermine himself rather).
Despite this debate being awful - did I hear Corbyn correctly? He's going to force homeowners to take on an interest free loan to make their homes more eco-friendly?
Click on the link, which I will admit I added in an edit.
Thanks just had a quick read.
What could possibly go wrong with doing enforced work on 27m households? How on earth are you going to measure the “savings” to pay the loan? More bonds for squillions being issued I guess from the back of Corbyn’s sofa to “invest@ ( not debt no siree). It’s a con man’s Christmas. Where’s the capacity to do it? Who judges what needs doing and has it been done to standard? What if ten million of us roundly tell them to piss off you’re not coming in? That’ll be a legal bunfight.
I could go on.
And how many will claim the money and not actually have any work done.
Well, that's easy. Nobody, because it's lending on bad terms. You have to pay it back - the idea is the savings on heating bills outweigh the costs. The tells me as much as anything else that they have fuck all idea about the realities of home insulations costs and benefits on older houses. In mine, for example, you could insulate the loft (and I will get round to it at some point) but not the walls. So any savings would be negligible. What would really make a difference is encouraging people to reduce their thermostats from 22C to 20C as standard.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - the people arguing on our tv should be people contesting for our votes. Sending your father is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
Problem is that it's a specialist subject, so you have an advantage if you can replace the Leader, who is naturally enough a generalist. This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
They don't have the authority to demand leaders attend. Clue is in the Ofcom regulations. Them's, as you say, the rules. Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
The Gove thing was a try on. Didn't work. It's no big deal.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
Problem is that it's a specialist subject, so you have an advantage if you can replace the Leader, who is naturally enough a generalist. This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
They don't have the authority to demand leaders attend. Clue is in the Ofcom regulations. Theme's, as you say, the rules. Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
They won't mind being on the naughty step if it delivers on its purpose, to undermine Boris (or have him undermine himself rather).
So, you agree that a supposedly impartial national broadcaster is actually biased against the Tories. Big of you to say so.
They don't have the authority to demand leaders attend. Clue is in the Ofcom regulations. Them's, as you say, the rules. Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
Yes it looks pretty open and shut to me. Channel 4 will be facing a fairly big fine.
It's odd that we're in this era of multi party debates but still using OFCOM regulations last updated in 2003?
I checked in here about an hour ago and I thought Boris had blown the election, or he had sent in his Dad to do channel 4 climate debate, or that Michael Gove had been barred by channel 4, or the conservatives have filed a formal complaint about channel 4's behaviour
I get home and put on the news and find it is a debate over the IFS report followed by the 8.00 news of the Duckinfield not guilty verdict. Nothing about this crisis for the conservative party and no doubt the broadcaster may well be careful on getting involved in an ofcom complaint during purdah
On the face of it I think the conservative party have a very strong case against channel 4.
They offer their chief climate change spokesperson in Michael Gove but channel 4 has a history of anti conservative bias that is well documented. I expect this could not turn out well for channel 4
As far as the debate is concerned the parties taking part are all from the left and competing in the same pot. While climate change is a very important subject, labour need to address their leave areas which in the main are less into climate change
BigG
Sorry if I missed your repsonse but following up on my Q last night on the MRP poll, do you think it is plausible that the Conservatives are tied or ahead in all 7 of the Clwyd constituencies as MRP suggests ?
Off topic but how do you edit posts already made for spelling etc ?
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
They don't have the authority to demand leaders attend. Clue is in the Ofcom regulations. Them's, as you say, the rules. Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
The Gove thing was a try on. Didn't work. It's no big deal.
It's top Tory trolling. The next few hours will be spent discussing this instead of any good ideas/policies that came out of the debate.
Despite this debate being awful - did I hear Corbyn correctly? He's going to force homeowners to take on an interest free loan to make their homes more eco-friendly?
Click on the link, which I will admit I added in an edit.
Thanks just had a quick read.
What could possibly go wrong with doing enforced work on 27m households? How on earth are you going to measure the “savings” to pay the loan? More bonds for squillions being issued I guess from the back of Corbyn’s sofa to “invest@ ( not debt no siree). It’s a con man’s Christmas. Where’s the capacity to do it? Who judges what needs doing and has it been done to standard? What if ten million of us roundly tell them to piss off you’re not coming in? That’ll be a legal bunfight.
I could go on.
And how many will claim the money and not actually have any work done.
Well, that's easy. Nobody, because it's lending on bad terms. You have to pay it back - the idea is the savings on heating bills outweigh the costs.
I know what the idea is. It’s not lending on bad terms if you don’t spend it on the stated purpose though! Probably a lot better than you could obtain commercially! And that’s before you get into “homeowners” who abscond with the cash...
The thing with the Tories is, we might all sagely feel we know what it is they should do, but their relaxed attitude about seeming to lose the above the line 'airwar' agenda is presumably because they feel they are winning in the below the line cloak and dagger Facebook stuff. They might even want, or perhaps have even engineered, a wobble. To make it seem that Corbyn is a genuine prospect. Certainly, Cummings' blog supports that - the man has not sincerely written a blog because he's genuinely worried and thinks it will help - we know he doesn't even pass wind without wargaming all the different scenarios. If they felt they needed to do more, they would.
Just struck me. The board has become a lot more "Tory" and Brexity as the inevitability of them both triumphing has become clear. Where is @williamglenn Where is @Scott_P Where is the mighty @Noo ??
I'm back! I wasn't able to log in and the password reset didn't work so I gave up, but just tried again and was finally able to restore access.
This debate has been billed and trailed for ages; why are the Tories scrabbling about trying to send a substitute at the last minute, anyway?
My guess is that they knew it was a leaders-only gig and sending Gove along was itself a stunt to deflect attention from Bozo’s frittery.
Well, so what? There is no constitutional rule saying that Channel 4 has the absolute right to summon party leaders to its studios. And if you think that's a partisan point, just consider how far Tony Blair would - quite rightly - have invited these people to fuck off.
I checked in here about an hour ago and I thought Boris had blown the election, or he had sent in his Dad to do channel 4 climate debate, or that Michael Gove had been barred by channel 4, or the conservatives have filed a formal complaint about channel 4's behaviour
I get home and put on the news and find it is a debate over the IFS report followed by the 8.00 news of the Duckinfield not guilty verdict. Nothing about this crisis for the conservative party and no doubt the broadcaster may well be careful on getting involved in an ofcom complaint during purdah
On the face of it I think the conservative party have a very strong case against channel 4.
They offer their chief climate change spokesperson in Michael Gove but channel 4 has a history of anti conservative bias that is well documented. I expect this could not turn out well for channel 4
As far as the debate is concerned the parties taking part are all from the left and competing in the same pot. While climate change is a very important subject, labour need to address their leave areas which in the main are less into climate change
BigG
Sorry if I missed your repsonse but following up on my Q last night on the MRP poll, do you think it is plausible that the Conservatives are tied or ahead in all 7 of the Clwyd constituencies as MRP suggests ?
Off topic but how do you edit posts already made for spelling etc ?
Click the gear wheel top right of the post and edit within 6 minutes.
Just struck me. The board has become a lot more "Tory" and Brexity as the inevitability of them both triumphing has become clear. Where is @williamglenn Where is @Scott_P Where is the mighty @Noo ??
I'm back! I wasn't able to log in and the password reset didn't work so I gave up, but just tried again and was finally able to restore access.
I checked in here about an hour ago and I thought Boris had blown the election, or he had sent in his Dad to do channel 4 climate debate, or that Michael Gove had been barred by channel 4, or the conservatives have filed a formal complaint about channel 4's behaviour
I get home and put on the news and find it is a debate over the IFS report followed by the 8.00 news of the Duckinfield not guilty verdict. Nothing about this crisis for the conservative party and no doubt the broadcaster may well be careful on getting involved in an ofcom complaint during purdah
On the face of it I think the conservative party have a very strong case against channel 4.
They offer their chief climate change spokesperson in Michael Gove but channel 4 has a history of anti conservative bias that is well documented. I expect this could not turn out well for channel 4
As far as the debate is concerned the parties taking part are all from the left and competing in the same pot. While climate change is a very important subject, labour need to address their leave areas which in the main are less into climate change
BigG
Sorry if I missed your repsonse but following up on my Q last night on the MRP poll, do you think it is plausible that the Conservatives are tied or ahead in all 7 of the Clwyd constituencies as MRP suggests ?
Off topic but how do you edit posts already made for spelling etc ?
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
Problem is that it's a specialist subject, so you have an advantage if you can replace the Leader, who is naturally enough a genertail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to ty?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the azz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They ref's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
They don't have the authority to demand leaders attend. Clue is in the Ofcom regulations. Theme's, as you say, the rules. Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
They won't mind being on the naughty step if it delivers on its purpose, to undermine Boris (or have him undermine himself rather).
So, you agree that a supposedly impartial national broadcaster is actually biased against the Tories. Big of you to say so.
I think none of our broadcasters will ever be able to uphold perfect impartiality at all times, but that it is important to continually make the effort to be so, and I suspect Ch.4 put in less effort than they should on that front. A somewhat elaborate stunt rather than just no chairing speaks to motives a bit. But this is still down to Boris for being a coward.
I think time here is far more relevant than which nationality they have
French person here 15 years planning to stay > Irish person here 1 year planning to leave or indeed UK person who has been absent for 20 years with no plans to return.
The only of of the three who could vote would be the Irish person and only because we treat them as British. Why hasn't your hypothetical French person bothered to take citizenship if they've been here for 15 years and are planning to stay? They can get citizenship if they want it if they've been here that long and then they can vote.
The Tory manifesto is offering votes for the absent expats.
Perhaps they dont have £1k disposable income to buy a passport. Perhaps they see themselves as French. Perhaps it is more convenient for foreign travel. I dont really mind, by being here 15 years they have shown themselves to be a long term part of the community and therefore should have a say.
If they see themselves as French they have no reason to vote in our elections. The fee has nothing to do with it and if you want to remove the fee then I'd have no objection to that. All countries for good reason reject their national elections to their own nationals.
The fee matters to those who cant afford it!
I want people who are a long term part of the community of the UK to be able to vote, whether they see their main identity as British, Scottish, Cornish, French, Irish, world citizens, Europeans, Chinese or even Catholic or Muslim doesnt change that.
It’s analogous to marriage/civil partnership vs cohabitation If you want the tax and other benefits you make the legal commitments If you want to vote you become a citizen
Don't you dare disrespect Cambridge, which held the title Best university anywhere in the world in a place called Cambridge from 1209 to 1636, still an unrivalled record, and still ranks probably 4th or 5th by the same metric, depending how you define university. A national treasure by any standard.
I think time here is far more relevant than which nationality they have
French person here 15 years planning to stay > Irish person here 1 year planning to leave or indeed UK person who has been absent for 20 years with no plans to return.
The only of of the three who could vote would be the Irish person and only because we treat them as British. Why hasn't your hypothetical French person bothered to take citizenship if they've been here for 15 years and are planning to stay? They can get citizenship if they want it if they've been here that long and then they can vote.
The Tory manifesto is offering votes for the absent expats.
Perhaps they dont have £1k disposable income to buy a passport. Perhaps they see themselves as French. Perhaps it is more convenient for foreign travel. I dont really mind, by being here 15 years they have shown themselves to be a long term part of the community and therefore should have a say.
If they see themselves as French they have no reason to vote in our elections. The fee has nothing to do with it and if you want to remove the fee then I'd have no objection to that. All countries for good reason reject their national elections to their own nationals.
The fee matters to those who cant afford it!
I want people who are a long term part of the community of the UK to be able to vote, whether they see their main identity as British, Scottish, Cornish, French, Irish, world citizens, Europeans, Chinese or even Catholic or Muslim doesnt change that.
It’s analogous to marriage/civil partnership vs cohabitation If you want the tax and other benefits you make the legal commitments If you want to vote you become a citizen
I know two Brits who have a second home in Spain, and are allowed to vote, certainly in local elections.
I checked in here about an hour ago and I thought Boris had blown the election, or he had sent in his Dad to do channel 4 climate debate, or that Michael Gove had been barred by channel 4, or the conservatives have filed a formal complaint about channel 4's behaviour
I get home and put on the news and find it is a debate over the IFS report followed by the 8.00 news of the Duckinfield not guilty verdict. Nothing about this crisis for the conservative party and no doubt the broadcaster may well be careful on getting involved in an ofcom complaint during purdah
On the face of it I think the conservative party have a very strong case against channel 4.
They offer their chief climate change spokesperson in Michael Gove but channel 4 has a history of anti conservative bias that is well documented. I expect this could not turn out well for channel 4
As far as the debate is concerned the parties taking part are all from the left and competing in the same pot. While climate change is a very important subject, labour need to address their leave areas which in the main are less into climate change
BigG
Sorry if I missed your repsonse but following up on my Q last night on the MRP poll, do you think it is plausible that the Conservatives are tied or ahead in all 7 of the Clywd constituencies as MRP suggests ?
I cannot give you a geniune answer as I am not involved in the party these days. I have no doubt David Jones will win (who I have known personally for 30 years and was his driver in 2010) and we should retain Aberconwy, Bebbs previous seat, but as for the rest some will probably fall to the conservatives but I think it is very unlikely Ynys Mon will
Despite this debate being awful - did I hear Corbyn correctly? He's going to force homeowners to take on an interest free loan to make their homes more eco-friendly?
Click on the link, which I will admit I added in an edit.
Thanks just had a quick read.
What could possibly go wrong with doing enforced work on 27m households? How on earth are you going to measure the “savings” to pay the loan? More bonds for squillions being issued I guess from the back of Corbyn’s sofa to “invest@ ( not debt no siree). It’s a con man’s Christmas. Where’s the capacity to do it? Who judges what needs doing and has it been done to standard? What if ten million of us roundly tell them to piss off you’re not coming in? That’ll be a legal bunfight.
I could go on.
And how many will claim the money and not actually have any work done.
To give an example: I live in a fairly old house. It needs more double glazing. £10k or so spent on that would improve it but:-
1) New windows use energy to make them and the old ones might well last another 20 years. Where are all these vast numbers of windows coming from? 2) Who pays for the redecorating? 3) How do you measure the saving? And this is supposed to pay the interest free loan? And if it is interest free really, it will be costing the country because though bond yields are low, they are not zero. This in itself presumes yields wouldn’t rise as Corbyn tries to fund 80bn here or 58bn there or whatever else he dreams up in the next two weeks and beyond. 4) How do you protect vulnerable people from those taking advantage of govt sponsored inspectors and workmen swarming around the nation demanding access to you home? 5) Why should I have to have govt sponsored arse ache tramping around my home creating mess, admin and general grief? 6) Do people with one or no kids get an exemption because they’ve already done their bit for the planet even if they fly once a month and drive a Porsche 911 turbo?
Absolutely stupid of CCHQ to be threatening to close down Channel 4. Whilst I see the sense in keeping Boris under wraps, just do it, keep your head down and hope hardly anyone notices. Making a song and dance about it completely negates the point of hiding Boris away to begin with. Cummings needs to get the boys and girls together and do his 'cool like Fonzie' speech again. There's detectable panic.
Despite this debate being awful - did I hear Corbyn correctly? He's going to force homeowners to take on an interest free loan to make their homes more eco-friendly?
Click on the link, which I will admit I added in an edit.
Thanks just had a quick read.
What could possibly go wrong with doing enforced work on 27m households? How on earth are you going to measure the “savings” to pay the loan? More bonds for squillions being issued I guess from the back of Corbyn’s sofa to “invest@ ( not debt no siree). It’s a con man’s Christmas. Where’s the capacity to do it? Who judges what needs doing and has it been done to standard? What if ten million of us roundly tell them to piss off you’re not coming in? That’ll be a legal bunfight.
I could go on.
And how many will claim the money and not actually have any work done.
To give an example: I live in a fairly old house. It needs more double glazing. £10k or so spent on that would improve it but:-
1) New windows use energy to make them and the old ones might well last another 20 years. Where are all these vast numbers of windows coming from? 2) Who pays for the redecorating? 3) How do you measure the saving? And this is supposed to pay the interest free loan? And if it is interest free really, it will be costing the country because though bond yields are low, they are not zero. This in itself presumes yields wouldn’t rise as Corbyn tries to fund 80bn here or 58bn there or whatever else he dreams up in the next two weeks and beyond. 4) How do you protect vulnerable people from those taking advantage of govt sponsored inspectors and workmen swarming around the nation demanding access to you home? 5) Why should I have to have govt sponsored arse ache tramping around my home creating mess, admin and general grief? 6) Do people with one or no kids get an exemption because they’ve already done their bit for the planet even if they fly once a month and drive a Porsche 911 turbo?
Really horrifying - he's a University professor. I really hope Labour get a halfway sensible leader once Corbyn has gone, who gets rid of the SWP wankers.
It won't be immigration we're worrying about in a couple of years' time. It'll be the brain drain. Just like in the 1970s.
I made a prediction a couple of years ago that by 2026, the UK would have a year of negative net migration. Amusingly, I just went to Migration Watch and created a "net migration" chart for "The EU8 grouping includes citizens of Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia." There is now negative net migration for those countries.
Its been trending that way ever since the EU2 got access and the Club Med countries had their difficulties.
Roughly speaking the Poles aren't as educated as the Italians nor as cheap as the Romanians.
I think time here is far more relevant than which nationality they have
French person here 15 years planning to stay > Irish person here 1 year planning to leave or indeed UK person who has been absent for 20 years with no plans to return.
The only of of the three who could vote would be the Irish person and only because we treat them as British. Why hasn't your hypothetical French person bothered to take citizenship if they've been here for 15 years and are planning to stay? They can get citizenship if they want it if they've been here that long and then they can vote.
The Tory manifesto is offering votes for the absent expats.
Perhaps they dont have £1k disposable income to buy a passport. Perhaps they see themselves as French. Perhaps it is more convenient for foreign travel. I dont really mind, by being here 15 years they have shown themselves to be a long term part of the community and therefore should have a say.
If they see themselves as French they have no reason to vote in our elections. The fee has nothing to do with it and if you want to remove the fee then I'd have no objection to that. All countries for good reason reject their national elections to their own nationals.
The fee matters to those who cant afford it!
I want people who are a long term part of the community of the UK to be able to vote, whether they see their main identity as British, Scottish, Cornish, French, Irish, world citizens, Europeans, Chinese or even Catholic or Muslim doesnt change that.
It’s analogous to marriage/civil partnership vs cohabitation If you want the tax and other benefits you make the legal commitments If you want to vote you become a citizen
I know two Brits who have a second home in Spain, and are allowed to vote, certainly in local elections.
It is rather worrying that Labour have become reliant on one big donor. If the Tories were being supported by a bank that had a long history of appointing people on the basis of their personal contacts, stood accused of rigging elections for the board, insisted on a share in their electoral procedure and shamelessly manipulated it, and overruled the party on matters of policy to suit themselves, I can't help thinking the left would rightly be outraged. But the alarming stranglehold UNITE has over Labour - which will persist unless they are actually reduced to fourth party status - not a murmur.
Are you actually trying to argue its Labour with the current dodgy donations scandal? Thinking about it, your run of the mill oligarchs wife will have no problems with electoral procedure nor vote rigging?
Despite this debate being awful - did I hear Corbyn correctly? He's going to force homeowners to take on an interest free loan to make their homes more eco-friendly?
Click on the link, which I will admit I added in an edit.
Thanks just had a quick read.
What could possibly go wrong with doing enforced work on 27m households? How on earth are you going to measure the “savings” to pay the loan? More bonds for squillions being issued I guess from the back of Corbyn’s sofa to “invest@ ( not debt no siree). It’s a con man’s Christmas. Where’s the capacity to do it? Who judges what needs doing and has it been done to standard? What if ten million of us roundly tell them to piss off you’re not coming in? That’ll be a legal bunfight.
I could go on.
And how many will claim the money and not actually have any work done.
To give an example: I live in a fairly old house. It needs more double glazing. £10k or so spent on that would improve it but:-
1) New windows use energy to make them and the old ones might well last another 20 years. Where are all these vast numbers of windows coming from? 2) Who pays for the redecorating? 3) How do you measure the saving? And this is supposed to pay the interest free loan? And if it is interest free really, it will be costing the country because though bond yields are low, they are not zero. This in itself presumes yields wouldn’t rise as Corbyn tries to fund 80bn here or 58bn there or whatever else he dreams up in the next two weeks and beyond. 4) How do you protect vulnerable people from those taking advantage of govt sponsored inspectors and workmen swarming around the nation demanding access to you home? 5) Why should I have to have govt sponsored arse ache tramping around my home creating mess, admin and general grief? 6) Do people with one or no kids get an exemption because they’ve already done their bit for the planet even if they fly once a month and drive a Porsche 911 turbo?
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
The Gove thing was a try on. Didn't work. It's no big deal.
It's top Tory trolling. The next few hours will be spent discussing this instead of any good ideas/policies that came out of the debate.
Blair of course famously challenged Major to a televised debate, then three days later when Major agreed realised if Major did well it might damage his campaign, so he withdrew. The Tories then memorably hired a chicken to appear at their next rally. This was attacked (literally) by a Labour chicken provided by the Daily Mirror. So this sort of thing has happened before. It still looks bad, but helpfully Channel 4 breaking every rule in the book is going to let Johnson wriggle off this particular hook of his own making. Funking Andrew Neil, otoh...
Don't you dare disrespect Cambridge, which held the title Best university anywhere in the world in a place called Cambridge from 1209 to 1636, still an unrivalled record, and still ranks probably 4th or 5th by the same metric, depending how you define university. A national treasure by any standard.
Just compare the number of number of Nobel Laureates Cambridge has produced compared to the pitiful number the dump has.
This despite the fact that Warrington South is a Lab/Con marginal that was Conservative held between 2010-2017 with the Liberal Democrats getting 5% at the last election. Is someone impersonating you and using your name and website's reputation . . . or do you really think that Warrington South is a choice between the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties? I'm checking the bookmakers and the bookies odds to me seem to be: Conservatives 1/2 favourites Labour 6/4 Liberal Democrats 66 Are you advising we pile on to the Liberal Democrats at 66 in this seat? That would be incredible odds if this is really a choice between Labour and the Liberal Democrats.
It is a minor point but not actually an inaccurate one, but ministers of the Crown do actually have Govt jobs to do during election campaigns. It is actually possible that they aren’t quite as free with their availability as those from other parties...
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
The Gove thing was a try on. Didn't work. It's no big deal.
It's top Tory trolling. The next few hours will be spent discussing this instead of any good ideas/policies that came out of the debate.
Tories threatening C4 licence.
Getting more like N Korea by the minute.
Some PB Tories know right from wrong some dont
Corbyn's outriders have threatened the media at every opportunity.
I honestly can’t decide if it is or it isn’t. Last time May was clearly frit this time it feels like the Tories are like a smart boxer, it’s impossible to predict their next move and it feels like they’re almost trolling the opposition at times. I don’t know if this is a deliberate tactic and if it is effective or not but it does at times feel rather unconventional on the surface at least.
The hope would be is that beneath all the froth they are precision targeting the voters and constituencies they need to win and everything else is noise.
Absolutely stupid of CCHQ to be threatening to close down Channel 4. Whilst I see the sense in keeping Boris under wraps, just do it, keep your head down and hope hardly anyone notices. Making a song and dance about it completely negates the point of hiding Boris away to begin with. Cummings needs to get the boys and girls together and do his 'cool like Fonzie' speech again. There's detectable panic.
On aesthetic grounds alone though, you have to say the gain to national cultural life would be incalculable.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
The Gove thing was a try on. Didn't work. It's no big deal.
It's top Tory trolling. The next few hours will be spent discussing this instead of any good ideas/policies that came out of the debate.
Tories threatening C4 licence.
Getting more like N Korea by the minute.
Some PB Tories know right from wrong some dont
They haven't threatened their license. Stop making crap up
And your reaction proves it. The demographic being targeted this time by the Blues will not give a toss. Farage and Johnson ridiculed by a left-wing broadcaster on an issue, which although important, is not a vital voting matter for the overwhelming majority of people. I'm sure your average "working class" Brexiteer in the Midlands will be outraged. Lol.
Don't you dare disrespect Cambridge, which held the title Best university anywhere in the world in a place called Cambridge from 1209 to 1636, still an unrivalled record, and still ranks probably 4th or 5th by the same metric, depending how you define university. A national treasure by any standard.
Just compare the number of number of Nobel Laureates Cambridge has produced compared to the pitiful number the dump has.
I thought it was referred to as Cowley Tech ?
If its now to be known as the dump then what replaces the term Fen Poly ?
If Boris had a climate policy he could sell, would he have turned up?
The polls are responsible for this. It’s become a stupid safety first Tory campaign, and I don’t want to come over all TSE with working class metaphor but, whenever you watch your team drop deep to see it out you know they are just inviting pressure and disaster.
And your reaction proves it. The demographic being targeted this time by the Blues will not give a toss. Farage and Johnson ridiculed by a left-wing broadcaster on an issue, which although important, is not a vital voting matter for the overwhelming majority of people. I'm sure your average "working class" Brexiteer in the Midlands will be outraged. Lol.
Indeed.
The vast majority of the voters the Conservatives are targeting with think well done if they even notice the spat between the Conservatives and Channel "Fuck The Tories" 4.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject is? What's to stop them having a [shadow] CotE debate about New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
The Gove thing was a try on. Didn't work. It's no big deal.
It's top Tory trolling. The next few hours will be spent discussing this instead of any good ideas/policies that came out of the debate.
Tories threatening C4 licence. Getting more like N Korea by the minute. Some PB Tories know right from wrong some dont
I don't think that insisting everybody abides by the rules designed to ensure fair and free elections, is what happens in North Korea.
It is rather worrying that Labour have become reliant on one big donor. If the Tories were being supported by a bank that had a long history of appointing people on the basis of their personal contacts, stood accused of rigging elections for the board, insisted on a share in their electoral procedure and shamelessly manipulated it, and overruled the party on matters of policy to suit themselves, I can't help thinking the left would rightly be outraged. But the alarming stranglehold UNITE has over Labour - which will persist unless they are actually reduced to fourth party status - not a murmur.
Are you actually trying to argue its Labour with the current dodgy donations scandal? Thinking about it, your run of the mill oligarchs wife will have no problems with electoral procedure nor vote rigging?
Yes. Gordon bloody Bennett, are Labour supporters really this dense? I thought it was rather obvious from my comment what I was saying. But of course, Labour supporters don't care about McCluskey's record being on this poster's own admission being comparable to that of a Russian oligarch, because he's on their side...
This debate has been billed and trailed for ages; why are the Tories scrabbling about trying to send a substitute at the last minute, anyway?
My guess is that they knew it was a leaders-only gig and sending Gove along was itself a stunt to deflect attention from Bozo’s frittery.
Well, so what? There is no constitutional rule saying that Channel 4 has the absolute right to summon party leaders to its studios. And if you think that's a partisan point, just consider how far Tony Blair would - quite rightly - have invited these people to fuck off.
No, but I think they have the right to hold a leaders’ debate, and if a leader doesn’t want to show up...
The basic problem is that after 9 years the tories have run out of ideas like a car out of gas. And what they're hoping, and their whole strategy is based upon, is that because they are ahead they can cruise on neutral all their way to crossing the line. They're assuming that 'Get Brexit Done' will be enough to win their allegedly new found friends in Labour's heartlands. But it won't. Because people have a whole load of other things that bother them.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
The Gove thing was a try on. Didn't work. It's no big deal.
It's top Tory trolling. The next few hours will be spent discussing this instead of any good ideas/policies that came out of the debate.
Tories threatening C4 licence.
Getting more like N Korea by the minute.
Some PB Tories know right from wrong some dont
They haven't threatened their license. Stop making crap up
The purism test will result in Jezza sending Seamus to a reeducation camp at this rate.
Unfortunately despite that level of of purism being demanded most of those derided for not being pure enough do return home to vote the way they are told.
Are those trust figures for real? I assume they aren't, they are VI figures presented as "trust" for the sake of the rather feeble gag. Which is seriously naughty, suggesting that Swinson is seen as more than twice as big a liar as Johnson.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry sp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Well, who has the right to stipulate both that it's a Leaders debate and what the subject bout New York fusion jazz clubs of the '50s and early '60s?
Nothing at all, but if it is a Leaders debate a non-Leader is invited on it has to be with the consent of the others. They refused, so that's that. Them's the rules.
Please provide the Ofcom rule that stipulates that. Parties must be invited, where does it say that parties are permitted to veto other parties representatives? That's completely inappropriate.
Leaders debate. The clue is in the title.
The Gove thing was a try on. Didn't work. It's no big deal.
It's top Tory trolling. The next few hours will be spent discussing this instead of any good ideas/policies that came out of the debate.
Tories threatening C4 licence.
Getting more like N Korea by the minute.
Some PB Tories know right from wrong some dont
They haven't threatened their license. Stop making crap up
And your reaction proves it. The demographic being targeted this time by the Blues will not give a toss. Farage and Johnson ridiculed by a left-wing broadcaster on an issue, which although important, is not a vital voting matter for the overwhelming majority of people. I'm sure your average "working class" Brexiteer in the Midlands will be outraged. Lol.
Indeed.
The vast majority of the voters the Conservatives are targeting with think well done if they even notice the spat between the Conservatives and Channel "Fuck The Tories" 4.
On the other hand I'm sure that same demographic would be over-joyed to be forced to take out a loan for some state employed apparatchik to enter their home and rip up their pride and joy to fit a heat pump they don't want.
I find it strange they would have a debate about climate change. Brexit maybe but it’s quite a niche issue and isn’t top of public priorities. Very Channel 4.
I also think it was strange Stanley was there but Gove is environment minister, it’s poor form not to let him take part when some Plaid Cymru Guy is allowed on
They allowed a sub for the leader of Plaid Cymru but not the Tories? That has got to be against the rules.
It’s an election - the people arguing on our tv should be people contesting for our votes. Sending your father is pitiful behaviour. Gove however should have been allowed in, on the same basis as Rudd who subbed for the last Tory leader too frightened to appear on tv.
Problem is that it's a specialist subject, so you have an advantage if you can replace the Leader, who is naturally enough a generalist. This point is being borne out by the discussion I am watching (in between playing scrabble). Sian Berry is not a great speaker but she has a grasp of detail that is giving her a definite edge in this debate.
The answer to that, is have it between specialists. Much more useful and informative. And is Gove a specialist anyway?
My son is in the biz and he rates Gove, but this is a Leaders debate, so specialist substitutes not really an option.
Sturgeon is not a candidate at this election and will not be participating at Westminster in any climate related debates nor voting on any legislation. Gove has more right to be in any pre-election debate than Sturgeon has.
If Boris had a climate policy he could sell, would he have turned up?
The polls are responsible for this. It’s become a stupid safety first Tory campaign, and I don’t want to come over all TSE with working class metaphor but, whenever you watch your team drop deep to see it out you know they are just inviting pressure and disaster.
It can work well if you are capable of counter-attacking into the extra space.
Don't you dare disrespect Cambridge, which held the title Best university anywhere in the world in a place called Cambridge from 1209 to 1636, still an unrivalled record, and still ranks probably 4th or 5th by the same metric, depending how you define university. A national treasure by any standard.
Just compare the number of number of Nobel Laureates Cambridge has produced compared to the pitiful number the dump has.
Don't you dare disrespect Cambridge, which held the title Best university anywhere in the world in a place called Cambridge from 1209 to 1636, still an unrivalled record, and still ranks probably 4th or 5th by the same metric, depending how you define university. A national treasure by any standard.
Just compare the number of number of Nobel Laureates Cambridge has produced compared to the pitiful number the dump has.
I thought it was referred to as Cowley Tech ?
If its now to be known as the dump then what replaces the term Fen Poly ?
And your reaction proves it. The demographic being targeted this time by the Blues will not give a toss. Farage and Johnson ridiculed by a left-wing broadcaster on an issue, which although important, is not a vital voting matter for the overwhelming majority of people. I'm sure your average "working class" Brexiteer in the Midlands will be outraged. Lol.
Indeed.
The vast majority of the voters the Conservatives are targeting with think well done if they even notice the spat between the Conservatives and Channel "Fuck The Tories" 4.
Oh I see. You're thinking I'm referring to the Climate debate. Well, I've news. I'm referring to every single day of this campaign. They are absolutely f-ing useless. They've learned nothing from last time. Johnson looks like a fish out of water. They have no ideas on anything at all, except getting Brexit done, which is beginning to look like the last gasp of a dying man in the Sahara.
And they likely mean what they say. The immediate reaction to the prorogation decision was a lot of outriders saying we need to politicise the Supreme Court, and their manifesto promises, vaguely, to review the relationship between parliament, government and the courts, conveniently being a blank check to enact any change they want.
The basic problem is that after 9 years the tories have run out of ideas like a car out of gas. And what they're hoping, and their whole strategy is based upon, is that because they are ahead they can cruise on neutral all their way to crossing the line. They're assuming that 'Get Brexit Done' will be enough to win their allegedly new found friends in Labour's heartlands. But it won't. Because people have a whole load of other things that bother them.
They won't win this election.
Problem is while the main Opposition may have lots and lots of ideas the public may not think turning the country in to Venezuela without the sunshine is necessarily a very good idea...
The basic problem is that after 9 years the tories have run out of ideas like a car out of gas. And what they're hoping, and their whole strategy is based upon, is that because they are ahead they can cruise on neutral all their way to crossing the line. They're assuming that 'Get Brexit Done' will be enough to win their allegedly new found friends in Labour's heartlands. But it won't. Because people have a whole load of other things that bother them.
They won't win this election.
You're right. The common thing shown in this campaign so far is that people are bothered about other things than Brexit. Namely Mr Corbyn.
I honestly can’t decide if it is or it isn’t. Last time May was clearly frit this time it feels like the Tories are like a smart boxer, it’s impossible to predict their next move and it feels like they’re almost trolling the opposition at times. I don’t know if this is a deliberate tactic and if it is effective or not but it does at times feel rather unconventional on the surface at least.
The hope would be is that beneath all the froth they are precision targeting the voters and constituencies they need to win and everything else is noise.
I'm with you (on the "can't decide" point). For example I think the Neil-dodging looks like a smart move after Corbyn's uncomfortable ride, because every reporting of Johnson refusing to commit is accompanied by a reinforcing reference to how bad Corbyn's interview was. Once they have exhausted that, probably the interview will happen because the downside of chickening out becomes bigger than the gain from not doing it....
... but then you see Johnson making a huge mess of trying to defend it on BBC news today where he basically says "I'd love to do it but I'm not important enough to make these decisions and I need to wait to be told what to do" (by who?) - and that's a worse look than just doing the interview.
My conclusion is that the strategy is much smarter than 2017 but that Johnson just isn't good enough at politics to execute the strategy well.
This debate has been billed and trailed for ages; why are the Tories scrabbling about trying to send a substitute at the last minute, anyway?
My guess is that they knew it was a leaders-only gig and sending Gove along was itself a stunt to deflect attention from Bozo’s frittery.
Well, so what? There is no constitutional rule saying that Channel 4 has the absolute right to summon party leaders to its studios. And if you think that's a partisan point, just consider how far Tony Blair would - quite rightly - have invited these people to fuck off.
No, but I think they have the right to hold a leaders’ debate, and if a leader doesn’t want to show up...
...they are obliged by Ofcom rules either to accept a reasonable substitute in the interest of impartiality, or to cancel the debate. I understand your reluctance to finish your own sentence.
Don't you dare disrespect Cambridge, which held the title Best university anywhere in the world in a place called Cambridge from 1209 to 1636, still an unrivalled record, and still ranks probably 4th or 5th by the same metric, depending how you define university. A national treasure by any standard.
Just compare the number of number of Nobel Laureates Cambridge has produced compared to the pitiful number the dump has.
And Diane Abbott!
Don't forget Richard Burgon. And he didn't study there but didn't Barry Gardiner lecture there?
Comments
I don’t know why is linking redistribution to fiscal responsibility as if they’re both signs of virtue.
Risks showing up Paul Johnson’s politics there.
Chocolate tea pot
Concrete pillow
A nun's dildo
A crocheted condom
Nipples on a breastplate
An ashtray on a motorbike
Italy as an ally in WW2
Other Parties don't get a say in who the Conservatives put forward for the debate. The second C4 asked other parties it was inappropriate. The Tories don't get a say in who Labour puts forward.
If the Tories were being supported by a bank that had a long history of appointing people on the basis of their personal contacts, stood accused of rigging elections for the board, insisted on a share in their electoral procedure and shamelessly manipulated it, and overruled the party on matters of policy to suit themselves, I can't help thinking the left would rightly be outraged.
But the alarming stranglehold UNITE has over Labour - which will persist unless they are actually reduced to fourth party status - not a murmur.
My guess is that they knew it was a leaders-only gig and sending Gove along was itself a stunt to deflect attention from Bozo’s frittery.
https://twitter.com/aphclarkson/status/1200130285410693120?s=21
Sorry if I missed your repsonse but following up on my Q last night on the MRP poll, do you think it is plausible that the Conservatives are tied or ahead in all 7 of the Clywd constituencies as MRP suggests ?
Chn 4 have now successfully put themselves on the naughty step for the remainder of this campaign. I don't agree with Boris not turning up, be he may have lucked out here.
The tells me as much as anything else that they have fuck all idea about the realities of home insulations costs and benefits on older houses. In mine, for example, you could insulate the loft (and I will get round to it at some point) but not the walls. So any savings would be negligible.
What would really make a difference is encouraging people to reduce their thermostats from 22C to 20C as standard.
It's odd that we're in this era of multi party debates but still using OFCOM regulations last updated in 2003?
Isn't that the next chapter of the Tezzie May 'How to do an election campaign' manual?
Wow
https://twitter.com/Emily_Benn/status/1200134819293872136
But this is still down to Boris for being a coward.
https://twitter.com/MarkyBooth97/status/1200102256080801793?s=20
If you want the tax and other benefits you make the legal commitments
If you want to vote you become a citizen
1) New windows use energy to make them and the old ones might well last another 20 years. Where are all these vast numbers of windows coming from?
2) Who pays for the redecorating?
3) How do you measure the saving? And this is supposed to pay the interest free loan? And if it is interest free really, it will be costing the country because though bond yields are low, they are not zero. This in itself presumes yields wouldn’t rise as Corbyn tries to fund 80bn here or 58bn there or whatever else he dreams up in the next two weeks and beyond.
4) How do you protect vulnerable people from those taking advantage of govt sponsored inspectors and workmen swarming around the nation demanding access to you home?
5) Why should I have to have govt sponsored arse ache tramping around my home creating mess, admin and general grief?
6) Do people with one or no kids get an exemption because they’ve already done their bit for the planet even if they fly once a month and drive a Porsche 911 turbo?
Fair comment, i’d have thought.
Under Corbyn you will do as you are told. Ok?
The tories making ALL the same mistakes.
Un-bel-ievable
Roughly speaking the Poles aren't as educated as the Italians nor as cheap as the Romanians.
You mean I've missed it ???
Say it ain't so ???
If only Tom Wolfe was alive to write satire about this election.
Getting more like N Korea by the minute.
Some PB Tories know right from wrong some dont
The Tories then memorably hired a chicken to appear at their next rally.
This was attacked (literally) by a Labour chicken provided by the Daily Mirror.
So this sort of thing has happened before.
It still looks bad, but helpfully Channel 4 breaking every rule in the book is going to let Johnson wriggle off this particular hook of his own making.
Funking Andrew Neil, otoh...
@MikeSmithson I've just had this come up on my Facebook feed. Apparently "Mike Smithson polling and political expert" has sent a letter out to residents in Warrington South insisting that only the Liberal Democrats or Labour can win that seat.
https://www.facebook.com/AndyCarterWarringtonSouth/photos/pcb.1359838424193849/1359838254193866/
This despite the fact that Warrington South is a Lab/Con marginal that was Conservative held between 2010-2017 with the Liberal Democrats getting 5% at the last election.
Is someone impersonating you and using your name and website's reputation . . . or do you really think that Warrington South is a choice between the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties?
I'm checking the bookmakers and the bookies odds to me seem to be:
Conservatives 1/2 favourites
Labour 6/4
Liberal Democrats 66
Are you advising we pile on to the Liberal Democrats at 66 in this seat? That would be incredible odds if this is really a choice between Labour and the Liberal Democrats.
He without sin etc etc.
The hope would be is that beneath all the froth they are precision targeting the voters and constituencies they need to win and everything else is noise.
Nor can they send the minister for Tory Propoganda (@bbclaurak)
Suggest a quivering jelly in the empty chair for 30 mins of Neil reading the charge sheet against Jester.
The purism test will result in Jezza sending Seamus to a reeducation camp at this rate.
And your reaction proves it. The demographic being targeted this time by the Blues will not give a toss. Farage and Johnson ridiculed by a left-wing broadcaster on an issue, which although important, is not a vital voting matter for the overwhelming majority of people. I'm sure your average "working class" Brexiteer in the Midlands will be outraged. Lol.
If its now to be known as the dump then what replaces the term Fen Poly ?
It's the 2nd worst campaign in electioneering history and they've two weeks in which to outdo the 1st one two years ago.
The polls are responsible for this. It’s become a stupid safety first Tory campaign, and I don’t want to come over all TSE with working class metaphor but, whenever you watch your team drop deep to see it out you know they are just inviting pressure and disaster.
The vast majority of the voters the Conservatives are targeting with think well done if they even notice the spat between the Conservatives and Channel "Fuck The Tories" 4.
Gordon bloody Bennett, are Labour supporters really this dense? I thought it was rather obvious from my comment what I was saying.
But of course, Labour supporters don't care about McCluskey's record being on this poster's own admission being comparable to that of a Russian oligarch, because he's on their side...
They won't win this election.
"They're ruining your new wallpaper Frank!"
But total defence is risky.
See that chart on the last thread.
... but then you see Johnson making a huge mess of trying to defend it on BBC news today where he basically says "I'd love to do it but I'm not important enough to make these decisions and I need to wait to be told what to do" (by who?) - and that's a worse look than just doing the interview.
My conclusion is that the strategy is much smarter than 2017 but that Johnson just isn't good enough at politics to execute the strategy well.
And he didn't study there but didn't Barry Gardiner lecture there?